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


Go Back   > >

Training & Nutrition Learn how to develop a training schedule that's good for you. What should you eat and drink on your ride? Learn everything you need to know about training and nutrition here.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-14-09, 09:35 AM   #1
jasandalb
C3 H6 O3 ACID
Thread Starter
 
jasandalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Old Peoplesville
Bikes:
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Can I possibly be shredding this many calories?

Okay...so I have a heart monitor and have been training for a week with it.
One thing it measures during my workouts is Kcal's burned (kilocalories)
The KCal to Cal ratio is 1:1000

So....my monday night run... 5k
Time = 23:11
Max HR = 183
Avg HR = 171
KCal Burned = 817
Converted and that's 8170 calories burned


Then...did a recovery run last night and worked the weights...
Last nights stats:
Time = 48:36
Max HR = 185
Avg HR = 143
KCal burned = 693
Convert that and last night's workout I burned 6930 calories....

Surely my math is NOT right....can I really burn that? I'm 31, current weight is 202lbs.
jasandalb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 10:13 AM   #2
Turt99
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
First if Kcal and cal was 1:1000 then your conversion is wrong, it would be 817 Kcal = 81,700 cals

But really the number you want is the Kcal value, there is no conversion. But not only that it is widely excepted that most HRMs will give you a calories burned value higher then it really should be in most cases.
Turt99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 10:24 AM   #3
StanSeven
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: No Va but ride also in So Md
Bikes: Cervelo SLC-SL, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Posts: 11,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
First HRM monitors usually provide a highly inflated calorie burned value. My Garmin showed 4,000 calories on a long ride once. I then used some calculations that showed less than half is the actual.

Second, with your weight and that pace, you likely burn 150 calories per mile. That's a little over 450 for 5K.

Finally forget about conversions.
StanSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 10:30 AM   #4
KyleOndy
Me!!
 
KyleOndy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Central NJ
Bikes: Trek 1500
Posts: 67
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It does not seem right to burn >800 calories in a 5k run.
KyleOndy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 10:32 AM   #5
caelric
triathlete? roadie? MTB?
 
caelric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bellevue, NE
Bikes: Cannondale Slice One tri bike, Cannondale F300 Hardtail MTB, Bianchi Giro roadie
Posts: 385
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Heh. When you talk about calories in food, and calories burnt via exercising, you are allready talking in kilo calories (kcal's) Read the wikipedia article on calories, kilocaroies, and Calories for a decent explanation.

Short version is that you burnt 817 Calories on your first run, and 693 Calories on your second run. A bacon cheeseburger has about 500 Calories. The Calories burnt do seem a little high; the average amount of Calories burnt during exercise is anywhere from 1000-1500 per hour. At 817 Calores in 23:11 minutes, you were burning over 2000 Calories per hour, which is rather high, even for your size. For refence, I'm 215 lbs and burn about 1000 Calories in a hour of cycling, about 15000 per hour running.
caelric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 10:37 AM   #6
CbadRider
Administrator
 
CbadRider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On the bridge with Picard
Bikes: Specialized Allez, Specialized Sirrus
Posts: 5,963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
According to your heart monitor you're burning 35 calories per minute. That is a bit high.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xerum 525 View Post
Now get on your cheap bike and give me a double century. You walking can of Crisco!!

Forum Guidelines *click here*
CbadRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 10:38 AM   #7
aham23
grilled cheesus
 
aham23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 8675309
Bikes: 2010 CAAD9 Custom, 06 Giant TCR C2 & 05 Specialized Hardrock Sport
Posts: 6,946
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
a very basic guideline for moderate efforts is 40 cals per biking mile and 100 cals per running mile. most HR units give off high numbers. i guess they want you to feel good about working out and buy more of their stuff. later.
__________________
aham23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 10:44 AM   #8
jasandalb
C3 H6 O3 ACID
Thread Starter
 
jasandalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Old Peoplesville
Bikes:
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
so...why in the heck do they put Kcal's on there?

I even cross checked my stuff at the gym... got on the treadmill and ran and it followed the same flow as my HR monitor, same increase in KCal burned....

