How to accurately count calories burned when riding an ebike / pedelec using IOS / Apple Health

[Tetsugaku]

Hey folks - I have no idea if anyone has any ideas about this but I thought I'd try you. I'm assuming a forum dedicated to the most advanced bikes you can buy is not full of technophobes!

I'm exercising for weight loss as well as calorie counting. (yes, I have tried a dozen other methods, this is the one I'm doing for now!). I know I need a defect of 1,100 calories a day, I know that a combination of my Apple Watch to track exercise and Loose It! app to track food will give me a sum total of calories burned + calories eaten and show me the numbers.

However. Electric bikes don't play well with just opening my watch, hitting outside ride and then hitting stop when I finish, because of course the effort I am putting in is definitely not what is being recorded. The motor helping me and all that...

I have a Specialized, their mission control app does *not* link to the apple health app and report exercise. However, it does upload straight to Strava if you want. Now, Strava will send data to Apple Health, but what Strava sees can be quite variable...

Turns out that this is way more complicated than I hoped it would be. However I do have a solution

Calories logged via 3 different methods are VASTLY different. I had a 24K commute home last night and I recorded it in 3 different simultaneous ways:
- Strava, via their app - 1,194 calories
- Apple Watch, started an outdoor ride - 793 calories
- Mission Control (specialised only) which then uploads a ride to Strava - 327 calories

I am staggered at how different these counts are.

Annoyingly, given how bad the mission control app is, I think it's recording the most accurate burn count.

Strava app - has no idea that 70% of the effort is being provided by the bike (even when the ride is specifically recorded as an ebike ride). And therefore counts the highest burn.

Apple Watch - Second best. More accurate because it has a heart rate monitor (and it's good, I've compared live to others). However the calculation for an "Outside bike ride" takes GPS into account as well and does a best guess. Still out by a factor of more than 2 however.

Mission Control - the only app that knows for sure how much effort I put in and how much the bike put in (which you can live display in the app, useful). My back of an envelope calculation whilst I'm riding, comparing my effort & motor effort says I'm putting in about 30% of the work. Which also tallies up if you look at the Strava app calorie count Vs the mission control calorie count.


What does all this mean?

If you are calorie counting to lose weight (I am, I am trying to lose 15KG) Then YOU MUST LOOK AT YOUR SOURCES CLOSELY. Because the difference between the high and the low counts is enough to make me put on weight, not lose it.

Can anyone pick holes in my logic? Please do!

How am I recording everything?
I am using the Lose it! app to record all my food
I am recording rides on my levo ONLY with the mission control app, which uploads to Strava, which uploads to the Apple Health app
Lose it! gives me a total calorie budget for the day that meets my goal of a 1,100 calorie deficit. This is worked out based on my daily burn for existing PLUS my exercise burn MINUS my total calorific intake.

I think I now have an accurate system. However it was not simple or easy to work out. I can't imagine most people being able to do this properly

 

[daveboy]

I was always told heart rate is the best way to calculate calories burned.

http://www.calories-calculator.net/Calories_Burned_By_Heart_Rate.html

 

[Tetsugaku]

Sadly it's not https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2017/05/fitness-trackers-accurately-measure-heart-rate-but-not-calories-burned.html

 

[daveboy]

Sadly it's not https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2017/05/fitness-trackers-accurately-measure-heart-rate-but-not-calories-burned.html

That report is a bit misleading because it doesn't take into account any
other factors, Whereas the link I provided lets you put in your age,weight and gender.

 

[Tetsugaku]

Judgement pretty much seems to be that heart rate is not a good estimate of calories burned unfortunately.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

Apps like Strava base their calculations on simple algorithms that are clearly way off. They say you burnt more calories freewheeling down a big hill than you did sweating your way back up it.

You need something that measures the power you're putting in to get an accurate result, but I'd say, other than that, heart rate is about as good as you can get.

With all these things, accuracy isn't that important. It's results that matter, so make a plan based on you Apple watch heart rate calculations, then see how quickly you shed weight. If your weight doesn't go down fast enough or as fast as it should with your calorie deficit program, make a new plan.

