Fifty Plus (50+) - Losing Weight

Setting aside for the moment the obvious statement that I need to lose weight, I find myself wondering about something.

My bike, fully loaded (water, keys, cell phone, etc.) weighs 33 pounds.

I weigh, fully loaded (shoes, helmet, gloves, sunglasses, etc.) weigh 258 pounds.

Which would make biking more fun and enable me to go farther and faster: the bike losing 10-15 pounds (obviously, meaning another bike), or me losing 10-15 pounds?

Why?

When I lost about 40 pounds and went below 200 two years ago, the hills didn't seem so long, and I got dropped while doing 22 mph rather than 18-19 mph. I'm back up to 245 and am much slower.

Wow, that's a good question. IMHO, I think it depends on the type of cycling. For trail riding, I think losing weight will have more impact. For road type riding, I think a ligter bike would make a bigger difference.
Either way, improving endurance is my objective this year.

If you lose more weight, I beleive you will find your body more cardio efficient and working better.

Otherwise, no difference.

15 pounds is 15 pounds.

Gary,

Lose more weight. Your bike is pretty good at self regulating its caloric intake. I, on the other hand, have a more challenging time, especially with a congregation of "feeders," as my Doc calls them.

I'm 6'2" and tip the scales pretty close to your same lbs. The good news is that is 30 lbs less than this time last year. The bad news is that I still have 50-60 lbs to lose. I hope I stay healthy until my physical later this summer. If I can lose another 15-20 by August my Doc will be thrilled.

I found that as I lost the 30 lbs I could climb hills faster and go further without a rest. For instance, we had a warm day in mid January and I took the Cannondale for a ride around Lake Sunapee--- a little over 25 miles with 6 big climbs. Even with all the winter clothing on I completed the ride faster than I ever did last summer and fall.

Lose the weight. I'm in your corner and cheering for you all the way!

Bob

I think that whichever of you (bike or Gary) is most likely to have a coronary is the one that ought to lose the weight. We can only ride as long as we are alive, ya know. But that should not stop you from getting another bike, or two. To quote another member, the correct number of bikes to have is n+1 where n is the number you have now.

Tim

P.S. If you get a bike that "... fully loaded (water, keys, cell phone, etc.) weighs 18 pounds" (i.e. 33-15) I trust you plan to bring lots of $$$

you need the tools and accessories


you don't need the fat

Gary,

If I were you I'd tie the two together. Set a goal: Lose X lbs. and buy a new bike. Remember, the whole idea of riding was to achieve better fitness and feel healthier. The heavier the bike, the more energy you need to move it. The more energy you use, the more fat you burn..... and on and on....


EDIT to clean up idiot english

Simple-reward yourself for losing 15 lbs with a 10 lb lighter bike.Win-Win!!For acceleration it would be better to lose the wt off the tires-rims-pedals,but at a steady speed the where the wt comes from wt matter much.Luck,Charlie

Which would make biking more fun and enable me to go farther and faster: the bike losing 10-15 pounds (obviously, meaning another bike), or me losing 10-15 pounds?
Both will make biking more fun and enable you to go farther and faster.

A key point is that static mass is static mass. If you're simply talking about the amount of mass you have to haul up a hill or push through the air, it doesn't really matter if it's on the bike, on your skeleton, or in your water bottle... it's pretty much the same.

A significant exception, though, is rotating mass... which means, mostly, wheels. When you stomp on the pedals and accelerate, you not only move your total bike/body mass forward... you also spin up your wheel mass. Decrease wheel mass and you will experience better acceleration.

Overall, though, I think that reducing weight is over-emphasized from a speed perspective. Going downhill, more mass actually helps you. (It only helps a little, though, since going downhill is mostly about aerodynamics.) On the flat, mass matters little. Again, aerodynamics reigns... you're better off being narrow than wide, but not much better off being light than heavy. Mass matters when you accelerate, and it matters when you climb. When you climb, mass is mass... it's how much stuff you have to haul up the hill. And when you accelerate, wheels count more than anything else.

