How many active exercise calories do you think you burn in a week?

Should also have said I use an Apple Watch. I previously used a Garmin with a HR strap and both have been very similar in terms of stats so I'm taking them as reasonably accurate.

@thenewaveragebear1983 I definitely burn more going uphill!!

When I run (roughly 10:30min miles) I burn around 100 calories per mile give or take 10/20 calories as my routes vary from flat to hilly(ish).

This week I did an 8.5mile fell walk, so pace was much slower and the ascent was a 1 in 3 (think needing something to hold onto to pull yourself up!) and I burned 200 calories per mile.

Other exercise I do includes spinning, HIIT, swimming and weights sessions with my PT, all burn around 500 calories per hour, so about the same as running.

Fellwalking is by far the highest calorie per hour burn for me

Pipi not according to this calculator we were comparing our Fitbit scores with yesterday, it was simply mass x distance. (Obviously, burning the calories quicker depending on speed, but the total calories for a 10k run or walk didn’t change)
Fitbit does allow more calories for the different heart rate zones, but this calculator didn’t.

So Fitbit said I burned 623 cals in 7.8k, this calc says 570. It would make sense that doing hill running, or walking would burn more over the same distance than on the flat

It would burn more if your heart rate was higher .

Following on from yesterday’s discussion, what about if you run up hills? As in, mass x distance seems to be constant, regardless of speed, but what about the combination of distance plus hills. Today I ran 7.5k and about half of that was up steady but reasonably steep hills. Would that burn more do you think?

My Apple Watch sets me a daily active calorie burn target, which is 450. I try to achieve this every day as a minimum, so that's 3150 straight off. The watch is set to my height, weight, age etc, although I've no idea of accuracy. My DH has the same target and he can go for a short walk and pretty much achieve it , v annoying!

Love the stats on my watch (and Fitbit before that), it definitely keeps me motivated.

Ooooh I love that, thanks!

You can do similar with all the other parameters. I love stats!

Sorry click on the arrow top right after you click on the cals circle....

Found it! According to mine I burn 2700 average a day. I’d be interested to know how accurate it is for general movement, not just exercise.

Click on todays 'cals' circle on the dashboard, then the row of cals on the next screen, then on the arrow top right, then on 1yr, 1 month or whatever. Hope that makes sense.

I’ve is that a Fitbit graph? If so, how do you access that in that format? I’ve not found that one!

I don't know how much due to exercise but I average about 2500cal a day.

That's walking about 16,000 steps a day and running 3 times a week.

how do you work out your active calories?

Partly back of envelope. About 500 kcal/hr, for stuff I think of as intense, and 250-300/hr for something active but gentler (eg., cycle commuting). There's a formula to calc how many calories you use based on heart rate that suggests for me 500 (round to 480) & 300 (round to 320) are about right.

So if I do 45 minutes of mild-mod. exercise, + 45 minutes of intense exercise, that works out as ~240+ ~360 = 600 kcal/day. One day a week I skip the intense session. Works out as 6*600 + 240 = 3840/week. This swimtag report says I under-estimate the calories for intense period, though, so maybe 3840 is too low.

I eat like a pig but am trying to reform enough to drop 4 kg so I can run faster. Wish me luck!

if I run 10k my heart is pumping, I’m physically working hard. That’s got to burn more calorie than walking, surely
running burns more calories per time than walking but not all that much more per distance

I don’t know yet, I’ve only had it on 3 weeks

Laurie since having your Fitbit has your resting heart rate improved? There’s a cardio fitness score- I find that really interesting. I was so unfit in January when I started, my resting heart rate is now about 43 which must be as a result of exercising but I don’t know how that would happen. These are the things I love about the Fitbit, the steps don’t fuss me except to remind me if I’ve had a lazy day. It’s all these little functions that I find so fascinating! I do lots of steps each day but they’re all at toddler speed, so I do look at the active minutes bit and try and get over 100 a day.

My resting heart rate though is very consistent at 69 and good for my age. No idea what that means though

Yep, just shifting my wobbly frame takes so much more effort than slim dh’s. I’m bloody weight training with every move !

I exercise for about 75 mins a day, 30of which are cardio. The rest weights. I've no idea but would say about a max of 300 per session. So about 2000 a week. I'd rather under estimate than over estimate.

That is likely true (not the Lardy arse bit!!) but those heart rate zones are simply based upon your age and nothing to do with any other factors. So your peak heart rate is calculated at 220- your age. Therefore it would figure that if you were bigger and also I suppose anyone who was unfit regardless of their size (therefore would get heart beat raised more easily for less) would be in the raised heart rate zone for more of their normal day?

You definitely do more if you’re a giant lardy arse like me. I’ve done an hour of yoga, 8500 steps and a 24 minute high intensity class today and my Fitbit tells me I’m in ‘fat burning’ mode for 7 hrs - but that’s because I’m 14 stone I think

Chest strap with watch monitor will give accurate heart rate and calories. My gym have the straps to borrow and pair up with the spin bikes

I do 3xspin at 400 per class early morning
Then Saturday & Sunday 2 hours Cycling so about 500/600 a morning or if wet/to cold spin
Swimming & fitness Pilates early morning about 150 each class
Walk to work and back 60 minutes 5x 125

With the lighter nights I’ll hopefully get out on a Thursday evening for another social ride

Using that calculator my 10k comes in at 725 (so about 100 less). So could glean from that that Fitbit overestimated by around 10 cals per Km?

I played around a bit and took my time from 1.15 to 1 hour and the calorie burn was the same, as it was if I extended time to 2 hours. So it must be purely based on mass x distance (time/speed irrelevant)

I’m sceptical if I’m honest, if I run 10k my heart is pumping, I’m physically working hard. That’s got to burn more calorie than walking, surely? Even for twice as long?? Please tell me it can’t be true!