I know that calories burned during an exercise is just an algorithmic estimate that shouldn't be taken completely seriously, but, I've always assumed it was simply based on time and average heart rate for the most part, so, that relative comparisons between activities would make sense.
But, check out these two activities done one day after the other with no settings changed or anything else that I can think of:
Strength Workout: 62 minutes, 133/166 Avg/Max HR, 105 Training Load, 811 Calories Burned (~13/min)
Indoor Cycling: 30 minutes, 150/177 Avg/Max HR, 78 Training Load, 210 Calories Burned (~7/min)
So listen ... I'm an overweight guy with a poor V02 max (working on getting healthier folks!), so, to many of you .. you might question the calories burned for the Strength Workout. No problem. It's probably high. But, again, my point is that on a relative basis, they should make sense. And I put in way more effort on my Indoor Cycling routine, so, I can't understand why I'm burning 13 calories/minute doing strength with a 133 average heart rate, but, only burning 7 calories/minute doing cycling with a 150 average heart rate. The Training Load makes sense to me for sure, but, not the calories.
For the record, I did the cycling on a Peloton with Garmin Vector 3 power meter pedals installed (might have something to do with it?). The Peloton app estimated my calories at around 450 which sounds more reasonable as compared to my Strength Workout.
Again, I know that these are all estimates and that they should be taken with a grain of salt, but, I'd really prefer that they make sense between activities and for some reason, my cycling activities ALL seem to be really low (this is just one example ... happens every time). My power meter is calibrated using my current FTP estimate, and my HR settings are the same for all sports (I don't have special cycling HR).
Any thoughts or suggestions?