Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Garmin vs Strava

  • 30-06-2013 9:09am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,917 ✭✭✭✭


    Hey,

    I upload my spins to both Strave and Garmin Connect ....

    I've noticed that on Strava for my last spin the Calories burnt was 436 but on Garmin Connect its coming in at 1001 burnt.

    The discrepancy is there on all my spins

    Any idea why the discrepancy?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,718 ✭✭✭AstraMonti


    Different algorithms. Measured calories is a useless random number.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,236 ✭✭✭Idleater


    AstraMonti wrote: »
    Different algorithms. Measured calories is a useless random number.

    True, but while the numbers from different systems don't tally, you can look at the values on one system compared to your other uploaded spins to that system to get a "consistent" reading of energy spent.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,763 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    The lower it is the more realistic its likely to be!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,038 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Idleater wrote: »
    True, but while the numbers from different systems don't tally, you can look at the values on one system compared to your other uploaded spins to that system to get a "consistent" reading of energy spent.
    Although it doesn't take wind into account.

    If you did 100k at 25km/h into a headwind and did the same route again at 30km/h with no wind, your Garmin will give a greater calorie count on the second trip even though the first trip would have spent a lot more energy.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,505 ✭✭✭colm_gti


    A HR strap will make your calories burned more accurate, a power meter even more so...


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,236 ✭✭✭Idleater


    Although it doesn't take wind into account.

    That is true, but it does take the measurements on the rider and bike in the same way. Heart rate would possibly be different in your two circumstances, already taking easier effort into account in the readings. Also you are presuming a simple calculation, I believe some garmins like the 500 have much broader inputs such as temperature and altitude.

    Look, I never said either reading was right or wrong, I said compare calculations made in the same way with each other and not to compare apples with oranges so to speak.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,038 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Idleater wrote: »
    I believe some garmins like the 500 have much broader inputs such as temperature and altitude
    Interestingly I've just compared 2x100k spins I did in the past week. Times, altitudes, metres climbed were roughly the same but one was at an average temp of 19 degrees (Dublin), the other 33 degrees (Florida). The spin in Florida felt much tougher but my Garmin deemed that I burned 300 more calories on Dublin spin.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 243 ✭✭ktz84


    colm_gti wrote: »
    A HR strap will make your calories burned more accurate, a power meter even more so...

    A v02 max test and a hr strap along with rider data and appropriate alogrithm will make calories burned more accurate but a hr strap on its own will not.


Advertisement