It is nice to have running power, but with power we can calculate calories. There is a huge diference between calories estimated from heart rate and power. https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/2370500613 I got 478 kcal. When i calculate it with average power i get about 1000 kcal energy (kcal) = avg power (W) X duration (hours) X 3.6 what is true ?
When i calculate it with average power i get about 1000 kcal energy (kcal) = avg power (W) X duration (hours) X 3.6 what is true ?
Your formula will give kilojoule, not kilocalories.
To get kilocalories, you will have to divide the result by approx 4.2. So the final result will be around 250 kilocalories.
So it seems that you have burnt 478 kilocalories to do 250 kilocalories of work. In other words an efficiency of more than 50%. I don't know the efficiency of the human body, but that figure sounds quite good - better than the combustion engine in a car.
Your formula will give kilojoule, not kilocalories.
To get kilocalories, you will have to divide the result by approx 4.2. So the final result will be around 250 kilocalories.
So it seems that you have burnt 478 kilocalories to do 250 kilocalories of work. In other words an efficiency of more than 50%. I don't know the efficiency of the human body, but that figure sounds quite good - better than the combustion engine in a car.
I think you are not right. look here https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1802941748 I rode with a power meter, i got 6,815 Cal, 6815/3,6/11,4=166 watts average(186 average show in garmin does not include zeros) on strava it is ok https://www.strava.com/activities/1041209413 I think the running power from garmin is overestimated. I know that, when a cycle at steady pace, i have 240 w at 145 bpm. But today a run average od 119 bpm with average power of 299 Watts
Do the math. You are missing the division by 4.2 in your calculation.
I think the running power from garmin is overestimated.
...in which case the efficiency will also be overestimated (if the burned calories are correct). Which fits very well with what I wrote: An efficiency of more than 50% seems very high.
But that was not the formula that you used in your first post. The formula in your first post would exactly calculate the work you had done in kiloJoule, based on power you had generated. Which was what I pointed out.
If you want to calculate kilocalories burned from average effect performed, taking the 22% efficiency of the human body into consideration, the formula in your first post would have to be changed into: Energy burned (kilocalories) = avg power generated (W) × duration (hours) × 3.6 / 4.186 / 0.22.
...which can be abbreviated into: Energy burned (kilocalories) = avg power generated (W) × duration (hours) × 3.9.
Note that the factor has changed from 3.6 to 3.9. Which may not be much in itself, but more important it will show that you are not just trying to calculate kilojoules generated from watt generated and hours spent.
