Originally Posted by Dr. Banzai (Post 11027848)

Wow, that seems awfully low. How long did it take you? Average speed?

Congrats on losing a century of weight my friend.

Originally Posted by Dr. Banzai (Post 11027848)

Wow, that seems awfully low. How long did it take you? Average speed?

Originally Posted by mike868y (Post 11028452)

Not really. People tend to way overestimate how many calories they burn on a ride.

Originally Posted by sinclac (Post 11028343)

02.16:.9 hours with an average speed of 15.6 mph

Originally Posted by Dr. Banzai (Post 11027848)

Wow, that seems awfully low. How long did it take you? Average speed?

Congrats on losing a century of weight my friend.

Originally Posted by sinclac (Post 11028343)

02.16:.9 hours with an average speed of 15.6 mph

Thank you.

Originally Posted by mike868y (Post 11028452)

Not really. People tend to way overestimate how many calories they burn on a ride.

Originally Posted by Machka (Post 11033789)

So 1039 calories is certainly within the ballpark, and given that sinclac has lost 101 lbs, he probably has a pretty good grasp on what he is burning and consuming.

Originally Posted by umd (Post 11028950)

That works out to about 460kJ/hr or about 128W average for the ride. Depending on the conditions that is a reasonable power for that speed. I rate this scenario as possible to likely. :thumb:

Sorry to some of you for bludgeoning you over the head with more math.

Originally Posted by krazygl00 (Post 11003327)

I would suggest you not pay attention to how many calories you burn with exercise, for a few reasons.

First, because it is far more productive to measure calories from food intake. You can lose weight with diet and no exercise...it will be tedious, it will take a long time, and you'll probably feel like crap, but you can do it. Conversely, you cannot possibly lose weight if you exercise like a maniac but have no plan in place to limit calorie intake. The reason for this is that for any given amount of calories, it is far easier to fulfill the caloric requirement with food than it is to burn the calories with exercise. Go ahead, ride that 3-hour ride...but I bet I can nullify the calorie loss with the calories I could fit on one plate of food.

You have to go into a calorie deficit of 3500 calories -- regardless of your body weight -- to burn one pound of fat. So if you plan to ride enough to lose that in one week -- the bikecalculator.com site says that is 130-ish miles at about 16mph for a 180lb man. That's 8 hours of riding for the week. Personally I think that estimate is a little stingy; I tend to think about 40 cal/mile is closer to the truth, but that is still about 90 miles. In any case, you go out and do your 6-8 hours of riding to go into a 3500 calorie deficit. But the catch is that your body doesn't like that...it starts to get hungry and if you don't have a diet plan in place, you'll eat whatever you can get your hands on. Willpower always loses to hunger and the calories will creep into every meal and every snack. Trust me, it's easy.

You're far better off coming up with a good strategy for eating that limits calories (large volume/low calorie, eating 5 times per day, strategically using meal replacements and protein shakes, keeping a food journal) and getting a regular moderate amount of exercise. The keys are planning, developing a routine, controlling your environment and keeping records.

Originally Posted by Dr. Banzai (Post 11039117)

So 31 cal/km

I'm 215 right now as well (97.5kg)

Still, I base most of my rides now on 40 cal/mile or 25 cal/km. Interesting.