Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
4/13/13 10:23 P

Yep. It seems to be pretty unreliable.

DRAGONCHILDE SparkPoints: (61,271)
Fitness Minutes: (15,545)
Posts: 9,713
4/13/13 9:25 A

All calculations are estimates, but I've found SP's to be pretty accurate. When I use my heart rate monitor, it's generally within 20 calories of SP's estimates. Running/walking are fairly well studied, so the relationships between size, speed, and heart rate are fairly reliable.

I can't comment on this specific website, since I haven't used it, not without knowing the full data of the people reporting these estimates. What kind of estimates are we talking about?

In the end, it's all an estimate, and as long as they're not reporting something absurd (like 2-300 calories per mile) it's probably not that off. Are they heavier than you? The more you weigh, the more you will burn. Someone that weighs 230 will burn a lot more calories than someone who weighs 130.

I did do a google search for "runtastic calorie accuracy" and there were a few complaints at the top about it being inaccurate.

Here's the top ones I found:

Edited by: DRAGONCHILDE at: 4/13/2013 (09:33)
4/12/13 4:29 P

Does anyone here use the website ""

Several of my friends do, and I see their routes, times, and calorie burn in their facebook feeds. BUT their "calories burned" seems quite a bit higher than the calories SP tells me I've burned for a similar route/time/distance.

How reliable are runtastic's calculations?

How reliable is SP?

Page: 1 of (1)  

Other Fitness and Exercise Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
Distance or speed? 6/16/2016 4:45:30 AM
Cold weather kayaking 3/25/2016 11:42:27 PM
Finding favorites 3/12/2016 8:29:24 AM NEEDS Captions for the Deaf and HOH 1/23/2017 11:59:12 AM
Exercises nurses can do at work 1/2/2017 2:50:03 PM