Recumbent Bicycle Question

SteffCooley
SteffCooley Posts: 111
edited September 19 in Fitness and Exercise
Hello! Have a question, hopefully someone has an answer :smile:

I work out every evening for 45 minutes on my recumbent bike, and then about 15 minutes on the elliptical. On the readout computer thing on the bike, I average about 17-20 mph the entire time. I turn up the intensity for a couple minutes, switch it back down to easy, etc...... just change it up to keep my body really working. But, the entire time I maintain the 17-20 mph. So, then I come back and log my exercise on MFP and I am getting over 800 exercise calories, JUST for the biking (logged as "stationary bicycling 16-19 mph very vigorous") Is it just me, or does that number not seem right? It just seems WAY too high. However, I have checked it on several other calorie/exercise calculator websites and they all have been very similar.

So, on another note, between the bicycling and the elliptical, I am getting about 1000 exercise calories a day. Would you be eating those back? I have read all the back and forth about eating your exercise calories, but GOSH - that is alot. I haven't been eating the extra calories, I guess because it just all seems *too good to be true*. I am currently eating about 1400 calories a day (per MFP) and losing 3-4 lbs. per week.

Any ideas? (on both questions!!!)
Thanks!!

Replies

  • SteffCooley
    SteffCooley Posts: 111
    Hello! Have a question, hopefully someone has an answer :smile:

    I work out every evening for 45 minutes on my recumbent bike, and then about 15 minutes on the elliptical. On the readout computer thing on the bike, I average about 17-20 mph the entire time. I turn up the intensity for a couple minutes, switch it back down to easy, etc...... just change it up to keep my body really working. But, the entire time I maintain the 17-20 mph. So, then I come back and log my exercise on MFP and I am getting over 800 exercise calories, JUST for the biking (logged as "stationary bicycling 16-19 mph very vigorous") Is it just me, or does that number not seem right? It just seems WAY too high. However, I have checked it on several other calorie/exercise calculator websites and they all have been very similar.

    So, on another note, between the bicycling and the elliptical, I am getting about 1000 exercise calories a day. Would you be eating those back? I have read all the back and forth about eating your exercise calories, but GOSH - that is alot. I haven't been eating the extra calories, I guess because it just all seems *too good to be true*. I am currently eating about 1400 calories a day (per MFP) and losing 3-4 lbs. per week.

    Any ideas? (on both questions!!!)
    Thanks!!
  • songbyrdsweet
    songbyrdsweet Posts: 5,691 Member
    A stationary bike is different from a recumbent bike. A recumbent bike allows you to be fully seated so you're not supporting your upper body at all. A stationary bike forces you to engage your abdominals to remain upright, therefore burning more calories. A 'very vigorous' would be spending a lot of time out of the saddle and up and down hills. You're not going to be out of the saddle at all on a recumbent because of how the machine is set up, so your HR isn't going to get as high and you won't burn as many calories. I'd choose a much lower setting if you're using the stationary bike values.
  • akwhite
    akwhite Posts: 55 Member
    Not to beat a dead horse...but the best way to know for sure is to get a HRM.
    1000 calories in an hour does seem a little high to me...but it all depends on your weight, age, heart rate, etc.
    I would hesitate to eat all 1000 calories of those back...but that's just me. Sounds like you're on the righ track though with your weight loss so far. Way to go on all that healthy exercise and loss!
  • SteffCooley
    SteffCooley Posts: 111
    Ok, have to re-clarify. I went and looked at my exercise log and I guess it doesn't say stationary - it just says "Bicycling, 16-19 mph, very vigorous". But yes, I agree that an upright stationary would be more of a workout than a recumbent.
  • shorerider
    shorerider Posts: 3,817 Member
    Ok, have to re-clarify. I went and looked at my exercise log and I guess it doesn't say stationary - it just says "Bicycling, 16-19 mph, very vigorous". But yes, I agree that an upright stationary would be more of a workout than a recumbent.

    Nope, can't use that one! My gosh, I've been cycling for months and just now got to 16-17 mph average on a regular cycle. And, it does burn up more calories--a lot more.

    Choose the stationary bike selection. Also, I have a recumbent stationary I use when all else fails, and I'm lucky to burn up about 450 calories an hour. That's going to town on it--high resistance, 15 mph.

    To compare, I can burn up to 700 an hour on my road bike.

    2nd on the HRM--best way to go.
  • SteffCooley
    SteffCooley Posts: 111
    Okay...... so:

    (per the exercise calculator on MFP)

    Bicycling, 16-19 mph for 45 minutes = 835 calories

    or

    Bicycling, stationary, very vigorous effort = 870 calories
    Bicycling, stationary, vigorous effort = 730 calories

    Doesn't that still seem high, though? What do you suggest that I log it as?

    Thanks!!!
  • shorerider
    shorerider Posts: 3,817 Member
    Okay...... so:

    (per the exercise calculator on MFP)

    Bicycling, 16-19 mph for 45 minutes = 835 calories

    or

    Bicycling, stationary, very vigorous effort = 870 calories
    Bicycling, stationary, vigorous effort = 730 calories

    Doesn't that still seem high, though? What do you suggest that I log it as?

    Thanks!!!

    The problem with getting any exercise calories calculations from any website is that it's all your perspective on how hard you're working. And, without knowing your HR, it's a guessing game as to how hard you actually pushed your body. MPH is not a good gauge. I mean, I know people who can cruise at 18 mph and not break a sweat.

    Also, hitting 17 mph on a stationary isn't going to be that strenuous to do unless the resistance is really cranked.

    I would underestimate to be safe because I'm guessing that you're probably burning up no more than 400-500 MAX in 45 minutes on a machine.
  • SteffCooley
    SteffCooley Posts: 111
    Ok, I see what you are saying ..... sounds like my best bet would be to get a HRM. :smile:
This discussion has been closed.

Categories