Is Stationary Bike Really A Waste Of Time?
Replies
-
It can be an intense workout! I do spin class 2x a week and we are up and down off the seat, do different speeds & different resistance levels...yesterday I did 20 mins on a Recumbent bike and had sweat running into my eyes...so yeah...it can be a workout if you make it one.
I do spin as well 2 to 3 times a week for ~40-50 minutes at a time. I'm pouring sweat and my heart rate averages in the 130s to 140s, peaking in the 150s to 160s (I have a heart condition and am on medication that keeps my heart rate down, so I usually peak in the 150s). I burn anywhere from 350 to 450 calories (based on my polar ft7). Like wizzybeth said, it's a workout if you make it one.0 -
I love the stationary bike. I'm more focused on lifting and don't care if I don't burn a ton of calories. Sometimes I just hop on for 10-20 minutes at steady state to help pad my deficit, sometimes I go all out on intervals if I want to burn the extra few calories.0
-
The effectiveness comes down to the quality of the bike. A high HR without the corresponding work load is meaningless. Some bikes provide a great workout, some are the equivalent of spinning out the pedals while going downhill.0
-
It's not great for calorie burns
Based on what? Its completely dependent on duration and intensity like all cardio. OP if you feel your heart is racing and you are experiencing that shortness of breath then you will be trying hard. People sweat at different temperatures, but you know your own body and should exercise based on that. Keep track of your times and distances, then you know when you are improving and when you are slacking. If you put the effort in then in terms of cardio burn its right up there with the best of them. Ive been using bike and rower, tend to find the bike easier, but its up to e to increase intensity and duration so its not easy. You do get to look around and its easier to listen to music.
I prefer the spin bikes as they feel more like a normal nike.0 -
It's not great for calorie burns
Based on what? Its completely dependent on duration and intensity like all cardio. OP if you feel your heart is racing and you are experiencing that shortness of breath then you will be trying hard. People sweat at different temperatures, but you know your own body and should exercise based on that. Keep track of your times and distances, then you know when you are improving and when you are slacking. If you put the effort in then in terms of cardio burn its right up there with the best of them. Ive been using bike and rower, tend to find the bike easier, but its up to e to increase intensity and duration so its not easy. You do get to look around and its easier to listen to music.
I prefer the spin bikes as they feel more like a normal nike.
Based on the amount I burn in 30 mins on a bike compared to what I burn on the elliptical or just walking on the treadmill.
I switch between all those. But, I still mostly bike, because I have joint issues. I always do intervals, and I always use as much resistance as makes sense, and I keep the revolutions per minute between 100 and 160.
And even then, it's still only roughly equivalent at that point. However, my thighs are looking shapelier and I'm sure the bike is what's making the difference there.0 -
also - it's not weight bearing exercise, which we need to help our bones. so it's good to mix it up with other things.
but it's not a waste of time, at all, you can def get a lot out of it, but you have to work hard.0 -
arditarose wrote: »I love the stationary bike. I'm more focused on lifting and don't care if I don't burn a ton of calories. Sometimes I just hop on for 10-20 minutes at steady state to help pad my deficit, sometimes I go all out on intervals if I want to burn the extra few calories.
also yeah, apparently it doesn't interfere with weightlifting as much as some other forms of cardio.
so yeah, those are the things i know about biking.0 -
also - it's not weight bearing exercise, which we need to help our bones. so it's good to mix it up with other things.
but it's not a waste of time, at all, you can def get a lot out of it, but you have to work hard.
Its weight bearing when you are out of the saddle. You are better off doing resistance training for bone density, which will be far more effective.
How much you burn is mostly dependent on your weight as well as the intensity and duration. Just because you dont seem to burn much is more of a reflection on how hard you are working relative to the other machine and has no bearing on how hard the ops workout is.0 -
also - it's not weight bearing exercise, which we need to help our bones. so it's good to mix it up with other things.
but it's not a waste of time, at all, you can def get a lot out of it, but you have to work hard.
Its weight bearing when you are out of the saddle. You are better off doing resistance training for bone density, which will be far more effective.
How much you burn is mostly dependent on your weight as well as the intensity and duration. Just because you dont seem to burn much is more of a reflection on how hard you are working relative to the other machine and has no bearing on how hard the ops workout is.
