We addressed a practical question that remains largely unanswered after more than a century of active investigation: can equations developed in the laboratory accurately predict the energy expended under free-walking conditions in the field? Seven subjects walked a field course of 6415 meters that varied in gradient (-3.0 to +5.0%) and terrain (asphalt, grass) under unloaded (body weight only, Wb) and balanced, torso-loaded (1.30 x Wb) conditions at self-selected speeds while wearing portable calorimeter and GPS units. Portable calorimeter measures were corrected for a consistent measurement-range offset (+13.8±1.8%, mean±sd) vs. a well-validated laboratory system (Parvomedics TrueOne). Predicted energy expenditure totals (mls O2/kg) from four literature equations: ACSM, Looney, Minimum Mechanics and Pandolf, were generated using the speeds and gradients measured throughout each trial in conjunction with empirically determined terrain/treadmill factors (asphalt=1.0, grass=1.08). The mean energy expenditure total measured for the unloaded field trials (981±91 mls O2/kg) was over-predicted by +4%, +13%, +17% and +20% by the Minimum Mechanics, ACSM, Pandolf, and Looney equations, respectively (corresponding predicted totals: 1018±19, 1108±26, 1145±37, and 1176±24 mls O2/kg). The measured loaded-trial total (1310±153 mls O2/kg) was slightly under-predicted by the Minimum Mechanics equation (-2%, 1289±22 mls O2/kg) and over-predicted by the Pandolf equation (+13%, 1463±32 mls O2/kg). Computational comparisons for hypothetical trials at different constant speeds (range: 0.6-1.8 m/s) on variable-gradient loop courses revealed between-equation prediction differences from 0 to 37%. We conclude that treadmill-based predictions of free-walking field energy expenditure are equation-dependent but can be highly accurate with rigorous implementation.