Training & Nutrition - HRM, Calories and my most recent ride...

Ive been riding around 24 miles 4 -5 times per week round trip here. I have my computer strapped to my bars and typically average about 16.5 mph on my SS. Ive hit as high as 28mph. My cadence is anywhere from 70 - 85 average i would say..but have hit as high as 115.

Ive been doing this most of the summer and just recently i strapped on my HRM for tonights ride. It typically has been pretty accurate for my running / training time doing other workouts. It is a cycling HRM.

That said......i hit my 24.x miles in around 1:42 hours ( i stopped half way to take a break for about 15 minutes).

The HRM said i was running around 151. When i get into the city i really have to slow it down heace the lower bpm. Every time i glanced at it i was in the 168 - 175 range ....and i hit 186 as a max on this ride.

THe calories burned stated that i burned 1105 calories on the ride. That seems pretty high but then again i was pushing pretty hard in spots.

I guess my question is.......is that even possible? 1000 calories in less than 2 hours? Mind you i was huffing and puffing pretty hard but still...

I hear 700 calories per hur if you avg. 15 mph.

ok....so maybe it wasnt so far off.

I have since stopped running...and working out cardio in any other form this summer accept for biking.

I had starting reading all these posts all over the web on how running and cycling are not comparable.....

That cycling cant give you a high calorie burn workout like running....

Cycling is the weaker of the 2 ......as far as calorie burn....

Hmm....

Im going with....if you have the time....you can burn just as much if not more. I definately have more fun cycling than i do running. Running starts to piss off my knees after about mile 5. Granted My running workouts were about 45 minutes vs my almost 2 hour cycling...but if you make time and stick with it....id say cycling wins hands down. So much more to see.....wind in your hair and just a down right personal dog fight that you dont get with running...

My point is not to start another running vs cycling thread. Thats the last thing i want to do :)

I hear 700 calories per hur if you avg. 15 mph.

Maybe on a mountain bike with flat tires.

UD

Maybe on a mountain bike with flat tires.

UD

well would you like to answer the question?

Or just have a smart ass post?

I've tracked my calories in, calories out and weight for extended periods over the last four years. I've had weeks where my rides burned far more calories than one would expect and just the opposite, too. While your number seems pretty high, it's probably possible and in any case the specific numbers are going to be different for every individual. In particular, the rules of thumb grow more inaccurate the farther someone is from an idealized "normal". A 150 pound person is going to have different energy expenditures than someone who is 300 pounds all else being equal, for example.

If you are willing to take the 15 minutes a day that it takes to log your food intake, weight and activities, you can learn a lot about how your body and it can be really interesting. With an HRM and enough other information you can even tell when you're getting a cold even if the symptoms aren't obvious yet.

There was an earlier post regarding calories consumed. One respondent suggested that 500 per hour for cycling and 300 per hour for walking was a good figure to use for average/good cyclists. So your value doesn't look too unlikely.

I gave up running long ago believing that cycling is far better for one's body as far as impact is concerned. Seems that my reasoning was scientifically sound. So I always recommend people to do cycling instead of running. I remember reading a recent article where a surgeon stated that he was doing many more hip replacements for 40/50 year olds - the reason - jogging! Mind you I have to admit that cyclists typically stand a greater risk of being mown down by a large vehicle.

Take HRM derived calorie consumption numbers with agrain of salt.

If you really want a pretty accurate estimate of the calories you burn, you need a power meter.

well would you like to answer the question?

Or just have a smart ass post?

I was going with just a smart ass post (hey we can say ass now), but if you insist. What I have observed with my power meter is on a flat to slightly rolling terrain with no significant wind it's about 600 Calories for 19-20mph average. As merlin said, to know for sure you need a power meter. Although even then it's a guestimation, although a more accurate one then with HRM. In the end ride a lot track calories if scale keeps going up cut back on calories.

UD

but....speed would be a pointless factor considering all the gearing options you have correct?

I would think cadence and HR would be more of a calorie burn indicator than speed.

Believe me...if i could afford a power meter...i would totally get one. I havent found any that are cheap or affordable.

but....speed would be a pointless factor considering all the gearing options you have correct?

I would think cadence and HR would be more of a calorie burn indicator than speed.

Believe me...if i could afford a power meter...i would totally get one. I havent found any that are cheap or affordable.In the absence of wind, power output(and calories burned) is proportional to speed cubed. A 5% increase in speed requires roughly 15% increase in power. To use HR as an estimate you really should calibrate it with power to know if you are close. Some individuals naturally have a higher HR than others without burning more calories. Your stated HR is much higher, for example, than mine would be riding 24 miles in 1 1/2 hrs.

Find a long hill and use http://bikecalculator.com/wattsUS.html to calculate your calories burned and compare with your HRM.

unless one has a power meter these calorie burned numbers are estimates at best. you can use the estimates to succesfully, but you should always remember that they are what they are; estimates. a widely accepted range is 30 to 40 calories burned per mile for moderate to aggressive rides. later.

I was going with just a smart ass post (hey we can say ass now), but if you insist. What I have observed with my power meter is on a flat to slightly rolling terrain with no significant wind it's about 600 Calories for 19-20mph average. As merlin said, to know for sure you need a power meter. Although even then it's a guestimation, although a more accurate one then with HRM. In the end ride a lot track calories if scale keeps going up cut back on calories.

UD


there ya go, all u had to say :)

there ya go, all u had to say :)

Yeah, but that involved more typing. :p

UD

I don't think that you are going to get an good estimate of caloric burn. The ones I have seen have quite a bit of variation such as +-33%. It depends on so many variables. Obviously a lean cyclist in top condition will burn more calories say at 80% on the HRM than a person who is fat and sort of out of shape at the same intensity even though they weigh the same. Measuing C02 production is probably the best measure but I have never heard of anyone doing that outside of a laboratory.

My Garmin HR monitor typically reports numbers for Calorie consumption that are 40-60% too high.

There was an earlier post regarding calories consumed. One respondent suggested that 500 per hour for cycling and 300 per hour for walking was a good figure to use for average/good cyclists. So your value doesn't look too unlikely.



That would be me ... 500 calories per hour for about a 15 mph average speed is a good number to work with, especially if you're wanting to lose weight with cycling and you're using that number in your calories burned vs. calories consumed calculations.

Everything is a guess and is going to be off. With a PM, you are able to tell the amount of energy put into the bike, at that particualr contact point and considering the error of the measurments and efficiency of the machine. Unless you have it tested, you don't have much of an idea how efficient your body is producing said power. A safe guess is 25%, but some are more (~30%) and some are less (~20% or lower).

A HRM guesses caloric expenditure based on percieved intensity. For me, I've found that my HRM is fairly accurate, though it's more of a gee-wiz number as I don't do much to count calories.

Also, you don't have an idea of how many calories you body is absorbing from the food intake.

As already mentioned, if your weight goes up, eat less or ride more.