I used the calories per hour calculator to figure the calories I burned on my ride today.
I rode 63 miles in 3:52 and I weigh 153. It said I burned 2961 calories. That is way high I think.
what do you think?
Kim
Printable View
I used the calories per hour calculator to figure the calories I burned on my ride today.
I rode 63 miles in 3:52 and I weigh 153. It said I burned 2961 calories. That is way high I think.
what do you think?
Kim
sounds good to me!!
I'd say this would be about right for a man, and a woman's count would be a little less, at around 600 calories an hour (depending on the effort). But that's just my uneducated guess...
I weigh around 170. I'm 46. I rode with my heart rate monitor a couple of weeks ago. 30 miles, 2:15 thereabouts, 1400 calories. The average speed for that ride was 12 mph. We had headwinds and I struggled up hills. HRM said I burned 500 cals last night on a 13 mile/1 hour ride.
If your ride felt easy, then I would back it off a few hundred calories. But if you worked it hard and fast, I can easily see 3000 calories for a ride like that.
Karen
Somebody (Chris Carmichael?) says that we burn between 13 and 17 calories per minute of cycling. Individual results may vary, of course, but that's the range.
Nope, not high. It will vary depending on different things like hills climbs, effort, speed and so on, but cycling can burn some major calories. I know I've got a calorie counter on my little odometer, it's set to my weight and I easily burn 2000 calories on my long rides.
OK, that's it, I'm blowing the dust off my bike. tomorrow, I have a meeting in Baton Rouge today. I'm in the "I can't stand my body" frame of mind, and maybe regular riding will get me fit again. That and IF I enjoyed ab exercises when I get home.
one word: pilatesQuote:
Originally Posted by bmccasland
How many calories per hour you burn can vary dramatically from person to person. The only way to get a better estimate is to get a VO2Max test done.
For example, I burn 500cal/hour at my easiest pace. At a hard pace I burn 1000 calories per hour and I weigh 120lbs and am a pretty petite woman. Somone else my size might burn half that much - it has to do with effort and natural metabolism.
You can imagine that my main race strategies center around food. But I know other women I race against who are good with about 200 calories for a 2.5 hour race ... a race where I consume 1250 or more calories (you can only absorb so many calories per hour before your digestive system says 'no way' and shuts down on you).
Going by 'feel' to ensure that you don't bonk and that you recover well is the next best thing to geting a VO2 Max test where they measure blood sugar, etc done.
Wow, all this info is totally promising. I recall many years ago having my b/f at the time tell me that he read something about how cycling is one of the most energy efficient types of exercise... or something like that - meaning that it wasn't very good for burning calories. It never stopped me from doing it, but I did wonder how true it was. I'm very happy to hear the sport I LOVE really burns those calories! While you're having fun... so great.:)
Actually, it's one of the most efficient forms of transportation. The energy expended to cover a distance on a bike is much less than walking or driving. Of course, you wouldn't want to walk a century (at least I wouldn't!).Quote:
Originally Posted by stacie13
CA
See this post by SadieKate:
http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showt...light=calories
If it's only taking distance, speed and weight into account, you get rides like mine yesterday.
To the LBS: 16.27 miles into a 16-20 mph headwind with 30 mph gusts. It took me 1:10. Computer says 655 calories.
From the LBS, 16.22 by a slightly different route. Thankfully the wind hadn't changed and it blew me all the way home in 0:54. Computer says 795 calories.
I think I probably burned a lot more calories on the upwind leg... even if I was going faster the other way!