Calories burned across exercises

drj1485

Ok. So i read a lot about different exercise burning different calories. And to a point it makes sense. Running is harder than biking so it burns more calories at a given intensity. Smaller muscle groups are harder to work out for duration and maintain a certain level. However. Lets use cycling and running. Obviously if you run ten miles you burn more calories than biking ten because it takes much long and you expend more energy. However. When we view our burns we calculate with time. Look at your HRM. No matter what exercise you do it gives you the same readout at a given HR. at a moderate level cycling burns less bc you only use legs. Your hhart rate will be lower. But. If you can maintain a certain heart rate for an hour it won't matter. 160bpm for an hour running is going to amount to the same as 160bpm cycling. This is my thought at least. Because to achieve the same heart rate from cycling you will have to pump your legs a lot harder than when you run. You heart rate increases with your oxygen consumption. If you are operating at 85% of your heart rate it means your legs Are using more than they are running. When you see the generally lower calorie numbers for swimming and cycling it is because the resistance is lower. Your heart rate and oxygen consumption will also most likely be lower. If you pump it up to that same HR threshold though you are going to end up doing the same work. Your lower body is making up for te lack of motion up top or in the pool you are over coming the buoyancy by swimming faster. Running just simply takes less effort in the same amount of time to burn the calories.

Am I way off base here? I'm positive I'm over thinking it.