Oh well... I kind of figured it was way off. But it would be nice to know what I am truly burning.
Anyone have any way of doing that???
jasandalb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 10:49 AM   #9
StanSeven
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: No Va but ride also in So Md
Bikes: Cervelo SLC-SL, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Posts: 11,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasandalb View Post
Oh well... I kind of figured it was way off. But it would be nice to know what I am truly burning.
Anyone have any way of doing that???
Do a Google search. There are lots of charts that show calories burned per each type of exercising, speed, your weight, etc. It all varies. For example, someone mentioned running is 100 calories per mile. That's true for someone weighing 150 lbs. Since you weigh 202, your rate is closer to 150 calories. Your pace has an impact, but much smaller. The difference between 7:00/mile and 9:00/mile varies by 20%.
StanSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 10:53 AM   #10
jasandalb
C3 H6 O3 ACID
Thread Starter
 
jasandalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Old Peoplesville
Bikes:
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Okay..... think I might have figured this out....

1Kcal = 4184 Joules.
1 Joule = .000239 calories (nutritional)

SO......in my monday run:

817Kcal = 3,418,328 Joules
3,418,328 Joules x .000239 = calories burned

Calories burned = 816.9

That sounds a little more like it.....
jasandalb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 11:03 AM   #11
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Bikes:
Posts: 23,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasandalb View Post
so...why in the heck do they put Kcal's on there?

I even cross checked my stuff at the gym... got on the treadmill and ran and it followed the same flow as my HR monitor, same increase in KCal burned....

Oh well... I kind of figured it was way off. But it would be nice to know what I am truly burning.
Anyone have any way of doing that???
They put Kcals because that's what everybody uses--it's just that what we lay people (and the nutrition labels) commonly call "calories" are really "Calories", which are the same as what scientists call "kilocalories". Confusing, isn't it?

Your HRM probably gives the most accurate estimate of the calories you burn, as long as it's set up properly. For greater accuracy, you would probably have to go into a laboratory setting.

Why do you feel it's important to get any estimate of calories burned? If you're trying to lose weight, the scale is the best measuring instrument. Weigh yourself every week. If you weigh more this week, eat a little less next week. Repeat on a weekly basis for the rest of your life. Very simple, very effective, and very cheap.

Ride your bike for fun and fitness--not for weight loss. Exercise is largely ineffective for weight loss, which is mostly about eating less.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 11:07 AM   #12
bcbcbc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
wiki:

The unit calorie has historically been used in two major alternate definitions that differ by a factor of 1,000

The small calorie, gram calorie, or calorie (symbol: cal) is the amount of heat (energy) required to raise the temperature of one gram of water by 1 C.

The large calorie, kilogram calorie, kilocalorie (symbol: kcal), or Calorie (capital C) is the amount of heat (energy) needed to increase the temperature of one kg of water by 1 C, exactly 1000 small calories, or about 4.184 kJ.

The second definition is the one commonly used to express food energy
bcbcbc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 11:10 AM   #13
bcbcbc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turt99 View Post
First if Kcal and cal was 1:1000 then your conversion is wrong, it would be 817 Kcal = 81,700 cals

.
er... 817,000 ???
bcbcbc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 11:13 AM   #14
jasandalb
C3 H6 O3 ACID
Thread Starter
 
jasandalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Old Peoplesville
Bikes:
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

I am trying to make sure that what I burn I am able to replace.
Its about staying fit and lean.

Its not as simple as stepping on the scale each week....if it was then there wouldn't be as big a weight problem as there is. What about when you keep exercising, sticking to the EXACT routine you've done... then 3 wks in a row you weigh the same? Would you not want to dig deeper to find out what's going on??

I bike and run because I enjoy it....but there is also a purpose to it. I am training for my first TRI and this is the best way....for me....to keep track of my goals.
jasandalb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 11:19 AM   #15
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Bikes:
Posts: 7,266
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roody View Post
Ride your bike for fun and fitness--not for weight loss. Exercise is largely ineffective for weight loss, which is mostly about eating less.
I think you've got that backwards. For me it is much easier to lose weight by exercising than by cutting out food. It's not too hard to burn an extra 3500 calories a week by riding a bike. On top of that you get the ancilliary benefits of being fit.
gregf83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 11:28 AM   #16
jasandalb
C3 H6 O3 ACID
Thread Starter
 
jasandalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Old Peoplesville
Bikes:
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roody View Post
Exercise is largely ineffective for weight loss, which is mostly about eating less.
you are not serious are you
jasandalb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 11:39 AM   #17
kylejack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 248
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roody View Post
Ride your bike for fun and fitness--not for weight loss. Exercise is largely ineffective for weight loss, which is mostly about eating less.
Weight loss is about creating a calorie deficit. This is done by eating fewer calories, increasing physical activity, or both. Its not "mostly" about one or the other.
kylejack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 01:11 PM   #18
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Bikes:
Posts: 23,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
To lose one pound of fat, you have to ride roughly 87 miles. And you have to do that without eating even one additional bite of food. How many people can do this every week, or how many actually will do it?
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 01:20 PM   #19
127.0.0.1
50000 Guatts of power
 
