Walking vs cycling

grace173

Hi,

Pardon my typing as I'm almost fallin asleep typing this. For the past year I have been cycling 7.5kms (each way) 2 days a week to work (going to the gym other days). I got run off my bike once by a car and I fell off my bike from my own stupidity another time. I have decided it is just too dangerous to cycle. I don't live in a very cycle safe country. So now I have walked to the bus in the morning about 20mins but then I walk home from work. I have only done this twice now and I am so tired. So I was just wondering firstly why am I so tired? and secondly if walking for an hour and 15 at a good pace is as good a workout as cycling for 27 minutes at a good pace.

I'm quite surprised how tired I am but maybe my body just needs to get used to the change.

Thank you for any opinions ps my fall only happened this day last week so this could be a factor in my tiredness, body healing etc

Strudders67

Recovering from your fall probably isn't helping. Also, an hour's walk after a day at work is likely to be quite draining, whereas your cycle journey home was relatively quick. Perhaps, for a couple of weeks, get the bus home as well so that you're not walking for quite so long. I assume you'd still have a 20 minute walk from the bus stop to home. I presume you are logging the exercise and eating the calories back. A quick calculation says that both activities burn the same calories, but cycling will use different muscles to walking.

lynn_glenmont

A bicycle has two wheels. Wheels are a type of machine to help you do something with less effort, or more quickly, like a lever or an inclined plane.

While cycling is a somewhat higher MET activity than walking, especially if you are doing both at a fairly similar level of intensity, the speed advantage of cycling more than makes up for it, so you will burn more calories covering a given distance walking than you will covering the same distance cycling.

For me, biking at around 12 mph (8 METS) and walking at around 3.5 mph to 4 mph (3.8 to 5 METS) feel like similar intensity to me, and are probably the paces I would tend to use for a commute (I'm not racing or even trying for a real workout, but I am trying to get somewhere in a reasonable amount of time). YMMV.

Let's say your RMR is about 100 kcal per hour (yeah, it's probably a little high for most people, especially women, but it's an easy number to work with, and the relative results will be the same no matter what your real RMR is).

To cover 7.5 km (4.7 miles) by bike at 12 mph would take about 20 min. at 8 METS, or 240 kcal (8 METS X 100 kcal/hour X .33 of an hour). To cover 7.5 km (4.7 miles) on foot at 4 mph would take about 70 mins at 5 METS, or 583 kcal (5 METS X 100 kcal/hour X 1.17 of an hour).

So walking burns more than twice as many calories as biking to cover the same distance at those sample speeds.

OP's stated times are 75 mins for walking and 27 min for biking, so not too far off from the example speeds I selected.

grace173

Thank you for your replies. I have been doing the walk now for a few months and I am adjusting so not as tired. I agree about the muscle use so I am doing spin class now to make up for that loss. This is such a great site for advice and encouragement, thank you. Loving the fact that I'm burning so many cals with the walk, having said that my fitbit will tell me I burn way more cals logging in the gym re heart rates, excercises logged etc but anything close to 500cals burned is cool to me tbh

NorthCascades

Are you enjoying the walk? Getting outside, showing down, getting away from work and deadlines, etc, it's very relaxing for me.

Sorry to hear about the troubles on the bike.

OooohToast

hello OP and sorry to hear about your cycling experience.

I'm a fan of walking and like @NorthCascades find its a good time for yourself. If you are feeling tired, might be an idea to check your hydration levels ? If I were walking that long, I would deffo be in need of some water although I suspect I am not as fit as y

Keep on striding !

OooohToast

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

A bicycle has two wheels. Wheels are a type of machine to help you do something with less effort, or more quickly, like a lever or an inclined plane.

While cycling is a somewhat higher MET activity than walking, especially if you are doing both at a fairly similar level of intensity, the speed advantage of cycling more than makes up for it, so you will burn more calories covering a given distance walking than you will covering the same distance cycling.

For me, biking at around 12 mph (8 METS) and walking at around 3.5 mph to 4 mph (3.8 to 5 METS) feel like similar intensity to me, and are probably the paces I would tend to use for a commute (I'm not racing or even trying for a real workout, but I am trying to get somewhere in a reasonable amount of time). YMMV.

Let's say your RMR is about 100 kcal per hour (yeah, it's probably a little high for most people, especially women, but it's an easy number to work with, and the relative results will be the same no matter what your real RMR is).

To cover 7.5 km (4.7 miles) by bike at 12 mph would take about 20 min. at 8 METS, or 240 kcal (8 METS X 100 kcal/hour X .33 of an hour). To cover 7.5 km (4.7 miles) on foot at 4 mph would take about 70 mins at 5 METS, or 583 kcal (5 METS X 100 kcal/hour X 1.17 of an hour).

So walking burns more than twice as many calories as biking to cover the same distance at those sample speeds.

OP's stated times are 75 mins for walking and 27 min for biking, so not too far off from the example speeds I selected.

Loving the calc work !