Why do different cycling calorie calculators give out different answers, often multiplication of one with a fixed number?

Question

I’m overweight and trying to lose weight via diet and stationary cycling but I’m confused with different calculators

if

Stationary bike says 100 calories (no weight input)

online calculators say 200 400 600 etc asking me the same info including weight

In: 4

Answer 1

Because they’re not designed to be accurate. They’re designed to make you feel good about working towards a goal. There are way too many variables involved for any online calculator outside of a medical setting to be remotely accurate: RHR, THR, wake/rest cycles, body weight, body fat %, muscular concentration, exercise being performed, weights involved in that exercise, caloric intake (which is whole other ball of wax: the #s that are actually on foods are allowed a huge variation in their calculations, as well [e.g. sugar packets can be labeled as having 0 calories per serving if they’re small enough]), intensity of exercise, exact time spent on each exercise at each intensity level, and so on and so on. It’s just too much to plug in and keep updated. Some gym equipment can help mitigate some of those tracking issues, but the body composition and basic metabolism stuff would still be based on an estimated average expenditure at a given weight/gender/age, all of which also play a role.

It is more beneficial for you to track the time you spend *doing* exercise than it is attempting to calorie count, anyways. Odds are real good that you’ll never reach the **ideal** weight, because that’s a myth, anyway (also based on averages and perceptions and a bunch of other misogynistic BS), but it is entirely possible that you can reach a body composition that is healthy, and that should be your goal. Don’t focus on what “looks good”, focus on what it will be like to feel good, and you *will* get there (with a little effort). It will take some time. The recommended weight gain/loss metric is really low (.5 – 4 lbs *per month* is recommended, lower at lower weights and higher at higher weights, up to a point), but you *will* get there and it will be worth it, I promise.