127.0.0.1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 1,001
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OP

you original number are way off


expect to burn 1000-1200 calories per hour running at a good clip
your revised number in the 800's is probably quite correct
127.0.0.1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 01:21 PM   #20
bcbcbc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 105
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregf83 View Post
I think you've got that backwards. For me it is much easier to lose weight by exercising than by cutting out food. It's not too hard to burn an extra 3500 calories a week by riding a bike. On top of that you get the ancilliary benefits of being fit.

I'm surprised at the negative reactions to this quote. It's becoming more and more accepted in the weight loss community that you cut calories taken in to lose weight. You exercise, preferably resistance exercise, to minimize the percentage of weight lost as muscle.

The more you need to lose weight the truer it is. A sedentay 300 pounder probably cant run aerobically. Any run is a gasping sprint. They cant bike or do anything else at running colorie expenditures. Unless they dedicate hours a day to walking at a strolling pace or some walking equivalent exercise they cant burn 3500 calories per week. One pound a week average is the absolute minimum to motivate someone to stay on a weight loss program. Counting on exercise also runs the risk of increasing appetite or just giving an excuse to eat more.

If you do the math then anecdotal stories of exercise based weight loss have to be explained by something beyond straight calorie deficit theory. Like LARGE increases in BMR or decreases in digestive efficiency.
bcbcbc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 02:08 PM   #21
dwilbur3
Freewheelin' Fred
 
dwilbur3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sacramento
Bikes: Surly Cross Check
Posts: 742
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think it's fair to say that using BOTH calorie restriction and exercise will improve the odds of success of any weight-loss plan.
dwilbur3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 02:16 PM   #22
spunky
Senior Member
 
spunky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oregon
Bikes:
Posts: 473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The reason why it's most effective to exercise in order to achieve and maintain weight loss is because exercise increases the BMR. Just cutting out calories works to a certain extent. But eventually the body senses the caloric decrease and adjusts it's BMR to offset it....hence it lowers your actual caloric expenditure. Exercise combined with a reduction in caloric intake focuses on both sides of the equation.
spunky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 02:18 PM   #23
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Bikes:
Posts: 23,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregf83 View Post
It's not too hard to burn an extra 3500 calories a week by riding a bike.
I never said it was hard to burn the calories. I said it's hard to lose weight with exercise alone.

To burn the calories, you only have to ride about 12.5 miles a day on every day of the week. But to lose the weight, you must never eat any extra food because you're riding those miles. No Gatorade, no power bar, no banana or fig newton in the jersey pocket. Just remember, if you do eat only one energy bar (240 calories) in the entire week, you have to ride six more miles to burn it off. That's half a day's extra exercise for just energy bar!

Maybe not that easy after all?
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 02:21 PM   #24
StanSeven
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: No Va but ride also in So Md
Bikes: Cervelo SLC-SL, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Posts: 11,762
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 127.0.0.1 View Post
OP

you original number are way off


expect to burn 1000-1200 calories per hour running at a good clip
your revised number in the 800's is probably quite correct
I don't think you meant that. His revised number didn't changed - just the caluculation worked out.

There's no way someone can burn 817 calories in 23 minutes unless they are 350 lbs and capable of six minute miles.
StanSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 02:30 PM   #25
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Bikes:
Posts: 23,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwilbur3 View Post
I think it's fair to say that using BOTH calorie restriction and exercise will improve the odds of success of any weight-loss plan.
I agree that exercise might help a bit with weight loss maintenence. But then again, I once gained 10 pounds in a couple months while I was riding 100 miles a week. That's because I wasn't paying attention to my portions and I wasn't paying attention to the scales.

Now I pay attention to both these things. On 10/30/08 I had a bad injury and had to go "cold turkey" from 130 miles/week to zero miles/week. I haven't gained any weight, even with drastically less exercise, because I weigh myself every week and adjust my food intake accordingly. Again, this method of weight control is both easier and more effective than the "calorie equation" that most unsuccessful dieters use: "If you gained weight this week, eat less next week."
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody 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 12:41 AM.