>Gears and Wears>Why does Suunto give a different caloric value than Garmin or this site?
I have 2 HRM with foot pods, a Garmin FR60 and a Suunto T3c. I have just started using the Suunto for training despite having to enter the data by hand here in RA, the reason is that the HRM of my Garmin is completely nuts, but that's another story.
When I run with my Garmin with our without HRM the values in calories burned are reasonably close and so is the value that this site calculates when manually entering the time, weight and distance. I don't recall the formula by heart but I made a spreadsheet where I get calories and VO2 and it's also quite close to these values.
But for the same value in Suunto's "Movescount" site or on the device itselfs the values are almost a half of these For instance so that for a 16km run (10 miles) at 8.5mi/min and 1h27m of duration I get 1176 calories while Movescount shows around 640 (!).I have checked the weight and other parameters and it's correct on both sites: 70kg (*) and 172cm.Note that I have to keep track of my energy balance in order to avoid eating too little or too much.
Any idea of the reason for this difference?
(1) Yes, you are right, I got very fat... :P
day after day sameness
They each use different formulas and algorithms for calculating the calorie use. There is no one, specific, standardized means to make the calorie calculation.
Make sure you have your weight set similarly in each device and RunningAhead, as weight and time are the major values used in the calorie estimation formulas.
Choosing my words carefully has never been my strength I've been known to be vague and often pointless
Here Enric, I can give you the formula:
miles x 100 = calories. +/- 10-15ish%. There, that was easy!
If you are looking for more precision from Garmin or Suunto or RunningAhead I don't think you are really going to get it, despite possible claims to the contrary. Suunto is clearly gorked in this case.
all running goals are under review by the executive committee.
Does the Suunto calculate calories burned by HR? Because I ran into a similar issue when I first got my 310XT -- prior to that, I had been solely using the FR60. I believe the 310XT is more accurate, because it does calculate calories burned using HR, whereas the FR60 just uses one set algorithm.
Feeling the growl again
because they are all wrong.
"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand
Both calculate calories on HR. I use the Suunto when boxing and only on HR (obviously). Curiously enough the value it gives is quite similar to what you would get from other standard sources.
Hmm reading the answers on this thread I think that I will continue using my proven scientific method to know when my diet is out of balance: My Wife when she tells me "Darling, you should eat more, you look like one of those fakirs"
Okay, then, that's weird. I got nothing.