Calorie burn and steps higher when in pocket

[Seattlekitten1]

I use my treadmill 1-2 times a day and tracking calorie burn for weight loss management.  I was participating in a step challenge and realized I was not getting correct step counts wearing my Versa 3 on my wrist.  (I do inclines 3-10% and use the rails occasionally).  So i started using the TREADMILL feature and putting fitbit in my pocket to log maximum steps.

Then I read Fitbit only calculates accurate calorie burn based on heartrate - which naturally cannot be detected in the pocket.  So I did an experiment....  I did a workout and put my Luxe in the pocket on TREADMILL mode, and wore my Versa 3 on the wrist in TREADMILL mode. (NOTE:  I have worn both on my wrist several times and have registered nearly the same results for a day to ensure comparable stats).

Interesting results:  The Luxe registered more steps (expected), but it also registered higher calorie burn!!!?  How would this be when Fitbit states calorie burn is determined by the heart rate?  This experiment result actually proved to be opposite of what FitBit states. Clearly calorie burn total is NOT ONLY based on heart rate as shown in this experiment.  

Can you please explain how this is?  

[JohnnyRow]

Look at heart rate chart during exercise time, to see a some (random) heart rate was recorded, and if so, if it was higher.

I would suggest try experiment again, but when put in pocket, turn heart rate completely off in Settings, and see what results.

Calories are determined by heart rate (and weight) when heart rate is on, but if heart rate is turned off, it must use some other algorithm, probably based on step count per minute.  Before fitbits measured heart rates, and for the Inspire 2 worn in clip mode, they still calculate calorie burn, though probably not as accurately.

[Seattlekitten1]

Thanks for the reply!  I will try the experiment again as you mentioned and follow up.  

[Seattlekitten1]

Hello again -

I repeated the experiment as you suggested, turning HR monitor off on the LUXE (which I kept in pocket) - while wearing the Versa 3 on the wrist.  The results were nearly the same:

Luxe registered 32% more in steps

Luxe registered 21% more in calorie burn  (Note: in 1st experiment Luxe registered 30% more in calorie burn, so it went down but it still doesnt make sense if HR is the key factor in determining calorie burn count.

Thoughts?  

[Rich_Laue]

While in the pocket or clipped to the waist, your Luxe is looking at the natural movement of the hip while stepping. On the arm, your tracker looks for arm movements that should occur while the feet are stepping. I'm not surprised that they do not agree. However I've tested the Luxe ( with clioon) and Sense on separate accounts over a 6 month period. Yes they did not agree on most days but where very close over the week and months. With one month within 200 steps. 

[JohnnyRow]

@Rich_Laue  I think the issue in question here is not really the step count, but the calorie calculation with Luxe on wrist vs. in pocket, with heart rate both on and off.

[Seattlekitten1]

JohnnyRow is correct - the question is the accuracy of calorie burn totals between the 2 units.  One in the pocket WITHOUT the HR monitor on, and the other on the wrist with the HR monitor on, but I am holding the rail during incline treadmill workouts.

I am more interested in accuracy of calorie burn than steps btw.