# Calorie Counter/calculator



## Lizban (10 Feb 2011)

Does anyone know of a good calorie calculator that is reasonably accurate for working how much you've burnt on your bike?


----------



## Dan B (10 Feb 2011)

Ballpark: 40 calories per mile

Accurate-ish: measure your heart rate over the course of exercise and calculate an average, then energy expenditure is given by 


EE = -59.3954 + gender x (-36.3781 + 0.271 x age + 0.394 x weight + 0.404
V[O.sub.2max] + 0.634x heart rate) + (1 - gender) x (0.274 x age + 0.103x weight
+ 0.380x V[O.sub.2max] + 0.450 x heart rate)

(where gender = 1 for males and 0 for females) or if you don't know your VO2max, 


EE = gender x (-55.0969 + 0.6309 x heart rate + 0.1988 x weight + 0.2017 x age)
+ (1 - gender) x (-20.4022 + 0.4472 x heartrate - 0.1263 x weight + 0.074 x age)


The formulae are taken from 

_Prediction of energy expenditure from heart rate monitoring during submaximal_
_exercise._
_Publication: Journal of Sports Sciences_
_Publication Date: 01-MAR-05_
_Author: Keytel, L.R. ; Goedecke, J.H. ; Noakes, T.D. ; Hiiloskorpi, H. ; Laukkanen, R. ;_
_van der Merwe, L. ; Lambert, E.V._

which AIUI is the basis for most of the calorie calculators in heart rate monitors, web sites, etc. It's available on the net somewhere, but I forgot to bookmark it after downloading. Note that 


> During moderate physical activity, there is a linear relationship between heart
> rate and oxygen consumption. This heart rate--oxygen consumption relationship
> is subject to both intra- and inter-individual variability. Heart rate may be partially
> dissociated from energy expenditure by factors such as emotion, posture and
> ...



so you won't get a good figure out of it if you're supine nor yet if you're redlining it


----------



## Lizban (10 Feb 2011)

Thanks, I think I will stick with the 40 amile!

Cheers


----------



## surfdude (10 Feb 2011)

a good set of scales every week


----------



## Over The Hill (10 Feb 2011)

surfdude said:


> a good set of scales every week




Nooooooo

Fat off and muscle on = a gain in weight sometimes. 




I had heard 500 calories an hour. A fattie on a bad bike will burn a lot more per mile than a light person on a good bike so a per hour figure is probably more reliable. 

I am not keen on counting calories. Better to know what foods have more in them and avoid those foods.


----------



## surfdude (10 Feb 2011)

alright how about a tall mirror


----------



## Dan B (10 Feb 2011)

Over The Hill said:


> I am not keen on counting calories. Better to know what foods have more in them and avoid those foods.



That's fine if it works for you but I'd rather not give up eating flapjack


----------



## ColinJ (10 Feb 2011)

I've done enough centuries and 200 km audax rides now to know that I burn about a pound of fat per 100 miles. I weigh myself before the ride, then every day for several days afterwards. I might lose 6 or 7 pounds on the day of the ride but that is mainly fluid losses. Once I'm fully rehydrated and my glycogen stores are stocked up, I typically see that 1 pound per 100 miles.

I'm quite a big man, say 15 stone (it varies!). Obviously a bigger person would use more energy to ride a certain distance, and a smaller person would use less.

1 pound of fat is equivalent to 3,500 calories, so I reckon on roughly 35 calories a mile which means that for me, Dan B's ballpark figure is pretty close!


----------



## Bayerd (11 Feb 2011)

Uncle Mort said:


> Where's jimbo when you need him?



Just what I was thinking. I guess he got sick of the MumboJimbo tag.....


----------



## Bodhbh (11 Feb 2011)

I don't know the answer, but obviously hills, road vs off-road, and bike (MTB with knobblies vs road) all have an effect. I've always assumed 50kcals per mile on the road - and it's been not far out from predicting weight loss over long periods of time - but none of my bikes are remotely fast/light.

I used to do a run everyday after work and switched from a 20 mile road route on a hybrid to a 20mile off-road route on the MTB. My appetite went thru the roof, I think the difference in conditions is not so trival.


----------



## Broadside (11 Feb 2011)

I had been wondering what happened to Jimbo and the chart! Has anyone heard from him?


----------



## Dan B (13 Feb 2011)

Dan B said:


> EE = -59.3954 + gender x (-36.3781 + 0.271 x age + 0.394 x weight + 0.404
> V[O.sub.2max] + 0.634x heart rate) + (1 - gender) x (0.274 x age + 0.103x weight
> + 0.380x V[O.sub.2max] + 0.450 x heart rate)
> 
> ...