I work my butt off on any machine I get on, thanks. The OP may well get a nice burn, I haven't said anything about that. I'm saying that in comparison to other activities it just doesn't burn as many calories. People can investigate that for themselves to see it's true.
Some people actually can't weight train for one reason or another. Sometimes, those are the same people who have to use bikes. For them/us, walking is an excellent activity for bone density.
also lol @ "weightbearing when you get out of the saddle" - it's likely not enough.0 -
You completely miss the point which is bikes can be great for cardio burns if you work hard enough in terms of intensity and duration, then the burn is limited only by the person on the machine.
Heres a review of machines. Sorry you cnat manage to get a decent burn off a bike compared to walking, but if you work hard enough then ofc you can achieve high rates of burn.
The only thing you have to back up that according to you bikes dont burn many calories is that you dont burn many when working your butt off.In can be intimidating to walk into the gym and see row upon row of shiny contraptions with belts, chains and gears. The vast array of cardio machines is dizzying. But when it comes to getting results, boosting your fitness and shrinking your waistline, the best cardio machine is the one that burns the most calories. In this article, I'll review the most popular machines -- the ones you'll probably find in both the poshest exclusive health clubs and the hole-in-the-wall hotels. You'll learn which ones burn the most calories and how to use them properly.
The bike
The pedaling motion of the bike incorporates the big and powerful leg muscles and can burn 500-1,000 calories per hour, which ranks it among the highest calorie burners (as long as you use it correctly). But most people don't choose a resistance that is high enough to stimulate all the calorie-burning leg muscles, and instead let the natural movement of a bicycle's pedals do the work for them. To get maximum benefit from a bike, choose a resistance that makes you breathe hard at 90 RPM (revolutions per minute). Most stationary bicycles show RPM on the computer display.
The treadmill
Running on a treadmill can burn 600-1,200 calories per hour, and running up an incline on the treadmill is the best way to boost your metabolism for hours after you've finished your workout. In contrast, walking on the treadmill burns only 150-400 calories per hour, depending on your speed and incline. If you're using a treadmill, then either run or jog (if your joints can handle it) or walk up a steep incline. Avoid the common mistake of constantly holding on to the handrails. These should only be used if you have extreme balance difficulties or must stabilize yourself to change a setting.
The elliptical
You generally burn about 600 calories per hour on the ellipticals that don't include arm movement, and 700-900 calories on the ones that do. Using an elliptical burns fewer calories than running because once you get the parts on an elliptical moving, they use momentum to keep going, and you expend less energy. To get the best results on an elliptical, use the rails as little as possible, and challenge yourself with the resistance settings. You should be breathing hard while aiming for a cadence or stride rate of 120-140+ (this is shown on the display). If you don't feel your muscles contracting during the forward and back stroke of the elliptical, then you probably need to increase resistance.
The Stairmaster
Although the stairmaster is popular, it doesn't get great results. It incorporates small, low-calorie burning calf muscles, and just a small part of your upper thighs and butt -- and only burns at most 400-500 calories per hour. In addition, if you have low back pain, then you may find that the pain is aggravated during the up and down motion of the Stairmaster.
However, if you are lucky enough to have access to the kind of machine where you walk up a moving belt of stairs (like a stationary staircase), then you can get far better results. It will give you just as much calorie-burning benefit as running up an incline on a treadmill, and do a fantastic job toning your butt and thighs. While using it, try holding dumbbells or switching to a slow pace and taking 3-4 steps at a time.
The rowing machine
The rowing machine can burn over 1,000 calories per hour, and it's an excellent upper and lower body muscular endurance and cardiovascular workout. But it can be boring. To make things more interesting on the rowing machine, try to intersperse short periods of very hard pulling with easy pulling. For instance: row for 250 meters as hard as possible, then row 100 meters easy, and repeat 6-8 times. When rowing, use both your torso and legs -- not just your arms.