To be honest, you don't need any complicated equipment, plans, records or calculations. It's dead simple to lose weight, you just eat as little as your body will stand and get out on your bike as much as you can.

Hard exercise is good for rapid weight lost, but on an ebike, it's not so easy to push yourself hard enough. Your aim should be to build up some stamina by reducing the power you use on the bike, then get a non-electric bike for exercise. I use a road bike for exercise and my electric bike for transport and convenience. I lost 26 kg (just over 4 stone) in a year. A non-electric bike gives you a big incentive to reduce weight because every kg lost reduces your pedal effort by approximately 1%, so that means I can go up the same hills with only 75% the effort as what I needed a year ago. I can feel the difference absolutely. The first time I tried the road bike, it was really hard. Now I find it just as easy as my electric bike.

I did 30 moderate hilly miles today. Fitbit says that I burnt 1200 calories during the ride and 2909 in total today so far. Sports Tracker says I burnt 2000 calories during the ride (sounds a bit high). I will eat about 1500 calories today, so I will definitely lose some weight. That's all that matters.

Tomorrow, I will do the same ride (to see forum member Geoff9 and help him fix his bike), so I could pig-out tomorrow with a Chinese takeaway and feel that I earnt it, or I could eat what I always eat and lose more weight. Difficult decision!

 

[Nealh]

On my e-mtb ride to the south downs and back I lost 3lbs 10oz in weight. I weighed myself before and after in the same attire.
For lunch I ate my nice focaccia roll and a choc cake, along with some nice snacking fruit and 700mls of juice.

 

[Tetsugaku]

Apps like Strava base their calculations on simple algorithms that are clearly way off. They say you burnt more calories freewheeling down a big hill than you did sweating your way back up it.

You need something that measures the power you're putting in to get an accurate result, but I'd say, other than that, heart rate is about as good as you can get.

With all these things, accuracy isn't that important. It's results that matter, so make a plan based on you Apple watch heart rate calculations, then see how quickly you shed weight. If your weight doesn't go down fast enough or as fast as it should with your calorie deficit program, make a new plan.

To be honest, you don't need any complicated equipment, plans, records or calculations. It's dead simple to lose weight, you just eat as little as your body will stand and get out on your bike as much as you can.

Hard exercise is good for rapid weight lost, but on an ebike, it's not so easy to push yourself hard enough. Your aim should be to build up some stamina by reducing the power you use on the bike, then get a non-electric bike for exercise. I use a road bike for exercise and my electric bike for transport and convenience. I lost 26 kg (just over 4 stone) in a year. A non-electric bike gives you a big incentive to reduce weight because every kg lost reduces your pedal effort by approximately 1%, so that means I can go up the same hills with only 75% the effort as what I needed a year ago. I can feel the difference absolutely. The first time I tried the road bike, it was really hard. Now I find it just as easy as my electric bike.

I did 30 moderate hilly miles today. Fitbit says that I burnt 1200 calories during the ride and 2909 in total today so far. Sports Tracker says I burnt 2000 calories during the ride (sounds a bit high). I will eat about 1500 calories today, so I will definitely lose some weight. That's all that matters.

Tomorrow, I will do the same ride (to see forum member Geoff9 and help him fix his bike), so I could pig-out tomorrow with a Chinese takeaway and feel that I earnt it, or I could eat what I always eat and lose more weight. Difficult decision!

You're absolutely right about the apps being terrible, I had no idea how variable they could be until I ran my own experiment on that one ride!

Luckily - Mission COntrol, which is the specialized app that hooks directly into he bike, does have a power meter and so it seems to be the most accurate judge of the effort I am putting in. I have my phone stuck to my bars and I can see in real time the energy the battery is putting in right next to how much energy I am putting in. I am sure now that the methods I out lined is going to work the best.

