Originally Posted by
bajadock
D.A.B. , my experience is also the 3x to 4x ratio of running v. cycling caloric burn.
Interesting that the original poster's main exercise is running, but, reason for this post is losing weight.
One dimensional programs don't work for many. I like diverse exercise programs for mental stimulation.
Only reason I would choose bicycling for weight loss is if that was only exercise routine that I liked. It's very inefficient return on time investment compared with so many other choices. But, hey, I think this is a bike forum.
But the calories burned per unit time is similar. The one major benefit of cycling over running is that you can go much longer than running, because your knees, hips, ankles and spine aren't getting pounded into submission with every stride. So, if you could burn 500 calories per hour running or cycling, and you could bike for 3 hours or run for 1, cycling's the clear choice. Cycling also allows the scenery to change more rapidly...and in Oregon that's a neat incentive.