No matter which form of cardio you choose, be sure to regularly switch things up and incorporate new forms of cardio that are unfamiliar to your body. So if you always walk, then switch to cycling or the elliptical; or if you always run, then try rowing. This will ensure that your body is constantly challenged and burning as many calories as possible.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-greenfield/best-cardio-machines_b_1035202.html0 -
I didn't miss the point. I made that point.0
-
The only thing you have said is the bike is not great for YOU even when working your butt off. That rule doesnt hold for everyone else. If you believe its inferior, then back it up and show us how its inferior to walking on the treadmill.Calories Burned Biking One Mile
Last Updated: Nov 02, 2013 | By Jay Schwartz
Bicycling is one of the best exercises you can do if you want to burn as many calories as possible. Bicycling more than 20 mph is tied for first with running among 150 exercises assessed by the Harvard Heart Letter in its July 2004 publication and tied for third among approximately 175 exercises assessed by the State of Wisconsin’s Department of Health and Family Services. In their book "The Well Adult," Dr. Mike Samuels and Nancy Samuels analyze only 25 exercises, but bicycling ranks second behind running.0 -
i really didn't read any of the responses, but felt compelled to tell you that i don't think any physical activity that you enjoy is a waste of time.
Of course, depending on your desired results (weight loss/sculpting/building), you have to mix it up and work all the muscles.0 -
I spin 5 days a week for 55 to 80 minutes. I burn around 12 calories a minute. I've lost 37 lbs. Of course you can spin with no resistance and barely break a sweat, but me, I love a good uphill sprint and leave a puddle on the floor every time.0
-
Based on the amount I burn in 30 mins on a bike compared to what I burn on the elliptical or just walking on the treadmill.
I switch between all those. But, I still mostly bike, because I have joint issues. I always do intervals, and I always use as much resistance as makes sense, and I keep the revolutions per minute between 100 and 160.
And even then, it's still only roughly equivalent at that point. However, my thighs are looking shapelier and I'm sure the bike is what's making the difference there.
I was told that 110 RPMs is as fast as you should go. If you go faster, you are relying on the momentum of the bike more than your legs, therefore getting less of a workout.
0 -
also - it's not weight bearing exercise, which we need to help our bones. so it's good to mix it up with other things.
but it's not a waste of time, at all, you can def get a lot out of it, but you have to work hard.
Its weight bearing when you are out of the saddle. You are better off doing resistance training for bone density, which will be far more effective.
How much you burn is mostly dependent on your weight as well as the intensity and duration. Just because you dont seem to burn much is more of a reflection on how hard you are working relative to the other machine and has no bearing on how hard the ops workout is.
I work my butt off on any machine I get on, thanks. The OP may well get a nice burn, I haven't said anything about that. I'm saying that in comparison to other activities it just doesn't burn as many calories. People can investigate that for themselves to see it's true.
Some people actually can't weight train for one reason or another. Sometimes, those are the same people who have to use bikes. For them/us, walking is an excellent activity for bone density.
also lol @ "weightbearing when you get out of the saddle" - it's likely not enough.
Please explain how I can hit my VO2 max on a stationary bike but other activities burn more calories?
0 -
If you are cycling at 160 rpm you need more resistance. Basically the pedals are spinning for you.0
-
lmjohnson110 wrote: »If you are cycling at 160 rpm you need more resistance. Basically the pedals are spinning for you.
I'm doing 160 rpm at level 9 on the bike, for 60 seconds, then back to 100 rpm for another 60. Etc. for 45 mins. That's where I'm up to as of my last workout. I continually increase the resistance. I am getting enough resistance, lol0 -
also - it's not weight bearing exercise, which we need to help our bones. so it's good to mix it up with other things.
but it's not a waste of time, at all, you can def get a lot out of it, but you have to work hard.
Its weight bearing when you are out of the saddle. You are better off doing resistance training for bone density, which will be far more effective.
How much you burn is mostly dependent on your weight as well as the intensity and duration. Just because you dont seem to burn much is more of a reflection on how hard you are working relative to the other machine and has no bearing on how hard the ops workout is.
I work my butt off on any machine I get on, thanks. The OP may well get a nice burn, I haven't said anything about that. I'm saying that in comparison to other activities it just doesn't burn as many calories. People can investigate that for themselves to see it's true.
Some people actually can't weight train for one reason or another. Sometimes, those are the same people who have to use bikes. For them/us, walking is an excellent activity for bone density.
also lol @ "weightbearing when you get out of the saddle" - it's likely not enough.
