Fake bike vs. a Real bike
01-30-13, 01:51 AM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
That 220-age formula has been discredited long ago, at least as a predictor for individual athletes. Your max heart rate is just that: the maximum rate your heart will pump.
01-30-13, 07:53 AM
#27
Old, but not really wise
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fairfax, VA commuting to Washington DC
Posts: 814
Bikes: 2010 Kona Dew Drop (the daily driver),'07 Specialized Roubaix (the sports car), '99 ish Kona NuNu MTB (the SUV), Schwinn High Plains (circa 1992?) (the beater)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
For comparison: When I was 35, my max HR as calculated was 185, but I routinely hit 194.
Similarly, all the calorie count estimates for exercise in the world are just that -- estimates. Most of them seem to be based on a person of moderate fitness, and thus they tend to become less and less accurate the more you exercise. If I believed the estimators in my HR Monitor, Fitness apps, etc... I would burn an extra 3000 calories a day when I ride my full commute (such as in the summer). My waistline sends a very clear message that it isn't quite true.
Last edited by CptjohnC; 01-30-13 at 08:04 AM.
01-30-13, 08:11 AM
#28
Full Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 359
Bikes: Salsa Fargo, One-One Inbred 29er, Blue Norcross
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I just did a quick calculation. Assuming you and your bike weigh 70kg (which is low if you are an average male, slightly low for an average female), you would need to put out 465 watts just for the climb rate (8000 ft/hr). That alone (not accounting for air drag) is more than a pro cyclist can maintain; the number bantered about is somewhere around 400 watts.
01-30-13, 11:45 AM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
From the wikipedia article on heart rate:
FWIW: I am 45. During Saturday's Cal Aggie crit, my Garmin recorded a max hr of 199. Single data point, I know, but there it is.
[h=4]Haskell and Fox[/h] Notwithstanding the research of Tanaka, Monahan, & Seals, the most widely cited formula for HR[SUB]max[/SUB] (which contains no refererence to any standard deviation) is still:
HR[SUB]max[/SUB] = 220 - age Although attributed to various sources, it is widely thought to have been devised in 1970 by Dr. William Haskell and Dr. Samuel Fox.[SUP][8][/SUP] Inquiry into the history of this formula reveals that it was not developed from original research, but resulted from observation based on data from approximately 11 references consisting of published research or unpublished scientific compilations.[SUP][9][/SUP] It gained widespread use through being used by Polar Electro in its heart rate monitors,[SUP][8][/SUP] which Dr. Haskell has "laughed about",[SUP][8][/SUP] as the formula "was never supposed to be an absolute guide to rule people's training."[SUP][8][/SUP]
While it is the most common (and easy to remember and calculate), this particular formula is not considered by reputable health and fitness professionals to be a good predictor of HR[SUB]max[/SUB]. Despite the widespread publication of this formula, research spanning two decades reveals its large inherent error (Sxy = 7–11 b/min). Consequently, the estimation calculated by HR[SUB]max[/SUB] = 220 - age has neither the accuracy nor the scientific merit for use in exercise physiology and related fields.[SUP][9][/SUP]
HR[SUB]max[/SUB] = 220 - age Although attributed to various sources, it is widely thought to have been devised in 1970 by Dr. William Haskell and Dr. Samuel Fox.[SUP][8][/SUP] Inquiry into the history of this formula reveals that it was not developed from original research, but resulted from observation based on data from approximately 11 references consisting of published research or unpublished scientific compilations.[SUP][9][/SUP] It gained widespread use through being used by Polar Electro in its heart rate monitors,[SUP][8][/SUP] which Dr. Haskell has "laughed about",[SUP][8][/SUP] as the formula "was never supposed to be an absolute guide to rule people's training."[SUP][8][/SUP]
While it is the most common (and easy to remember and calculate), this particular formula is not considered by reputable health and fitness professionals to be a good predictor of HR[SUB]max[/SUB]. Despite the widespread publication of this formula, research spanning two decades reveals its large inherent error (Sxy = 7–11 b/min). Consequently, the estimation calculated by HR[SUB]max[/SUB] = 220 - age has neither the accuracy nor the scientific merit for use in exercise physiology and related fields.[SUP][9][/SUP]
01-30-13, 01:02 PM
#30
Collector of Useless Info
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Yeah- 8000 feet in an hour is mighty optimistic without an internal combustion engine. When I was in my best cycling shape ever, I managed to do 4000 feet in an hour. Once.
But 650 calories is reasonable. I usually burn 1000 calories an hour when I'm going fast, about 250 watts, and that was verified by an oxygen consumption test.
But 650 calories is reasonable. I usually burn 1000 calories an hour when I'm going fast, about 250 watts, and that was verified by an oxygen consumption test.
01-30-13, 03:34 PM
#31
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 88
Bikes: 1991 Trek 5200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I just did a quick calculation. Assuming you and your bike weigh 70kg (which is low if you are an average male, slightly low for an average female), you would need to put out 465 watts just for the climb rate (8000 ft/hr). That alone (not accounting for air drag) is more than a pro cyclist can maintain; the number bantered about is somewhere around 400 watts.
