NOTE: Calculative models for predicting energy expenditure under load can vary significantly based on a multitude of factors, some of which are not included in this calculator such as difficulty of terrain, change in elevation, individual physical differences, and more. The Rucking calorie calculator is intended for estimation purposes only.

"As a general rule, rucking burns 2x to 3x more calories than walking. But general rules are generally made for breaking.

One new study put it this way: “Current predictive equations underestimate the metabolic cost of load carriage by military personnel over complex terrain.” That’s nerd speak for, “this burns way more calories than we thought.”

Estimates rucking in Special Forces training burns between 1,500 and 2,250 calories an hour. It also suggests that the heaviest rucking I did in the Arctic burned between 1,850 and 2,150 an hour. These examples are extreme. But they give you a sense of what happens when you explore your edges.

These graphs show data for three different people using 20 and 50-pound ruck weights and walking 3 MPH for 60 mins on different terrain. They’re probably an underestimation and I’m not factoring in BMR.

The catch: Calorie burn is just a way to measure work. If a person is measuring work in calories (instead of time or distance) they probably want to change how their body looks.

This requires two things: Fat loss and muscle growth or preservation.

Rucking is better at burning fat and preserving muscle compared to running. It helps you avoid excess bulk and that skinny-fat look that running can sometimes render.

In a recent study, over 12 days, a group of backcountry hunters/ruckers lost a lot of fat, preserved muscle, and saw fitness and health markers rise. In short: They became human weapons.

Become a human weapon. Ruck."

- Michael Easter