patdown45

Is this a possible goal? Probably not a realistic one for sure....but its sure sounds interesting

brianmcg123

No

kc0bbq

50 miles doesn't burn that many calories unless you're really working hard.

dabac

Regardless of method, losing 1 lbs/day is neither realistic nor healthy.

I came close once, while doing MTB touring in the Pyrenees. We did ride abt 50 miles daily. But that was single-track, 2-3 miles in elevation.

Not really the kind of thing that'll integrate nicely into everyday life.

Juan Foote

Lol, go on tour. If you can end up averaging that manner of mileage by the end of 50 days, I bet you come pretty close.

Yendor72

You still have to eat less. You can ride 1,000 miles a day and not lose any weight if you eat too many calories.

pdlamb

Eh, maybe not. I averaged just over 50 miles/day for close to 90 days and only lost some 30 pounds.


This is one of those, "Sorry, you're going to have to cut back on the food. Practice kicking back from the table instead" kinds of threads.

jsigone

2500mile is ALLOT in 2 months!!! and I doubt you will drop that much weight, you may have to eat 5000 cals per day just to keep going

deaninkl

Losing a Lb per week with regular exercise and wise eating is a way better way, like many clydes I have experience rapid weight loss, but quick off generally leads to quick on++, and that is depressing... I'm in the depression stage of such folly right now.....

By getting the weight off quick you do things that are not sustainable over the long term... the Lb per week means you just have to be smart.. not take on a grueling regime.... best go smart in my opinion...

baron von trail 

50 miles for 50 straight days should get you started. If you manage your diet effectively, I estimate you'll lose 10 lbs. Maybe 15.

Thing is. Can you ride 50 miles for 50 straight days? I ride 50 miles r/t on my commute. I can't do it for 50 straight days, and I've been at this for 10 years.

rgconner

Whut?

At 15mph a Clyde is likely burning 1000Cals an hour, and 50 miles is 3.3 hrs.

That is a LOT of calories!

However, your body is not going to burn all that as fat, and you have to eat to replace some of it or you will pass out.


Don't make weight loss the challenge, make doing it a challenge, because 3+ hrs on a bike a day is no small task.

If you lose weight... GREAT!

You get fitter? BETTER!

You have fun? BEST

ill.clyde

Eh ... according to Strava, while wearing my heart rate monitor, my 51 miler this past weekend I only burned 1,700 calories.

That was at 13.5 mph for just under three hours and 50 minutes. So while I could have worked harder, I doubt that extra 1.5 mph would have earned me another 1,300 calories.

Of course I take that caloric figure with a grain of salt, and I think Strava likely underestimates my calories while the Polar app likely overestimates. FWIW I didn't use the Polar app the day of my 50 miles but it's figures are generally higher than Strava. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

jsigone

Best advise here!!!!

kc0bbq

Warning: This is going to get a little numbers geeky...

That's about a 275W average, which is not in any way realistic to expect at 15mph. On flat ground a Clyde is burning only marginally more than a small rider. Our drag isn't *that* much higher than anyone else on a bicycle.

I'm on the smaller edge of Clydeness, but a 170 watt average gets me a 16.5mph avg 50 miles on a route with 2650' of climbing with half of the ride in a 20mph headwind (in a group of 5 doing my share of pulling). That's barely breaking 600cal/hr on a pretty tough ride. 600cal/hr tends to be where all of my rides work out to be on faster rides, 400-500/hr on slow, looking-at-the-scenery rides. Calories per mile generally works out to about the same at any speed below the point where wind resistance takes over.

Hills are a little different, where power to weight ratio kicks in, but flat ground speed would increase in parallel with speed up a hill... In the end, watts are watts, they're just overcoming different things.

If you're including BMR (calories burned just being alive) it's not that much more. A 40 year old, 400lb, 6'0" Clyde will burn about 115cal/hr.

Overestimating calories burned leads to a lot of disappointment. Weight loss got to be much more predictable after I splurged on a power meter. The efficiency of the human body only varies by a few percent.

If the ride was dead flat, like southern Florida flat it's probably somewhat accurate, or maybe a little high if it wasn't windy. Any breeze of any kind throws everything off on their power estimations, and certain kinds of hills mess with the estimate, too.

rgconner

Strava does something unusual, they are measuring power at the pedal, either from a powermeter or by estimating the effort.

Then they convert that Kj directly to KCals (or food calories).

Unfortunately, the the human body is not that efficient. It is only about 25% efficient and so to produce the power claimed by the Power Meter your body must burn 4X the energy.

None of the literature or calculators out there match what Strava does, so you have to understand their methodology when using their numbers.

kc0bbq

You are correct. I did take that into account in my numbers. Otherwise 275w for an hour would be a little less than 250cal/hr. Strava assumes a slightly lower efficiency than 25% right now, so if you have a power meter it says calories burned are a bit higher than a straight 1:1. It's somewhere between 22-23%. My last ride was 1061kJ, Strava turned that into 1183 calories. I usually just look at kJ and use that. At one point they were using an efficiency of about 27%, which is awfully high.

Anyway, I'll stop derailing... It's better suited for another thread. Most people don't enjoy number crunching, and when you don't it takes away from the freedom of just riding a bike.

bigbiker1

I don't quite buy that. Our drag is not the only factor, even on flat ground you have to exert enough force to maintain speed. The force a 150lb person needs to maintain speed is going to be significantly less than a 350lb man.

rgconner

It is about 40% higher.

But the real problem is that the more you burn, the more you eat and it is very easy to keep eating like a riding day when it is not a riding day.

And honestly you can't effectively run more than 500 calories deficit per day without causing issues like consuming muscle instead of fat.

Better is to shoot for being more active and more fit and let the weight take care of itself.

Myosmith

Karnak sees overtraining, serious fatigue, malnutrition and injury in your future.

DrIsotope

@ 205lbs, 600kJ/hr is my sub-15mph Z1 efforts with my wife on weekends. I average just under 800kJ/hr. Because I ride solo. Group riding throws any power "averages" right out the window. Moving more weight and more height takes more work-- a day of 170w average for me is slooooowww. For me at least, a "tough" ride is 800-900kJ/hr (+230w avg.) for 4-5 hours.


On topic, 50 miles a day for 50 days, you have as good a chance of gaining weight as losing it. I eat like a horse after big rides, because if I don't, on the next ride I'll feel like crap.

indyfabz

Last month I did two weeks in northwest Montana. 13 days of fully-loaded riding with an average of about 60/day. Climbing was about 3,100'/day, with at least one day over 4,000'. Maybe lost a couple of lbs.

When I crossed the country and then some (6,000 miles in nearly 4 months on the road) in '99 I lost weight overall but actually put on some while riding through the midwest because I was still eating like I was when riding in the mountains.

Personally, I think cyclists tend to eat too much unless they have done really hard rides like Dr. I above. And I am not talking really hard for them rides. (25 flat, slow miles could be really hard for someone.) I am talking rides that actually burn a lot of calories.

Tokwan

Don't starve, just change your diet, and ride regularly. I lose 20Kg in 5 months just doing that, without feeling fatigue or weaker and still enjoying what I did. Used to be 95kg, now 75kg.

Tokwan

This was what I did,
I was 95kg 5 months ago. I reduced 15kg in 3 months and another 5kg recently. I am now 75kg (abt 165lbs at 5'10")
The 15kg was reduced via diet. No, I didn't eat less and I didn't go vegetarian. I simply my diet to:
1. Its oatmeal, honey with goat's milk and fruits for breakfast everyday ...and I mean everyday. When I wanna cycle, I add 2 3/4 boiled eggs to my breakfast. And coffee.

2. Every 2 days consecutively my lunch and dinner will be rice porridge with any condiments such as soya sauce+ either eggs, minced chicken , corned beef and whatever you please.

3. On the 3 rd day, I eat whatever I want, but stop just when I feel I am gonna be full.

4. I repeat the porridge again for another 2 consecutive days and it goes on an on. No more late nite snacks or supper.

Check your weight weekly, and you will see the difference.

Milton Keynes

I'm not telling anyone else what to do, but I've lost 50 pounds in the past year & a half by just cutting out a lot of sugar, carbs, and by not drinking any soda. I've also cut down on the amount I eat. I'm hopeful I can keep losing weight and become a non-Clyde.

ill.clyde

For me, the answer has always been, burn more calories, eat less.

I've never not succeeded doing that and I'm down 15 pounds over the past few months.

My wife is going low carb, and I support her and try to eat what she eats. I still eat carbs, but I've cut out Diet Coke (not an easy thing for me to do) and I log EVERYTHING that goes into my mouth. For me it's about portion control and being mindful of what I eat and how I eat.