All of this having been noted, there are other valid reasons to lose weight off of both the bike and the bod. :)

Gary,

If I were you I'd tie the two together. Set a goal: Lose X lbs. and buy a new bike. Remember, the whole idea of riding was to get achieve better fitness and feel healthier. The heavier the bike, the more energy you need to move it. The more energy you use, the more fat you burn..... and on and on....

I agree wholeheartedly with Serotta (must be the NC connection). You will notice a significant difference by losing body weight. If you decided to get a lighter bike after you lose the weight you will notice another step change in performance. Believe it or not I can tell a difference in 175 lbs versus 170 lbs. Maybe some of it has to do with the additional conditioning it takes to get off the 5 lbs but it makes a noticeable difference on them hills.......

A significant exception, though, is rotating mass... which means, mostly, wheels. When you stomp on the pedals and accelerate, you not only move your total bike/body mass forward... you also spin up your wheel mass. Decrease wheel mass and you will experience better acceleration.


All of this having been noted, there are other valid reasons to lose weight off of both the bike and the bod. :)

Jobst Brandt, author of the noted book, "The Bicycle Wheel" might disagree a bit with you:

http://yarchive.net/bike/rotating_mass.html


From: jbrandt@hpl.hp.com (Jobst Brandt)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: The weight question...
Date: 26 Mar 2000 02:30:27 GMT

Andre Charlebois writes:

> The most important weight is that which is at the periphery of a
> rotating mass. In other words, pedals, rims, tires, tubes are more
> important than cogs, BB's, hubs, etc.

This is an age old fable in bicycling and useful to cite when an
excuse for some new wheels is needed. If they are aerodynamic, then
that's easy to justify even though they are heavier, but just a bit
lighter ones are less so, so out comes the rotational inertia bit.
Inertia is important for acceleration but not at constant speed where
it is probably beneficial, although I don't know of any study that has
quantified this. Francesco Moser used a large flywheel rear wheel in
his last attempt at increasing his Hour Record but the flesh wouldn't
respond. I am sure they analyzed the effects however.

Although it may seem daunting, when another rider pulls away on a hill
or in a bike race on the flat, these accelerations, except in standing
starts, are so small as to make the rotating mass story a hoax. Sure,
the mass counts twice as much when accelerating but two times zero is
still zero, and how long does a rider accelerate. Weight of bicycle
components for climbing is the main consideration, not acceleration.
The rotating mass story is a fable that sounds good and has just
enough technical truth to be one that will probably sustain itself
indefinitely. Making equipment choices by it are a matter of faith,
not fact.

Jobst Brandt <jbrandt@hpl.hp.com>

Gary,

It would be healthier for (both) you and your pocket book to lose those 15 Lbs., also easier on your bike. Keep peddling, and little by little, it will happen. It's a simple formula, burn more calories than you consume. As you drop the pounds, you'll find that you can become more agressive and drop those pounds more and more easily. You've completed the most difficult part, starting... OHB

Gary,

It would be healthier for (both) you and your pocket book to lose those 15 Lbs., also easier on your bike. Keep peddling, and little by little, it will happen. It's a simple formula, burn more calories than you consume. As you drop the pounds, you'll find that you can become more agressive and drop those pounds more and more easily. You've completed the most difficult part, starting... OHB

Well, I agree with this and those above who said something similar, but...

I started biking last June. Fairly quickly, I lost 15 pounds or so, give or take 2 or 3 which is where I began to plateau, up two, down two, etc. I didn't change my diet much, but I now bike between 200-300 miles per month (compared with no miles per month).

My weight has remained stable for months now. And while I don't have a perfect diet, I also have changed it (for the better) considerably in the past year or so. Much less junk food, quite fewer trips to fast food places, many more veggies, etc. Only "bad" habit I really haven't addressed is milk -- I love milk.

Anyway, I would have thought with the increased activity over this length of time my weight would still be dropping, but it's probably been four months since that's happened.

So I know I should lose some more weight, but I'm stumped about how to go about it. I hate trying to follow a diet book. I'm not good at counting calories or that sort of thing. I don't have the will power to live on salads for three months.

Enough whining. I started this thread really from intellectual curiousity about how much does the weight of the bike really matter, not how to diet. I guess i'll continue to search for the right book, or the right plan, and eventually find one that works for me. That's how I found biking, come to think of it, as a way to get exercise! Nothing else was working, that's for sure!

DeeGee,
When I started this activity I weighed 270 on a 6' frame. I used my old 830 with fat knobbies on it (not my butt cheeks, though they qualified) because that's what I had at the time. A couple months later I put 1.5's on it to decrease rolling resistance, which was a great move. Now, I'm down to 228 and very fit aerobically and power-wise. I've rewarded myself with a beautiful Trek 520 which is 10 lbs lighter than the 36lb 830.

It took about 80 to 100 miles/week to do it, but no dieting since I can't do that. There are some vices I won't give up and a thick pizza with Coke or a beer are among them. I positively know that 200-300 miles a month would not have made much difference in my case. For the past two months I've averaged about 120/week. It took that to break below the last plateau at 235-240lbs.

I know you are schedule challenged so just stay at it. Besides, weight is not the final arbiter of good health. If your blood pressure is ok and your triglycerides are ok, then you are healthy. Any exercise you get with your bike is a bonus despite the weight. Keep at it.

Get the other bike anyway!

Switch to apples for snacks. Trust me. ;)

You mainly do the longer rides and for those you have to have the body carbo- loaded. Look as your temporary overweight problem as being preparation for the Century rides you are going to do.

Mind you- you may be putting too much into the carbo load training.

I carbo load for my big ride and hope to put on 5-7lbs in the fortnight before the ride. That is from a base of 145lbs and boy do I feel overweight for that period.

[QUOTE=Digital Gee] Anyway, I would have thought with the increased activity over this length of time my weight would still be dropping, but it's probably been four months since that's happened.

So I know I should lose some more weight, but I'm stumped about how to go about it. I hate trying to follow a diet book. I'm not good at counting calories or that sort of thing. I don't have the will power to live on salads for three months. [QUOTE]

Here is a rule I have learned to live by and respect.

"small disciplined changes over a long period of time will reward the largest dividens"

Don't try to eat the entire elephant at one time. The very first year of cycling netted me a total weight loss of 10 lbs. But I had become a much stronger rider meaning I had gained muscle. I would reach flat spots for months without loosing any weight. I started making small suttle changes in my diet such as 2 cokes a day verses 4 and added more water. Over the past 6 years I have had a total net weight loss of 50 lbs averging almost 10 lbs per year. The past 2 years have been almost nothing but I am where I want to be and stable. I started doing weight training the past 6 months and have added back some lbs but my total body fat and pant size have decreased. Don't just pay attention to pure weight.

Great advise Trekke Phil! Way to go. I hope I can be in pursuit!

Bob

Tough choice - so do both!
Lose the weight and then reward yourself by getting another lighter bike!

I agree wholeheartedly with Serotta (must be the NC connection). You will notice a significant difference by losing body weight. If you decided to get a lighter bike after you lose the weight you will notice another step change in performance. Believe it or not I can tell a difference in 175 lbs versus 170 lbs. Maybe some of it has to do with the additional conditioning it takes to get off the 5 lbs but it makes a noticeable difference on them hills.......

Hey JPPE, I've noticed if I lose weight, I definitely improve my climbing, but I notice it's perceivably harder to stay with the front group on the flats. It takes about a month or more for the flat speed in a group to return. Maybe it's just a figment of my imagination, wonder if you or anyone else experiences this phenomenon?

From a cost/benefit viewpoint,...

Losing weight on the bike costs money, losing weight on the person saves money (eat less, less medical expense, fewer sick days....)

So if you are looking for a cost/benefit analysis, then the right answer is to lose the weight on the rider... that is my objective. :)

Here is a rule I have learned to live by and respect.

"small disciplined changes over a long period of time will reward the largest dividens"



This is so true. Say you change your behavior solely to lose weight. What do you do when you have accomplished that goal? Most people then stop their weight loss behavior and fall back into the behaviors that caused them to gain weight. They then get caught in a repetitive cycle of gaining and losing weight.

It sounds like you are now in a stage where you are maintaining a certain weight and you want to reduce your weight some more. I'd suggest making small changes (eat a little less/exercise a little more) and stay on that path until you find your new equilibrium. If that equilibrium point happens to be your goal then you have accomplished two very important things. Obviously you will have met your goal and that would be great, but you have also developed the behaviors to maintain that condition. That is more benficial in the long run. If you haven't yet met your goal then make small adjustments again and repeat the process until you get there.

And get the new bike. It will inspire you to meet your goals.

If you lose more weight, I beleive you will find your body more cardio efficient and working better.

Otherwise, no difference.

15 pounds is 15 pounds.

Since our hearts have to FEED all of our cells then the less there is to feed the less work
our hearts will have to do the longer it will last. (Maybe)

As we age our bodies want to store food for those times we might not be able to "hunt" for
food. So we all need to tone up or we get fat. That's the way nature designed the human
body.

Gary
Your original question: "Which would make biking more fun and enable me to go farther and faster: the bike losing 10-15 pounds (obviously, meaning another bike), or me losing 10-15 pounds?"

Actually you've asked 4 questions: farther; faster; losing weight; and fun.
Farther: train harder. People have ridden around the world on highwheelers; singlespeeds, and mountain bikes. Father is endurance. You're riding farther than you did last summer already.

Faster: ride a road bike if you aren't already.

Losing weight: weight loss is more calories burned than calories consumed. If consuming less calories isn't an option, burn more--ride harder, increase your pedal rpm, use higher gears--work harder. It's interesting to read the journals of touring riders--7 to 8,000 calories a day are normal diets when you ride all day. Diet books are great for reading and learning from, but in the end, calories burned must exceed carlories consumed.

And fun: fun is what you make it. It doesn't depend on the weight of the bike, or the brand, or the style. That's about you.

Armstrong (I think he's some kind of bike rider from Texas, I think he won a race or he's an astronaut or something) said it's not about the bike. That means that it's about you. Like the groups says, lose the weight.

John in Oregon
Same boat: 20 down, 60 to go.

I would think lugging the extra bike around would help you lose weight and you would get a better workout.

Hey JPPE, I've noticed if I lose weight, I definitely improve my climbing, but I notice it's perceivably harder to stay with the front group on the flats. It takes about a month or more for the flat speed in a group to return. Maybe it's just a figment of my imagination, wonder if you or anyone else experiences this phenomenon?

Very interesting and unfortunately I haven't noticed anything like that probably because I always get dropped so quickly anyways!!

Just trying to guess but generally when I get dropped it's either because I don't have the aerobic capacity or the power to keep up. My heart rate will zoom up well into the red zone and unless I'm able to grab a wheel and stay on it I'm toast. Could it be something you're purposefully doing to lose weight that has a short term effect on either the power or the aerobics by chance? Or could it be that others in the group are improving at a faster rate during that training period? For me, I can get decent at either speed work or climbing but for some reason I just don't seem to peak in both areas at the same time.

