> >
>

# Cycling to running miles conversion

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

# Cycling to running miles conversion

02-06-24, 05:12 PM
#1
Senior Member

Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 1,986
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Quoted: 2692 Post(s)
Liked 482 Times in 348 Posts
Cycling to running miles conversion

How many miles cycled do you think it takes to equal 1 mile ran? In terms of difficulty, workout, time elapsed, or however you wish to compare. I think maybe 8 miles cycled = 1 mile on foot
02-06-24, 05:15 PM
#2
Senior Member

Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,810
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Quoted: 6912 Post(s)
Liked 10,904 Times in 4,657 Posts
Originally Posted by LarrySellerz
How many miles cycled do you think it takes to equal 1 mile ran?
4.62197.

Anyone who says otherwise is wrong.
Likes For Koyote:
02-06-24, 05:21 PM
#3
Senior Member

Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,912

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Quoted: 3925 Post(s)
Liked 7,229 Times in 2,924 Posts
N * sin (2 π t) *exp (- µ t) / sqrt (1 + t^2)

where t is the effective time, µ is Moehper's coefficient, and N is the meteorological distance. But it's only an approximation, good to 0.1% at best.
Likes For tomato coupe:
02-06-24, 05:33 PM
#4
Senior Member

Join Date: Oct 2023
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 525
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Quoted: 339 Post(s)
Liked 250 Times in 161 Posts
How does a marathon compare to a 100 mile bike ride in your book?
02-06-24, 05:39 PM
#5
Senior Member

Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,346
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Quoted: 4378 Post(s)
Liked 4,803 Times in 2,969 Posts
Well if you run at 6 mph and ride at 18 mph then it is about a 3:1 ratio in distance. But in terms of energy used I would think the ratio is considerably higher. I can comfortably ride 100 miles at 18 mph, but I certainly can’t run 33 miles at 6 mph. I don’t do running, but Strava would probably provide a ballpark energy consumption per mile, which you could compare with your cycling consumption.
02-06-24, 05:48 PM
#6
Senior Member

Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,346
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Quoted: 4378 Post(s)
Liked 4,803 Times in 2,969 Posts
Originally Posted by ScottCommutes
How does a marathon compare to a 100 mile bike ride in your book?
For me as a cyclist who doesn’t run, a marathon would be a LOT harder. But a lot depends on how fast you ride. Running has a much higher minimum energy demand than cycling unless you are climbing a steep hill. Riding 100 miles on the flat at say a leisurely 12 mph is not very challenging. But at 20+ mph it becomes a lot harder. Running a marathon is hard work at pretty much any speed above walking pace.

Last edited by PeteHski; 02-07-24 at 08:25 AM.
02-06-24, 05:57 PM
#7
Happy With My Bikes

Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,169

Bikes: Hi-Ten bike boomers, a Trek Domane and some projects

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 874 Post(s)
Liked 2,295 Times in 1,108 Posts
Purely unscientific, but I've done 1 century and 3 marathons. How I felt after the century and the marathons was similar. I've done many half marathons and while I've never gave it much thought, I guess I guesstimate a half to be about 55 or so miles on the bike. One thing that is common to all those activities is I usually enjoy a beer afterwards.
__________________
"It is the unknown around the corner that turns my wheels." -- Heinz Stücke

02-06-24, 06:03 PM
#8
Senior Member

Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,912

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Quoted: 3925 Post(s)
Liked 7,229 Times in 2,924 Posts
Originally Posted by Camilo
They're not comparable. Running is a high impact sport, cycling is low impact. They use and abuse different muscles.
No, this is Larry asking -- cycling is a high impact sport for him.
Likes For tomato coupe:
02-06-24, 06:09 PM
#9
Senior Member

Join Date: Oct 2023
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 525
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Quoted: 339 Post(s)
Liked 250 Times in 161 Posts
I cycle 19 miles to work every day in a little under 1:40, including traffic and stop lights and such. An elite marathoner can do 26 miles in a hair under 2:00. It burns me up a little inside that there are people who could beat me to 19 miles without a bike.
Likes For ScottCommutes:
02-06-24, 06:22 PM
#10
I am potato.

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,099

Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆

Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Quoted: 1780 Post(s)
Liked 1,617 Times in 926 Posts
There is no comparison.
Wait, there is. It's just that time, miles, and speed fail to really capture it well and the results are so easily skewed so as to be effectively meaningless.

Running is harder. The minimum energy expenditure to run, not jog, but run is much higher than sitting on a bike. Something on the order of 100-120-ish calories per mile. To "run" a mile with reasonable enough form to actually be "running" takes ~8 minutes or so at the slowest possible pace. An hour would take you 7.5 miles and about 750-900 calories.

The same number of calories expended on a bike might very well be a personal time trial of 30+ mph average speed for an hour. Impossible. A more reasonable 18-20 mph speed is (off the cuff) ~8 calories per minute equals a depressingly low 480 calories per hour. It would take about 1 hour 45 to 2 hours of reasonably high effort cycling to equal runnings 750-900 calorie expenditure. So...36-40 high effort cycling miles in 2x the time running takes to do 7.5 miles. 40 miles in 2 hours is awfully fast.

All variable and subject to externalities, of course.

I've been told that a 4 hour marathon (slow) is about equivalent to a double century. I don't know if that is true or not. The math suggests 3500-4000 calories to do a marathon depending on fitness. Personal experience of ~7500 calories measured for a double century in 3-4x the time is close enough to be plausible from an "effort x time" perspective.

Useful? I'm not sure.

Last edited by base2; 02-06-24 at 06:31 PM.
Likes For base2:
02-06-24, 06:42 PM
#11
Junior Member

Join Date: Aug 2023
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked 26 Times in 17 Posts
Originally Posted by LarrySellerz
How many miles cycled do you think it takes to equal 1 mile ran? In terms of difficulty, workout, time elapsed, or however you wish to compare. I think maybe 8 miles cycled = 1 mile on foot
In terms of difficulty: 20 miles cycling is 1 mile running.(but you still won't hurt as bad by cycling) Aand why in hell would you run?

Last edited by Bleu; 02-06-24 at 06:48 PM.
02-06-24, 06:46 PM
#12
Senior Member

Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 753

Bikes: United Motocross BMX, Specialized Langster, Giant OCR, Marin Muirwoods, Globe Roll2, VROD:)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 238 Post(s)
Liked 404 Times in 245 Posts
I avoid running (not a fan)but I'll cycle for miles/hours. However, I'll skate for hours....does that count.
02-06-24, 06:48 PM
#13
Senior Member

Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 5,797

Bikes: 1986 Cannondale SR400 (Flat bar commuter), 1988 Cannondale Criterium XTR, 1992 Serotta T-Max, 1995 Trek 970

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Quoted: 1940 Post(s)
Liked 2,162 Times in 1,321 Posts
A lot depends on whether you are going downhill.

John
Likes For 70sSanO:
02-06-24, 06:51 PM
#14
Senior Member

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,507
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Quoted: 3228 Post(s)
Liked 2,505 Times in 1,509 Posts
I'd say the best way to find out is to go to the local HS/MS track........and run a mile or two. That should give you a starting point. I've ran 18 marathons since 2013. Let me think about it and get back to you.
02-06-24, 07:31 PM
#15
climber has-been

Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,060

Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Quoted: 3392 Post(s)
Liked 3,504 Times in 1,767 Posts
Some estimates from the science folks, for a 150 lb. person:

Running at a 6 min/mile pace consumes 1145 Calories per hour, and the runner covers 10 miles. 1145 Calories / 10 miles = 115 Calories/mile

Cycling at 20+ mph consumes 1145 Calories per hour, and the cyclists covers 20 miles. 1145 Calories / 20 miles = 57 Calories/mile

Cycling at 20+ mph is metabolically just as "hard" as running a 6 min/mile pace, but cycling gets you twice as far.
__________________
Ride, Rest, Repeat. ROUVY: terrymorse

Likes For terrymorse:
02-06-24, 08:02 PM
#16
Senior Member

Join Date: May 2020
Location: North Florida
Posts: 513

Bikes: 2019 Specialized Diverge, 2021 Cervelo Caledonia

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 258 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 378 Times in 197 Posts
Originally Posted by ScottCommutes
How does a marathon compare to a 100 mile bike ride in your book?
I've done both and I assure you it is much easier to cycle 100 miles than to run 26. I've completed five marathons, all between the ages of 38-40, and four centuries, all in my 70s. It took me several weeks to recover from each marathon. After my centuries, I was cycling as usual the next day.
02-06-24, 08:22 PM
#17
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,185
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Quoted: 18388 Post(s)
Liked 15,452 Times in 7,299 Posts
I’m going to go out on a limb and say 1. After all, a ton of feathers weighs as much as a ton of bricks.
Likes For indyfabz:
02-06-24, 08:56 PM
#18
Full Member

Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: NorCal
Posts: 462

Bikes: Santa Cruz Blur 4 TR, Canyon Endurace cf sl, Canyon Ultimate cf slx, Canyon Strive enduro, Canyon Grizl sl8

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked 768 Times in 307 Posts
I've been using the imperial system of measurement for quite some time now, this is the first time I've heard there are bicycle and running miles. I'm curious how these compare to a standard mile, i.e. 5280'?
02-06-24, 09:28 PM
#19
Senior Member

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,084
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Quoted: 1033 Post(s)
Liked 1,281 Times in 739 Posts
Originally Posted by koyote
4.62197.

Anyone who says otherwise is wrong.
3.14159...
Likes For phughes:
02-06-24, 09:31 PM
#20
Senior Member

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,084
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Quoted: 1033 Post(s)
Liked 1,281 Times in 739 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse
Some estimates from the science folks, for a 150 lb. person:

Running at a 6 min/mile pace consumes 1145 Calories per hour, and the runner covers 10 miles. 1145 Calories / 10 miles = 115 Calories/mile

Cycling at 20+ mph consumes 1145 Calories per hour, and the cyclists covers 20 miles. 1145 Calories / 20 miles = 57 Calories/mile

Cycling at 20+ mph is metabolically just as "hard" as running a 6 min/mile pace, but cycling gets you twice as far.
Now calculate aerobics.
02-06-24, 11:21 PM
#21
Cheerfully low end

Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,971
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Quoted: 644 Post(s)
Liked 1,044 Times in 667 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse
Some estimates from the science folks, for a 150 lb. person:

Running at a 6 min/mile pace consumes 1145 Calories per hour, and the runner covers 10 miles. 1145 Calories / 10 miles = 115 Calories/mile

Cycling at 20+ mph consumes 1145 Calories per hour, and the cyclists covers 20 miles. 1145 Calories / 20 miles = 57 Calories/mile

Cycling at 20+ mph is metabolically just as "hard" as running a 6 min/mile pace, but cycling gets you twice as far.
My running chart says a six minute mile pace takes 4.75W/kg. At 80 kg that puts me at 380W. Does it really take me 380W to cycle 20 mph? I’d think that would get me well into the 20s. Omnicalculator estimates 380W on a road bike gets me to 26mph on the hoods. 20mph only requires 190W which corresponds to a 12 minute pace. The nonlinearity of cycling load means the mileage equivalence will vary a lot based on speed.

Otto

Last edited by ofajen; 02-06-24 at 11:35 PM.
02-07-24, 01:35 AM
#22
Full Member

Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 407

Bikes: Trek Emonda ALR 5

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 159 Post(s)
Liked 301 Times in 140 Posts
Offhand, Id say gearing on a bicycle would be the major variable.
02-07-24, 03:36 AM
#23
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,185
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Quoted: 18388 Post(s)
Liked 15,452 Times in 7,299 Posts
Originally Posted by ScottCommutes
How does a marathon compare to a 100 mile bike ride in your book?
One is about 74 miles longer (in distance) than the other.
Likes For indyfabz:
02-07-24, 05:44 AM
#24
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,911
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Quoted: 1903 Post(s)
Liked 625 Times in 428 Posts
Riding a century is far easier than running a marathon. Anybody in good shape can ride a century every day forever.

The record for daily cycling is 240 miles every day for an entire year straight. Running a marathon every day for a year has been done but it's on a whole other level. Let alone 2.4 times that distance.
Likes For Yan:
02-07-24, 07:05 AM
#25
Senior Member

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,507
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)