Hi All
The gym I go to has lots of cardio equipment, all of which requires you to enter your weight, level and type of workout, etc.

I noticed when I do 30 mins of HIIT on the elliptical, the machine puts the calories burned at say 470. When I do the same workout on the stationary bike, the calories burned number comes in in the mid 200's.

I seem to be working just as hard on both. Any ideas on the reason for the big discrepancy? Which one is closer to the actual calorie burn? (I am 201 lbs).

Thanks in advance for any light you can shed on this.

Hi All
The gym I go to has lots of cardio equipment, all of which requires you to enter your weight, level and type of workout, etc.

I noticed when I do 30 mins of HIIT on the elliptical, the machine puts the calories burned at say 470. When I do the same workout on the stationary bike, the calories burned number comes in in the mid 200's.

I seem to be working just as hard on both. Any ideas on the reason for the big discrepancy? Which one is closer to the actual calorie burn? (I am 201 lbs).

Thanks in advance for any light you can shed on this.

It's possible that it's accurate and it's possible that it's nonsense.

Calorie estimates of machines can be accurate, but you should not assume that that are accurate.

The simplest way to compare different exercises for calories is to use a heart monitor that counts calories. You have to do a little homework to make sure the heart monitor counts are reasonable, but then, you can use the heart monitor for bike, elliptical, freeweights, you name it. Then you can tell.

It wouldn't surprise me if you were burning more on the elliptical than on the bike, but you don't know until you measure with the same yardstick.

And whatever you do; do not use one of those sites that estimate calories by activity and time. Those are very inaccurate.

I noticed when I do 30 mins of HIIT on the elliptical, the machine puts the calories burned at say 470. When I do the same workout on the stationary bike, the calories burned number comes in in the mid 200's.

I seem to be working just as hard on both. Any ideas on the reason for the big discrepancy? Which one is closer to the actual calorie burn? (I am 201 lbs).

You'll probably notice that the stationary bike doesn't ask for your weight. That's because it's not "weight-bearing" cardio; the elliptical is. (You're standing).

People have said the elliptical calorie burn is wildly exaggerated. I haven't found that to be true from my own experiences (ymmv). But, I do my best to make the workout as effective as possible by either letting go of the suport bars when safe and pumping my arms naturally, or holding on with just two loose fingers. I also keep the resistance up to the highest level at which I can maintain 130-140 rpm, so I'm not just spinning.

My assumption would be that if you did both the elliptical trainer and stationary bike at a steady heart rate of 155 BPM - you would burn the same amount of calories. It may take less effort (possibly) to reach 155 BPM on the elliptical than on the bike due to more muscles involved and more simulated moving through space, but I would guess that calories are burned respective to heart rate and not cardiovascular exercise method.

One could lift in a fast tempo, low rest "circuit training" manner and knock out weight training and cardio training in one swoop.

So - my opinion is:

The elliptical burns 2x more calories than the bike if you use the elliptical 2x longer (assuming both are used at the same heart rate.) Trust not the calorie expenditure calculators on the cardio equipment. Buy a heart rate monitor.

You'll probably notice that the stationary bike doesn't ask for your weight. That's because it's not "weight-bearing" cardio; the elliptical is. (You're standing).

People have said the elliptical calorie burn is wildly exaggerated. I haven't found that to be true from my own experiences (ymmv). But, I do my best to make the workout as effective as possible by either letting go of the suport bars when safe and pumping my arms naturally, or holding on with just two loose fingers. I also keep the resistance up to the highest level at which I can maintain 130-140 rpm, so I'm not just spinning.


Is there anything wrong to upping the resistance? I prefer to go about 100 RPM's on the eliptical with teh resistance set fairly high. I'm still getting my heartrate up, but don't have bouncing up and down when you are going really fast.

I've been using my home elliptical for 5 months now and I've always wondered how many caloires I burn. Height/Age/Weight staying the same, my burned calories seem to be based on RPM and not Heart Rate. The biggest way to change amount of calories burned is by increasing the amount of time I stay on the Elliptical, and not the intensity of the workout. I could jack up the tension, which in turn tells me the amount of watts I am generating has increased, but this usually keeps me from keep my HR in a particular target zone.

Currently 30 minutes of a high intensity interval (4 min high, 4 min rest, with heart rate going to 85-95% MHR on the hard parts) tells me I burn 750 calories. My Polar Heart Rate monitor tells me I've burned 425 cals in that time.

Switching to 45 minutes of LISS the Elliptical tells me I've burned 950-1000 (again, based on RPM) while my Polar HRM tells me I've burend 650.

Not sure how it does all the calculations, but it seems to think that it's making you burn about 30% more cals then the Polar Watch. All I know is that I'm making progress by being on the damn thing from day to day regardless of what it's telling me.

Is there anything wrong to upping the resistance? I prefer to go about 100 RPM's on the eliptical with teh resistance set fairly high. I'm still getting my heartrate up, but don't have bouncing up and down when you are going really fast.

I doubt it. I think that keeping resistance high for whatever RPM you're working at is most important. That, and not using your arms to hold yourself up.

My assumption would be that if you did both the elliptical trainer and stationary bike at a steady heart rate of 155 BPM - you would burn the same amount of calories. It may take less effort (possibly) to reach 155 BPM on the elliptical than on the bike due to more muscles involved and more simulated moving through space, but I would guess that calories are burned respective to heart rate and not cardiovascular exercise method.

The elliptical burns 2x more calories than the bike if you use the elliptical 2x longer (assuming both are used at the same heart rate.) Trust not the calorie expenditure calculators on the cardio equipment. Buy a heart rate monitor.

That's pretty close to the story. If the heart rate is steady and the same for two different exercises, then those to exercises are burning close to the same Calories.

Heart rate monitors give you control over which way Calories will be estimated so you know if you can trust them.

6 months ago I weighed 212lbs. Right now I weigh 194.

I use my eliptical regularly.

The eliptical won't burn twice the calories of a stat bike unless the parameters can be compared and rectified.

If you do 10 min on the stat at it's highest setting you will probably burn more calories than doing 10 min on the elipt at it's lowest setting.

But it would also depend on your ferocity and intensity for the same period on either.

GENERALLY the elipt will burn more, all things being equal, because you are standing up and using more muscles proportionately than the stat bike, which, because you are seated takes half the body out of the equation.

And if you hold a dumbell in each hand and do the elipt work "free-style", you will definitely be using more muscles than a bike.

I've never bought into the "monitor your heart rate" routine. Except as a possible precaution for over-exertion.

When doing HIIT it's almost impossible to keep a handle on the heart rate effectively.

Never owned a monitor...never will.

The important thing is to get out and do it.

I do at least 10 min of HIIT or 30min of LISS.

In a public building I never use the elevator. Always take the stairs no matter how many floors up.

In some ways the heart rate monitor can work against you...especially if you make the heart rate the focus of the routine instead of the workout itself.

Exertion is calories burned...period. If you happen to hit 150bpm during a session that called for (by your calculations) 120bpm, don't fret about it.

Even if you are just out on a walk, your heart rate will fluctuate depending on your speed.