Why no separate activities for hiking vs backpacking?

I922sParkCir said:

One interesting example is that when I look at backpacking vs hiking in Connect I’m not seeing a significant difference in calories expended. 

This is me with ~28 pound/13 kg pack:

i.imgur.com/Odnhcpd.jpg

This is me with a ~5 pound/2.25 kg running vest:

i.imgur.com/y0LNpZo.jpg

They are relatively comparable. I’m going a little faster without that pack, and I had a little more elevation gain. My heart rates are comparable too. Should they be? Am I actually burning the same calories?

Ya that sounds right to me. When you had the pack, you were going slower with less incline. Without the pack, you were going faster with more incline. Either way, you were expending a comparable amount of energy.

whats your body weight

Hi, look if you want to compare the 2 activities to each other you have to be a bit more scientific I think. Currently:

The activities are different

The routes are different

They are different distances

They are different durations

They are different ascent profiles

They are different weights

They are different temperatures as well

If you want to compare, then you try to reduce the variables to the one you are interested in which is weight. So use the same course, same weather, etc etc etc. Do it using backpacking, then a few days later do it again with hiking and see if the weight difference shows up in the results.

Test 1&2, do the route backpacking with both sets of weights with a few days rest between

Test 3&4, do the route hiking with both sets of weights with a few days rest between

Then you can see the effect of weight on each activity and see the variations between activities if there are any.

Yes I know its 4 activities, but if you want a more accurate answer where only the weight is changing then thats how you can do it.

I dont think the watch activities are that different, its more in what the default data screens show you. But if you do controlled tests like above you might be able to answer the question with a bit more confidence in the results.

Note.

I didnt realize backpacking wasnt an activity (just checked, duh I should read more carfully). Well no problems, copy hike and rename it backpacking, or copy walk and rename it backpacking, then change the data screens for whatever interests you. I doubt you will see a difference between walk and hiking, but it would be an interesting experiment to try.

2572376 said:

you have to be a bit more scientific

Do you use a chest strap for hiking?

The best way to compare it before doing big activities: do a hike on the same ways/paths twice, one time without and the other time with a backpack/weight. So you can see, if you may get trustable values...

That you gave me an upvote, does that mean that you are using a chest strap?

While I haven't done an experiment precisely the way you described (which would be much more scientific, I agree) I have done quite a lot of hiking and backpacking with my Fenix, as it's the primary reason I bought the watch. While I don't have the exact figures (because I didn't realize I would need precise data to win internet arguments, haha) I can definitely see that generally I burn way more calories while carrying a backpack, than without. I always use "Hike" for both activities.

Like I said, I don't know the exact difference, but what I have noticed generally is that I burn way more calories when I've got a backpack on, which is reasonable to assume is because my HR is elevated because my body is working harder.

Hi, its not an argument, I just described a way of analysing what the watch was recording that is a bit more sensible than showing data while juggling so many variables you have no idea what you are really looking at. If you are really interested in finding out, then do defined repeatable experiments only changing the weight and you will have a more meaningful result which can be compared to previous experiments. :-). 

Thanks for posting the results from your experimentation to validate the earlier suggestions.