Southern California - Gearing question for a GENIUS

good link! the base is pretty close for me..... but it gives me WAY too many for exercise! but that's why i wear my polar... i get a better idea of calories extra i can add! (i know the polar isn't dead on... but it's lower than any online calculator and lower than the edge... so i err on the side of the lower number when adding calories!!!!)

Here's a BMR calculator
http://www.global-fitness.com/BMR_calc.php


My BMR is 2086.68
Total Energy requirement 3459 calories

To all, re: my diet:

A. It's working for me, I'm not feeling starved, I'm not just cutting back on foods I normally eat, I'm changing my foods so I can eat more and still ingest fewer calories (vegetables, meats, fruits, etc)

B. Voltman "it'll do a number on your metabolism"...In what way? I'm definitely NOT being argumentative, because I'm just not that smart. I'm truly concerned as to what may contribute to a change in my metabolism.

...for the record, I have a crappy metabolism. I've always had baby fat, yet always worked out and always yo-yo'd with my weight. I'm trying to find what works for me.

C. Tiffanie, thanks for the link. I use the RMR (Resting Metabolic Rate) on www.caloriesperhour.com (http://www.caloriesperhour.com) - some of the better calculators and calorie counters I've found online. RMR, to me, seems to actually take things like standing up, climbing a flight of stairs, walking to your car, going potty, etc. into account, where as BMR is just you...lying on the floor...for 24 hours...defecating in a diaper.

My BMR is 2086.68
Total Energy requirement 3459 calories


Thats about where Im at too.

i don't pay attention to that stuff.... i just ride! i started riding to burn calories and for fun... if you start putting all these numbers into it... it's not fun anymore!

so i say: just go out and RIDE!
Well, to each his/her own. I don't count calories. I just eat. Life for me would suck if I had to count calories. On the other hand, I don't mind analyzing gearing all day long.

That said, you and I don't have to care about our gearing because we've already given ourselves a very wide range of gearing options, and so basically, whatever gear we want, it's already there. The people asking are people who don't currently have access to this same wide range of gears and wondering if giving themselves the gears they would naturally select (were they present) is a bad thing. I don't think that's a bad thing, though as some have pointed out, it can lead to laziness on a hill. (But it doesn't have to.)

To all, re: my diet:

C. Tiffanie, thanks for the link. I use the RMR (Resting Metabolic Rate) on www.caloriesperhour.com (http://www.caloriesperhour.com) - some of the better calculators and calorie counters I've found online. RMR, to me, seems to actually take things like standing up, climbing a flight of stairs, walking to your car, going potty, etc. into account, where as BMR is just you...lying on the floor...for 24 hours...defecating in a diaper.

:lol: :roflmao: :lol:

where as BMR is just you...lying on the floor...for 24 hours...defecating in a diaper.
ewww.... Gotta get that mental image out of my mind! :o

Simply put, staying way below sub-maintenance with your calories for too long (at least months at a time), will shut your metabolism down because it's accomodating the reduced intake. The less it takes in, the less it learns to burn.

Thats about where Im at too.

seems about right I guess I'm consuming about 3200 cals per day. Even more with all this pie I ate this week. I tired t cut back to like 2400 and 2200 cals, I felt like crap, always starving feel before my rides. I felt slower then normal. I'm not sure, I havn't logged into Fitday since May:D

Well, to each his/her own. I don't count calories. I just eat. Life for me would suck if I had to count calories. On the other hand, I don't mind analyzing gearing all day long.

You can thank your genes for that. From what I remember, you're about 5'-9" and 145lbs or so. I'd be emaciated/anorexic with that height and weight....seriously. I'd have a body fat percentage of -2.6%. As I said, I have crappy metabolism. You, on the other hand, have a high metabolism, can eat what you want, when you want, and never gain weight. However, that also means your body type has a hard time building and establishing muscle because your body is burning all the building blocks away. Me? I could pound 4,000 calories per day, hit the weights and in a year compete for Mr. Universe (well...Mr. Escondido)


That said, you and I don't have to care about our gearing because we've already given ourselves a very wide range of gearing options, and so basically, whatever gear we want, it's already there. The people asking are people who don't currently have access to this same wide range of gears and wondering if giving themselves the gears they would naturally select (were they present) is a bad thing. I don't think that's a bad thing, though as some have pointed out, it can lead to laziness on a hill. (But it doesn't have to.)

