|
|
|
|
Curtis
Newbie
|
|
|
Joined: 10 May 2006
Posts: 9
|
| Back to top
|
|
 Posted: 07/20/06 - 22:08 Post subject: how do running and cycling compare?
I want to start cycling because I think I have stress fractures. My question is: how do the two compare in terms of intensity? Lets say my usual workout is 2 miles; how many miles on a stationary bike would I have to do to get the same workout?
|
|
|
|
|
JACKED UP
PRESIDENT
|
|
|
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 21238
Location: www.johnnydu.com
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 07/21/06 - 07:19 Post subject:
I think its 4 miles of cycling to 1 mile running. Cappy or PH, right?
|
|
|
|
|
TriBob
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 29 Aug 2002
Posts: 5771
Location: Lost in Transition
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 07/21/06 - 07:46 Post subject:
Go by time and HR or preceived exertion. Stationary bike milage is way off. So what ever time your run would be you can bike that or a little more because of no impact. I.e. 20 min run could be 30 minutes on bike. You will be using different muscles so do a few short rides to get used to cycling.
Good luck with your recovery.
|
|
|
|
|
purple hayes
Frightened Inmate #2
|
|
|
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 14462
Location: ON YOUR LEFT!
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 07/21/06 - 10:25 Post subject:
| JACKED UP wrote: | | I think its 4 miles of cycling to 1 mile running. Cappy or PH, right? |
The more I read about cycling, the less I know.
For now though, a 4:1 ratio is pretty safe.
|
|
|
|
|
gretriever
Hipster Doofus
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Jul 2003
Posts: 19385
Location: A moving target in a firing range.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 07/21/06 - 10:45 Post subject:
| purple hayes wrote: | | JACKED UP wrote: | | I think its 4 miles of cycling to 1 mile running. Cappy or PH, right? |
The more I read about cycling, the less I know.
For now though, a 4:1 ratio is pretty safe. |
4:1 is what I've heard too. Wonder if it matters between a regular bike and a stationary... (my guess would be little if any)
|
|
|
|
|
cdnhollywood
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 05 Oct 2004
Posts: 1538
Location: Ottawa, Canada
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 07/21/06 - 12:49 Post subject:
I think it's best, like TriBob stated, to focus it on HR and intensity. The muscular requirements are different between the two, so your body will react differently even if HR is the same between the two activities.
Cycling is fantastic crosstraining, especially for aerobic development (I just can't stay aerobic when I run - if I do, I'm walking).
|
|
|
|
|
navygreen
Newbie
|
|
|
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 5
Location: Orange County, CA
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 08/18/06 - 00:37 Post subject:
Personally, the same exertion between the two results in a higher HR in running than in cycling. I'd say if my HR is 170 or so cycling, it feels as tough as a 180 running. I think it's because of the blood volume requirements for cycling, especially if you're exerting pressure throughout every stroke, your quads, hamstrings, glutes and calves are all going to have more muscle fibers stimulated than they would in running (even sprinting, IMO). Those muscles, especially the quads and glutes get engorged with blood, especially in higher gears.
Cycling helped my running, not so much towards the end of endurance runs, but a big difference in my 1mi to 5k runs, and I think it's because my body had to acclimatize by producing more red blood cells. Just a theory.
|
|
|
|
