Is Stationary Bike Really A Waste Of Time?

tomatoey wrote: »

sijomial wrote: »

tomatoey wrote: »

sijomial wrote: »

tomatoey wrote: »

999tigger wrote: »

tomatoey wrote: »

also - it's not weight bearing exercise, which we need to help our bones. so it's good to mix it up with other things.

but it's not a waste of time, at all, you can def get a lot out of it, but you have to work hard.

Its weight bearing when you are out of the saddle. You are better off doing resistance training for bone density, which will be far more effective.

How much you burn is mostly dependent on your weight as well as the intensity and duration. Just because you dont seem to burn much is more of a reflection on how hard you are working relative to the other machine and has no bearing on how hard the ops workout is.

I work my butt off on any machine I get on, thanks. The OP may well get a nice burn, I haven't said anything about that. I'm saying that in comparison to other activities it just doesn't burn as many calories. People can investigate that for themselves to see it's true.

Some people actually can't weight train for one reason or another. Sometimes, those are the same people who have to use bikes. For them/us, walking is an excellent activity for bone density.

also lol @ "weightbearing when you get out of the saddle" - it's likely not enough.

Please explain how I can hit my VO2 max on a stationary bike but other activities burn more calories?

look, i can't, i'm not a scientist. i'm saying most people will burn fewer calories on the bike, as it's typically used, as per ordinary calculations. plug in your stats on any calculator and they'll say that.

Sorry but really you are guessing. The limiting factor for cardio burns is the person and not the machine. I see just as many people rowing badly with no real leg drive as I see people putting in no effort on a cycle. That's down to the person and not the equipment.

By the way you really aren't using your bike at all well by hitting that high rpm, crank up the resistance and reduce the revs and you will get a much more effective workout.

My advice for the OP would be choose which you enjoy, which you are sure you will use consistently but also factor in the likely duration.

For a short, sharp high intensity workout a rowing machine is hard to beat. For long duration a cycle is hard to beat. It's very hard to do long duration rowing (I have personal experience of a charity 2 hour row which was one of the most painful things I've ever done...).

some researchers have theorized that sprints (speed of revolutions) are the factor increasing catecholamines & therefore fat loss in studies of interval workouts on the bike - see the studies reviewed in this paper

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2991639/

are people seriously getting worked up about this? obviously the bike is a great tool (see ^^), and yes people can get good burns under certain conditions (like i've said about five times now). comparing activities, though, other choices might be more likely to burn more calories for the same effort. someone else above talked about rowing, that's a great one for that.

bikes r great, ok? lol

Not getting worked up at all but you keep posting things that are wrong so I was trying to help you understand.

As a fairly serious cyclist I was trying to give you some advice but if you think whizzing your legs round in a blur with no resistance is the way to train.... Well if it makes you happy then good for you.

Speed of revolution is not the same thing as intensity or effort so posting a link to a study you clearly misunderstand is a bit desperate.

Will give up on you now as you are "listening to respond" rather than actually having an open mind and being prepared to learn.

sijomial wrote: »

tomatoey wrote: »

sijomial wrote: »

tomatoey wrote: »

sijomial wrote: »

tomatoey wrote: »

999tigger wrote: »

tomatoey wrote: »

also - it's not weight bearing exercise, which we need to help our bones. so it's good to mix it up with other things.

but it's not a waste of time, at all, you can def get a lot out of it, but you have to work hard.

Its weight bearing when you are out of the saddle. You are better off doing resistance training for bone density, which will be far more effective.

How much you burn is mostly dependent on your weight as well as the intensity and duration. Just because you dont seem to burn much is more of a reflection on how hard you are working relative to the other machine and has no bearing on how hard the ops workout is.

I work my butt off on any machine I get on, thanks. The OP may well get a nice burn, I haven't said anything about that. I'm saying that in comparison to other activities it just doesn't burn as many calories. People can investigate that for themselves to see it's true.

Some people actually can't weight train for one reason or another. Sometimes, those are the same people who have to use bikes. For them/us, walking is an excellent activity for bone density.

also lol @ "weightbearing when you get out of the saddle" - it's likely not enough.

