Calories Burned

davidcamilleri

I do 10km biking 3 times a week.

1) I am noticing that since I am keeping my RPM to 70 I am burning less calories. Why?

2) Is it true that the fitter you are the less calories you consume during biking?

Thanks.

imposter2.0

You burn calories according to the level of effort you put in and/or the duration of your ride. Riding harder will use more energy, as will riding longer.

Alex_Simmons/RST

davidcamilleri wrote:

I do 10km biking 3 times a week.

1) I am noticing that since I am keeping my RPM to 70 I am burning less calories. Why?

2) Is it true that the fitter you are the less calories you consume during biking?

Thanks.

1. Because whatever you are using to estimate energy metabolised is probably wrong.

2. No. You actually tend to metabolise more as you are able to generate more power for longer.
Even if you ride at same pace and it feels easier because you are fitter, you are still generating the same power to ride at that pace and metabolising a similar amount of energy in the process.

davidcamilleri

I use Garmin Edge 500 to take information of calories burned.

I read that the best way to ride a bike is between 70 and 90 RPMs. So if I have to keep this ideal pace then I have to make my trips longer in order to burn more calories. Am I right?

Thanks.

amaferanga

No. Your Garmin is guessing calories burned, not calculating it. Cadence has little if anything to do with how many calories you burn.

Alex_Simmons/RST

To "burn" more calories, you need to do more work. Work is a function of your power output and duration. IOW you would need to ride harder, or longer, or both.

Cadence doesn't come into it.

No bicycle computer can measure calories metabolised with any level of useable accuracy. It requires laboratory testing to do that. Power meters are reasonable for estimates within about 10%. Anything else is a wild guess good for not much more than light comic relief.

davidcamilleri

madasahattersley wrote:

davidcamilleri wrote:

I use Garmin Edge 500 to take information of calories burned.

I read that the best way to ride a bike is between 70 and 90 RPMs. So if I have to keep this ideal pace then I have to make my trips longer in order to burn more calories. Am I right?

Thanks.

Not sure I understand the question?

I watched this you tube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAYw42fATnU the best cadence is 70 - 90 RPMs. Since I kept this cadence I was burning less calories for 10 km route but felt my heart rate more stabilized and not getting tired early. So to burn more calories I have to increase the route to 15km?

I hope you understand my dilemma.

imposter2.0

I would ignore any video which tells you what cadence you should ride at. But as has already been said, if you want to burn more calories, just ride harder, or longer, or both. Energy usage relates to effort and/or duration, not gearing.

davidcamilleri

Imposter wrote:

I would ignore any video which tells you what cadence you should ride at. But as has already been said, if you want to burn more calories, just ride harder, or longer, or both. Energy usage relates to effort and/or duration, not gearing.

1) So what is the purpose of cadence in a bike?

2) Does cadence readings affect computation of calories burned in Garmin Edge 500?

Thanks

imposter2.0

davidcamilleri wrote:

Imposter wrote:

I would ignore any video which tells you what cadence you should ride at. But as has already been said, if you want to burn more calories, just ride harder, or longer, or both. Energy usage relates to effort and/or duration, not gearing.

1) So what is the purpose of cadence in a bike?

2) Does cadence readings affect computation of calories burned in Garmin Edge 500?

Thanks

Not sure what you mean. Cadence is just a measure of the rate at which you turn the pedals. Just pedal at whatever rate you personally find comfortable, or most effective.

And as has already been pointed out, calorie calculations are nothing more than 'guestimates' at best.

Alex_Simmons/RST

davidcamilleri wrote:

1) So what is the purpose of cadence in a bike?

2) Does cadence readings affect computation of calories burned in Garmin Edge 500?

1. Cadence is simply a measurement of the rate you turn the cranks over. If you ride along at the same speed on same terrain and wind etc, your cadence will vary depending on what gear you've chosen. But your energy use will be the same*.

2. I've no idea (although I very much doubt it), but if it did, it would be an even sillier wild arse guesstimate than what it already is.


* there will of course be minor variations due to acute variations in GME, but let's not confuse the main point

davidcamilleri

I found info on Garmin how calories are burned. I think you guys are misinformed - no offense.

This is how Garmin says calories are calculated:

The Edge 500 calculates calories based on available resources.

Below is the order of precedence:

New Leaf profile - calculated using New Leaf profile if loaded onto the device
Firstbeat technology - calculated when the Garmin heart rate monitor is paired with the Edge 500 and user profile dataThird-party ANT+ enabled power meter (converts wattage (kj) to calories)
Speed, Distance, and User Profile - calculated using speed, distance, and user profile data

If one or more is not available, the Edge 500 will intuitively use the next option to calculate calorie burn.

Alex_Simmons/RST

davidcamilleri wrote:

I found info on Garmin how calories are burned. I think you guys are misinformed - no offense.

This is how Garmin says calories are calculated:

The Edge 500 calculates calories based on available resources.

Below is the order of precedence:

New Leaf profile - calculated using New Leaf profile if loaded onto the device
Firstbeat technology - calculated when the Garmin heart rate monitor is paired with the Edge 500 and user profile dataThird-party ANT+ enabled power meter (converts wattage (kj) to calories)
Speed, Distance, and User Profile - calculated using speed, distance, and user profile data

If one or more is not available, the Edge 500 will intuitively use the next option to calculate calorie burn.

