Another weight thing but perplexing to me. Every Saturday at 8 AM I go off on my club ride. We do anywhere from 40-60 mi. Usually at least 2500-4000 ft. of climbing and I burn at least 2,000 calories. Then I come home and during the rest of the day probably put 2,000 calories back into my body. Maybe a bit more but I don't pig out. The next morning I get on the scale and invariably my weight has gone up by 2 lbs. Just wondering if anyone has an idea why that happens.

Likely fluid retention. Do you pee a lot during the day after the ride?

2000 additional calories over what you would need without riding(1800~2000)? Did you weigh yourself first thing when you got up and after you went to the bathroom?

Like above, I'd say fluid retention.

What is causing this? Using a scale. Just stop. Get to know your body and you will know whether you are gaining weight or just fluctuating within a normal range.

Weighing yourself after a ride gives you a false reading.

Just to clarify....I don't weigh myself right after the ride. I weigh myself the next day.

Like others have said, it is probably fluid retention. I experience the same thing as well. If that is the case, then over the next 2-3 days you should see the weight go back down. If it stays up, then you ate more than 2000 cals.

No, a total of 2,000 calories post ride. Probably something like 2500 calories for the entire day and 2,000 calories burned for a net intake of 500 calories for the day.

I don't know how I could be retaining that much fluid when I have lost 2 lbs of fluid (generally) during a ride. Not sure how to word this but....if I weigh myself when I come home from the ride I might weigh 2lbs. less but the next day it seems I have gained back that 2 lbs. and an additional 2 lbs. Eventually, I go back to the pre-ride weight after a couple days.

I don't live and die by my scale but I did notice this phenomenon and am perplexed by it.

Burning 2000 calories on a bike ride seems like a stretch unless your riding for 8-10 hours.

You may be using incorrect information, skewing your calculations. Calories burned on a 40-60 mile bike ride is in the hundreds, not thousands.

p.s. You and I and everyone else knows that the only way to gain weight is to eat too much. Sometimes we just don't really realize how much we eat and if your like me, we really don't count everything.

The calorie counters I've seen put calorie consumption at about 500 calories/hour depending on the rider's weight and the pace they are riding. (About.com and the estimator on my Garmin are in the same ballpark). I've often wondered if that applies as much to someone that rides a lot versus someone that does not.

I eat fairly light during the week and on weekends ride a lot and eat a lot ... and the same weight mystery happens with me. I dunno if this explains it, but my theory is that the extra weight is all the food you ate, in the process of being digested. Until you expel what's left (ahem), it's going to skew your weight a bit.

My sources indicate that at my weight (192lbs) and at a 13.5 mph average speed over 3 hr 44 min I would burn 3066 calories. I have used several on-line calorie expenditure tools and this the average. How someone could ride a bicycle for 3 hr. 44 min. at 13-14 mph on a route with 3800 ft of elevation (yesterday's ride) and burn calories in the hundreds is beyond me.

I should note that this is pretty consistent with my gf's HRM set up and another rider's Strava app info.

Calories lost on the ride is probably about right but like you I weigh myself before a ride--And if it was a hard or hot ride- I weigh myself afterwards. Any weight loss I put back on with fluids and then carry on for the rest of the day. Weight loss during a ride is most likely Fluid and IF I don't put it back on by drinking after the ride- then I have a thirst for the rest of the day that is difficult to get rid of. I eat lightly for the rest of the day and next morning usually find there is no weight loss but providing I don't pig out on buns and pies then the weight will come off over the next few days.

But I am lucky in that I am not trying to lose weight. I am at 140 lbs and may go up to 144 with less exercise and more eating. I recently did a ride and 142 in the morning--137 after an easy 50 miles but with heat and over 5 hours. Drank to get back to 140 and without cutting food or "Extra" exercise was still 140 5 days later. But at the start of the year I was 155lbs. That did take some serious Exercise and a very good look at my diet. The extra 15lbs came off in about 4 months and luckily I have kept it off

I stress that I am trying to keep my weight steady and not lose weight so my regime will be different to someone trying to lose weight. If I was it would be Use 2,000 calories- eat 1500. And eat the right food that will not give a weight gain--No fats- no sugars and cut back on carbs.

I don't have a scale or watch what I eat that much (I've always tended to be slim). Since I stopped riding for about a decade I picked up a pot belly and about 15 lbs. Well now that I started riding again I've lost much of the belly and about 10 lbs. I'm starting to button up slacks and old jeans that I used to have to leave unbuttoned at the top and cover with a belt.

All I really do is try and hit it a little hard, when I ride, now and then and throw in some hills that I'm starting to jump up out of the saddle for again.....still not setting any records at it but looking alive. I also try and lay off some of the cake and donuts that find their way to my workplace. Like I said though I'm one of those guys whose dinner hosts always wonder where their food disappears to since they don't see it show up on me.

The accepted consumption in long-distance circles, and that used by Machka in her advice to people is 250 to 300 calories an hour is what you need to replenish on the bike. Your estimates might be a bit over the cards. All the energy estimators that we have come across have way overestimated the calories consumed for the exercise and intensity undertaken. You might use a bit more if you are on a hammerfest with the Cat 2 boys.

The catch here is that unless you are actively dieting for the days after the ride, and you are losing the weight, you are likely having fluid retention. That's why I asked about how often you are peeing in the day after the ride, and even the day after that.

I wouldn't worry about it too much. If you are showing a trend upward over a month in your weight, yes there might be an issue with eating too much after a ride. But if not, or you are trending down, then things are OK.

There is a thought in weight loss not to be a slave to the scale, but rather record weights three times a week, at the same time every week with the same clothing. You can get way too wrapped up in the minutia of a few ounces here and there.

I would also suggest you go to the Training and Nutrition forum and ask some questions there. I can recommend reading some of Carbonfibreboy's posts on post-ride rehydration and refuelling.

Rowan:

Thanks for the info. I'm going to look into this a bit more. I am curious about your use of "we" in this statement: "All the energy estimators that we have come across have way overestimated the calories consumed for the exercise and intensity undertaken." and was wondering who "we" is. Are you involved in this subject professionally?

Sorry for the confusion -- "we" means Machka and me.

Both of us have dealt with all this sort of nutritional stuff over the years as randonneurs. So we have practical experience. But she also has a bookmark library that is stunning for its depth of resourcing and knowledge. We've even got one of Arnie Baker's books sitting right here at the moment.

Even so, the principles still come back to the basics.

Fluid retention is something that is not unusual after any sort of distance ride, in our experience, and that of other endurance riders.

I have actually noticed it more in the past couple of months, but that may be due to my paying a bit more attention to my weight -- that minutia stuff that really I should worry less about.

But the issue for on-bike energy consumption is that the devices used to calculate it aren't very good. There are huge variations in them and they overestimate, for reasons that others have to explain... some of it has to do with using heart rate rather than power, and even their algorithms may be off. It's a subject that comes up regularly in both Training and Nutrition, and the Road forum (and presumably the Race forums).

There have been numerous examples on BFs and elsewhere when someone has stated they are unable to lose weight even though they are cycling a lot, and their calorie burn for rides has been in the thousands. But when it comes down to it, they are overestimating their energy use on the bike, and over-replenishing after the ride.

At the other end of the scale, many people underestimate their food intake, too. So it becomes a circle of unders and overs with a result that no weight is lost, or it's even gained.

Anyway, I would say fluid retention is still it. Some of it might have to do with the creation of water molecules in the physiology of glucose being converted to energy. Some of it might have to do with your rehydration routines on the bike (which, if the case, you shouldn't alter).

Remember, it is all opinion. And some experimenting by you may be needed.

The 250-300 Cals/hr is based on what your body can process and isn't really an estimate of what you are burning. On a relatively easy 3 hr ride today I burned about 2,300 Cals over 85km (42 Cals/mile) according to my powermeter.

Bruce: Were your legs sore after the ride? One possible explanation could be inflammation and associated fluid retention.

Rowan and Machka are married, having met, I believe, on BFN. Perhaps that is the "we."

Machka has given excellent advice and ideas to folks for many years on this forum, along with Rowan. I admire their knowledge. Sorry to step in here, and I am probably out of line.

Yes. I agree about what the body can process. Of course, if you eat 2300 calories after the ride, when you've consumed 500 or 600 on the ride, you won't be in calorie deficit or at status quo.

You yourself have a power meter, but many people are still relying on HR monitors to do their calculations for them, and some of them have been wildly off in their estimates.

Thanks Denver

That's my understanding too. And that's why ultra endurance riders end up in a calorie deficit.

Not sore but climbing stairs was a little achey. Of course, over the years I've always felt a bit of that whenever I exert myself cycling. The more I think about this the more I think only fluid retention could result in a 2 lb. gain in such a short time. FWIW during Saturday's ride I drank 2+ large bottles of water with GU tablets. And, after the ride I drank the remains of the third bottle and 8 oz. of chocolate milk.

With regard to calories burned during that ride it is hard for me to believe the low numbers some propose. I have researched this on sites as diverse as Bicycling.com to the Mayo Institute to many other medical/nutrition sites. All the results on those sites would indicate a much higher calorie expenditure. I am not a scientist or professional in the field but have been a serious athlete and do have a "sense" of it.

What it amounts to is my really wanting to understand how my body functions at this age. It seems much different than what I have known before I hit 50 or so.

Without nit-picking about the exact number of REAL Calorie burn, I'd say that anything between 2000 and 4000 Calories is believable. The real question was the weight gain. Fat is about 3500 Calories per pound; and gaining 2 lbs of muscle overnight would be a miracle; so in order to gain 2 pounds of fat, bruce19 would have had to eat 7000 Calories over and above what he'd burned on the ride. A 9000-11000-Calorie-eating day? I don't think so. The only possible explanation is the difference in hydration. Eating salt or carbs (they're not called carboHYDRATES for nothing) would explain the weight gain, which would be temporary. A lot of diet plans will tell you to not weigh every day; because normal fluctuations like that will drive you crazy. Weigh a couple of times per week and watch the trends.

Water = 8.345 pounds/gallon

Exactly the same thing happens to me. I weigh myself every morning. About 5 weeks ago I did a century. The next day, I was 2 pounds heaver. Yesterday, I rode 91 miles and burned about 3,000 calories. This morning, I was 3.1 pounds heavier!

My best guess is fluid retention. I drank 6 bottles of water during the ride and had about 40 ounces of water after the ride.