I think it could be a difference caused from the bicycle weight.
My one has a weight from about 28kg I didn´t find a posibility to set this weight to make the calculate more exactly.
So I need some more calories to get up the montain :-) and the speed ist normaly slower.
Well for the first training you had an average heart rate of 149 bpm for an average speed of 16,9 km/h.
For cycling at an average speed of about 17 km/h, Run.GPS assumes a lower heart rate, and thus a lower calorie burn rate.
The calories calculated based upon heart rate are more exact since external factors like wind, the model of your bike et cetera are taken into account through your heart rate.
Hello, here you have 2 very similar Trainings with and without the HRM.
Training: Fahrrad, 16,74km mit HRM in 58:43min = 878 kcal (02.05) Gewicht + HM identisch
http://www.gps-sport.net/trainings/aus-Firma-zur%C3%BCck%2C-Barmer_1374490
Training: Fahrrad, 16,83km ohne HRM in 57:36min = 405 kcal (19.05) Gewicht + HM identisch
http://www.gps-sport.net/trainings/aus-Firma-zur%C3%BCck%2C-extrem-gem%C3%BCtlich_1387580
All my trainings with HRM have between 100%-200% more Calories than without.
The Difference is only so strong when I´m climbing a mountain. When I´m getting down there is no difference.
When I´m running there is the same extrem difference.
Here you have the trainings. That first one is mine with HRM: http://www.gps-sport.net/trainings/Alta-Extremadura-%28Gredos%29_1331967
And this belong to my friend (no HRM used)
http://www.gps-sport.net/trainings/hiking_1332265
The route is not exactly the same, he is lighter than me and he walked one and a half hour less, but the difference is very high anyway. In other occasions, doing the same, we have differences -and we are very competitive about the "animal ranking", so he is angry about that, you know, he thinks I'm cheating ;)
What I really want to know is if that using the HRM I have an accurate information of my calories consumption or maybe there could be a mistake in the measuring.
In fact, depending on if you use a heart rate monitor or not, the formulae for calorie consumption are completely different. The calories depend on the following parameters:
WITH HRM: age, gender, body weight, heart rate, duration
I've done a hiking route using Polar wearlink bluetooth and, according to this, I've spent 4.600 calories (in 8 hours). A friend of mine, has just spent 1200 calories, doing the same route, with the same program, and having a weigh and a high quite similar than me, but without heartrate. Is that normal?