Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    southern indiana
    My Bikes
    dicks special!
    Posts
    37
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    body charts vs reality question

    I was reading one of those body charts and I should be no more that 188 lbs for 6'. right now I'm 266. Is it possible to be at 188? I played sports in high school and some in college and was very active. I've never weighed 188 (except when much younger). Is this really possible that I need to lose another 80lbs? Has anyone experienced this?

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pasadena, CA
    My Bikes
    1995 Cannondale R500 2010 Specialized Tarmac Comp
    Posts
    60
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ya those charts are "ideal body weight" charts, they dont take into account genetics (Just big a$$ people) or even higher muscle mass...Im very fit and im at 235 right now at 6'5". According to those charts my max weight should be 210 which ain't happening...unless i get really really sick. Im a clyde for life .

    If you're like me, just a bigger human, Body fat % would be a more practical measurement to go by.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,134
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Start with losing 40 ,aside from theories, 266 is too much for a six footer. Most agree that charts are either unrealistic or overly generalized. You'll get comments for sure. I recommend that you search the threads as this topic occurs monthly. And yes I've exp. this.

  4. #4
    foolishly delirious RatedZeroHero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Panhandle of NE
    Posts
    798
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    body composition is the key, not a chart...

    accurately figured body fat % (I think the most accurate is the float method)

    i am 6'6" 260# atm... could I lose 60 more lbs? my current body fat is 24% according to that I could...

    but it would put me right at 0% body fat... not possible... I'm probably a Clyde for life... but me at a super fit 215 would be really nice!!!

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,134
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RatedZeroHero View Post
    body composition is the key, not a chart...

    accurately figured body fat % (I think the most accurate is the float method)

    i am 6'6" 260# atm... could I lose 60 more lbs? my current body fat is 24% according to that I could...

    but it would put me right at 0% body fat... not possible... I'm probably a Clyde for life... but me at a super fit 215 would be really nice!!!
    You're 6'6" not six foot even, you ain't that fat.

  6. #6
    Downtown Spanky Brown bautieri's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Camp Hill, Pennsyltucky
    My Bikes
    07 Raliegh Grand Sport 98ish Mongoose Manuever
    Posts
    2,099
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Yes, for the most part they are quite based in reality as much as I don't want to believe it either. What they fail to take into acount is muscle mass and bone density. (example, Arnold was about 220 in his prime)

    A better measurment is definatly body fat %. A bathroom scale with body fat analysis is relativly inexpensive (about $50), and easy way to track your fitness progression. I'm sure it's not the most accurate tool by any means but should be good enough for rough ideas. This morning I weighed in at 208 with 20% body fat meaning that I have roughly 40lbs of goo left on my frame. If I weigh myself next month and find that I weigh 210 and have 18% body fat then I know that even though I gained weight my fitness and muscle mass increased so I won't sweat the extra pound or two.

  7. #7
    Clyde - Grinder Kamala's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Seattle
    My Bikes
    2009 Jamis Aurora Elite - 2007 Specialized Hardrock
    Posts
    321
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Check out the Coast Guard standards for fit weight. They actually take into account differing frame sizes relative to height. At the weight at which I would be fit for duty in a military organization I would be obese according to a BMI chart.

    The pages you would need are 2-9 and 7-2. Most of the rest of it is a lot of bureaucratic fun.
    http://www.uscg.mil/directives/cim/1...IM_1020_8G.pdf

    Also, here's a good article on the trouble with BMI from a scientific standpoint: http://www.slate.com/id/2223095/.

  8. #8
    You gonna eat that? Doohickie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas Church of Hopeful Uncertainty
    My Bikes
    1966 Raleigh DL-1 Tourist, 1973 Schwinn Varsity, 1983 Raleigh Marathon, 1994 Nishiki Sport XRS
    Posts
    14,022
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In my case, when they talk about BMI, that's pretty much right on for me. I'm 6'-2". When I was 240 (which is just into the Obese range for BMI), I felt like I was going to die a lot- out of breath easy, light headed, etc., even from mild activity. I went on the South Beach Diet and lost down to a little under 168, a little on the light side of Normal BMI I think. That wasn't good either; I was too skinny. I think I'm at my best at about 190 lb., which is right at the high end of the Normal range. I'm sitting at 210 right now and would like to get down about 20.