I've *really* snuggled with weight and I've found the counting to be the best way of doing it *for me*. Mainly because I can quite easily eat less, but then when I am doing long exercises, like riding or worse, running, I bonk, badly and frequently, meaning I cannot train at all. More than once during marathon training I had to get a taxi home from half way along the route because my vision went grey and I nearly passed out!

26KG is a hell of a lot to lose, well done you! I probably have 20KG to lose and I am very much looking forward to putting in less effort to do the same things.
Thanks again for the feedback!

 

[GLJoe]

I've *really* snuggled with weight and I've found the counting to be the best way of doing it *for me*. Mainly because I can quite easily eat less, but then when I am doing long exercises, like riding or worse, running, I bonk, badly and frequently, meaning I cannot train at all. More than once during marathon training I had to get a taxi home from half way along the route because my vision went grey and I nearly passed out!

You probably know this but ...
There is now a fair bit of evidence to suggest that people's bodies get conditioned to use and expect energy in two very distinct ways when undertaking long exercise.
One is from simple carbs. The problem with this is that the body only has a small amount of reserve of this, hence the common advice for cyclists that if you are training for more than around an hour, you then need to eat/drink fast energy foods on a regular basis to stop the bonk. Hence the huge industry in gel packs etc.
However the other method to get this sustained energy source is for your body to efficiently convert its fat reserves to usable energy 'on the fly'. The problem with this, is that modern sugary diets have effectively switched off most people's ability to do this. The good news though is that you can retrain your body through following a strict low carb type diet such as the Atkins (and if you read the original books by Dr Atkins, he explains a lot of the medical science behind all of this - it wasn't just another fad diet!). It might take a few weeks or even months, but once you wean yourself off needing a constant stream of simple carbs to fuel your body (and brain!), then you'll usually find that you can perform moderate exercise for really long extended periods with no energy problems - you just need a good supply of water, but that's basically all. And the weight will then come off a lot easier because ... well because the energy is efficiently being derived from the fat reserves!

Also - back to your original question.
I was thinking about this. You should be able to work out (roughly!) how many calories are in a watt. If you know this, then as you have a battery meter, you could see how many watt hours you've used, work out how many total calories that equates to, and subtract it from the standard approximations that your watches etc will report.
Have a gander here to see if this is any good:
http://mccraw.co.uk/powertap-meter-convert-watts-calories-burned/

Cheers.

 

[VictoryV]

Here is a personal guide/account to calorie counting. I lost 22kg in 2014 and still have it off. I was 68 at the time. Working at 100 watts is equivalent to 90 K calories per hour or 1.5 Kcal per minute

 

[Deleted member 4366]

Here is a personal guide/account to calorie counting. I lost 22kg in 2014 and still have it off. I was 68 at the time. Working at 100 watts is equivalent to 90 K calories per hour or 1.5 Kcal per minute

That sounds a bit low. Is that the direct conversion? The human body has a very low efficiency of converting energy source (sugar) into output energy. It's something like 25%, so if that is a straight mechanical conversion, the actual conversion would be 360 Cals per hour, which sounds a bit more realistic when you consider that you burn more than 100 cals per hour doing nothing (actually breathing, pumping blood, thinking, digesting food, etc).

The next thing is whether you want to add the 100 Cals per hour to the 360 pedalling Cals to get a total burn of 460 Cals per hour.

 

[VictoryV]

That sounds a bit low. Is that the direct conversion? The human body has a very low efficiency of converting energy source (sugar) into output energy. It's something like 25%, so if that is a straight mechanical conversion, the actual conversion would be 360 Cals per hour, which sounds a bit more realistic when you consider that you burn more than 100 cals per hour doing nothing (actually breathing, pumping blood, thinking, digesting food, etc).

The next thing is whether you want to add the 100 Cals per hour to the 360 pedalling Cals to get a total burn of 460 Cals per hour.

That is the straight mechanical conversion, any human inefficiencies have to be added. You are correct we are running at about 100 watts just staying alive. They used 100 watts bulbs for each passenger when testing the Concord's cooling system against aerodynamic heating loads - using the fuel as a heat sink I believe