Mileage theory

[pooks]

Is the health benefit/caloric burn determined by mileage or by time spent cycling/effort exerted?

When I was swimming for weight loss I read somewhere that it didn't matter how far you swam, just how long you swam (as long as you were really swimming). That a poor swimmer burned as many or more calories as an efficient one.

Does having a heavier bike that is more work to ride a better workout than a bike that rides smooth as silk?

[Veronica]

Effort exerted. Yes, you will expend more effort riding a heavier bike. That's why during last year's training I put rocks in my saddle bag.

I suppose the question is, will a lighter bike encourage you to ride more?

V.

[bmccasland]

I think its effort and time. Strolling for an hour doesn't burn as many calories as running for an hour. In swimming theres a certain amount of resistance in the water, and it's hard to swim slowly, you have to move a certain amount to keep afloat.

Depending on where you are in your fitness level - and I'm thinking of a poster that's in the exam room of my doctor's office. - the bottom level is to get out and move - go for a walk, slow bike ride, something 3-5 x per week. Then when you're comfortable with that start increasing your activity level. Pushing yourself harder.

Yes you'll work harder on a heavier bike, but on the lighter smooth as silk bike you could drive your harder to go fast.

Seems to me that whatever keeps you out there is what you should do. Which bike is more fun to ride?

[li10up]

My understanding is (lets take running as an example) that a person who runs fast but for a short duration burns the same calories as a person who runs slowly but for a longer duration. I'm not sure of the time frame involved here. I'm sure some calculations are involved. But I think the overall message is, if you can't go fast/hard then go longer (duration, not necessarily distance).

Anyone concur?

[pooks]

Well, if my bike fit, I don't think weight would bother me except when going uphill and we don't have that much of that around here. It doesn't fit, so that's an entirely new subject.

I'd prefer a lighter bike that fits. That's my goal. But this goes beyond that.

So, if I ride an hour now, and it's kind of hard -- and I get a bike that's easier to ride --

Is the advantage that it will be easier to ride longer/farther?

Are you saying that riding an easier bike an hour might not give me the same benefit as riding my current bike?

Or that I'd end up working just as hard, but it wouldn't feel as hard?

[Veronica]

Will you be riding with the same heart rate? Calorie expenditure is based on how hard you work.

For example nearly the same route, same bike:

Ride 1: average HR 148, calories burned 1174, ride time 1:41, distance 23.2, average speed 14.9

Ride 2: average HR 166, calories burned 1256, ride time 1:29, distance 22.8, average speed 15.9

If I had stayed out for the same amount of time and kept working at the same rate, I'd have burned even more calories.

It's really about you and how hard you work, not the bike. :D

A more comfortable, smoother ride may keep you on the bike longer, which would translate to more calories.

V.

PS The first ride was with other people. The second ride was by myself. :)

[Pedal Wench]

Another way of looking at it:

With a heavier bike, you might go 12mph, so, for one hour, you've gone 12 miles at a certain level of perceived effort.

The next day, on a lighter ('easier') bike, you can go 15 mph, because it's lighter. So, for one hour, you've gone 15 mph, but it will be with the same level of perceived effort.

[SadieKate]

Calories are burned by exerted effort. The total calories burned is determined by the duration of the effort. My husband burns more calories per hour because he weighs more, so just the number of calories it takes to fuel his body at rest is more than mine. It take more effort for the heavier ride to get from point A to point B (except on a descent), but then you have to factor in wind drag, rolling resistennce of tires, etc., etc., etc.
Blah-blah-blah.

So here, have fun. Don't ask me to explain any of it.

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

http://www.analyticcycling.com/

[Veronica]

Or that I'd end up working just as hard, but it wouldn't feel as hard?

Greg Lemond said, "It never gets easier, you just go faster." :D


V.

[DarcyInOregon]

Pooks, you can do a lot of analysis and what-ifs, but the reality is once you get the road bike you will ride it more often, go longer and longer distances, and start setting yourself roadie goals, like doing your first metric century. The result of all of that is you burn more calories, because on the comfort bike you couldn't bike hundreds of miles each month.

The equation is simple, more miles rode equals more calories burned.

And you will ride more miles because that is what roadies do.

There will be more exertion used on the road bike versus the comfort bike because you will be setting yourself goals. Roadies are like the explorers of past centuries in that they constantly extend their horizons as in what is over the next hill, or what happens if I go that way, or can I get somewhere before the sun goes down. It is a different mind set, one that is beneficial to burning body fat.

The goals get modified to accommodate increasing the speed, improving the cadence, going up steeper hills, then going up longer steeper hills. By then you say a metric century, what is so difficult about a metric century?

Can you do all of that on a heavy comfort bike? The answer is no.

Darcy

[Veronica]

The equation is simple, more miles ridden equals more calories burned.



Actually that's not true. It's about how much you exert. If you look back at my data I added in the distance for each ride. I burned more calories on the slightly shorter ride because I worked harder.

V.

[li10up]

Are you saying that riding an easier bike an hour might not give me the same benefit as riding my current bike?

Or that I'd end up working just as hard, but it wouldn't feel as hard?
I think that you would ride the same route but on your new bike you would ride it faster which would make the calorie expendure about the same. My $.02.

[Kitsune06]

Pooks-
It's my opinion (because this is all theory, each voice a new opinion, etc) that a heavy bike will produce more exertion.
If you ride a heavy hybrid an hour, vs. a light road bike an hour, given the same amount of exertion, the road bike will take you much further, faster.

The question lies more in "do you want to do smaller neighborhood rides, or go for an hour spin and manage a 15 mile ride?" Are you comfortable on your hybrid?
Anecdote:
My transition came because my heavy (32#) mountain bike's frame was too small, and not made for what I found my body wanting to do. With saddle all-the-way-back and bar ends, I was getting low-and-tight to use my whole body to try and get appreciable zoom- but as the bike was too small, and very heavy, I ended up hurting all over from what should have been a fun little ride.
That said, it's still a great workout taking her out on the singletrack for 8 miles at, oh, 4-6 or 10-15mph (on hills)
It's taken me three years, from the time I started riding with Mz Cakes in the spring of '04 to now, to be at a place where I can get my zoom on with my mtb but feel that, mechanically, physically, geometrically, she limits me in the directions I want to go... but her weight and those limitations have made me a stronger rider, I think, than I would have easily become otherwise, and I will probably continue to use her to commute during the winter because she's heavy, strong, can put up with the elements and will provide a decent workout for the short distance I'm going.

[SadieKate]

Exactly.

For instance, a fast short ride with a lot of hills can burn more calories than a leisurely and longer flat ride.

Not to mention, as one becomes a better cyclist you come more efficient in your effort. Someone with a smooth good pedal stroke can burn less energy than someone who moves around a lot on their bike. The first person gets better power transfer to the bike and rides a straighter line.

[Veronica]

I think that you would ride the same route but on your new bike you would ride it faster which would make the calorie expendure about the same. My $.02.

Only if her exertion is the same. This is why those HRM you don't care for are good. :) They tell without a doubt, if you are really exerting the same.

From the Mayo Clinic
Stated simply, metabolism is the process by which your body converts food into energy. During this biochemical process, calories — from carbohydrates, fats and proteins — are combined with oxygen to release the energy your body needs to function.

You control the number of calories burned depending on the frequency, duration and intensity of your activities.

Just getting a lighter, faster bike is not going to make Pooks lose weight. If she rides the same route with the same level of exertion, the only thing that will be lighter will be her wallet.

If the new bike causes her to increase the frequency, duration or intensity, then she'll see weight loss.

V.

[Kitsune06]

then perhaps it would be best to keep the heavier bike for training, and if she wants a light bike for zoom during events (livestrong?) then she should go for that, too.

[Veronica]

Go back to the original question


Is the health benefit/caloric burn determined by mileage or by time spent cycling/effort exerted?

Does having a heavier bike that is more work to ride a better workout than a bike that rides smooth as silk?

The health benefit comes from time and effort. If she spends less time and less effort, what's the point of a new bike? (except better fit, which is a big issue.)

I think Pooks has to decide, will a new bike make her get out longer and more often? That's what will aid her in burning calories.