    BMI ratings work for me. But when I was a kid, I wasn't athletic. So I don't have any of that "but I'm a muscular build" stuff to fall back on. I think for people who have carried additional muscle mass due to athletics, carrying a little more weight isn't too bad. Out of the various forums I post to, though, a much greater portion of this crowd can claim "mucular build" and get away with it. Cycling is a healthy activity and you do tend to put additional muscle on in your most powerful muscle groups.

    Even though I'd like to lose 20 lb., as long as I ride I feel really good, health-wise.
    I stop for people / whose right of way I honor / but not for no one.



    Originally Posted by bragi "However, it's never a good idea to overgeneralize."

  9. #9
    Go Leafs kgriffioen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jross View Post
    I was reading one of those body charts and I should be no more that 188 lbs for 6'. right now I'm 266. Is it possible to be at 188? I played sports in high school and some in college and was very active. I've never weighed 188 (except when much younger). Is this really possible that I need to lose another 80lbs? Has anyone experienced this?
    You bet I have. I'm 6'1" and at my biggest I went around 225-230. Today 182 and I feel great!!

  10. #10
    foolishly delirious RatedZeroHero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Panhandle of NE
    Posts
    798
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by old and new View Post
    You're 6'6" not six foot even, you ain't that fat.
    thanks for noticing!

    at 24% BF I have alot I could stand to lose...

  11. #11
    Senior Member John Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    East Jordan, MI
    My Bikes
    Trek FX 7.3
    Posts
    219
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My doctor, many years ago, explained that the weight charts weren't to be trusted. His method was pretty simple. He asked me, up to age 25, when did I feel the most fit. I told him it was after I had done a section of the Appalachian Trail. I was fit before I went and after weeks carrying 50 lbs. I felt great. I weighed 195 at the time at 6'. He said between age 25 and 40, I would gain one pound a year through change in my body. He told me that would be my best weight throughout my adult life until I became very elderly. For me, that meant 210. Until my back and knee surgeries, that's about what I weighed.

    John
    Last edited by John Bailey; 09-25-09 at 03:24 AM.

  12. #12
    Senior Member hopsing08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    418
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    the common issue is that people with more muscle mass dont see how they can lose extra weight. from lifting weights i was around 15% body fat weighing in at 230. that was about 3 years ago. then i lost weight all the way to 190. still at around 12% body fat. but i gained it back and was up to 235, but much more unhealthy. i started training and everyone said, dont lose too much weight. well im at 206 and i still have a gut. its because my muscles leaned out also.

    i run into this issue with a few women i know. they look at other women and say she weighs 120, there is no way i could get to 120, but they can, same as you can get to 180... what happens is you have to decide first off if you want to lose the muscle too.
    when you do a serious training routine and alot of endurance sports you dont lose strength all together but your muscles "lean" out. so you may have legs that can squat 500lbs and be 8% BF and weigh 250 but when you start cycling, or in my case doing triathlons your muscles realize...i dont need legs that can squat 500lbs. (it helps but you dont need all that muscle.)i need legs that can propel me as i run or as i bike. so your body begins to lean out the muscle.
    also another big thing is that when people who weigh alot start to lose weight they lose the fat first, most likely, and then are left with the muscle that was needed to support that weight, then you lose that muscle and since muscle weighs more, you continue to lose weight.

    blah blah blah, it can be done. but again many BF calculators say that i should weigh 150 to have a 8% BF. because i have more muscle and like having more muscle, i think my ideal weight is 185 to 190

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Aurora, CO
    My Bikes
    CAAD9-1, Windsor Cliff 29er
    Posts
    1,306
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I used to disagree with those charts too, until I started losing weight. I'm 6'5" and weighed about 230 lbs for a long time. I thought I'd be fine losing 15-20 lbs. Right now I'm weighing in at 185 and still have 12% body fat, I could feasibly dip into the 170's and still be healthy.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,793
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm 6'1", about 230-235; a little heavier than I want to be, but not bad.

    Ideally, for my body and health, I can roll in about 220 or so. F the BMI's and ideal weight charts. I know when i feel good, and my 'vital numbers' are already good!

  15. #15
    You gonna eat that? Doohickie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas Church of Hopeful Uncertainty
    My Bikes
    1966 Raleigh DL-1 Tourist, 1973 Schwinn Varsity, 1983 Raleigh Marathon, 1994 Nishiki Sport XRS
    Posts
    14,022
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    When I was about that weight (6'-2" and 240 lb.) I seriously felt like I was gonna die.
    I stop for people / whose right of way I honor / but not for no one.