Please explain how I can hit my VO2 max on a stationary bike but other activities burn more calories?
look, i can't, i'm not a scientist. i'm saying most people will burn fewer calories on the bike, as it's typically used, as per ordinary calculations. plug in your stats on any calculator and they'll say that.0 -
The only thing you have said is the bike is not great for YOU even when working your butt off. That rule doesnt hold for everyone else. If you believe its inferior, then back it up and show us how its inferior to walking on the treadmill.Calories Burned Biking One Mile
Last Updated: Nov 02, 2013 | By Jay Schwartz
Bicycling is one of the best exercises you can do if you want to burn as many calories as possible. Bicycling more than 20 mph is tied for first with running among 150 exercises assessed by the Harvard Heart Letter in its July 2004 publication and tied for third among approximately 175 exercises assessed by the State of Wisconsin’s Department of Health and Family Services. In their book "The Well Adult," Dr. Mike Samuels and Nancy Samuels analyze only 25 exercises, but bicycling ranks second behind running.
i said people can get good burns, if they work at it, with speed and resistance.
i said i personally am seeing results from the bike that i like.
i am not saying that the bike is useless, i get on the stationary bike several times a week, but really it's not controversial that the elliptical or running or whatever typically burn more than the bike, this is a ridiculous conversation.
0 -
also - it's not weight bearing exercise, which we need to help our bones. so it's good to mix it up with other things.
but it's not a waste of time, at all, you can def get a lot out of it, but you have to work hard.
Its weight bearing when you are out of the saddle. You are better off doing resistance training for bone density, which will be far more effective.
How much you burn is mostly dependent on your weight as well as the intensity and duration. Just because you dont seem to burn much is more of a reflection on how hard you are working relative to the other machine and has no bearing on how hard the ops workout is.
I work my butt off on any machine I get on, thanks. The OP may well get a nice burn, I haven't said anything about that. I'm saying that in comparison to other activities it just doesn't burn as many calories. People can investigate that for themselves to see it's true.
Some people actually can't weight train for one reason or another. Sometimes, those are the same people who have to use bikes. For them/us, walking is an excellent activity for bone density.
also lol @ "weightbearing when you get out of the saddle" - it's likely not enough.
Please explain how I can hit my VO2 max on a stationary bike but other activities burn more calories?
look, i can't, i'm not a scientist. i'm saying most people will burn fewer calories on the bike, as it's typically used, as per ordinary calculations. plug in your stats on any calculator and they'll say that.
Sorry but really you are guessing. The limiting factor for cardio burns is the person and not the machine. I see just as many people rowing badly with no real leg drive as I see people putting in no effort on a cycle. That's down to the person and not the equipment.
By the way you really aren't using your bike at all well by hitting that high rpm, crank up the resistance and reduce the revs and you will get a much more effective workout.
My advice for the OP would be choose which you enjoy, which you are sure you will use consistently but also factor in the likely duration.
For a short, sharp high intensity workout a rowing machine is hard to beat. For long duration a cycle is hard to beat. It's very hard to do long duration rowing (I have personal experience of a charity 2 hour row which was one of the most painful things I've ever done...).0 -
lmjohnson110 wrote: »If you are cycling at 160 rpm you need more resistance. Basically the pedals are spinning for you.
I'm doing 160 rpm at level 9 on the bike, for 60 seconds, then back to 100 rpm for another 60. Etc. for 45 mins. That's where I'm up to as of my last workout. I continually increase the resistance. I am getting enough resistance, lol
I don't know what a level 9 is. Out of what? At LA Fitness the max resistance was 25, so 9 would be free wheeling. Find out what the max resistance is and aim for at least 65% for a sprint, 75 to 85% for a good climb.
The bike I ride has no levels, I go for push point. The push point is the point you need to engage your quads to push the pedal. If the pedal all the way up is 12 o'clock, a good sprinting push point is 2 o'clock. 12 o'clock is a good climb.0 -
Is stationary biking a waste of time ? Not according to my polar watch which adds up calories burned weather I'm on a real bike or the indoor one. Just adjust the tension on the indoor bike so that you burn the same amount per hour as your real bike. With a twist you can create hills. I think the stationary bike actually helps my cadence.
All that being said , I heard people have actually died of boredom on the indoor bike. (-0 -
Oh, on my recumbent gym bike (which is the worst of the two), I have three modes of use:
1) grab my tablet and play for two hours while pedaling away - where did that two hours go?? Burn a few hundred kcals without noticing.
2) crank it to level 8 and pedal as fast as I can for 20 seconds, rest for 10, repeat for 10 minutes, watch my heart explode out of my throat.
