Stationary bike calories

maryvalekingz602

I would like to know if this website is accurate or way too high.

http://www.nowloss.com/weight-loss-calculators/bicycle14159.htm

I weigh 200lbs and i pedal consistently at 14mph-18. I usually do this for 50 minutes. It says in that time and with that speed, I burn 790 calories. Does that seem too high to you fitness experts?

aokoye

I'm gonna go with really inaccurate. I'll leave you to read the somewhat recent thread about cycling and the best ways to measure calories burned (in short, a calibrated and accurate power meter is the way to go). For reference, I did a 49 min ride inside and averaged "17mph" - I put that in quotes because speed means nothing inside, power does, but speed doesn't. I weight about as much as you (though weight has nothing to do with calorie burn in this instance) and this ride was with a power meter with a plus or minus of 1.5% - I burned 434 calories.

maryvalekingz602

aokoye wrote: »

I'm gonna go with really inaccurate. I'll leave you to read the somewhat recent thread about cycling and the best ways to measure calories burned (in short, a calibrated and accurate power meter is the way to go). For reference, I did a 49 min ride inside and averaged "17mph" - I put that in quotes because speed means nothing inside, power does, but speed doesn't. I weight about as much as you (though weight has nothing to do with calorie burn in this instance) and this ride was with a power meter with a plus or minus of 1.5% - I burned 434 calories.

Damn. So its a good thing I dont eat back those calories like my diary tells me to

AnvilHead

That's why people often recommend that you only eat back around 50% of your exercise calories, then gauge results accordingly to see whether you need to increase or decrease it.

sijomial

You can't use an outdoor cycling "calculator" for indoor riding - no rolling resistance, no aerodynamic drag, no hills..... Even if that was an outdoor ride for that burn that would require a very high fitness level and way beyond the capabilities of most people.
BTW - that particular calculator is worthless! Mountain bike on gravel in hilly countryside or fast road bike on smooth tarmac?

In all probability that's far too high. You haven't given any clues about your fitness level but to achieve that burn in that time you would have an extraordinary level of fitness and pushing hard.
For me for 17mph outdoor pace for 50 mins would probably be 400 - 450 cals depending on elevation change.

Stationary bikes don't actually do any MPH at all (they don't move!) - ignore the mph it bears very little relation to your real effort on a stationary bike.
Your body weight is an irrelevance for a non-weight bearing exercise, it has some bearing outdoors when you need to accelerate your mass, climb hills etc.

Does your bike give you power in watts? That can be converted very accurately into calories.

Machka9

On a stationary bike I usually estimate 350-400 cal per hour depending on my effort.

Given my weight loss, that seems to work for me.

callsitlikeiseeit

on a stationary bike i estimate it around 300 cals/ hour ... if i credit myself the exercise calories (which i usually dont ) i give myself 150 to eat back.

jjpptt2

Any time you get more than 10 cals burned per minute of exercise, I'd start to question the number. It's not impossible, and could be very reasonable depending on the person, the activity/workout, and the duration... but that's my threshold when I start to second guess the estimate. Anything over 13 cals per minute for a meaningful length of time and I assume the number is wrong.

farsteve

callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »

on a stationary bike i estimate it around 300 cals/ hour ... if i credit myself the exercise calories (which i usually dont ) i give myself 150 to eat back.

This seems reasonable to me and corresponds to what I generally get on a stationary bike.

farsteve

jjpptt2 wrote: »

Any time you get more than 10 cals burned per minute of exercise, I'd start to question the number. It's not impossible, and could be very reasonable depending on the person, the activity/workout, and the duration... but that's my threshold when I start to second guess the estimate. Anything over 13 cals per minute for a meaningful length of time and I assume the number is wrong.

IMO, anything over 10 calories per minute is approaching a hgh intensity workout. 13 per minute is close to a sprint and is not something most people can maintain for longer than 20, 30, (or for the elite athlete) 40 seconds. 30 seconds is about what it takes me to do a 100 yard dash!

antsosbo

my stationary bike puts me at 300 cals in 30 min. I don't eat back any calories i exercise though so its more of a, hey i worked up a sweat, not a hey i get to cheat.

jjpptt2

farsteve wrote: »

jjpptt2 wrote: »

Any time you get more than 10 cals burned per minute of exercise, I'd start to question the number. It's not impossible, and could be very reasonable depending on the person, the activity/workout, and the duration... but that's my threshold when I start to second guess the estimate. Anything over 13 cals per minute for a meaningful length of time and I assume the number is wrong.

IMO, anything over 10 calories per minute is approaching a hgh intensity workout. 13 per minute is close to a sprint and is not something most people can maintain for longer than 20, 30, (or for the elite athlete) 40 seconds. 30 seconds is about what it takes me to do a 100 yard dash!

It's just a rough guideline I used based on what I've read from trusted sources and my own personal experience. You can slice that hair however you want.

cwolfman13

antsosbo wrote: »

my stationary bike puts me at 300 cals in 30 min. I don't eat back any calories i exercise though so its more of a, hey i worked up a sweat, not a hey i get to cheat.

fueling your exercise isn't cheating...