Related
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Forerunner 965 doesn't track NEAT or calories burned accurately

2117613
over 1 year ago

It seems very unlikely that Garmin is tracking NEAT calories at all.

Exhibit A:

1 hour and 49 minute run = 1291 calories burned. I can believe that.

However, I also did 31k steps that day (the run accounted for 14,000 of them).

So for the remaining 17,000 steps AND other active activities throughout the day, I only burned another 83 calories total.

I find that hard to believe.

Meanwhile, Fitbit seems to capture the actual NEAT calories. While the calories from the run were very close to each other, my Fit Bit Charge 5 said I burned far more calories throughout the day.

My Garmin. which I love for other reasons but cost 4x as much should be more accurate when calculating calorie expenditures.

  • 0 over 1 year ago in reply to 2117613

    As noted above. I guess you issue is that Garmin gives a lower figure and you want a higher one.  

    You have 2 choices, go back to your old tracker or ignore the figures and do what you always have.  

    It’s not a medical grade device and calorie burn figures from any trackers are a best guess. Personally I ignore them and use the scales to confirm if I’m eating too much or too likely.  Just over 3100 calories seems to be the sweet spot.  Over the weeks and months garmin suggests 2989.  So pretty close. 

    I cannot be more clear here, calorie burn is a best guess in any device. Garmin is better than most but, just because you want a higher figure doesn’t mean it’s wrong. 

  • 0 over 1 year ago in reply to 2687480

    This is a question for a trained medical professional.

  • 0 over 1 year ago

    Did you ever find a fix for this. I just got my forerunner 965 and have the exact same issue. For example today up until 2pm i had only 28 « active » calories burned. Meanwhile i went grocery shopping, went up and down stairs to do laundry, i cleaned my house, vacuumend mopped etc. And i was at 4000+ steps and only 28 active calories? And even worse, my max heartrate recorded by that time was 73? What a joke. I am still wearing my fitbit to compare and by the end of the day it is 1000 calories more than garmin. When i create an activity it seems more accurate, still lower than fitbit but at least its showing that my HR can actually go above 73. 
    i spent the big bucks for a new smart watch to replace my fitbit with the training capabilities of garmin. But i think at this point i will keep my fitbit for everyday usage and use my garmin only during a training.

    Yesterday i did a test, not creating an activity, to bring my heartrate up above 120. Once it got up to 130 i took a screen shot of garmin connect which shows that my heart got up to 130, but that heartrate was not recorded as the high bmr of the day.

  • 0 10 months ago in reply to roxieslaf

    Hi

    I have the same issue. I bought forerunner 965 3 weeks ago and already see there is something wrong. Previously I used Fenix and did not have such experience. For example I recorded one activity today that burned over 300kcal but on the screen with active/rest I see only 250kcal as active. I also have the same opinion as some people here that there is probably a bug when it comes to measuring neat properly. Even if I spend the active day but won’t record any activity, it will show me that I burned less than 100kcal as active. 
    I started to regret that I chose this model, should continue with Fenix..

  • 0 10 months ago in reply to 6416174

    The reason why it doesn’t show 300 is because you would have burned some calories anyway.  Likely 50 or 60 doing nothing.  Active = exercise minus resting.  

    I agree though, there is an issue with neat and calories burned outside of an activity.   My own estimate is around 100 off.  Perhaps 200 on some days.  It’s not miles away.  

    we all want to burn loads of calories but most watches overestimate by miles.  Fitbit and Apple are some of the worst.  

    in all honesty this will never be accurate.  It’s a guide and it comes close.  The best way to check is to weigh yourself.  If you gain weight, eat less, if you lose weight, eat more.   

    don’t rely on your watch.  

  • 0 10 months ago in reply to bigdwazda

    I do not rely on my watch. I just want to point out they should do something with this particular model as I had two other ones - fenix and one of previous forerunners and I know there is something definitely wrong. If I spend so much money on my watch I demand some quality that I always got from Garmin. That’s all. So it is not just a matter of +/- 100kcal, it’s a matter of delivering quality that I expected to get for this price. 

  • 0 10 months ago in reply to 6416174

    I understand your frustration, however, I feel the algorithm is better.  Like you I got higher calorie burns on previous watches.  The issue being that I believe these were incorrect.  Older watches over estimated calorie burn.  I believe the 965 veers a little the other way but not by much.  

    if I wear my 645, I could eat an extra 500 calories a day, the scales wouldn’t like it though. :-).  Everyone’s body is different so yours may be miles out.  However, like I said, the calorie burn is a best guess at this point.