Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
CUDA440 SparkPoints: (77,013)
Fitness Minutes: (72,299)
Posts: 7,843
9/26/13 11:46 A

I just checked mine numbers to compare

Map my run - 3.1 miles 37 min = 455 calories
SP - Run at 11 min mile, 37 min = 367

Only off about 90 calories. Since I am about at goal, I don't pay too much attention to the numbers. I just get a great workout in at least 5-6 times a week, and watch my food intake.


SW July 2005 - 177
Thanksgiving 2005 - found out pregnant 159
July 2006 - 9 months pregnant - 197
3/19/09 - 177. AGAIN!!!
11/23/09 - 170.6

MLAN613 SparkPoints: (213,689)
Fitness Minutes: (193,492)
Posts: 13,245
9/26/13 8:15 A

The MapMyRun calorie burn inflation is my biggest complaint with it! Actually, it's my only complaint.

MOTIVATED@LAST Posts: 14,905
9/26/13 6:44 A

Yeah, those mapmyrun figures do seem inflated, and they don't pass either of two reality checks.

First, you can expect to burn about 100-120 calories per mile run.

Secondly, most people burn about 6-10 calories per minute on a sustained basis - 6 on the moderate end, 10 on the more vigorous. Somebody who was fit and really pushing themselves might burn 12-13 per minute - figures above this are not really feasible.

760 for 4 miles in 40 minutes.


The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
MALAMI518 SparkPoints: (97,043)
Fitness Minutes: (76,135)
Posts: 2,037
9/26/13 6:32 A

Thank you, all for your insight! I didn't know about putting in distance and time. I'll see if that makes a difference. I may add a HRM to my wish list.

from Central NYS
DASHKATH Posts: 861
9/26/13 5:22 A

If you put you time and distance in SP it will calculate the correct "selection" for you. Also make sure you have your weight in both SP and MapMyRun. I use both all the time and I get about the same calories burned for both.

SIMONEKP Posts: 2,615
9/24/13 11:40 A

If possible, consider investing in a HRM, it will be a little more accurate than the estimate on SP and MMR


"Patience and perseverance have a magical effect before which difficulties disappear and obstacles vanish." - John Quincy Adams

No matter how slow you go, you're still lapping everyone on the couch!
Source: unknown

DRAGONCHILDE SparkPoints: (58,536)
Fitness Minutes: (14,252)
Posts: 9,692
9/23/13 9:39 P

Yes. A general rule of thumb for most people is around 100 calories per mile burned when walking/running. Obviously, you'll burn a couple more when you are heavier, or run more intensely, but the variance isn't going to be as much as Map My Run appears to be providing you.

Writer, mother, wife, and breadwinner. I love to run, but running doesn't love me, so I'm switching to my low-impact bike.

I'm not pregnant, just fat: My blog.
MALAMI518 SparkPoints: (97,043)
Fitness Minutes: (76,135)
Posts: 2,037
9/23/13 8:54 P

I don't have a HRM. I've been using Map My Run app to keep track of my walk/jog sessions. It reports a much higher calorie burn than what I get when I use the Fitness Tracker. Any idea which is closer to accurate?

For example, today I recorded two 4 miles sessions. The first was 4 miles in 46:50 and the second was 4 miles in 50:59. Map My Run said 769 calories for the first and 670 calories for the second. I used "Intervals of run/walk or walk/jog: 6 mph or slower" in the tracker. It gave me 378 calories for the first 4 miles and 410 calories for the second. That seems to be a big difference. Is Map My Run really that inflated?

from Central NYS
Page: 1 of (1)  

Other Fitness and Exercise Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
Exercise before or after breakfast 2/2/2015 8:56:45 AM
I just ordered the Spark Activity Tracker! 12/9/2014 6:36:44 AM
Overuse muscle 9/7/2014 6:21:50 PM
Fitbit vastly underestimating daily calorie burn 2/7/2015 5:33:13 PM
New Fitbit 9/30/2014 11:56:25 AM