hi all, i have just moved up from a garmin305 to a 405cx,can anybody tell me how accurate they are with the calorie counts,when running for 2yrs with the 305 it was telling me i was burning around 125/130 calories per mile which i thought was great,then when i moved to 405 with the same information inputted in the 405 says im only burning around 94/96 calories per mile,which one is right coz if its the 405 then i'll be gutted as ive been led to believe in burning a higher rate?
It must depend on what you tell it your weight is, and I think also on how much you climb. I don't know if the vertical distance it uses is the true one or the stupidly exaggerated one that's usually its first choice. E.g. if I run miles round a track, it will first tell me I've climbed ~500m and then correct itself to show correctly that the track is 1-2 m higher at one end than the other.
Thanks for your replys,but like my missus said ive been running for 2yrs now should i still be counting calories,and concentrating more on my fitness and health.?
Visit the official Runner's World page
Follow Runner's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
Run For Charity
About Runner's World
Runner's World is a publication of Hearst Magazines UK which is the trading name of The National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.
Website powered by: Immediate Media Company Limited. | © Runner's World 2002-2013 |