V.

[mimitabby]

Bottom line, if it's more fun, she's going to ride more and harder and have fun
zooming around. The more you ride, the more calories you burn the more muscles you build. if a bike is frustrating and ponderous, you're going to leave it parked.
I get a great delight out of jumping on my Bianchi and making those tires spine!

[fikustree]

Have you tried using a Heart Rate Monitor? That makes all the difference for me. You can even see a guesstimate of calories burned.

The "rule" that I learned from running is that you would burn the same amount of calories going for a half hour run as an hour walk.

With more resistance (heavier bike, more hills, harder gears) you will build muscle and adding muscle increases your calorie burning capacity because muscles need fuel to work.

So in the end you could ride all day somewhere flat or you could go for a tough hilly ride at a fast pace and get a better workout because you will burn calories for a while afterwards.

In the end, it is best to do both long slower rides and shorter tough rides because your body will probably respond best to changing things up.

[pooks]

I probably should get a HRM. It just looks like it would drive me crazy, fastened around me like that.

There's no doubt in my mind that I need a new bike. I'm just weighing all sorts of things, and I've gotten mixed messages on the benefits of an easier ride, that's all. It just seems logical that working harder will burn more calories. I won't intentionally be buying a heavy bike, mind you, just to burn more!

[Pedal Wench]

I probably should get a HRM. It just looks like it would drive me crazy, fastened around me like that.

There's no doubt in my mind that I need a new bike. I'm just weighing all sorts of things, and I've gotten mixed messages on the benefits of an easier ride, that's all. It just seems logical that working harder will burn more calories. I won't intentionally be buying a heavy bike, mind you, just to burn more!

As I said, you'll probably use the same amount of energy. If you maintained a speed, say 12 mph on the heavy bike, you are correct - you'll use less calories on the lighter bike to maintain that speed - it will be easier. But, if you're used to a certain amount of effort, the new bike, at that same effort, will go faster. Given the same output of energy, you'll just go faster on the new bike. So, you can burn the same, if not more calories on the new bike, because you'll go faster!

[SadieKate]

I probably should get a HRM.You know, lots of people over the eons have managed to get fitter and faster without a HRM. I think I read somewhere that Tom Boonen doesn't use a HRM. To each his own, but somehow I think at this state of your cycling life you just need to find a bike that fits you, makes you happy and you have fun riding.

A friend of mine would have said "buying a Ferrari to squish grapes." Right now, you're squishing grapes. If you decide later that you want to make wine, you'll know whether you need fancy techno-gradgets to do it or if the simple joy of riding and knowlege of your body is enough.

[li10up]

Pooks, this may help. My first bike when returning to bike riding was a mtn bike. I took it out on the road and although a good workout (maybe too tough) I couldn't get far from home and therefore didn't really enjoy the ride that much. I decided to get a road bike. I quickly went from 6 mile rides to 12 miles and then to 20. Within a year I had done my first metric century. I honestly believe the road bike will make riding more enjoyable and therefore you will ride further and longer. You'll get further away from home (or wherever you start) so you will see more interesting things and have more variety in your rides. And we all know that "Variety is the spice of life." :)

[fikustree]

I didn't mean to imply that you need a HRM- I just found it very eye-opening when I got one. I was either working to hard because I was extremely motivated or not working enough because I am naturally lazy. The make some now that are built into a sports bra!

[DarcyInOregon]

Actually that's not true. It's about how much you exert. If you look back at my data I added in the distance for each ride. I burned more calories on the slightly shorter ride because I worked harder.

V.

Veronica, you are looking at specific rides. Pooks is attempting to make a decision as to keep her heavy comfort bike or to purchase a road bike, and the question she asked is what everyone who is thinking of transitioning to a road bike will ask. Over the long term, she will burn more calories on a road bike because she will bike more miles. It is that simple.

After she gets the road bike, she can get into the micro analysis of the declining heart rate as her fitness level increases, riding harder and faster to increase the heart rate, and so on. In the long run, Pooks will burn more calories and more body fat with a road bike because she will ride more miles, and as the decision-making process is going on Pooks needs to be looking at the long-term, not the micro aspects of specific rides.

Darcy

[DarcyInOregon]

Pooks, I resumed my cycling with a heavy hybrid comfort bike. Within 5 months I purchased my road bike. Sure, the comfort bike is fun to ride, and yes, it requires a lot of energy to pedal it. However, the heavier the bike, the more limited you will be on how you can bike, and the more limitations you have the less miles you will ride.

Here is the difference between the comfort bike and the road bike, and it has nothing to do with your question about calories.

With the comfort bike, it was a tool to use to gain fitness.

With the road bike, I finish a ride and I exult in my prowess. I exclaim, 'I AM THE WOMAN!" Since I ride almost every day, I am empowering myself constantly.

Yes, that is the difference, and it is a signifciant difference - all mental. With the road bike, my successes give me self-affirmation which permeate into all other aspects of my life, and it makes me a confident self-assured woman.

Darcy

[SadieKate]

Sorry, Darcy, but that only works if she also increases time (duration) on the bike, assuming the intensity goes down because a road bike is more efficient. I can bike fewer miles on my mountain bike and burn far more calories per hour because it is a more intense exercise. Miles do not guarantee longer duration.

Bottom line, it depends on frequency, duration and intensity. If she gets a bike, any ol' bike, that is more fun than she has now Pooks will probably increase one or more of the above. It's all good.

[Geonz]

And it's not a question that lends itself to a simple "X calories" answer - and different people are more suited to different kinds of riding.

Here's a factor that I"m dredging up from the past, which I remember 'cause it's basically true for me. I don't *like* speed for long distances... I have to pay too much attention to the riding and those fast rides have a different attitude, which I enjoy now and again but not as my main fare.
If I'm doing high mileage I would rather ride *hard* at 15 mph on my hybrid than 18 on my ... light hybrid ;) ...
The neat thing about having both kinds of bikes is that my options are *so* expanded. I can get in good shape riding my big ol' thing and have a good "social" time. If all i had was the fast bike I wouldn't ride as often (this is just me!) - because I'd have to be in the mood for fast.

On the other hand, I have gotten strong and fast. Having the slow bike gives me more optoins for groups to have fun riding with. When I started - for those first five years - it would have been really nice to have a faster bike so that I could have kept up with the medium-groups and had a good time. It might not have taken five years to get strong and fast ;)

[Veronica]

Is the health benefit/caloric burn determined by mileage or by time spent cycling/effort exerted?

Does having a heavier bike that is more work to ride a better workout than a bike that rides smooth as silk?

I was answering this question with specific data to back up my answer.

I don't really care whether she buys a new bike or not. I wanted to answer the question she asked not give anecedotal evidence about whether or not a new bike would help her achieve her goals.

V.

[DarcyInOregon]

Pooks, you will make the right decision for yourself. The question you asked about calories burned versus the weight of the bike really isn't that important, but it is a question that everyone who is going through your decision-making process asks. If it was an important criteria in the type of bike being ridden, you would see the majority of cyclists on heavy comfort bikes. You don't. Cyclists on the road are on road bikes, not comfort bikes, and they are all fit and healthy. Just look outside to see what is the norm and you will have your answer.

Darcy

[pooks]

Aha. While reading for other info in Bicycling Magazine's NEW CYCLIST HANDBOOK (http://www.amazon.com/Bicycling-Magazines-New-Cyclist-Handbook/dp/1594863008/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-1320337-9715045?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176429205&sr=8-1) I stumbled across this interesting tidbit:

"But it is known that the energy used in cycling varies dramatically as speed changes, thanks to wind resistance."

How about that?

I keep thinking about the speed/distance thing, and how there aren't any really good places to ride near me that I could really ride 20 or 30 miles or more without simply staying on busy streets.

However, it finally hit me that (duh) the faster I can ride those miles, the more likely I am to drive somewhere else to ride. Total time consumed by riding would have to include travel time, after all. And of course there's the fact that easier riding would mean more fun riding.

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

Too many variables!!! BRAIN HURTING!

I find I bike faster when I wear my plain chapstick as opposed to my peach flavored chapstick. I figured it out: With my peach chapstick, it's so yummy that I occasionally lick my lips while riding. At 20mph, wet lips quickly become cold, and the resulting body heat loss slows me down by at least .000000000000072 mph.
From now on it's PLAIN chapstick for me on the road!

[pooks]

Lisa?

Go to your room.

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

Lisa?

Go to your room.

Hah! I had to go to bed now ANYWAY!!!! :D

[Kano]

just made the switch

I don't know if it burns more calories or not, but

my braking muscles got a better workout on the way downhill than ever before yesterday.

my ab muscles, yes my abs, gave out on the way up the hill -- so they must be getting a better workout on this new bike.

I didn't run out of gears on the way up the hill on my new bike. Old bike doesn't have enough gears for hills. old bike also doesn't have enough air in my lungs for up hills. This was not an issue on new bike yesterday -- well, not nearly as much, and when the cold given to me by the booger king goes away, all should be well! This means more hill climbing for me! (though new body position makes me a bit more nervous going DOWN hill, thus the better work out for braking muscles!)

This will sound a little silly: it's easier to work harder on this bike. It's easier to cruise along say one gear higher than I'd normally want to ride on the comfort-beast.

I don't think I'm working this bike to its capabilities yet, I'm still getting to know her and how we work together. She calls me to ride. I enjoy riding my other bike too, but that one has never called me like this one does.

Pooks, the hardest thing for me to do choosing this first road bike (shhhh, don't tell DH I called her my first) was look beyond the paint (when we looked at the Allez, the paint job had me cringing inside, even though the bike felt really good!) and concentrate on the features -- that triple was really important to me, shift mechanisms, etc. (and the double/triple debate that's been going on: I am really GLAD to have that triple!) I feel like I really lucked into the pretty part!

Karen in Boise

[pooks]

Abs? That sounds very promising!!!

As for braking/downhill/new position/new speed --

:eek:

[mimitabby]

Karen, Pooks

when going downhill, scootch your butt as far back as you can. that puts your weight more firmly on the back wheel and gives you more stability if you need to use your brakes.

but, Karen, like you; my hands get sore on some downhills because i am holding the brakes!!!

[Geonz]

Pooks, you will make the right decision for yourself. The question you asked about calories burned versus the weight of the bike really isn't that important, but it is a question that everyone who is going through your decision-making process asks. If it was an important criteria in the type of bike being ridden, you would see the majority of cyclists on heavy comfort bikes. You don't. Cyclists on the road are on road bikes, not comfort bikes, and they are all fit and healthy. Just look outside to see what is the norm and you will have your answer.

Darcy

To base a decision on what the majority does assumes that what matters to them matters to me. It's worth looking at more closely than that. (In other words: why be normal :D :D )

'Round here, on any given bike rack, you'll see mostly clunkers. Of course, the bikes going by are not quite as clunker-dominated... there's a connection there, too.

[pooks]

Karen, Pooks

when going downhill, scootch your butt as far back as you can. that puts your weight more firmly on the back wheel and gives you more stability if you need to use your brakes.

but, Karen, like you; my hands get sore on some downhills because i am holding the brakes!!!

Does this mean I need a banana seat?

;)

Geonz, my husband freaks at the idea of leaving a bike locked outside a business. Even when I'm just in Starbucks, and can see it through the window! (And yes, it's locked.)

Our son had a couple of bikes stolen right out of our yard, one out of the back yard! Sigh.

[Kano]

Mimi, I remember reading scooch back -- and so I did. Perhaps not far enough, but I did scooch! And yes, my hands were a bit sore from holding those brakes, but it was in my forearms, which is where the muscles are, that I REALLY felt it!

It's the curvy hills that have me holding those brakes for dear life -- I flew down the straight shot like the wind as soon as I was away from the curves! (curvy hills are fun to go UP, though, because I can have goals -- get to the next curve, and assess how much farther I can go when I get there) That straight shot gave me more questions to ask somewhere else, when it's not lunch time!


Yes, Pooks, I don't know where it came from, but abs on the climb! And, yes, I think that particular smiley is probably how I looked on the way down that curvy hill!