I should have tried this before I posted it, then I would have noticed that there is no 'time' input. Anyway, the results seem to be in in joules/minute, so multiply by 60/4.184 to get calories per hour


----------



## thomas (15 Feb 2011)

Get endonmondo for smart phone.it tracks everything, including cals burnt.


----------



## Dan B (15 Feb 2011)

thomas said:


> Get endonmondo for smart phone.it tracks everything, including cals burnt.



How does it know?


----------



## BinBag (16 Feb 2011)

Lizban said:


> Does anyone know of a good calorie calculator that is reasonably accurate for working how much you've burnt on your bike?




Not sure about the first reply - but I calculate mine by this formula (just paste into Excel)

=(A+B)*0.0138*(X*24*60)*10^(0.0405*Z)

A = your weight in lbs
B = your bike weight
X = time in minutes on the saddle
Z = average speed

Looks pretty accurate to me each time!


----------



## ColinJ (16 Feb 2011)

BinBag said:


> Not sure about the first reply - but I calculate mine by this formula (just paste into Excel)
> 
> =(A+B)*0.0138*(X*24*60)*10^(0.0405*Z)
> 
> ...


That can't possibly be accurate if any significant climbing is done or if there is much wind!

Imagine 3 scenarios:


You ride along a 10 mile flat road, no wind. It takes an hour. Average speed = 10 mph
You ride along the same 10 mile flat road into a 15 mph headwind. It takes an hour. Average speed = 10 mph
You ride up a 9.75 mile monster climb which goes up 2,500 ft and it takes you 59.5 minutes. You cycle off the edge of a precipice and fall back to where you started. That takes 0.5 minutes. Average speed = 10 mph


Don't tell me that they all use up the same number of calories!


----------



## Fiona N (17 Feb 2011)

ColinJ said:


> That can't possibly be accurate if any significant climbing is done or if there is much wind!
> 
> Imagine 3 scenarios:
> 
> ...You ride up a 9.75 mile monster climb which goes up 2,500 ft and it takes you 59.5 minutes. You cycle off the edge of a precipice and fall back to where you started. That takes 0.5 minutes. Average speed = 10 mph



This sounds like the sort of mental arithmetic I indulge in while progressing up long hard climbs to take my mind off the pain ...


----------



## ColinJ (17 Feb 2011)

Fiona N said:


> This sounds like the sort of mental arithmetic I indulge in while progressing up long hard climbs to take my mind off the pain ...


It's the kind of mental arithmetic I indulge in while sat in front of the computer, _avoiding_ doing long, hard, painful climbs!


----------



## Smurfy (17 Aug 2011)

This looks quite interesting, anyone with all the gadgets interested in performing a comparison?


----------



## VamP (17 Aug 2011)

ColinJ said:


> That can't possibly be accurate if any significant climbing is done or if there is much wind!
> 
> Imagine 3 scenarios:
> 
> ...



I suspect it's not far off TBH. Obviously it will be out for very hilly rides, and allowing for rider (and bike!!) weight is a bit pointless in cycling if you are not measuring hilliness, but then the most important factor in measuring calories burnt is the power output which is primarily a function of duration and average speed. Wind I think can be ignored, as on average you'll cycle as much with as against it. Let's just hope they've got the constant's right...


Pottering off to plug into Excel and eyeball the results... 



Edit: Nah that's way out, gives me 1500 Calories burnt in 1 hour at 20 mph. Interestingly if you remove the weight adjustment part of the formula, then it gives 570 Calories, which is about right for me on flattish terrain.


----------



## TheSandwichMonster (17 Aug 2011)

thomas said:


> Get endonmondo for smart phone.it tracks everything, including cals burnt.


Yes it does, but I think you'll find that Endomondo is pretty generous in terms of the calories that it quotes. According to my stats (last 4 weeks):

Total distance: 383.88 km Average speed: 21.59 km/h Average pace: 2m:46s Calories burned: 18330 kcal

And for yesterday's commute home:

Distance: 32.24 km
Duration: 1h:13m:18s
Avg Speed: 26.4 km/h
Max Speed: 59.4km/h
Calories: 1548 kcal

I'm not being funny, but I don't get rid of calories that fast even if I fart them!


----------



## VamP (17 Aug 2011)

TheSandwichMonster said:


> Yes it does, but I think you'll find that Endomondo is pretty generous in terms of the calories that it quotes. According to my stats (last 4 weeks):
> 
> Total distance: 383.88 km Average speed: 21.59 km/h Average pace: 2m:46s Calories burned: 18330 kcal
> 
> ...



Yep, that's 2 - 3 times the calories you really burned.


----------

