biking calories

eep223

Here's a question I've been toying with for a while now... let me toss it out here and get your thoughts. What do you think the most accurate way (minus a heart rate monitor) is track the calories I expend riding to and from work on my bike? I don't have a multi-speed road bike; I have a one speed cruiser. This means that not only do I rotate the pedal more per mile, but I also have a wider, less efficient tire. I know for a fact from biking with others that I am working harder to cover the same distance that they are on their bike that is designed for speed. Therefore, it doesn't seem quite right to simply log the number of minutes I biked at the speed I went. I'm pretty sure to calorie calculator is figuring in a more efficient bike. Thoughts?

BrianSharpe

You're probably right that it takes more energy to cover a given distance on a mechanically less efficient bike with tires that have a higher co-efficient of rolling resistance than a road bike with skinny tires.

Why the resistance to using a HRM? (It's probably a much more economical option than going the powertap route and measuring your wattage output....)

KinoM

For a quick estimate you could use the calculator here: http://www.bikeweek.org.uk/calculator.php
It takes into account your weight, your bike's weight & your average speed. A HRM would be much more accurate, but you'd need to be wary of whether it outputs a net or gross calorific burn (ie whether or not it excludes the calories your body would have burned doing nothing).

omma_to_3

I wouldn't adjust for that, based on my comparison with HRM vs. RunKeeper, vs. MFP.

Here's from last night's 57 minute ride. I went about 9.5 miles on paved trails with generally small rolling hills.

HRM: 429
MFP: 405
RunKeeper: 339

I used to subtract 10% from any HRM reading to remove my BMR calories, so that would put it at 386 calories. Now, I subtract more, just because I need to keep a tighter rein on my calorie intake (and I eat back all my calories).

eep223

Thanks, folks. I'm not resistant to a heart rate monitor, per se, I just don't have one and don't imagine I'll be able to purchase one terribly soon. And since these things are all different forms of estimation anyway, it's not a top priority of mine.

Thanks for that, KinoM, I had been looking around for something something similar and come up short. It seems like all the website and forums addressing cycling focus on the more competitive side (for obvious reasons). I enjoy it, but am by no means elite. I'd just like to know in a general way how to track the activity with some degree of accuracy, since I am doing it daily.

That's really interesting, omma_to_3. Maybe my best bet would be to just stick to the MFP calculation as some sort of middle ground. Though maybe bumping up the speed calculation might be a way to be more accurate?

5brownsnc

Do you have a bike computer ? I just added one to my bike and it allowed me to put my bike's tire size during set-up.
It displays MPH ( or KPH if you prefer) , Avg speed, miles , and time. Having these numbers should help you to log the cycling correctly.

eep223

Do you have a bike computer ? I just added one to my bike and it allowed me to put my bike's tire size during set-up.
It displays MPH ( or KPH if you prefer) , Avg speed, miles , and time. Having these numbers should help you to log the cycling correctly.

Nah, I'm low budget over here and, as I said, more of a recreational biker. I have a very short commute, but I do ride daily.

omma_to_3

I used the website listed above to compare last night's ride and came up with about 385. That's spot on with what my HRM is after subtracting out my BMR calories. So I'd go with that for accuracy. Any 'bonus' you get from a less efficient bike probably isn't a significant amount.

dough21

I use MapMyRide for biking to tell me my mph/distance/pace/time/splits. It also tells me calories, which often times is within 20 - 50 calories of my HRM. Give it a try.

lisapr123

Honestly, unless you're feeling like you're not getting enough food in (assuming you eat your exercise calories) I wouldn't worry about it. I have both an oldie but goodie bike and a road bike. MFP overestimates my calories burned on both bikes (as compared to my HRM and my Garmin).

Plus, the more you ride the more efficient you get. I've been an avid cycling for a very long time (and am heavy, which I think is why it overestimates my calories...apparently I weight too much to be fit) and my last ride shows 1023 calories for 16 miles in 1:08....no way I burned that much, I didn't even break a sweat! Yet when I run (which I totally suck at...10 minute miles and huffing the whole time) it shows me burning ~450 calories per hour. Something is off here.

This whole thing is nothing more than a guessing game, in my opinion. Like I said, though, if you're left hungry eat a little more and look into adjusting it. But if it's a short ride you're probably not even getting the heart rate up for very long, and I doubt it's a ton of calories being burned.

5brownsnc

Do you have a bike computer ? I just added one to my bike and it allowed me to put my bike's tire size during set-up.
It displays MPH ( or KPH if you prefer) , Avg speed, miles , and time. Having these numbers should help you to log the cycling correctly.

Nah, I'm low budget over here and, as I said, more of a recreational biker. I have a very short commute, but I do ride daily.

I hear ya.... mine was only $39 // I debated for a long time and finally broke down and bought it. I love the mapmyride suggestion too @dough21

glocke12

To be honest, my personal opinion is that counting calories burned from exercising is really nothing more than guess work and is far from exact. Different methods will give you different determinations, but they all seem to be within 10% of one another so I think you are safe just using one of the online calculators that will tell you what you burned based on distance rode and your weight...

Last week I rode 30 miles in my road bike. The bike app for my iphone told me i burned 1500 calories, an online calculator told me I burned 1550 calories, and my heart rate monitor told me I burned 1400 calories...

eep223

Wonderful. Big thanks to all of you for your suggestions. It really is guesswork, and I suppose no matter what technique I use, there is no way to know for sure how accurate it is. The bottom line is that I am burning the calories, whether I know exactly how many they are or not. Have fun and keep cycling!