I wouldn't say it's all about gearing available...if I was so concerned with that, I'd get a triple and just spin like there's no tomorrow. The original post in this topic really stems from a big question I asked myself after reading Terry Morse's posts. He said he'd always used Standards and was good on hills, but changed to a compact and now he was a climbing fool, able to stay with the younger guys on climbs and have more left in the tank for the descent. I asked myself, "How?" Wasn't he expending the same amount of energy to get to the top at the same time as everybody else? It didn't make sense logically...and your equations actually support my questions.

Simply put, staying way below sub-maintenance with your calories for too long (at least months at a time), will shut your metabolism down because it's accomodating the reduced intake. The less it takes in, the less it learns to burn.

Question: I have a low metabolism. Is there anyway (with diet, exercise, etc.) to improve that metabolism? I was thinking that, by working out more, and eating the right kind of foods (that don't just sit in the pit o' the stomach), I was proactively improving my metabolism, regardless of caloric intake.

more muscle burns more calories/ups your metabolism... so lift weights and build muscle! HOWEVER.... i don't think that means if you lift weights... that you can eat a few thousand more caloires, unfortunately!

the BEST way to lose weight is what goes in your mouth! low or good fats... GOOD carbs (not low carb)... etc...

But that argument works for both Compact and Standard.

Yeah-- as long as you don't feel like you're mashing hard or spun out all the time, the crankset isn't going to make much difference. You might find that a favorite gear is missing from one or the other combination -- with the SRAM 12-26 that I have on now (53/42 in front) I really miss having the 15 cog that the shimano 12-25 has.

Another thing about compacts is that they drop the gears that most people don't need and shouldn't use because they'll kill their knees. 53x12 is a *huge* gear, and racers raced on 52x13 max gearing for a long time. If you're a normal person and are in the 53x12 a lot you either descend a lot of big hills or are killing your knees. And you can descend big hills fine in a 50x12 or 52x13.

back to the fatassedness-- I'm only that by racer standards-- by normal people standards I'm pretty normal. Road racers tend to get frighteningly skinny.

I'm pretty sure that I'm inadvertantly putting the better things in my mouth. (hush, Brandy and Tiffanie). Wheat bread has trounced white, and mayo is out the window. No sugar or salt...

I guess I'm prejudiced against all things white.

Question: I have a low metabolism. Is there anyway (with diet, exercise, etc.) to improve that metabolism? I was thinking that, by working out more, and eating the right kind of foods (that don't just sit in the pit o' the stomach), I was proactively improving my metabolism, regardless of caloric intake.

You can repair metabolism by gradually increasing calories 10% at a time.

Question: I have a low metabolism. Is there anyway (with diet, exercise, etc.) to improve that metabolism? I was thinking that, by working out more, and eating the right kind of foods (that don't just sit in the pit o' the stomach), I was proactively improving my metabolism, regardless of caloric intake.


exercise in the morning will raise it for the day.

I guess I'm prejudiced against all things white.

when talking about food.... or more importantly.... grain/wheat... that's a GOOD thing!

exercise in the morning will raise it for the day.

although you all know i'm a 4 a.m. riser to get my workout in.... i've read that's a fallacy.... working out is working out..... however.... that said.... i know "I" feel a LOT better when i workout.... i may not want to... but once i'm done... and showered... i have all sorts of energy!

exercise in the morning will raise it for the day.

Up at 4:30...shower/shave/breakfast/driving by 5:15...at desk by 6. No morning time. I used to swim in the morning, but would require waking 45 minutes earlier and smelling of chlorine all day....even with the gym shower. PITA. I'm able to run 4-5 miles during my lunch hour, and that's working for me.

