A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Accuracy of Calorie-counters on Cycle Computers?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 23rd 05, 12:14 PM
Steve McDonald
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Accuracy of Calorie-counters on Cycle Computers?


I got a new Bell cycle computer (speedometer, etc.) and went for a
short spin to try it out. In just 6.3 miles, at average speed of 16
mph, it claimed I'd burned 363 extra calories. My weight is set at 200
lbs. Based on my experience in counting calories the old-fashioned way,
I'd be surprised if I'd actually used up even half this much energy.
How accurate have these calorie-counters seemed to other riders?

If this thing does work correctly, when I go for a 50-mile ride at
an even faster speed, I should be on the way to being a skeleton when I
finish. Maybe they figure if these computers generate a big "feel-good"
factor for hefty riders, they'll be more popular. Reminds me of how the
current administration measures the strength of the economy.

Another issue is whether the weight of the bike should be added to
that of the rider in the computer setting. This isn't specified in the
manual. Since my bikes range from 25 to 80 lbs. in total weight, this
would be a good idea.

Steve McDonald

Ads
  #2  
Old August 23rd 05, 01:09 PM
Beverly
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Accuracy of Calorie-counters on Cycle Computers?


Steve McDonald wrote:
I got a new Bell cycle computer (speedometer, etc.) and went for a
short spin to try it out. In just 6.3 miles, at average speed of 16
mph, it claimed I'd burned 363 extra calories. My weight is set at 200
lbs. Based on my experience in counting calories the old-fashioned way,
I'd be surprised if I'd actually used up even half this much energy.
How accurate have these calorie-counters seemed to other riders?

If this thing does work correctly, when I go for a 50-mile ride at
an even faster speed, I should be on the way to being a skeleton when I
finish. Maybe they figure if these computers generate a big "feel-good"
factor for hefty riders, they'll be more popular. Reminds me of how the
current administration measures the strength of the economy.

Another issue is whether the weight of the bike should be added to
that of the rider in the computer setting. This isn't specified in the
manual. Since my bikes range from 25 to 80 lbs. in total weight, this
would be a good idea.

Steve McDonald


Compare your results to this site.

http://www.caloriesperhour.com/index_burn.html

  #3  
Old August 23rd 05, 02:37 PM
GaryG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Accuracy of Calorie-counters on Cycle Computers?

"Steve McDonald" wrote in message
...

I got a new Bell cycle computer (speedometer, etc.) and went for a
short spin to try it out. In just 6.3 miles, at average speed of 16
mph, it claimed I'd burned 363 extra calories. My weight is set at 200
lbs. Based on my experience in counting calories the old-fashioned way,
I'd be surprised if I'd actually used up even half this much energy.
How accurate have these calorie-counters seemed to other riders?


That doesn't sound very realistic to me. 40 calories per mile is a good
rule-of-thumb for cycling, and your computer is saying your burned close to
58 calories per mile. Since you're a larger rider, you could use 45
calories per mile, which would equal 284 calories for your ride.


If this thing does work correctly, when I go for a 50-mile ride at
an even faster speed, I should be on the way to being a skeleton when I
finish. Maybe they figure if these computers generate a big "feel-good"
factor for hefty riders, they'll be more popular. Reminds me of how the
current administration measures the strength of the economy.


They may, indeed, over-estimate calories burned for the reason you suggest.
I've always thought that gym equipment was programmed to the high side for
that reason.

Another issue is whether the weight of the bike should be added to
that of the rider in the computer setting. This isn't specified in the
manual. Since my bikes range from 25 to 80 lbs. in total weight, this
would be a good idea.

Steve McDonald


Oddly enough, bike weight doesn't make a huge difference, although 80 lbs
would have to be taken into account to be accurate (BTW, you need to get a
lighter bike!).

I've included a calorie and watts calculator in my CycliStats training
program (http://www.CycliStats.com) - it includes a bunch of different input
variables, including bike weight. You can download a free, 30-day trial
version, to see how the calorie calculator works, and play around with
various bike weights to see how it affects the calorie and watts
calculation.

--
~_-*
....G/ \G
http://www.CycliStats.com
CycliStats - Software for Cyclists


  #4  
Old August 24th 05, 02:02 AM
Andy Gee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Accuracy of Calorie-counters on Cycle Computers?

What are these things counting? I've seen calory meters attached to
speedometers, attached to workout equipment, counting heartbeats, etc.
Calories could be brake horsepower converted to the heat equivalent,
actual amount of calories expended (fuel loss) for the duration of the
exercise or for the exercise plus the effects over 48 hours, net work of
the bike+rider system, etc. I never got a straight answer on this. I
would think you would need 30 randomly selected people pedaling bikes
mounted on dynamometers inside calorimeter rooms to calibrate the
process, then mount a pitot tube for airspeed on the bike, add some
sprung weights and use both the heartrate and speedometer methods to get
an accurate value. Or is this stuff just more consumer toys?

--ag


(Steve McDonald) wrote in
:


I got a new Bell cycle computer (speedometer, etc.) and went for
a
short spin to try it out. In just 6.3 miles, at average speed of 16
mph, it claimed I'd burned 363 extra calories. My weight is set at
200 lbs. Based on my experience in counting calories the
old-fashioned way, I'd be surprised if I'd actually used up even half
this much energy. How accurate have these calorie-counters seemed to
other riders?

If this thing does work correctly, when I go for a 50-mile ride
at
an even faster speed, I should be on the way to being a skeleton when
I finish. Maybe they figure if these computers generate a big
"feel-good" factor for hefty riders, they'll be more popular. Reminds
me of how the current administration measures the strength of the
economy.

Another issue is whether the weight of the bike should be added
to
that of the rider in the computer setting. This isn't specified in
the manual. Since my bikes range from 25 to 80 lbs. in total weight,
this would be a good idea.

Steve McDonald



  #5  
Old August 24th 05, 04:21 AM
Jeff Starr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Accuracy of Calorie-counters on Cycle Computers?

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 01:02:54 GMT, Andy Gee
wrote:

What are these things counting? I've seen calory meters attached to
speedometers, attached to workout equipment, counting heartbeats, etc.
Calories could be brake horsepower converted to the heat equivalent,
actual amount of calories expended (fuel loss) for the duration of the
exercise or for the exercise plus the effects over 48 hours, net work of
the bike+rider system, etc. I never got a straight answer on this. I
would think you would need 30 randomly selected people pedaling bikes
mounted on dynamometers inside calorimeter rooms to calibrate the
process, then mount a pitot tube for airspeed on the bike, add some
sprung weights and use both the heartrate and speedometer methods to get
an accurate value. Or is this stuff just more consumer toys?

--ag

My HRM has a calorie counter. You input weight, activity level, and
set ranges.
I compared my last ride to the site that Beverly posted. It was very,
very close.

I think the ones that don't take heart rate as part of the caculation,
may not be all that accurate. But if they are consistent, you can see
if you are burning more or less. It would give you an idea of
improvement.


Life is Good!
Jeff
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wheel size for cycle computers Paul Rose UK 19 March 12th 05 04:20 PM
Wirless cycle computers and PC realtime interfaces? tomw General 2 February 18th 04 05:58 PM
Are cycle computers waterproof? Uphill DownHill UK 6 August 29th 03 10:51 AM
Pick 'n Pay Cape Argus Cycle Tour - Cape Town, South Africa, 2004 David Cowie Racing 0 August 28th 03 10:29 PM
Pick 'n Pay Cape Argus Cycle Tour - Cape Town, South Africa, 2004 David Cowie UK 0 August 28th 03 10:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.