Does cycling speed and duration affect calories burned?

Options
Toumani
Toumani Posts: 78 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
This is probably a stupid question and I'm missing the obvious answer but here goes:

I just got a stationary bike to get me through the winter and I use a Polar FT7 instead of the HRM on the bike for better accuracy. Here's what I was wondering.. if I want to burn around 400 calories that day in exercise, does it matter for how long or how fast I cycle as long as I reach the 400 cal mark?

I am always reading that everything boils down to cals in vs cals out, but I was wondering if there truly is a difference in fat loss if I exercise one way or the other (this of course in conjunction with the correct calorie intake and deficit).

Thanks in advance!

Replies

  • chervil6
    chervil6 Posts: 236 Member
    Options
    400 cals burned is 400 cals burned which ever way you go about it i'd say :)

    ride the bike hard n fast or slow and easy , you either get to 400 cals burned faster or slower
  • eAddict
    eAddict Posts: 212 Member
    Options
    Burning 400 cal is burning 400 cal. What I think you are asking is the most efficient way to do it. I mean even by not eating and sitting on the couch for a few days one can lose 400 cal. I would recommend doing a bit of research on bike riding and weight loss. What has worked for me is sprints. I ride for 20-30 min/day. I have head phones so I pedal at a casual pace for 1 song then pedal like a crazy man for the next. yeah. there is probable a better way to do timing but it works for me and makes the time pass quickly yet fun.
  • trogalicious
    trogalicious Posts: 4,584 Member
    Options
    The level of effort and time that you put into the exercise makes a difference in how many calories you're burning. IF the goal is only to burn 400 calories, then the harder you push yourself, the faster you'll get there.
  • BorgieMN
    BorgieMN Posts: 116 Member
    Options
    I have been on a stationary bike lately. Got a huge blister on my heel so have to layoff the treadmill for awhile.

    So i had to improvise and come up with a different cardio routine that has no pressure on the back of my heel.

    1. 5 minutes of tabata rope work.
    2. 20 Kettle Bell squat swings with a 25 pound kettle bell.
    3. 12 minutes on the bike. (medium pace, so/so on the resistance)

    I do this 4 times. I wear a heart rate monitor and my average heart rate is around 135. Did 80 minutes this morning and burned 910 calories. Not super strenuous but does keep your heart rate up.
  • Yogi_Carl
    Yogi_Carl Posts: 1,906 Member
    Options
    I think the only reason why you would consider cycling at a slower pacebut still staying within a reasonable mid range heart-rate would be that you are conditioning for longer rides outside when the weather improves. You will build stamina over winter and be able to ride for longer at a reasonable pace.

    If you are just using a stationery bike to workout out, I would cycle at a pace that is obviously oxygen demanding but not so much that you are fighting for breath. That way you will keep the highest pace you can without having to take breaks for lactic acid to subside. That will be as long for each individual as a piece of string, but I go by how I feel in my heart and lungs rather than trying for a certain heart rate range. If it's not fun any more I slow down a touch!
  • lcedmond
    lcedmond Posts: 15
    Options
    There are differences. The intensity of the effort will dictate which "fuel system" is producing energy. I am certainly no expert but believe the exercise physiologists talk about at least three different systems for producing energy: aerobic, anaerobic and [I think] glycolysis. The difference is what type of fuel is used. Seems like the three basic "fuels" are fats, carbs & protein. If you really want more info, you need to do some research into this.

    I have seen that trainers have begun shifting their focus to use of high intensity workouts to better utilize particular energy systems and get better results with less time. I think there is also evidence showing differences in perceived food cravings after efforts using the different systems.

    This information will also likely discuss the timing of when and what you eat relative to the work effort. For example, eating particular foods within 30 minutes of the effort is more effective than waiting an hour or two.
  • Bocch
    Bocch Posts: 191 Member
    Options
    During this time of year I spin indoors. I wear an HRM that also counts calories. The HRM calories burned are way different from what is being used on this site. I prefer to go with what my HRM states for calories burned.
    OK, duration of intensity is how calories are burned. For example, if you were to sit on an indoor trainer and just turn the cranks slow you might not even break a sweat you might burn 40 kcals. At that rate you probably burn more calories climbing stairs! However if you can sustain 15MPH over a 20 or minute period you will see your HR increase and along with that the burning of more calories.
    BTW, you should not be using calories burned when spinning indoors. I recommend that you change to how many miles you want to get in (and in a certain time). Or, use time and speed, for example ride 30 minutes and try for an average of 15mph.
  • eAddict
    eAddict Posts: 212 Member
    Options
    I have seen that trainers have begun shifting their focus to use of high intensity workouts to better utilize particular energy systems and get better results with less time. I think there is also evidence showing differences in perceived food cravings after efforts using the different systems.
    I have moved to sprints on my stationary bike. Been getting good results. Since the bike is 'level' all the time easier to maintain a high speed vs outfdoors. Outside I usually go for time and distance.

Categories