You can repair metabolism by gradually increasing calories 10% at a time.

Raising it 10% at a time over what interval and to what end caloric intake?

wow! what time do you get off work?

3 pm...then it's roughly 45-60 minutes home (commute on I-15 North sucks at rush-afternoon...traffic builds at 2 pm).

Can you give me an example of one of your typical interval training sessions?

It varies from week to week (and fortunately I don't have to plan them). Typical is something like:

15 minute warmup (going from Zone 1 to Zone 5)
short break (5-7 min)
intervals (varies a lot, keeps it interesting, usually tailored to time of year):
sometimes 30s Z1, 30s Z5, 5 times, 5 sets
sometimes 2 min Z2, 3 min z3, 1 min z1, 1 min z4, 30s z5, 1 min z1, 3 min z3, 2 min z2, ~3-4 times, 3 sets
sometimes alternating z2/z3 for 2/3 minutes a bunch of times.
short break (10 minutes, enough time for a gear change)
20-30 minutes of motorpaced race simulation-- motor goes around with everyone on, and stronger people try to gain laps (sometimes alone, sometimes in a group, sometimes assignment is to gain one lap alone and as many as you want in a group)
Stagger home and fall in bed.

I'm pretty sure that I'm inadvertantly putting the better things in my mouth. (hush, Brandy and Tiffanie). Wheat bread has trounced white, and mayo is out the window. No sugar or salt...

I guess I'm prejudiced against all things white.


What? I'm innocent.

I wouldn't say it's all about gearing available...if I was so concerned with that, I'd get a triple and just spin like there's no tomorrow. The original post in this topic really stems from a big question I asked myself after reading Terry Morse's posts. He said he'd always used Standards and was good on hills, but changed to a compact and now he was a climbing fool, able to stay with the younger guys on climbs and have more left in the tank for the descent. I asked myself, "How?" Wasn't he expending the same amount of energy to get to the top at the same time as everybody else? It didn't make sense logically...and your equations actually support my questions.

Well, Terry Morse runs a 50/34, with a 12-27 9-speed cassette in back. Might as well have a triple as far as the range of gears on his bike is concerned. He generally considers his 34/21 to be his low climbing gear, and his 24t and 27t cogs to be bail-out cogs and cogs for the ultra-steep stretches. (He has noted on several occasions that he wishes he could just replace the 21t cog since that one gets worn out by far the fastest.) So generally, he's climbing as if his low gear was 39/25. (But he's also climbing pretty fast.) He's also a spinner, prefering a cadence of about 70 RPM on climbs. He climbs mostly seated. So he gives himself lower gears than someone of comparable climbing speed who mostly gets out of the saddle and "mashes".

You're right that changing his gearing doesn't change how much energy he has to expend or how much power he has to put out. I think his "more left in the tank" has to do with having fresher legs because he doesn't have to "power his way up" using leg strength anymore, but can spin at more comfortable cadences and lower pedaling forces. His legs are being spared the high forces that tire them out. He's a skinny guy with relatively small legs, so if forced to generate power at low cadences by powering his way up, his legs will tire. If allowed to raise his cadence, his legs can stay fresh.

It's much the same reason spinning at 80-110 RPM (take your pick of a cadence) all day long on flat ground is easier than mashing the same speed at 30 RPM. Your power output is essentially the same (in fact, slightly higher at higher cadences due to increased parasitic forces), but at the low cadences, you burn out your legs faster because they have to put out such huge amounts of torque.

What? I'm innocent.
:roflmao:

It is not about the “Gears....transmission” it is about the engine. Engine = you.

I need to spin high RPMs. Others spin low RPMs… the Engine tells you what Transmission/gears you need.

Cheers,
Dusk

It is not about the “Gears....transmission” it is about the engine. Engine = you.