Karen in Boise

[indysteel]

"Or that I'd end up working just as hard, but it wouldn't feel as hard?"

It seems like there's no easy answer to your original question Pooks, in part because there are so many variables beyond the weight of your bike. A heavier bike does takes more energy to move than a lighter bike all other things being equal. But your questions seem to imply that the weight of the bike is the only thing that affects how hard your workout is, and it's not. On any given bike, including a road bike, you can make your workout hard if you want to make it hard by riding it in a bigger gear, into the wind, up hills, at a faster speed, faster cadence, etc. Having worn my HRM on my road bike, I know I get a good workout regardless of how "smooth as silk" it may be.

The lighter weight of a road bike and, more importantly IMO, the position it puts you in, makes a road bike more efficient than your cruiser, which is one of the reasons it might inspire/allow you to do longer and faster rides and, ultimately, burn more calories, build more muscle, etc. I know you said your goal was to get a lighter bike that fits, but beyond that, what are your cycling/fitness goals? A lighter, better fitting bike might inspire you to ride more often and for longer stretches, but at the end of the day, you have to be motivated to ride and to work hard at it when you do.

But here's my experience for what it's worth. My first bike was a hybrid, and I road it about 300 miles before getting my road bike. Less than a year later, the road bike has about 3,000 miles on her. And the hybrid? Still about 300.

[mimitabby]

here's a generality for you:
take a look at who is riding the heavy bikes: are they the people that cruise down to the minimart to buy the newspapers or are they the ones doing 25-50 mile rides with the wind in their hair? (under the helmet i mean :D )
Sign up for a distance ride and see how many cruiser riders are on it.

There must be something to this light bike stuff or so many avid cyclists wouldn't be riding them.

[pooks]

I just realized the one bit of info I left out when I posed my question --

It's my husband who asked it. Or rather, has asked me, "Why would you get a lighter bike? If you're wanting a workout, you need to work harder, not easier."

I want a lighter bike because it will be more fun to ride. And I'm sure I'll ride more when I have a lighter one. As to my goals -- I think I want to be a bit of a jock for the first time in my life. I'm not sure what that means. I don't have a specific weight or size I aspire to. I just want to be able to ride distances and be physically fit. I said when I got my bike last June that in a year, I planned to be in better shape than I was ten years ago. Well, that's hardly likely, ahem, but I've finally accepted that a lot of that is because of how hard it can be to ride my bike, which makes me less likely to take it out when conditions will make it harder.

[Kano]

I just realized the one bit of info I left out when I posed my question --

It's my husband who asked it. Or rather, has asked me, "Why would you get a lighter bike? If you're wanting a workout, you need to work harder, not easier."

.

Pooks, that was MY husband's exact question!

My answer sounds kinda goofy when I say it out loud. I think he understood it.

And it wasn't so much a lighter bike for me, it was the ride style that I wanted to change. Lighter is mostly a really cool side effect.:cool:

I told him that I felt like if I could just get my butt up and back a bit, I'd have more power. The upright ride wasn't letting me get all I could out of my body.

Yup, I experimented with it on my first bike -- lean forward more, and push my butt back, sorta stand cuz the seat can't be any higher, and it was indeed a stronger ride, but the bike isn't designed to let me do that for very long!

Karen in Boise

[IntenseRide]

My first bike when returning to bike riding was a mtn bike. I took it out on the road and although a good workout (maybe too tough) I couldn't get far from home and therefore didn't really enjoy the ride that much. I decided to get a road bike.

I will second this! I have two mountain bikes, one which is a hardtail, that I will ride on the road when I'm desperate before the trails open in the spring, or when they are closed during the year because of rain. I never much enjoyed riding my hardtail on pavement, the tires make too much noise and for as much effort it takes to push knobbies the return of 'joy' just wasn't there. This spring I bought my first road bike ever and the difference was phenomenal. Its MEANT for pavement and the sweetness is just as acute as when I'm on my full suspension riding dirt. This has definitely changed my tune about riding the road, which will equate into speed when I get back on the mountainbike. I have also heard that roadies ride mountain bikes to gain strength for the road.