3) set to level 2, pedal as fast as I can for 30 minutes, watch my heart rate rise to around 120bpm and feel short of breath for a nice moderate fitness improvement.
Gym bikes have their uses.0 -
The settings on all cardio equipment are just random reference points and do not correlate with any set values. Stating you workout at a certain setting does not add to anybodys useable knowledge other then you know what setting you used.
If you want to measure or compare your workout energy expenditure get a HRM and then compare your effort as a % of Max heart rate, duration and calorie burn.0 -
The settings on all cardio equipment are just random reference points and do not correlate with any set values. Stating you workout at a certain setting does not add to anybodys useable knowledge other then you know what setting you used.
If you want to measure or compare your workout energy expenditure get a HRM and then compare your effort as a % of Max heart rate, duration and calorie burn.
Obviously. I was kinda implying max and easy. I think from the descriptions you can guess what the settings were like.0 -
also - it's not weight bearing exercise, which we need to help our bones. so it's good to mix it up with other things.
but it's not a waste of time, at all, you can def get a lot out of it, but you have to work hard.
Its weight bearing when you are out of the saddle. You are better off doing resistance training for bone density, which will be far more effective.
How much you burn is mostly dependent on your weight as well as the intensity and duration. Just because you dont seem to burn much is more of a reflection on how hard you are working relative to the other machine and has no bearing on how hard the ops workout is.
I work my butt off on any machine I get on, thanks. The OP may well get a nice burn, I haven't said anything about that. I'm saying that in comparison to other activities it just doesn't burn as many calories. People can investigate that for themselves to see it's true.
Some people actually can't weight train for one reason or another. Sometimes, those are the same people who have to use bikes. For them/us, walking is an excellent activity for bone density.
also lol @ "weightbearing when you get out of the saddle" - it's likely not enough.
Please explain how I can hit my VO2 max on a stationary bike but other activities burn more calories?
look, i can't, i'm not a scientist. i'm saying most people will burn fewer calories on the bike, as it's typically used, as per ordinary calculations. plug in your stats on any calculator and they'll say that.
Sorry but really you are guessing. The limiting factor for cardio burns is the person and not the machine. I see just as many people rowing badly with no real leg drive as I see people putting in no effort on a cycle. That's down to the person and not the equipment.
By the way you really aren't using your bike at all well by hitting that high rpm, crank up the resistance and reduce the revs and you will get a much more effective workout.
My advice for the OP would be choose which you enjoy, which you are sure you will use consistently but also factor in the likely duration.
For a short, sharp high intensity workout a rowing machine is hard to beat. For long duration a cycle is hard to beat. It's very hard to do long duration rowing (I have personal experience of a charity 2 hour row which was one of the most painful things I've ever done...).
some researchers have theorized that sprints (speed of revolutions) are the factor increasing catecholamines & therefore fat loss in studies of interval workouts on the bike - see the studies reviewed in this paper
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2991639/
are people seriously getting worked up about this? obviously the bike is a great tool (see ^^), and yes people can get good burns under certain conditions (like i've said about five times now). comparing activities, though, other choices might be more likely to burn more calories for the same effort. someone else above talked about rowing, that's a great one for that.
bikes r great, ok? lol0 -
darrensurrey wrote: »The settings on all cardio equipment are just random reference points and do not correlate with any set values. Stating you workout at a certain setting does not add to anybodys useable knowledge other then you know what setting you used.
If you want to measure or compare your workout energy expenditure get a HRM and then compare your effort as a % of Max heart rate, duration and calorie burn.
Obviously. I was kinda implying max and easy. I think from the descriptions you can guess what the settings were like.
Your easy might be another persons max so how do we compare ?
0 -
I lost weight using the bike mostly and it keeps my legs toned and strong. It does work.0
-
darrensurrey wrote: »The settings on all cardio equipment are just random reference points and do not correlate with any set values. Stating you workout at a certain setting does not add to anybodys useable knowledge other then you know what setting you used.
If you want to measure or compare your workout energy expenditure get a HRM and then compare your effort as a % of Max heart rate, duration and calorie burn.
Obviously. I was kinda implying max and easy. I think from the descriptions you can guess what the settings were like.
Your easy might be another persons max so how do we compare ?
2nd but 1 easiest setting on the machine. Not going to require you to be able to squat 100kg, really.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions