K
Originally posted by HellonWheels
I use a recumbent stationary bike with an electronic calculator on it for mileage, calories, distance, time, etc
According to my bike, riding intensively nonstop for 12 mins at a speed of 22-24 mph, you burn 200 calories. When I'm done doing 75 mins a day, it says I burned 1200 calories.
Originally posted by kokopuffs
In cycling somewhat briskly I seriously doubt that one burns 100 cal per mile; that's approx 2400 calories in less than 2 hours. Review your information.
I have also read elsewhere that cycling burns fewer calories per hour than golf. Having played golf, carrying my own clubs, over hilly courses, and having cycled quite a lot for 30+ years, I can only assume those authors were thinking of cycling at 7 mph or so on a level road.
Originally posted by M2cycler
i came across this website and found it useful. it tells you the equivalent energy expenditure of cycling to running at different cycling speeds.
http://www.active.com/story.cfm?story_id=5941
hmmm. jan ullrich recently rode a ~47km timetrial in a bit less than an hour. acording to the writer he would have burnt more calories walking around a field and hitting a ball intermittently.
is that article on the internet, i would like to read it.
Originally posted by cincinattikid
Please forgive my naivety, but can someone explain to me why HRM's are so 'useless' for measuring calories burnt during exercise?
I went to a lab and had my VO2max and max heart rates measured. These figures are inputs into my HRM and help calculate an approximation of calories burnt based on the intensity of exercise (reflected as heart rate) and duration. Now why is it that this should be so wrong?? Ive read here that it HAS to be a power X time relationship to get a ball park approximation - well, doesn't the heart rate increase or decrease accordingly depending on the output? And if this is so, isn't it a worthwhile input instead of power (if you dont have a power sensor)?
Even if the approximation is out by say 10%, I could live with that. I would especially appreciate any comments from those PHD's out there
The Kid.
Originally posted by sugametal131
Hi, I'm a constant biker and i saw you calories per mile. I just found out that when foods list calories, 1 calorie actaully equal 1000 calories (energy needed to heat 1 gram of water 1 degree celcius). Now i'm worried, are you talking food calories or true caloies?
800 calories amounts to about 2.5 chocolate bars, the minimum that is normaly recomended to people who are losing weight 1200 calories (more for men or larger people).Originally posted by Jim's ride
I am 5"11 and 90 kilograms(((FAT)))... Sometimes I ride for 50kms in the hills and the most is 100kms around Adelaide in Australia.
The bike I ride is a $500 Mongoose Mountainbike (Heavy thing it is)
If I remeber correctly my doctor said I should eat 800 calories per day and it's mainly what you eat during the ride.
Example when i stop at a Red traffic Light and I look like I went for a swim I know the calories are vanishing.
I find it very hard to know what amount of calories I eat during the day. The labels on food products look like i need a degree to understand what's in the product.
Cycling is more like a science these days.
I can't wait to follow the Tour Down Under....
Originally posted by 2LAP
800 calories amounts to about 2.5 chocolate bars, the minimum that is normaly recomended to people who are losing weight 1200 calories (more for men or larger people).
When calculating how many calories you eat, all you need to know are the number of calories per 100g or 1g and the amount you eat. From that you can calculate how many calories have passed your lips.
The same 500 to 1000 calorie advice is still given and works on the basis that a pound of body fat contains 3500 calories. Of course the calorie defocite can be completed by increasing exercise, reducing food intake or both.Originally posted by dhk
The "LA Performance Plan" book states that Lance got a scale and weighed everything he ate when he was losing 12 lbs for the '99 TdF. That would certainly be the disciplined approach.
Concerning calorie levels for dieting and training, I've got a 1981 book called "Coaching Young Athletes", which recommends a calorie deficit of not more than 500-1000 calories per day for someone on a training program, a level which would equate to 1 to 2 lbs/week weight loss.
Originally posted by 2LAP
The same 500 to 1000 calorie advice is still given and works on the basis that a pound of body fat contains 3500 calories. Of course the calorie defocite can be completed by increasing exercise, reducing food intake or both.
Originally posted by TTguy
During aerobic exercise your body can only handle (about) 300 cals. / hr. REGARDLESS of exercise intensity. So, you should not look to replace all the calories expended during exercise...rather strive to replace glycogen expended as it is used. Sorry for brief 'splaination but this is pretty well documented in authoritative places. Glad to point you in that direction if interested.
Thats an important consideration when 'refueling on the go'. At high intensities people are sometimes unable to tolerate any water, energy drinks or food at all. This causes problems when riding; as it means you can't take in energy at intense times in races or long climbs, etc. during touring or training.Originally posted by TTguy
During aerobic exercise your body can only handle (about) 300 cals. / hr. REGARDLESS of exercise intensity. So, you should not look to replace all the calories expended during exercise...rather strive to replace glycogen expended as it is used. Sorry for brief 'splaination but this is pretty well documented in authoritative places. Glad to point you in that direction if interested.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.