DigitalGee-it is pretty common to plateau for a month or 2 when you are losing weight.Others have mentioned that you have almost certainly increased your lean body mass.If you keep your activity level up,you take another bump down in wt.
Hey,there is nothing wrong with drinking milk;it is a great source of high quality protein-good source of calcium.It might be better to drink 1-2% than whole milk-half the calories in whole mile are from fat.I still drink it with Nestles Quick(55 years old).The Blue Bell Homemade Vanilla icecream is my problem.Some folks can't digest milk sugar-lactose-they will avoid milk-gas,cramps,diarrhea-,but you must not fall in that category.Folks of NW European extraction generally tolerate milk pretty well.
Luck,Charlie

PS-there is a prescription med-Xenical-that is pretty safe as wt loss meds go.It is currently expensive-maybe $1.50/t and you could take 3/d (I actually open it up and spread one over a day-cheap).It will be an OTC med-at a much lower price some time in the next several months.If you are a whole milk lover,it might be the pill for you.It inhibits the breakdown of fat in your gut so you only absorb ~70% of it.There is a downside(no free lunch-bad pun,but I couldn't resist)-it can cause mild diarrhea,and it could inhibit(a little) the absorption of fat soluble vitamins.Most folks -especially exercise conscious folks-prefer to avoid meds,but...If you normally take in 100 grams of fat a day-it will cut out 30 grams-about 300 calories or close to 2.5 lbs extra lost per month.

This is so true. Say you change your behavior solely to lose weight. What do you do when you have accomplished that goal? Most people then stop their weight loss behavior and fall back into the behaviors that caused them to gain weight. They then get caught in a repetitive cycle of gaining and losing weight.

It sounds like you are now in a stage where you are maintaining a certain weight and you want to reduce your weight some more. I'd suggest making small changes (eat a little less/exercise a little more) and stay on that path until you find your new equilibrium. If that equilibrium point happens to be your goal then you have accomplished two very important things. Obviously you will have met your goal and that would be great, but you have also developed the behaviors to maintain that condition. That is more benficial in the long run. If you haven't yet met your goal then make small adjustments again and repeat the process until you get there.

And get the new bike. It will inspire you to meet your goals.

Great points Mollusk--Right on target. Gary, not to beat a dead horse, but how long did it take you to get to the weight you are? Keep hammering and you'll get where you want to be, and probably in a lot less time than it took you to gain that weight. I can tell by your threads that you are a determined guy, and if you back-slide a bit from time to time, just get on this forum and I'm sure you'll get all of the support, opinions, critisism and ideas you can imagine, whether you want them or not... OHB

Some folks can't digest milk sugar-lactose-they will avoid milk-gas,cramps,diarrhea-,but you must not fall in that category.Folks of NW European extraction generally tolerate milk pretty well.

Growing up I used to eat a bowl of fudge ripple ice cream just about every night. I'd drink milk at meals and drench my cereal with it daily. The milkman left bottles of the really fresh stuff on our doorstep every morning.

When I reached high school age the lactose issues surfaced....I run from the stuff any more. I've tried some of the commercial tablets but it's just not worth the pain for me....Boy, what I'd give to be able to dunk a fresh, hot Krispy Kreme doughnut in a glass of cold whole milk. Or crumble cornbread into a glass of milk. Here I go again. Sorry for regressing on the food stuff. I must be in a really weak state!!!

DigitalGee-it is pretty common to plateau for a month or 2 when you are losing weight.Others have mentioned that you have almost certainly increased your lean body mass.If you keep your activity level up,you take another bump down in wt.
Hey,there is nothing wrong with drinking milk;it is a great source of high quality protein-good source of calcium.It might be better to drink 1-2% than whole milk-half the calories in whole mile are from fat.I still drink it with Nestles Quick(55 years old).The Blue Bell Homemade Vanilla icecream is my problem.Some folks can't digest milk sugar-lactose-they will avoid milk-gas,cramps,diarrhea-,but you must not fall in that category.Folks of NW European extraction generally tolerate milk pretty well.
Luck,Charlie

PS-there is a prescription med-Xenical-that is pretty safe as wt loss meds go.It is currently expensive-maybe $1.50/t and you could take 3/d (I actually open it up and spread one over a day-cheap).It will be an OTC med-at a much lower price some time in the next several months.If you are a whole milk lover,it might be the pill for you.It inhibits the breakdown of fat in your gut so you only absorb ~70% of it.There is a downside(no free lunch-bad pun,but I couldn't resist)-it can cause mild diarrhea,and it could inhibit(a little) the absorption of fat soluble vitamins.Most folks -especially exercise conscious folks-prefer to avoid meds,but...If you normally take in 100 grams of fat a day-it will cut out 30 grams-about 300 calories or close to 2.5 lbs extra lost per month. Thank GOD they dont sell Blue Bell in California or my svelete 178 would be pegging 200 in a month !!!

Chuck-Blue Bell-more specifically Blue Bell Homemade Vanilla has put 22lbs on me.I go thru 2 qts every 3 days!I make a big glass of Nestles Quick(called nesquik now) with-get this-skim milk-them I put a huge scoop of Bluebell Homemade vanilla in it.Worse,it is frequently on sale for $3.50/2qts instead of the usual $5.59.Every drugstore-grocery store around here- metro New Orleans-has it.
JPPE-most stores have lactose free milk now-not some BS gagging soy barf-real milk with the lactose already broken down so it won't give you any problems.I tried it-just like regular milk-maybe a tiny bit sweeter.Luck,Charlie

Most people then stop their weight loss behavior and fall back into the behaviors that caused them to gain weight.


Lots of beer and sex, and giant restaurant breakfasts after the bars close?

I believe, regardless of age, that our bodies tend to "store" the food we eat if we are only eating two or three large meals a day.

A few years ago when I endeavored to overcome a lifetime of sedentary living (read: sloth) and began a weight training/diet regimen, I discovered that by never going more than two hours without eating something, usually a fruit or vegetable, my metabolism actually speeded up and I lost weight by eating more.

As I understand it, the body will go into survival mode and store food when it doesn't know when the next meal is coming. Conversely, once the body becomes accustomed to regular frequent-fueling it automatically assumes that more is on the way and no longer stores but rather burns what is taken in -- thus accelerating the metabolic rate.

I should hasten to mention that I now find myself a few pounds heavier, also, since quitting cigs a year and a half ago. That positive action propelled me back into cycling and, regardless of the extra weight, I am enjoying my rides and certainly breathing a whole lot easier.

So, despite my desire for both a lighter body and a lighter bike, with less than six months before turning 60, I will do my level best just to appreciate each and every mile that rolls beneath my wheels -- 23.6 today, hallelujah!

ride on!

*sdr*

...................
As I understand it, the body will go into survival mode and store food when it doesn't know when the next meal is coming. Conversely, once the body becomes accustomed to regular frequent-fueling it automatically assumes that more is on the way and no longer stores but rather burns what is taken in -- thus accelerating the metabolic rate..............*sdr*

YES, a philosophy of eating and drinking that I can finally embrace whole-heartedly. Thank you, thank you, thank you! sdr!!!!!!

Lots of beer and sex, and giant restaurant breakfasts after the bars close?

I don't think that the second activity causes weight gain. In fact, weight gain may cause a decrease in that particular activity. :D

Gary, in order to lose weight you have to buy the weight loss books. Try these:

South Beach Diet

The Atkins Diet

How the Rich Get Thin

The Supermarket Diet

The Sonoma Diet

The Flavor Point Diet

The Ultimate Weight Solution

Ok, got the books? Here's the good news, you don't have to read them. Just find a flight of stairs and spend a half hour a day, four days a week, carrying the books up and down the stairs. You'll lose weight. Need more? Add a dictionary to help find meaning in what you are doing. You'll lose weight more quickly if you used an unabridged version. Websters is always good. Then put a rack on your bike, put the books on the rack, find the steepest hill, and, well you know the rest. Good luck!

All kinds of good ideas in this thread! Not to mention the humor, which cracked me up!

I think I'm going to get a unicycle which will cut down on the bike weight, and because it's a single speed, I'll get more exercise on the hills, right?

