poolmanrob

Q: apple watch workout is way off on calories

I've used the apple watch workout app and the approximate calories burned is way off from what it should be. Is there any way to calibrate it so it will be more accurate? It shows only about half the calories burned that I know it should be.

Posted on Apr 28, 2015 11:25 PM

Close

Q: apple watch workout is way off on calories

  • All replies
  • Helpful answers

Previous Page 2 of 6 last Next
  • by dhy8386,

    dhy8386 dhy8386 May 4, 2015 7:42 PM in response to terryfromnew orleans
    Level 1 (10 points)
    May 4, 2015 7:42 PM in response to terryfromnew orleans

    Beyond the obvious which is deserving accurate data, why does it matter? If you know your resting calories -- which is a static number mostly (obviously it changes slowly as you lose/gain weight) - you are relying on the watch to calculate active calories anyway. So if its starting from a higher number (500 too high as you say), it will be so consistently. I agree it would be nice to understand what they are doing, but even if we did and didnt agree and they dont change, you would just have to make any adjustment to total calories manually (i.e. if you were inputting into some other app).

  • by arsook,

    arsook arsook May 5, 2015 8:12 AM in response to dhy8386
    Level 1 (0 points)
    May 5, 2015 8:12 AM in response to dhy8386

    When you pay almost twice as much for a device.  It should be accurate. My resting calories are 1000 calories too much.

    Mine have been measured by various professional methods.  Yes a 5 or 10% variation would be acceptable.  50% is not.

     

    Apple should fix this issue pronto!!  We should be able to go in manually at least to fix it.  Cause if it is on this forum you can bet that Fitbit is jumping up and down with glee!

  • by nick101,

    nick101 nick101 May 5, 2015 8:15 AM in response to arsook
    Level 5 (5,103 points)
    May 5, 2015 8:15 AM in response to arsook

    If you want Apple to hear your opinion, you need to go to the link below - Apple doesn't participate here - it's user to user.

     

    I expect Apple to improve the software over time, but it would do no harm for you to tell them your experience

     

    http://www.apple.com/feedback

  • by arsook,

    arsook arsook May 5, 2015 8:52 AM in response to nick101
    Level 1 (0 points)
    May 5, 2015 8:52 AM in response to nick101

    Thank you.  I just did that.

  • by sterno74,

    sterno74 sterno74 May 5, 2015 9:14 AM in response to terryfromnew orleans
    Level 1 (5 points)
    May 5, 2015 9:14 AM in response to terryfromnew orleans

    So here's a couple workouts that I've done:

     

    • Cycling 1 - 278 active calories, 79 resting calories, duration 38:41
    • Cycling 2 - 590 active calories, 149 resting calories, duration 1:13:48
    • Cycling 3 - 782 active calories, 225 resting calories, duration 1:50:28

     

    So now to compare those numbers against calculators that estimate calories:

    • Cycling 1 - Apple: 357.  Calculator: 368 (3% difference)
    • Cycling 2 - Apple: 739.  Calculator: 698 (6% difference)
    • Cycling 3 - Apple: 1007.  Calculator: 1038 (3% difference)

     

    So that seems pretty consistent.  Apple tends to return a little lower overall total calorie burn but it's within a few percent of the totals I get elsewhere.  Also the app I'd previously used for calculating calorie burn when cycling is consistent with the online calculators (i.e. it's combining active and resting calories).

     

    The calculation seems to have me burning about 2.05 calories per minute at rest which would mean I'd burn 2952 calories/day.  Looking at the move section of the activity app, I see it's showing an average resting burn rate of around 2900 calories/day.  When I go online to find a calorie burn calculator that incorporates an estimation of activity level, it matches quite well.  So here you can see your BMR if you don't move at all, and how it is affected by your level of activity: http://www.bmrcalculator.org/

     

    So for me, the base BMR came back as 1862/day.  That number means what my calorie burn would be if I literally stayed in bed all day and didn't move. But the watch is assuming I have some moderate exercise (which is true).  So based on that the number comes back as 2886, which is right in the ballpark of what the watch is estimating. 

     

    The reality is that this is all a pretty complicated interplay of how our bodies work.  If you don't move at all, the number is simple.  When you exercise regularly, not only do you have the calories burned from exercising, but you also have the calories burned from maintaining your body being increased.  So if you are moderately active, even if on a given day you sat on the couch all day, you'd still burn more than your BMR suggests because your body is still keeping all that muscle mass, etc.  It would shift over time.  Also, this is why weight lifting can be beneficial to weight loss (it ups your maintenance calorie burn). 

     

    The question in my mind is how the watch adjust this over time.  Does it detect my activity level and adjust my resting calorie burn accordingly.  If I become more active does the number go up?  If I become less active does it go down?  Not sure...

  • by astromutt,

    astromutt astromutt May 5, 2015 9:27 AM in response to poolmanrob
    Level 1 (5 points)
    May 5, 2015 9:27 AM in response to poolmanrob

    I have fully "calibrated" my Apple Watch by walking over 5 miles (over the span of a few days) in an "Outdoor Walk" exercise with my iPhone 6 (GPS enabled) on me.  Yesterday I pedaled for 48 minutes on an "Indoor Cycle" exercise (recumbent lifecycle) and the result was 3 Active Cal (yes - 3!) with a resting of 60 and total of 63.  That's absurd.  I should have burned more than that sleeping for 48 minutes let alone pedaling at a reported average of 133bpm.  This was my 3rd "Indoor Cycle" routine of similar length and with similar reported results.  Even a 22 minute "Outdoor Walk" for 1.11miles resulted in only 46cal total (still way more than 48 minutes on the indoor cycle).  Something just isn't right here.

