Cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Versa 2 calorie burning between different exercises isn't right

ANSWERED
Replies are disabled for this topic. Start a new one or visit our Help Center.

Today I did a HIIT boxing session on heavy bag, followed immediately by a 2.3km run. My average HR was at 177 and sat at 185 (97% max) for the last 3 minutes. This run burned 155 calories.

 

I went on a short 600m walk with my kids over 22mins and spent around 5-8 mins at the park stationary. Max HR was 115 carrying a kid up a hill, with the average 101. This very slow walk burned 142 calories - I entered 'fat burning' for maybe 30 seconds.

 

This doesn't seem accurate to me. This isn't about my individual fitness and status, rather how it records a burned calorie based on the specific exercise differentiates calories burned between varying exercises.

 

How accurate are the calories burned based on HR?

Best Answer
0 Votes
1 BEST ANSWER

Accepted Solutions

You might be right, but it sounds to me like you've got a lot of variables on the "walk".  Are you just looking up the calculation for a very slow 600 m walk?  If that is what you look-up was for, I suggest doing that: a very slow 600 m walk, alone, not pushing swing, not carrying kid uphill, etc, to at least make sure you are comparing comparable activities.

Before posting, re-read to see if it would make sense to someone else not looking at your Fitbit or phone.

View best answer in original post

Best Answer
0 Votes
6 REPLIES 6

What are the recorded time lengths of the 2 workouts in the workout logs, which is where I assume are getting calorie counts.

Before posting, re-read to see if it would make sense to someone else not looking at your Fitbit or phone.

Best Answer
0 Votes

The run was 10m 13s and the walk was 22m, although a third of that was stationary pushing my kid on a swing.

Best Answer
0 Votes

So roughly twice as many calories burned per minute on the run.

Before posting, re-read to see if it would make sense to someone else not looking at your Fitbit or phone.

Best Answer
0 Votes

6 cal/min walking vs 13 cal/min running, however 86% of the walk was in 'Below zones', whereas 95% of the run was at 'Peak', with 78% of the run at 97% max HR.

 

These other calorie calculators suggest the run should have burned 160 (relatively close), but the walk should have only burned around 50 calories.

 

https://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1350959101

Best Answer

You might be right, but it sounds to me like you've got a lot of variables on the "walk".  Are you just looking up the calculation for a very slow 600 m walk?  If that is what you look-up was for, I suggest doing that: a very slow 600 m walk, alone, not pushing swing, not carrying kid uphill, etc, to at least make sure you are comparing comparable activities.

Before posting, re-read to see if it would make sense to someone else not looking at your Fitbit or phone.

Best Answer
0 Votes

Yeah that's true. It just didn't feel accurate - the post HIIT run killed me vs a walk with a 3y/o who stops every 30m. I would have been pushing the swing with my watch hand though, so perhaps it recorded extra steps and added those in to the mix.

 

Thanks for your assistance!

Best Answer
0 Votes