Important Update: Calorie Count will be shutting down on March 15th. Please click here to read the announcement. Data export is available.
i did an hour today and it said 600 calories and thats just ridiculous. so i logged 270 calories by walking 4.0mph.
the treadclimber says it burns 2x the amount of calories than just walking on a treadmill. its kinda of like a stepper and treadmill combined.
So if the treadmill is at no incline, and the treadclimer is at incline 12 it would indeed burn twice as many calories - walking uphill does burn more calories than walking along flat ground, neh?
A bit misleading though, if you don't take the time to check out which conditions that statement is true under.
It's not impossible that walking uphill will burn 5-800 calories/hour depending on the incline you use and the speed you walk at. Though I'd be sceptical of the calories-burned claim too if it didn't either measure your power output in watts or your heart rate while working out. Machines will typically over-estimate your calories burned by 22%-35% if they don't use your HRM data or measure your power output directly - though halving your burn was probably overdoing it a bit ;)
im trying to do really well and to focus. i just got back from whole foods. only bought veggies, fruit, oatmeal, yogurt and granola for my yogurt .
bakc to the treadclimber... it has two inclines.. a min and max so i dont know what to tell ya for that.. i had it at max of course. my average heart rate was 110, so not high at all. i can never get it high walking.
I'm thinking that you can probably log it as either a fast uphill walk, or Climbing Hills With 0 To 9 Pound Load if the incline is steep enough; and using the highest incline sure sounds pretty steep. A stairmaster would prolly burn even more calories in a given timeframe, but meh, I think you're probably getting pretty good exercise as is as long as you keep the incline high.
If you want higher accuracy, a heart rate monitor is the way to go, but meh, I think using the CC estimates tend to be close enough for most people, considering the results.
I don't have a heart rate monitor, so I can't say for sure how many calories the treadclimber burns. However, I do know that the calorie read on the machine is likely very inflated. Entering your height and weight will help a bit, but if you hold onto the machine while you're walking (which I've seen most people do), you're not burning nearly as many calories as the machine indicates. Women at my gym live and die for the machine because they think they can burn 1000 calories an hour...and that's definitely wrong. It's a much better workout (better=more calories burned) if you can avoid holding on (though be careful because it's very easy to slip on the machine).
if you did it for an hour, i think you're underestimating your calories at 270, though that depends on the speed and treadle setting (min vs. max). either way, an hour is great--you should feel great that you did A LOT (not just "something")! i guess it can't hurt to underestimate, unless your deficit is already quite large.
letting go takes some practice, but it really improves the quality of your workout. try doing two minutes hand's on, one minute hand's off. when you don't hold on, you're not only using more of your hamstrings, you're also recruiting muscles from your core to keep yourself stable. plus, it just makes life more exciting!
I have a step machine at home. It's not as fancy as yours but does the job. Anyway on that I counted that I burn 1cal for every 6 steps it counts & have done an hour on it before & reached 600cals burnt.
Hi everyone. I work out mostly on the elliptical machine. I use a heart rate monitor though (the MIO). The monitor on the machine is not as accurate. I usually compare the heart rate monitor to what the machine says during my workout. The calories burned on the elliptical machine is way lower than what's shown on my heart rate monitor. The setting on the machine is not exactly geared to your workout. If you get a heart rate monitor compare the two and you will see that. I do approximately 60 minutes on the elliptical and my monitor reads between 700-850 calories burned, for 5 miles, depending on how hard I'm working out. I usually do approximately 20 minutes on weights or the treadmill after the elliptical. I try to leave the gym buring approximately 1100 - 1200 calories.
I find when I use the cross trainer (stepping and using arms like cross country skiing) it says I burn 600 kCal in 50 minutes but I'm working hard! I'm pretty fit, but to get there I have to be really sweating and I'm usually stepping at a rate of 180 (whatever that is). It says I burn a bit over 10 cals a minute.
I think that's pretty accurate when I look at the weeks I do it. The deficit it produces seems to add up with how much I lose those weeks.
I'd also agree with Laura916 about mixing it up.
Do intervals - sprint on it for a minute, then go a bit slower. Also, focus on leading with your arms for a few minutes - so don't use your legs to drive it as much, use your arms. I find it really tones them quickly.
I also always make sure I'm using my core as much as possible, so that I'm not just shifting my weight to move the steps. It seems to be working (I've lost about 4 inches from my waist in a few weeks, and I mostly just x-train and row (erg and in a boat)).