Seriously, I'm taking to heart the ideas of being patient, keep on keeping on, eating apples for snacks, making small changes and remembering it's supposed to be fun (which it is!). I'm not sure I can raise my mileage and/or time in the saddle, so I suppose I'll have to eat less. Perhaps I can do some reflection and pick something small to eliminate (or cut back on) to start.

I'm tempted to completely eliminate broccoli, brussel sprouts, and eggplant immediately. ;)

I'm tempted to completely eliminate broccoli, brussel sprouts, and eggplant immediately. ;)

I'd be happy to join that contest!!!

Weight is a very personal thing - I know "deeep thoughts".

FWIW - I've been biking as a serious hobby for about two years. When I started, I weighed 238lbs and was on blood pressure med's to keep me in the 120/80 range that doc's seem to like. Now, I'm 185 and no long need the meds to keep my BP low. I feel really great and bicycling is much much more rewarding. Hills that used to sack me are now taken in the big chain ring with me dancing on the pedals. I am getting familiar with and am very comfortable riding in the "drops" on my road bike for aero efficiency - before, my gut would get in the way of pedaling in this position. So, in my humble experience, you losing the weight will make a big improvement in your riding.

Last April, I rode 60 miles with some of my buddy's to see if it could be done. It just about killed each of us. We collapsed at the end in front of pitchers of beer and pizza to lament our journey. This year, at the same event, I've made a bet with these same guys that I'll ride the 100 mile ride in the same time that they make it through the 60. The difference is that I've been training and riding all winter, they haven't. Should be interesting.

As usual, YMMV, etc.

Yardbird....................

Setting aside for the moment the obvious statement that I need to lose weight, I find myself wondering about something.

My bike, fully loaded (water, keys, cell phone, etc.) weighs 33 pounds.

I weigh, fully loaded (shoes, helmet, gloves, sunglasses, etc.) weigh 258 pounds.

Which would make biking more fun and enable me to go farther and faster: the bike losing 10-15 pounds (obviously, meaning another bike), or me losing 10-15 pounds?

Why?

1. You loosing 15 lbs because you don't carry it even when not on the bike.
2. Because chances are you won't be loosing it in muscle mass.
3. It will be weight loss high relative to the desired center of gravity.
4. It's much harder to loose and there is a greater sense of accomplishment in doing so.
5. Anyone who can ride their age, at this stage in life, can do anything they want to.

I'm tempted to completely eliminate broccoli, brussel sprouts, and eggplant immediately. ;)

For Huck Finn, it was no longer eating crab-apples! A noble sacrifice! The emphasis shouldn't be martyr-like focusing on what you're giving up (delicious cinna-buns), but, in a non Pollyanna way, what you're substituting (delicious strawberries).

Dieting, or better called "eating right", is in the head more than the belly. And it does take time to transition. Which means PATIENCE. But there are motivating victories along the way.... as witnessed by Yardbird's heartening post above.

(Having said that, my mouth still waters when passing the cinna-bun outlet at the mall.......but, like Yardbird, its nice not to have my knees pistoning into my gut when down on the drops.)

Having recently (past 9 months) come down from the 250 mark to working to break the 200 mark (9 pounds to go), I guarantee the most speed increase will come from riding off the weight on you. Not all of the weight is burned off, some of it you keep, but in the form of muscle. When I started riding to classes, about 4 months after I started riding, it took me 14 minutes on my 27lb commuter, and 11 on my racing bike, so you could ignore equipment differences and claim that shaving 10 lbs off the bike saved me 3 minutes. 15 lbs lighter now, and I get to class in 9 minutes on the commuter, and 7 on the roadie. 5 and 4 minutes difference. So, purely scientifically ;) , it's exactly 165% as effective to lose weight off your body as your bike.

(Having said that, my mouth still waters when passing the cinna-bun outlet at the mall.......but, like Yardbird, its nice not to have my knees pistoning into my gut when down on the drops.)

What a great aroma comes from those cinna-bun outlets in the malls and airports!

