cardio machines' calorie counters?

Haven't seen this question in the time I've been on here - on bikes, treadmills, ellipticals, etc, they all have calorie counters that tell you what you've burned.  How accurate are those counters?  Presumably they do calculations based on speed & resistance or incline?  Any thoughts?

Those counters are useless. They don't even come close. Most of the time they way overshoot the calories. I don't know if it's to make people feel better or what but they're totally off.

Add me on facebook!

once after a 10 min walk, the machine showed 400 calories were burnt. And that was a very expensive branded machine!

Anbe Sivam. Period.

lol 

The max info they calulate based on are; weight, speed, incline, time.

Which will not be very accurate at all.

if u stay at a steady heartrate there are places who have good estimates of exercises at certain heartrates.

ie jump roping etc.

Goal: Cut to less than 10% BF by summer.

Mine undershoots enough that I think it might be almost close to accurate...which is funny as hell, cause it is the cheapest piece a crap I got off a friend.

I did just a 4 minute warm up, nothing hard, very fast walk actually (but I do live in a city, my fast walk is much faster then my slow run, and blow anybody not used to walking out of the water), the counter read 19 calories... When I manage HIIT on the thing... I think I might, just might have broken the 100 calorie marker... I'm a crap runner...  

For every mile, you burn 100 calories. Now, this is saying that its a flat surface with no incline/decline. The elliptical I use is positioned on an incline, and the resistance is elevated. When i get passed the first mile at an accelerated stride, it ranges from 150-170 burned. This makes sense because of the variations in position. However, some machines are totally off. I think that the standard lifelongs; treadmill, stationary bike, and elliptical are somewhat accurate. If anything, off by 50 calories up or down.

I say this because on my sessions on the elliptical, I go for distance and time trials:

Yesterday did 5.25 miles in 40 minutes, and I had burned about 670 calories. This is calculated from the weight given, the course selection(incline/decline), the stride, and the resistance. Thinking like a runner, it does match scientifically. It may be off a little here and there, but not by much.

Current Supplements: Multi, Whey, Caffeine, BCAA, Vitamin C, Calcium
Current Cycle: Strength

"Do not go where the path may lead, instead go where there is no path, and leave a trail."

At least you are doing cardio !!

No very accurate...not at all in fact. But still, you can use this as a reference...if 15 minutes gave you 500 by example...try to have this number increasing.

I really don't care about this number but it's pleasant to see numbre going up while energy level go down.

Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege.

I dont really think there very accurate at all. I usually just ignore them or turn them off. I pay more attention to distance and time tbh.

6'2" @205
press:200, Deadlift:475, Bench:300, P.clean:235, Squat:385
www.Nikdesigns.com

Most machines are based on a 150 pound person of average cardiovasular health.  If you are in good shape it will overshoot your actual calories, if you are overweight and out of shape, it seriously undercuts your efforts.  Some of the high end machines can take your weight into account, but not your muscle makeup.  Too many variables.  Distance is really your only measuring stick.

Do not  waste your time in looking for such details. Just do your work out.