Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) Looking to lose that spare tire? Ideal weight 200+? Frustrated being a large cyclist in a sport geared for the ultra-light? Learn about the bikes and parts that can take the abuse of a heavier cyclist, how to keep your body going while losing the weight, and get support from others who've been successful.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-30-08, 11:10 AM   #1
Alathea
Mr. Frowny Man
Thread Starter
 
Alathea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nebraska
Bikes: 2009 Giant Yukon single speed;2014 Foam Green Surly CrossCheck
Posts: 459
Damned efficiency

This sucks.....well, in a good way, I suppose. I took off this morning, no big surprises (no headwind either) and got to work in 28ish minutes. Three weeks ago I started at around 38-40 minutes, then I switched tires and it dropped to 35ish. Today it was 28 and some change. 5.81 miles, 28 minutes....but the suckage that im finding that I was vaguely aware of but not really, is that with increased speed on a bike the time traveled drops, thus (according to calculators anyway) does calorie consumption.

Im sure in there somewhere is a wattage adjustment or something, since ive been powering up the low grades with more speed lately near my home *Prescott Prescott Prescott.....*and i've been using the 3rd chain ring more as well, pushing harder. Should I gear back and start this spinning thing a bit? Im going to look around for places on the way home on some nights, but I really am a morning creature of habit so it would take a little while to adjust to getting up earlier to go trailblaze. What are some of the strategies you guys use to get workouts crammed into a commute ride besides distance? Do you aim for calories burned or just TT's or other self challenges?


You all did this to me.

CAS
Alathea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 11:35 AM   #2
deraltekluge
Senior Member
 
deraltekluge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Bikes: Kona Cinder Cone, Sun EZ-3 AX
Posts: 1,195
Why do you care what your calculator says if you know it's not telling the truth? Work is force times distance. If you're exerting more force to ride faster (and you are, because the drag is greater), you're burning more calories over the same distance, even if you spend less time doing it, and even if the calculator doesn't understand.
deraltekluge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 11:50 AM   #3
Alathea
Mr. Frowny Man
Thread Starter
 
Alathea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nebraska
Bikes: 2009 Giant Yukon single speed;2014 Foam Green Surly CrossCheck
Posts: 459
I just use it to track time and mileage. It doesn't figure calories-I go do that elsewhere.
Alathea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 11:52 AM   #4
jyossarian
SERENITY NOW!!!
 
jyossarian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: In the 212
Bikes: Haro Vector, IRO Rob Roy, Bianchi Veloce
Posts: 8,756
Take a longer ride home.
__________________
HHCMF - Take pride in your ability to amaze lesser mortals! - MikeR



We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!
jyossarian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 12:00 PM   #5
Tom Stormcrowe
Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset.
 
Tom Stormcrowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Bikes: Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
Posts: 16,121
If you expend greater effort, and raise the HR more by riding faster and harder, then the calorie burn does increase, but over a shorter time period.

If you burn X calories over a shorter time span or over a longer span, it's still X calories. The longer time period has you spending more time in the zone where you are operating in the Fat/Protein metabolism rather than the more high energy Carb/Glycogen cycle is the only real difference.

Longer and slower is marginally better for fat burn, yeah, but it's not that critical when applied to shorter time periods like the commute to work. It really applies on longer weekend rides where you are spending hours in the saddle rather than minutes. That is where you'll hit your most efficient fat burn. Enjoy the speed increase and efficiency increase with no guilt, because it's actually a form of periodization and helps keep the body from adapting to a routine of exercise by doing fast and hard during the week and long and slow on the weekend.
__________________
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche

"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
Tom Stormcrowe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 12:02 PM   #6
ochizon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 262
the second poster is correct. No matter what, you are burning more energy (calories) to cover the same distance in less time.

If you are more concerned about calorie burn, put the fat knobbie tires back on and shoot for 25 minutes!
ochizon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 12:18 PM   #7
evblazer
Thread Killer
 
evblazer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Marfan Syndrome-Clyde-DFW, TX
Bikes: Fuji Touring Xtracycle, Merlin Road, Bacchetta Giro 26 (Sold), Challenge Hurricane, Cruzbike Sofrider
Posts: 1,845
I've been bringing my HRM on commutes and try to do some distance training intervals.
When I went from a big heavy wind catching Fuji Touring turned Xtracycle to a Bacchetta High Racer recumbent the efficiency vrs wind went way up and my heart rate at the same speed went waaay down. Which led to ruining my weight loss but saved my back/knees/arms.

I can do my whole 42 mile commute including spinning up hills with a near 100bpm heart rate average which is far far lower then it was on my xtracycle or the road bike I rode for a couple months in between. (I'm going to butcher this since I just started this program) I'm training for the texas time trials whether I actually end up going or not so I'm doing some aerobic and lactacte threshold intervals on my commute now one way while I relax the other. I'm probably going to do the 12 hour event unless one of the recumbent teams needs a 4th for the 500 mile so I need distance endurance and heat tolerance.
evblazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 12:22 PM   #8
hammond9705
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 1,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by jyossarian View Post
Take a longer ride home.
+1 The diff between 6 miles at 28 mins vs 32 mins isn't a whole lot. Extend the ride home at least a few times a week.
hammond9705 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 05:10 PM   #9
ModelT
Read, Ride, Repeat
 
ModelT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 58
I burned up about four bucks driving to work today...

You are doing OK.
ModelT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 05:17 PM   #10
Scummer
Genetics have failed me
 
Scummer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Zorneding, Germany
Bikes: Norwid Aaland, Dahon mju, Pedalforce CX1, Trek Madone 5.9, Old MTB and lots of spare parts
Posts: 2,986
If you want to know about exact calorie consumption, you need to get a powermeter Not the cheapest instrument in the house, but it will be pretty exact
__________________
Gelato aficionado.
Scummer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-08, 05:34 PM   #11
krazygluon
Mad scientist w/a wrench
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chucktown
Bikes: none working atm
Posts: 760
well, the basic physics of W=f*dx says that indeed no. If you take the same trip faster you will exert more work. although, w=fdx isn't *exactly* applicable to the complex bike-human system.
krazygluon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:05 PM.