SammyJ 

20 or more app for iPhone and android, web pages, who do we believe.

No. I'm not looking to eat my calories back, just looking for good answers.

hubcyclist

I think the ballpark is 700-800 cal an hour. According to this calculator, I burn 844 cal as a 155lb person riding 16-20mph How Many Calories Do You Burn Cycling? | Bicycling Magazine

caloso

A power meter has the right answer.

prathmann

Even a perfect power meter can only tell you how much energy you output, but it doesn't know how many calories your body needed as input to generate the measured output. Usually an efficiency estimate is used to approximate the necessary input calories - generally about 25%. But there is some variation in the efficiency between individuals.

Machka 

400-600 calories per hour.

Depending on your weight ... if you're really heavy you might burn more than someone who is quite light.

Depending on your effort ... if you ride at the top of your effort level you might burn more than someone who is just toodling along.


"They" used to provide quite high estimates of how many calories we burned while cycling ... many calculators still seem to over-estimate the number of calories burned. I'm not sure why, maybe it is to make people feel good about what they're doing. But I've noticed in the last several years, the estimates have dropped considerably ... down to much more realistic levels.


Another calorie estimate I've heard is 35-40 calories per mile (approx. 21-25 calories per km) ... depending on weight and effort. That seems fairly accurate.

FrenchFit 

It's all nonsense because none of these apps can factor your metabolism, fitness, acclimation. If you are a regular rider doing long slow distance my guess is you burn nothing more than what you would going for a walk to the local Starbucks.

achoo

Too high - that's averaging about 230-240W. That's well over a 20 mph average at your weight.

(200W is about 720 cal/hr)

achoo

Nope. It's not nonsense - calories are a measure of energy. The energy that propels you and your bike can be measured easily.

Amazingly enough, it's pretty damn accurate.

achoo

I've even noticed that the spin bikes at my gym measure power, but then overestimate the calories burned compared to the estimated power anyway.

And of course the power estimate is preposterously high to begin with.

chasm54

Yes, there is some variation between individuals. But even taking that into account, with a power meter you'll be likely to be within plus or minus ten percent of the correct figure.

The HRM algorithms are often wildly inaccurate. Some of the later garmin models seem more realistic than earlier versions, but they can't take account of the fitness of the subject. A highly-trained cyclist will put out more power at a lower HR than the algorithm expects so their calorie burn might be understated while an unfit newb's might be overstated.

Why do we care, anyway? It can only be for purposes of weight management. In which case, I'd suggest taking an estimate of calories burned that is definitely too low, and making sure not to eat to replace even that low number.

FrenchFit 

You miss the point entirely. The "energy" I'll expend running a 5K trails this morning is probably 30% of the energy you would expend running my 5K. I'm assuming you are not an accomplished runner, and I am a daily runner. I won't break a sweat unless I run intervals, and I won't need any fueling before or after, and I won't be burning noteworthy cals. Your app would say I'll burn 500+ calories.

GeorgeBMac

I use both Strava and DigiFit with a heart rate monitor and their calorie estimates tend to come out pretty close to each other.

But, it seems that both are much to too high. If they were accurate, I would weight about 2 pounds right now. Some days, I even end up (supposedly) burning more calories than I consume...

I suspect that part of the trouble is that they include basal metabolic calories in with their calculation which would grossly inflate the number. That is: my basal metabolic rate doing nothing but 'bed rest' is 1500 calories per day. That alone accounts for most of my daily calories.

chasm54

OP, I just noticed your signature line. If you're riding 40-50 miles per month, you may as well count the calories burned as zero, because it's going to be a trivial figure that will get lost in the noise as far as your diet is concerned.

Machka 

Yes ... based on the 35-40 calories per mile calculation, that's at most 2000 calories per month ... 66 calories per day. Not much at all. One slice of plain bread with no toppings is 66 calories. One small apple is 77 calories. A person could eat back those calories almost by accident.

It's better than nothing, but if the goal is to lose weight, there needs to be a lot more activity than that.

LMaster

500 seems pretty high. I would be going with something closer to 300 for a 5k for a runner at a typical running weight of 120-150. Either way, it's going to be somewhat more than trivial in my opinion. 300 is plenty of calories over trivial, at least from my view. You absolutely do get more efficient with training, but at the same time it still takes a certain amount of energy to physically move your body over one mile.

FrenchFit 

I call my running weight 210lb, about a 30 pace for a casual 5k run. I do 40 push-up & sit-ups afterwards as part of the cool down. And, I fast all day; if I burned 300-500 calories at 6am I would be in trouble by 6pm.

Not every car gets the same mpg, yo. Unless you believe apps & calculators.

Looigi

One good way to measure energy consumption during exercise is through respirometry, measuring consumption of O2 and expiration of CO2. This can measure basal metabolism as well as exercise metabolism rates and, of course it can be used to measure VO2 max. You probably have seen pictures of people on stationary bikes or treadmills breathing through a mask and hoses. Divide energy output determined by a power by energy consumed as determined by respirometry and you get your efficiency coefficient under those specific test conditions.

Short of all that, I just borrowed a PM for awhile and using the default factors determined that I average ~700 cal/hr of my typical riding.

mr_pedro

Calories burned totally depend on your effort. If you go very slow, say about 12 mph on a road bike on flats, it is probably something like 350 Calories per hour. If you are averaging about 20 mph on flats with a little wind on a road bike in traffic, that would be something like 850 Calories per hour.

delcrossv

The one downside of riding a recumbent. I probably burn 250- 300 kcal/hr at 20 mph.

mr_pedro

That much? According to Bicycle Speed (Velocity) And Power Calculator in the white hawk it would only take 200 Cal per hour to do 20 mph.

LucF

Same here.

LMaster

No, every car doesn't get the same mpg. But there is still a definitely cost to move your body against gravity and forward over a mile of ground, some people are more efficient at this than others and will absolutely burn less calories. How extreme that amount ends up being is I suppose what is up for discussion.

I will admit I find it improbably that you would burn significantly less than 100 kcal/mile out on a run given myself. I was, and still sorta am, religious about counting calories. I know if I eat roughly 2,100 kcal/day when inactive my weight remains in one place. Running was a pretty clear 90-100 kcal/mile for me, and as expected 70 miles a week and eating 2500 kcal/day got me a pretty steady 1 lb/wk weight loss.

As you've said and I agree with, YMMV, but it's hard for me to imagine that a 210lb guy running 8:00-10:00 pace burns significantly fewer calories per mile than a twig 135lb guy running 6:45-7:45 pace.

mx22

That's only the case if you use just the basic app. Add heart monitor and the calories you burned should be more or less accurate.

achoo

Where are you getting this "app" crap?

One wonders how you know how many calories you burn when you run.

mr_pedro

How much you burn with running is practically only a function of weight and distance. Rule of thumb is 0.63Cal/lb/mile. So with 210 lb you are at 130 Cal/mile and your 5k will set you back about 400 Cal.


You must be eating (and burning) something like 2800 Cal a day, why do you think the 400 Cal would be trouble?

My morning ride before breakfast is 1100 Cal and I Normally only make up for the deficit by dinner time.