VO2max And Calories Burned

Takes time and a few activities to get to the right VO2 Max.

I would also guess you don't have your HR ranges set properly on the watch, which would lead to lower calorie estimate and lower VO2 Max estimate.

EDIT: Sorry, just had a look at your activity file and the calories look right to me generally, about 100 - 110 / mile and if your HR is getting in to 160s at 11 mi / mile + pace you probably do not have a very high VO2 Max.

Upgraded to the beta today, but not sure if this is related to that because its the first run I have done with the device.

Got a VO2max of 25, and I know that my fitness level is good, not poor. I get good VO2max numbers with my Suunto device, so I don't understand why I am getting such poor numbers with the F5.

Also, it only gave me 323 calories burned for the run. I normally get over 600 calories burned on this run at this intensity.

Here is the activity...

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1660027919

Everything else seems to be fine, and the GPS track is very good IMO.

Anyone else having similar issue with VO2max and calories burned?

thanks in advance.
Bob

Wow, that's a sweet GPS track, but back to your question, I can't say about the VO2Max, I've never been able to generate one since my knees won't let me run. I don't own a power meter for my bike (too expensive for me), but I can attest that the way Garmin and Suunto generate calorie burn are totally different. I used to own a Fenix 3HR, and was fairly pleased with it, except for the GPS tracks. I now own a Suunto Spartan Ultra, and it appears that doing the same group fitness classes, I burn probably between 20-30% more with the Suunto than with the Garmin. I say just go with the flow, and stay within your calorie allocation, don't worry too much about the calorie burn, it's arbitrary anyway, IMHO.
That track is really sweet though.. :-)
Steve

Takes time and a few activities to get to the right VO2 Max.

I would also guess you don't have your HR ranges set properly on the watch, which would lead to lower calorie estimate and lower VO2 Max estimate.

EDIT: Sorry, just had a look at your activity file and the calories look right to me generally, about 100 - 110 / mile and if your HR is getting in to 160s at 11 mi / mile + pace you probably do not have a very high VO2 Max.

Dude, I'm 59 years old...:)

I was in zone 5 for over 30 minutes.

I get way more calories on this same run at this intensity all the time with my Suunto and my F3HR.

Just seems very low to me. Maybe it takes a couple weeks or so to get more accurate numbers?

Do you know if activity class is still used or not?

thanks,
Bob

Edit: My MHR is 161 (according to a stress test I had done).

Wow, that's a sweet GPS track, but back to your question, I can't say about the VO2Max, I've never been able to generate one since my knees won't let me run. I don't own a power meter for my bike (too expensive for me), but I can attest that the way Garmin and Suunto generate calorie burn are totally different. I used to own a Fenix 3HR, and was fairly pleased with it, except for the GPS tracks. I now own a Suunto Spartan Ultra, and it appears that doing the same group fitness classes, I burn probably between 20-30% more with the Suunto than with the Garmin. I say just go with the flow, and stay within your calorie allocation, don't worry too much about the calorie burn, it's arbitrary anyway, IMHO.
That track is really sweet though.. :-)
Steve

Yeah, I installed the beta today, then went outside and let it soak for 20 minutes.

I'm very pleased with the GPS and the OHR. much much better than my F3HR.

I'm not really counting calories or anything, but I do expect to see a better burn for the work I put into the workout...:)

Dude, I'm 59 years old...:)

I was in zone 5 for over 30 minutes.

I get way more calories on this same run at this intensity all the time with my Suunto and my F3HR.

Just seems very low to me. Maybe it takes a couple weeks or so to get more accurate numbers?

Do you know if activity class is still used or not?

thanks,
Bob

Edit: My MHR is 161 (according to a stress test I had done).

I just don't agree, the Garmin is correct. 100-120 calories per miles is absolutely in the ballpark for 146 bpm with 12:20ish miles. Obviously it will vary with your weight but NO WAY it is 200+ calories per mile like your old watch was claiming. I think your Garmin is far, far closer to the truth.

http://running.competitor.com/2015/03/training/many-calories-running-burn_123951

Dude, I'm 59 years old...:)

I was in zone 5 for over 30 minutes.

I get way more calories on this same run at this intensity all the time with my Suunto and my F3HR.

Just seems very low to me. Maybe it takes a couple weeks or so to get more accurate numbers?

Do you know if activity class is still used or not?

thanks,
Bob

Edit: My MHR is 161 (according to a stress test I had done).

Dude, I am 52 so not a heck of a lot younger and my running VO2Max (which is not age dependent in any way) runs 45 to 51 depending on my current fitness level and I ran 6 miles today at 8:13 / mile pace and burned about 640 calories. My average HR was 153 BPM and max is 178 for reference.

Wasn't trying to put you down in any way, was an honest observation based on the data.

Your VO2Max might increase a bit after a few weeks, mine is lagging a little behind where my 735XT put it after only a few runs with the fenix.

Yeah, I installed the beta today, then went outside and let it soak for 20 minutes.

I'm very pleased with the GPS and the OHR. much much better than my F3HR.

I'm not really counting calories or anything, but I do expect to see a better burn for the work I put into the workout...:)

What are your recording settings? GPS or GPS+GLONASS? Smart or 1 sec data recording?

Upgraded to the beta today, but not sure if this is related to that because its the first run I have done with the device.

Got a VO2max of 25, and I know that my fitness level is good, not poor. I get good VO2max numbers with my Suunto device, so I don't understand why I am getting such poor numbers with the F5.

Also, it only gave me 323 calories burned for the run. I normally get over 600 calories burned on this run at this intensity.

Here is the activity...

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1660027919

Everything else seems to be fine, and the GPS track is very good IMO.

Anyone else having similar issue with VO2max and calories burned?

thanks in advance.
Bob

My advice is not to rely on a watch for VO2 max numbers. There are a number of sub-maximal tests one can take that will give you a good estimate of VO2 max, like the following:

http://www.runningforfitness.org/calc/vo2max/cooper

http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/OneAndHalf.html

An alternative would be to simply take the ~$100 plunge and actually get tested for your real VO2max.

What are your recording settings? GPS or GPS+GLONASS? Smart or 1 sec data recording?

GPS + GLONASS with 1 second recording.

The battery life is awesome on this thing, so I figure why not use the best settings.

Dude, I am 52 so not a heck of a lot younger and my running VO2Max (which is not age dependent in any way) runs 45 to 51 depending on my current fitness level and I ran 6 miles today at 8:13 / mile pace and burned about 640 calories. My average HR was 153 BPM and max is 178 for reference.

Wasn't trying to put you down in any way, was an honest observation based on the data.

Your VO2Max might increase a bit after a few weeks, mine is lagging a little behind where my 735XT put it after only a few runs with the fenix.

WOW!!!

You're in good shape.

I power just power walked for the past couple years, but about 8 months ago I started having trouble keeping my heart rate up enough just power walking (even at 4.5 mph) so I started adding run intervals into my power walks. I could only run for about 30 seconds at a time to start, but now I can run 5 miles. I only run at about a 5 mph pace right now, but I am working on improving my fitness level.

I am wondering now if my other devices have been deceiving me all this time now.

Also, I know it takes up to a month of activities before the F5 starts giving more accurate numbers, so I'm just going to keep doing what I'm doing and see what happens.

Thank you for your insight. I am starting to rethink some things now.