I just came back from a 10.5mi run and got very different calories estimations from garmin connect and strava, with strava coming in at 1501 calories and garmin at 958.
I don't fixate much on these, I just use as a general guidance of how much I should eat that day/after the run.
Did anyone else notice this difference and look into which one is more accurate?
Mine's the reverse: Garmin is generally 1.5x the calories than Strava. I record on the Garmin and that stuff is automagically fed to Strava. Is that your workflow?
Think of calorie counts as similar to GPS. They're to be used as a guide at best.
Yeah, mine works like that as well.
I checked my last 3 runs and in all of them strava had around 1.5x the calories of garmin connect.
My watch captures HR at the wrist, and I know garmin uses HR data for the calculations, while strava doesn't, so maybe if you don't use a HR monitor that's why we are getting different ratios.
fatlete wrote:
Think of calorie counts as similar to GPS. They're to be used as a guide at best.
That is ignorant. Yes, GPS data from two devices may be off but rarely by all that much.
Calorie counts are based on algorithms and some are just not very good. Since each company has labeled its calorie calculator as proprietary there is no way to validate them.
One of the simple explanations for differences is the user putting in different values for age, height and weight.
In one of them, the distances were very different as well, at 12.2km for strava, 11.1 for garmin. This was an anomaly though, as they're usually very similar.
Huh, hadn't thought of that. Gonna check my data in the two apps to see if they match.
Also, I agree that GPS, although not 100% precise, isn't as inaccurate as calorie counts.
Why are you counting calories in the first place? Eat until you are full; just don't eat crap that will make you fat.
luv2run wrote:
fatlete wrote:Think of calorie counts as similar to GPS. They're to be used as a guide at best.
That is ignorant. Yes, GPS data from two devices may be off but rarely by all that much.
Calorie counts are based on algorithms and some are just not very good. Since each company has labeled its calorie calculator as proprietary there is no way to validate them.
One of the simple explanations for differences is the user putting in different values for age, height and weight.
At best GPS is accurate to within 1 meter. At best, and that is being generous.
I'd say that you're ignorant but you're probably just defensive from spending $500 on your watch.
thejeff wrote:
Why are you counting calories in the first place? Eat until you are full; just don't eat crap that will make you fat.
Not counting. Just using as general guidance.
For example, I just ate a whole pizza from Pizza Hut, but wouldn't do that in an off day. No idea how many calories are in the pizza, though.