01-31-13, 03:56 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
Another point:
3500 ft/hr will get you a highly coveted T-shirt. 8000 feet an hour will get you the record and likely a pro contract.
3500 ft/hr will get you a highly coveted T-shirt. 8000 feet an hour will get you the record and likely a pro contract.
01-31-13, 09:22 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
One of the big differences between a stationary bike and a real bike is the amount of fatigue your body accrues from absorbing imperfections in the road. IF you ride skinnies over a rough road your body is going to tire out as the rattles and bumps are absorbed by your body, which is why a 20 mile ride off-road is always going toe be more exhausting than a 20-mile ride on smooth pavement. Plus, in real world conditions you have to deal with wind resistance, and no stationary bike is going to be able to replicate that.
02-01-13, 01:47 AM
#34
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 88
Bikes: 1991 Trek 5200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
One of the big differences between a stationary bike and a real bike is the amount of fatigue your body accrues from absorbing imperfections in the road. IF you ride skinnies over a rough road your body is going to tire out as the rattles and bumps are absorbed by your body, which is why a 20 mile ride off-road is always going toe be more exhausting than a 20-mile ride on smooth pavement. Plus, in real world conditions you have to deal with wind resistance, and no stationary bike is going to be able to replicate that.
That totally makes sense...
But would you guys say that in regards to the caloric number, does 6xx sound about right for an hours worth of pedaling?
02-01-13, 08:11 AM
#35
Full Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 359
Bikes: Salsa Fargo, One-One Inbred 29er, Blue Norcross
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
That sounds like a plausible number. This website https://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist.htm lists some estimates for calorie usage per hour; look under "cycling". Alternately, you can check https://bikecalculator.com/ where you can enter in some numbers. The latter site gives a bit lower numbers (including in comparison to other numbers I have seen), though I wonder if they are not including basal calorie usage. If not, you can add 50-100 calories/hour (it depends on a number of factors including muscle mass, age, sex, etc).
02-01-13, 09:28 AM
#36
Certified Bike Brat
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 4,251
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
6 Posts
Bottom line is you'll only see long term benifits from regular exercise, so ..... keep at it!
02-01-13, 12:07 PM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
Sure, but as always: It depends. An hour of noodling around the neighborhood with my 8-year old could be 200 kcal; a 40km time trial could be 1200 kcal.
02-01-13, 01:58 PM
#40
Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Training inside doesn't compare to being on an actual bicycle, outside.
Fresh oxygen air, cooling wind, wind resistance, uneven terrain, hills, sunshine/vitamin D, destinations, competition, nature, ect.
Personally, I only train indoors during bad weather.
Fresh oxygen air, cooling wind, wind resistance, uneven terrain, hills, sunshine/vitamin D, destinations, competition, nature, ect.
Personally, I only train indoors during bad weather.
02-01-13, 05:51 PM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
4 Posts
Yeah, but the OP says he's more like 220. According to this, that'd mean he'd have to put out about 1000W to climb an 8% grade at 19 mph.
FWIW, my eyeball estimate for calories burned is "1 hour at 200W is about 700 kcal". Seems to work fairly well. Now if I could just stop eating so damn much....
FWIW, my eyeball estimate for calories burned is "1 hour at 200W is about 700 kcal". Seems to work fairly well. Now if I could just stop eating so damn much....
02-01-13, 09:51 PM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
There's definitely going to be some major benefits even if 20 mile via stationary isn't really comparable to 20 miles on the road. I'm used to riding with my dad, but recently he's been going to a lot of spin classes and riding for an hour to an hour and a half (and he commutes to the gym via bike!). For the last 3-4 years we've been riding together we've occasionally taken a certain route that involves a 25 minute climb. Every single time we've gone up that hill I've split from him and gone at a pace that I like and waited for him at the top. But the other day we hit the hill and I started mashing up like usual and around 3/4s of the the way up he passed me and blew through the rest of the climb with me trying to keep up.
02-01-13, 10:28 PM
#43
In Real Life
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 52,152
Bikes: Lots
Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3203 Post(s)
Liked 596 Times
in
329 Posts
Maybe 60 minutes on the spin bike, 45 minutes on the treadmill either running or walking briskly at a steep incline, and 15 minutes rowing briskly at a reasonable tension setting.
That will, at least, improve your fitness and burn some calories.
__________________
Rowan
My fave photo threads on BF
Century A Month Facebook Group
Machka's Website
Photo Gallery
Rowan
My fave photo threads on BF
Century A Month Facebook Group
Machka's Website
Photo Gallery
02-02-13, 01:53 AM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cobourg Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,206
Bikes: ParleeZ5/Parlee Chebacco/Trek Farley/Cannondale Slice/Burley Tandem
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
4 Posts
There is no way to replicate gravity, ride trainer all winter but that first climb....sucks
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
digibud
Training & Nutrition
25
04-24-16 03:04 PM