Can't I just buy a bigger engine?:D

This is what I have on my new bike! Am I in trouble??? http://server12.ipslink.com/~wwwmamad/forums/style_emoticons/default/nerves.gif

That's what I had until I replaced the 12-25 with a 12-27 for Baldy. I was very glad I did, and still am to this day!

That's what I had until I replaced the 12-25 with a 12-27 for Baldy. I was very glad I did, and still am to this day!


You were doing great on GMR while we were riding near one another till I met up with Gina. Takes a couple of weeks for the bod to adapt to the hills, but if you trained in the hills(not sure if you do or not) you do GMR/Baldy easily on a 12/25. I was on my triple beater bike that day, but when I train I use my Cannondlae 53/39-12/25 and have no problems. The more you do it, the easier it gets. I did Ride Around the Bear century on my Cannondale double without a struggle. If you did GMR a few times, you fly up most hills with ease on a 25!.......Now ForestFalls was a B!TCH after OakGlen. That was the one time I wish I had a triple!I think it's nearly22% from other ride reports.

You were doing great on GMR while we were riding near one another till I met up with Gina. Takes a couple of weeks for the bod to adapt to the hills, but if you trained in the hills(not sure if you do or not) you do GMR/Baldy easily on a 12/25. I was on my triple beater bike that day, but when I train I use my Cannondlae 53/39-12/25 and have no problems. The more you do it, the easier it gets. I did Ride Around the Bear century on my Cannondale double without a struggle. If you did GMR a few times, you fly up most hills with ease on a 25!.......Now ForestFalls was a B!TCH after OakGlen. That was the one time I wish I had a triple!I think it's nearly22% from other ride reports.

Thanks. Since I've been climbing more (and riding more, generally) I think I could do it now with a 12-25. But having that bail-out gear is really nice, even if I don't use it.

It was really fun climbing Torrey Pines the other day while staying in my 53. I seriously doubt that would have happened if I only had a 25 in the back.

It was really fun climbing Torrey Pines the other day while staying in my 53. I seriously doubt that would have happened if I only had a 25 in the back.

Not sure why you would have done that anyway! You must have had your chain crossed like a muthah! :eek: Not good for the components, but it's yer bike!:p

Not sure why you would have done that anyway! You must have had your chain crossed like a muthah! :eek: Not good for the components, but it's yer bike!:p

Yeah, I thought about that, but was too pumped to shift. I rarely do that....

Not in MY thread, buddy! Please, for the love of pete...it's lose. (extreme pet peeve of an anal-retentive English major)...forgive me my quirk.


Don't know what you're talking about.. :)

The rear derailleur may not be able to take up that much range of chain if it's a short cage, so you might need to swap it out for a long cage, which isn't very difficult or expensive.

You may also be just fine with a 39x25, being relatively small and lightweight. I'm a ****** (by racer standards) at 180 lbs and use a 39x23, 39x25, or 42x25 for climbing almost anything. Try it and see.


Ok, I'm going through this right now with a co-worker. She wants lower gearing, has the short cage, and would like to do the 13-29. The short cage will only handle a wrap of 27 teeth vs 30 for the medium cage. 13-39 with a 53-39 front needs 30 teeth of wrap. So, if she doesn't cross chain, she should be ok, I'm guessing the short cage since it's rated for 27 could probably handle 28, which would mean she would have rub issues on the 13 and 14 tooth which she shouldn't be in anyway. I know that my Ultegra Triple handles 39 teeth of wrap and it's only rated for 37. They rate them conservativly, running a 53/39/26 triple with a 12-27 rear.

Has anyone tried the 13-29 with the short cage? I'm thinking it will be fine unless she cross chains it.

Don't know what you're talking about.. :)

Ooh...stealthy

There is the edit button. :) So, if you decide you don't need that High-n-Wide, I'm in the market for one and am local. Anything you're looking for, I've got a pretty good stash of parts. I think I'm sitting on a couple DA cassettes, 12-23 and 12-25. :)

Like I said, I'm a pack rat. I'll be keeping the cassette...especially for the Pie ride.