  • by Ozilios,

    Ozilios Ozilios May 18, 2015 10:20 AM in response to poolmanrob
    Level 1 (0 points)
    May 18, 2015 10:20 AM in response to poolmanrob

    Heys guys wondering if anyone can help.

     

    my girlfriend and I both have an apple watch sport And have both been reading our calories burned each day. She is extremely active, goes to the gym and I can be active but tend to be a lot lazier than her and I burn double the calories she does!?

    As you can imagine this is driving her mad! Haha

    We think it might be because I am bigger than her maybe?

    I am 6.1 tall 82kg and she is a lot less lets just say..

    is the watch just being inaccurate or is there some science behind this?

  • by Winston Churchill,

    Winston Churchill Winston Churchill May 18, 2015 10:39 AM in response to Ozilios
    Level 10 (103,708 points)
    Apple TV
    May 18, 2015 10:39 AM in response to Ozilios
    We think it might be because I am bigger than her maybe?

    You think right. Heavier people will burn more calories doing the same thing.

  • by poolmanrob,

    poolmanrob poolmanrob May 18, 2015 1:07 PM in response to Ozilios
    Level 1 (1 points)
    May 18, 2015 1:07 PM in response to Ozilios

    I can do the exact same exercise that my wife who weighs about 50 lbs less than me and I will burn a lot more calories than her. It takes more energy to move more weight thus the extra calories burned. That is why I can eat more than she does but not gain weight.

  • by itsolutionz,

    itsolutionz itsolutionz May 18, 2015 3:34 PM in response to poolmanrob
    Level 1 (0 points)
    May 18, 2015 3:34 PM in response to poolmanrob

    Today was my first 'workout' with the watch. I have weight and age set, and an elliptical workout selected (for the gym cross-training machine). For a 30 minute continuous exercise, my calorie reading was about 50 percent off due to the heart rate monitor occasionally reading 65 to 80 bpm instead of my typical 135 to 140 bpm. I attribute this to sweat under the sensor (I do have the watch band set snug), and, since I cannot move at my desired rate without sweating (doesn't everyone sweat?), I do not understand how I will ever get an accurate calorie or heart reading. Any suggestions?

  • by dhy8386,

    dhy8386 dhy8386 May 18, 2015 3:41 PM in response to itsolutionz
    Level 1 (10 points)
    May 18, 2015 3:41 PM in response to itsolutionz

    Where do you wear your watch on your arm? I sweat a ton but have never once had the HR drop out. This is over 10-12 runs and countless walks. I wear tight, clear above my wrist bone.

  • by Winston Churchill,

    Winston Churchill Winston Churchill May 18, 2015 3:45 PM in response to itsolutionz
    Level 10 (103,708 points)
    Apple TV
    May 18, 2015 3:45 PM in response to itsolutionz

    itsolutionz wrote:

     

    Today was my first 'workout' with the watch. I have weight and age set, and an elliptical workout selected (for the gym cross-training machine). For a 30 minute continuous exercise, my calorie reading was about 50 percent off due to the heart rate monitor occasionally reading 65 to 80 bpm instead of my typical 135 to 140 bpm. I attribute this to sweat under the sensor (I do have the watch band set snug), and, since I cannot move at my desired rate without sweating, I do not understand how I will ever get an accurate calorie or heart reading. Any suggestions?

    Surely it would need to read your heart rate as 65-80 all the time in order to be 50% out, not just occasionally.

  • by itsolutionz,

    itsolutionz itsolutionz May 18, 2015 4:03 PM in response to Winston Churchill
    Level 1 (0 points)
    May 18, 2015 4:03 PM in response to Winston Churchill

    I think it did read a rate of 65 to 80 bpm for the majority of the exercise (or as soon as I started to sweat--the watch sensor area was dripping with moisture when I temporarily removed the watch after exiting the elliptical machine). And in answer to dhy8386, I wear the watch on my left arm just above the wrist bone. If it helps, I am light boned with virtually no fat, have very tan skin from gardening; and as I am approaching 70 years old, I do have relatively thin and freckled skin as most do at my age. As I mentioned, this was my first 'test' of the watch (having just received it), so perhaps I was premature in raising the issue and I may need to experiment more. (But thanks for the replies!)

  • by Winston Churchill,

    Winston Churchill Winston Churchill May 18, 2015 4:26 PM in response to itsolutionz
    Level 10 (103,708 points)
    Apple TV
    May 18, 2015 4:26 PM in response to itsolutionz

    So why use the word occasionally originally.

  • by Gerard Harbison,

    Gerard Harbison Gerard Harbison May 20, 2015 6:46 AM in response to poolmanrob
    Level 1 (0 points)
    May 20, 2015 6:46 AM in response to poolmanrob

    There are two numbers it gives you: the move calories and the total calories. I've tried calibrating them against another activity watch, which I've worn for 1.5 years and which is pretty accurate (i.e., over a period where I neither gain and lose weight, and where I've counted food calories carefully, the total calories used my old activity watch gives me is approximately equal to the food calories.)

     

    I find the Apple Watch tends to give slightly less credit for exercise, but much more credit for resting calories, with the result that it reads 250 - 500 cal/day higher, or in other words probably too high.

     

    Contrary to what I've read elsewhere, the resting calorie number is uses for me is absolutely constant, and way too high for my height, weight and age.

    I definitely think whatever numbers Apple has programmed into its calorie counter should be tweaked.

Previous Page 2 of 6 last Next