Yep and they are all fantasy. If they get the right answer, it's just a lucky coincidence.

The most reliable will be the one using direct force power meter data (e.g. SRM, Quarq, Powertap), but unless you know your typical gross metabolic efficiency and any acute variances in GME, both daily and during a ride, then that'll be perhaps within +/-10%.

GME requires lab testing using a metabolic cart / gas exchange analysis.

But even something as simple as what you eat can change your GME.

cougie

Calories burned is just a vague guesstimate.

If I was running it would be about 100 calories per mile. If you're cycling 6 miles (10k) three times a week I'd think your calory use should be 150 to 200 calories per trip as cycling is a more efficient way to travel than running.

keef66

If you only have time to do 3 x 10km rides a week and you want to maximise calories burned, then ignore cadence and just do the rides as hard / fast as you can.

If you're cycling in order to lose weight you really need to be riding further than that, and combine it with a diet that gives you a daily calorie deficit.

Tiltzey Boy

davidcamilleri wrote:

I found info on Garmin how calories are burned. I think you guys are misinformed - no offense.

This is how Garmin says calories are calculated:

The Edge 500 calculates calories based on available resources.

Below is the order of precedence:

New Leaf profile - calculated using New Leaf profile if loaded onto the device
Firstbeat technology - calculated when the Garmin heart rate monitor is paired with the Edge 500 and user profile dataThird-party ANT+ enabled power meter (converts wattage (kj) to calories)
Speed, Distance, and User Profile - calculated using speed, distance, and user profile data

If one or more is not available, the Edge 500 will intuitively use the next option to calculate calorie burn.

I guess it goes to show that "Marketing" is well worth the financial investment from these companies, it clearly sells!!!!!!!!!!!!

markhopley

I love people who get sucked into technology.
A very good and very true phrase
SWEAT IS FAT CRYING ITS SELF TO DEATH

dw300

davidcamilleri wrote:

I think you guys are misinformed - no offense.

Classic!

sungod

davidcamilleri wrote:

Imposter wrote:

I would ignore any video which tells you what cadence you should ride at. But as has already been said, if you want to burn more calories, just ride harder, or longer, or both. Energy usage relates to effort and/or duration, not gearing.

1) So what is the purpose of cadence in a bike?

2) Does cadence readings affect computation of calories burned in Garmin Edge 500?

Thanks

1
cadence does matter, if you spend a lot of time grinding away at low cadence it puts an awful lot of strain on the knees etc., increasing risk of injury

i've read that biomechanically the most efficient cadence is typically around the 70s - but people vary

in practice, higher cadence is often preferred as it reduces strain on the legs (at the cost of increased load on heart/lungs, but these recover faster) fwiw i can sustain higher power at 90-100 than at 70-80, so less strain on the knees and higher performance, win win - but people vary

2
the edge 500 internal estimate of calories is utter nonsense, same as with all similar devices, it's just marketing-driven nonsense to provide an extra device feature for the specification list, but it's worthless, just ignore it, if you want to get a reasonable idea of calories burned get a power meter (which is still limited in accuracy due to indvidual differences in metabolic efficiency, but at least the pm is measuring actual work), otherwise forget about it

btw garmin prioritise new leaf profile over a power meter? hmmm, is there any validation of new leaf's methods that shows them to result in more accurate/repeatable results? seems unlikely, looks like more marketing at work here

mpatts

sungod wrote:

davidcamilleri wrote:

Imposter wrote:

I would ignore any video which tells you what cadence you should ride at. But as has already been said, if you want to burn more calories, just ride harder, or longer, or both. Energy usage relates to effort and/or duration, not gearing.

1) So what is the purpose of cadence in a bike?

2) Does cadence readings affect computation of calories burned in Garmin Edge 500?

Thanks

1
cadence does matter, if you spend a lot of time grinding away at low cadence it puts an awful lot of strain on the knees etc., increasing risk of injury

i've read that biomechanically the most efficient cadence is typically around the 70s - but people vary

in practice, higher cadence is often preferred as it reduces strain on the legs (at the cost of increased load on heart/lungs, but these recover faster) fwiw i can sustain higher power at 90-100 than at 70-80, so less strain on the knees and higher performance, win win - but people vary

2
the edge 500 internal estimate of calories is utter nonsense, same as with all similar devices, it's just marketing-driven nonsense to provide an extra device feature for the specification list, but it's worthless, just ignore it, if you want to get a reasonable idea of calories burned get a power meter (which is still limited in accuracy due to indvidual differences in metabolic efficiency, but at least the pm is measuring actual work), otherwise forget about it

btw garmin prioritise new leaf profile over a power meter? hmmm, is there any validation of new leaf's methods that shows them to result in more accurate/repeatable results? seems unlikely, looks like more marketing at work here

What he said.

Cadence is v important! But not for measuring calories. TO be honest, I find calories one of the least useful 'measurements', just get out on the bike.

ric/rstsport

cadence is a red herring!