    Originally Posted by bragi "However, it's never a good idea to overgeneralize."

  16. #16
    Working On My Kit Tan Varina Drag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    My Bikes
    2010 Specialized Allez Double
    Posts
    111
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As others have said, body fat is a much better measure (although the charts aren't bad for general guidance). My favorite frame of reference is Evander Holyfield. In his prime, he weighed 220 and was considered obese by the BMI chart. We're both 6'1". Since I'm down to 216, I must be in better shape, right?

    At the best shape of my life I weighed in at 185, the upper end of my band. I felt really good there and feel like that was my ideal weight. I know I'm a bit over-weight now but I'm not sure 175 is reachable. So, I'm shooting for body fat in the low teens and looking good in my clothes, what ever weight that might be.

  17. #17
    Senior Member downtube42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Indiana
    My Bikes
    Volae Team, '76 Motobecane Grand Jubile, '60's Schwinn Typhoon 2-speed kickback, Specialized Hardrock, Sun Flat-top unicycle
    Posts
    1,569
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the charts are a good rough guideline. I also think a full-length mirror tells a pretty true story.
    This has to be a tie between re-frozen slushy uneven dirty ice stuff just right of the nicely plowed pavement, and super-glassy ice with a dusting of fresh powder - SalshShark

  18. #18
    Senior Member ntime60's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    My Bikes
    Trek 7.3FX
    Posts
    94
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As long as it is a slightly convex mirror...ahaha

    I don't hold much stock in those charts because there are too many variables to account for. Even using them as a rough guideline is error prone. I don't know why people insist on using such crude devices to determine how healthy we are or should be.

    How do you feel? How do you look? Are you satisfied with those answers? These are the proper questions to answer.

    If you have an insatiable need to know, then get your actual percentage through a body impedance scale and not some very general chart provided by the insurance industry.
    2009 Trek 7.3 (Black), Cateye Strada /w cadence. My Cycling Adventures

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NY state
    My Bikes
    See Signature...
    Posts
    1,236
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I dont pay attention to those charts. Right now I have a bit to lose, but even if I got down to being in good shape again, I would not be in their "ideal" range. I'm 5'8, they think I should be around 150, that aint gonna happen with these broad shoulders!

    Its a good chart, for skinny tiny framed people...

  20. #20
    Senior Member nkfrench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    My Bikes
    2006 Specialized Ruby Pro aka "Rhubarb" / and a backup road bike
    Posts
    1,563
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    According to BMI charts and my height I should weigh 126#. My lowest adult weight was 139# and there my body fat was too low and I had no energy, was sick all the time, and was performing very poorly in sports. 145-150 was a much stronger/more sustainable weight for me and is where I had my best swimming times.

    Right now I am at a BMI level that suggests my body fat should be in the mid 40's when I am < 35%. BMI may be great as an easy statistical average but that doesn't work for all of us. I also don't fit the averages being 5'6" with size 11W feet, hands too big for XL women's gloves, lung capacity off the charts, etc. I'm more interested in body composition and "what" the pounds I lose are made up of rather than just the changes in pounds and BMI.

    When you lose weight there is typically some muscle weight loss. As a smaller person you just don't need all the skeletal muscle you did when larger. Set ballpark goals at first, then re-evaluate as you lose weight.
    Last edited by nkfrench; 09-29-09 at 08:02 AM.

  21. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Tucson
    My Bikes
    01 Specialized Rockhopper A1 and 07 Felt Z80 05 Canondale Prophet
    Posts
    112
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    BMI charts work sometimes.. Sometimes not.

    When I weighed 260, I'm 5'10", my doctor used to pull out the BMI chart and tell me that I should weigh no more than 175.. I'd chuckle and tell him that I weighed 205 when I got out of the Army and nobody would have called me fat.. I did have to get taped every weigh in, but that was not an issue.

    A couple of years later, after a MI and subsequent weight loss.. I'm down to 215, 40 lbs over what he said my max was.. Last time I saw him, he said "you look fit".. I'm about 20% body fat, I can live with that.

    Could I stand to lose some weight? Yep, but I won't complain where I'm at..

    For the record, in the Army, I got down to 178 and taped at 8% body fat.. I would guess that 195-200 lbs is a lean fighting weight for my frame...

    In my case the BMI chart doesn't work very well..
    01 Specialized Rockhopper A1
    07 Felt Z80

    45 pounds and counting :)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •