michael01612

Which is harder....running? or cycling?

ChrizzleDizzle6

i'd like to say running is. I run 5 miles per day 5 days a week. After I'm done i'm dead tired and winded.
Im not overweight just average i guess. I cycle 2times per week at 20-30miles each ride. I get a good work out but not gasping for breath like I am when running!

electrik

Running is certainly harder on your joints, if that is what you're asking.

In terms of exertion it just comes down to the pace you set as a runner or the pace you set on the bicycle.

Swimming or x-country skiing is way more work than both!

TurbineBlade

What's better, apples or oranges?

No one can answer this question, it completely depends upon how vigorous you perform both activities. I ran for years before getting into cycling and continue to do it on off days. I find both produce similar training results for a given intensity and duration.....Jogging is easier than hill climbing on a bike to me, but foot sprinting is harder than bike commuting for the pace I go.....

Running is something that you generally need to get into gradually, since your lungs and heart with adapt to the stress quicker than your joints. A lot of people start running, get to feeling pretty good about it - then push too hard and end up sore or with injuries.

Cycling is probably a lot less stressful and easier for people to get into for most cases.

Juha

Here's some discussion on the subject on an earlier thread:

https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...ing-a-marathon

--J

garethzbarker

i cant run at all. i can cycle for hours. i think for fatties like me the question is easy.

Pat

Well, at the top levels, they are both really challenging.

For us mortals, there are some qualifiers. Running is high impact. Most people will eventually have knee, shin, or foot problems with running. Some people seem to run with less impact so they can keep at it. The other thing is running is weight bearing. So being really light is a big deal in running.

By the way, metabolically, a marathon probably does not burn as much as a century. But even the top runners look like they are done at the end of a marathon. Also the pounding of a marathon pretty much precludes people doing them day after day.

But even recreational cyclists can ride centuries day after day. I have done four in a row myself. I could have done more too. It was just that after spending so much time on a bike for 4 days running, other things got in the way. And many cyclists can do 4 centuries in a row. Almost no one even thinks of doing 4 marathons in a row.

The Human Car

And for those of us who blew our knees out by running. Almost all runners eventually become cyclists the same is not true in reverse.

BlazingPedals

I can't bear to watch those self-made videos. Now that's what's hard! Oh, and count me as one that can't run to save my life but I can run and swim just fine. I'm currently taking a lap swim course (audit only) at the local community college, as my off-season cardio workout.

Keith99

So much depends onwhat one is good at. For me now running is completely out, my knees are shot. But I can still swim just fine and since in my youth I worked out to the point of passing out while swimming I have no trouble swinmming, even at pretty decent pace. I had little problems with cross country skiing either.

I don't consider proping (Rugby position) difficult at all, but it would kill (perhaps literally) most of the people on this board.

DieselDan

I'll make this easy for you:

Running is EVIL!

JanMM

An activity in which going up a hill is very hard and going down a hill is also hard: Running.
The only speeds are slow and not so slow.

Why?

kgriffioen

About a year ago my wife and I decided to do a triathlon which meant that I had to start running. I thought I was going to die!! Now, not such a big deal. I run 4 miles 3 times a week on a treadmill with no incline.

But to directly answer the question, running is still harder...... for me anyway

CbadRider

I have done marathons and century rides. The miles on my feet are much harder on my body than the miles on my bike.

devianb

In my opinion running is much harder regardless of the pace. At least on a bicycle you can coast [Except those fixed gear folks].

stapfam

I used to run 15 mile cross country competitively and Other than when I tried to step up the distance to Marathons- it was not hard.

But that was 30 years ago. Knee injuries and lack of practice now mean that I do not run- not even for a bus.

scroca

The question should be: What's harder, apples or oranges?

I say, apples.

rumrunn6

easy question. the one without the machine.

$ick3nin.vend3t

Best answer.

CB HI

Depends on which I have had the longest lay-off at that particular time.

If I have not run for some time, then running is the hardest.

If I have not cycled for some time, then cycling is the hardest.

Swimming is the easiest to regain.

Roody

Running is harder. When you run, you're actually lifting your whole body weight with each step. That doesn't happen when you're cycling--even out of the saddle.

electrik

A cyclist can produce a lot of power also, it is also larger group of different muscles than a runner. What happens is that the cyclist can put more torque down to the pedal through his leveraging his handsétorso on the handle-bar.

leslielove

Yuuup.

Closed Office

Let's not call it running. 'Blowing your joints to kingdom come' is a much more accurate description.

roadfix

But doing a century is a lot easier than running a full marathon. Perhaps riding a triple century is more comparable in effort?