In the sunny regions of NC we have what is called Krispy Kreme Doughnuts. I was addicted at a very early age to their doughnuts, especially when they were just coming out of the deep fryer, through the pool of sugar and off the conveyor belt. The sugar frosting would still be dripping off the sides.

I'm almost embarrassed to admit it, but at the height of my cravings I would buy 2 dozen doughnuts. I would usually eat 18 doughnuts and then would give 6 away.

Someone told me "that you are what you eat". Funny, but I definitely became a "doughnut" and it was all around my waist......

Today all I can eat at one sitting is One!!

Cut the food and lose the weight. Then reward yourself with an expensive new ride. You can do both.

I'm curious - what are folks referring to when they say they "rode their age"? Is it miles, Klic's, hours, minutes, miles per hour, feet of elevation in one hour, what?

Thanks for helping me on this.

Yardbird

Digital Gee - here are 2 things you may want to research. Everybody has their own journey, but these have helped me lose 40 pounds and keep it off and get stronger on and off the bike and not go crazy through some "fad" diet.

1. http://www.hussmanfitness.org/
2. http://www.bodyforlife.com/

A lot of people think BfL is just for Bodybuilding. I can assure you you can modify the weight training enough to fit into a cycling lifestlye. The info on overcoming mental barriers, setting goals, and "eating for life" (not dieting) are alone woth the cost of the book. The Hussman site rocks too. Lot's of great info on healthy weight loss and lean muscle buiulding.

Best of luck.

Again, thanks for all the tips and suggestions and links.

You know, I'd like to get a lighter bike (AND lose weight, of course). I almost pulled the trigger last December when my daughter's teacher decided to take the class on a field trip -- to DISNEYWORLD -- and that took care of that.

Then, I was ramping up again to take the plunge when my other daughter's car was broadsided and totalled. Not a fancy car, of course, but now it's not even a car. So there goes some more $$$.

Sometimes, it's SO frustrating!

Meantime, I guess I'll work on losing weight and ride my "couch' whenever i want.

Hang in there Gary!! Just remember it's a journey and you're well on your way. I did find that I rode more miles and was on the bike more after I'd gone to a road bike......That increased the calories out which helped bust through that darn plateau......

The way to lose weight and keep it off is pretty straight forward: take in fewer calories than you burn, to create a deficit. For every (3500) calorie deficit that you create, you lose one pound (approx). Most of the literature I've seen suggests that you create a (500) calorie deficit per day.

I hate counting calories, too; you can avoid that in large part by learning a little bit about the nutritional requirements of your body, and the nutrient value in foods you eat. Once you know what your body needs each day (5 fruits, 4 vegetables, 2-3 dairy, etc), then you focus on getting enough food, not limiting it. It turns out that the best foods are the most filling, and the lowest in calories. What a gift! So you wind up becoming aware of caloric content in foods, but not counting calories.

I heard you say you don't want to read diet books - but would you be willing to read a book that taught you how to eat healtfully, and offered a way for you to relearn eating, so that you wouldn't have to go through those weight swings again?

There is a book that was recently published by the FDA, in support of the new, revised food pyramid, called "A Healthier You." It is very good, and non-commercial. You can also check out the new food pyramid online.

I lost 8 pounds during this past off-season so that I could avoid paying $4000 for a new bike, to lose one pound of frame weight. Not only was the a good financial idea, it also is a healthful one. Tell you what - lose the weight and the payback extends to all your waking hours - you'll feel and look better, when you are off the bike, too.

In terms of finding your ideal weight key off your Body Mass Index (BMI). Here is a calculator: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public/heart/obesity/lose_wt/risk.htm from the NIH.

Here is one of my favorite recipes, that I use for breakfasts. http://readytoride.blogspot.com/2005/12/guerilla-eating-tactics.html. This and an english muffin will fill you up and you'll feel great, until about 10am and then, eat again - a fruit like an apple or banana.

Good luck and do check into the book. You can find it at Amazon.