Please explain how I can hit my VO2 max on a stationary bike but other activities burn more calories?

look, i can't, i'm not a scientist. i'm saying most people will burn fewer calories on the bike, as it's typically used, as per ordinary calculations. plug in your stats on any calculator and they'll say that.

Sorry but really you are guessing. The limiting factor for cardio burns is the person and not the machine. I see just as many people rowing badly with no real leg drive as I see people putting in no effort on a cycle. That's down to the person and not the equipment.

By the way you really aren't using your bike at all well by hitting that high rpm, crank up the resistance and reduce the revs and you will get a much more effective workout.

My advice for the OP would be choose which you enjoy, which you are sure you will use consistently but also factor in the likely duration.

For a short, sharp high intensity workout a rowing machine is hard to beat. For long duration a cycle is hard to beat. It's very hard to do long duration rowing (I have personal experience of a charity 2 hour row which was one of the most painful things I've ever done...).

some researchers have theorized that sprints (speed of revolutions) are the factor increasing catecholamines & therefore fat loss in studies of interval workouts on the bike - see the studies reviewed in this paper

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2991639/

are people seriously getting worked up about this? obviously the bike is a great tool (see ^^), and yes people can get good burns under certain conditions (like i've said about five times now). comparing activities, though, other choices might be more likely to burn more calories for the same effort. someone else above talked about rowing, that's a great one for that.

bikes r great, ok? lol

Not getting worked up at all but you keep posting things that are wrong so I was trying to help you understand.

As a fairly serious cyclist I was trying to give you some advice but if you think whizzing your legs round in a blur with no resistance is the way to train.... Well if it makes you happy then good for you.

Speed of revolution is not the same thing as intensity or effort so posting a link to a study you clearly misunderstand is a bit desperate.

Will give up on you now as you are "listening to respond" rather than actually having an open mind and being prepared to learn.

- I do use resistance, as I've said. I don't know *exactly* how many lbs ' worth "9" is on the machine at my gym, but it's not negligible.
- I understand the studies reviewed just fine. It's actually not my aim to prove that I do (especially on a Sunday) - just wanted to provide information for the interested, up to them to get what they want from it. just at the moment, I can't recall which study made the particular point I mentioned. If it's not in that article, know Dr Boutcher has discussed sprints viz catecholamines elsewhere. The amount of resistance required for that purpose is a token amount; speed matters more, according to that research group. Maybe I'll try to find what I'm talking about tomorrow, if I remember.

I am *not* a serious cyclist, and my goal is to maximize fat loss through the activities I'm able to do. Cycling suits that purpose well enough

I joined the gym this month just so I could ride the bike. Darn snow and rain is keeping me off my "real" bike. I work it hard and am always sore, hurts so good. I know when Spring finally gets here I'm going to be stronger in the saddle. Hoping to do 300 miles for the month of April. Ride that bike if you enjoy it!

rajnigandha21 wrote: »

Thank you everyone for clearing my doubts! After hearing your opinions I'm more determined to keep riding and add some HIIT into this work out. In fact I love bike-riding be it stationary or out doors. But these days I can only use stationary bike. I need to purchase a new cycle for outdoor trips which I will do surely.
My workouts are mixed and mostly cardio, like walking, running, elliptical trainer, swimming, cycling, kick boxing and also light weight lifting. Often I would pair it up viz. 30 min cycling- 30 min elliptical and do it for a month until I get bored of that. Then I move to other work outs.

It's good to be on MFP between you amazing people, be it diet discussion or workout regime advice people here are really supportive and inspiring.

If you are at a gym, do a spin class to add variety. Its good you are sweating but as we can sweat at different temperatures, then its not always the best sign of a good workout. Dont be foolish and just pedal like mad with inadequate resistance. Imo the spin bikes are more like real bikes and better to use. Keep a note of your performance each time. If you are doing a fixed 30mins then keep track of your average speed, rpm and wattage. You should be aiming to steadily increase the distance you travel week on week so you keep challenging yourself.
If you keep consistent, then you will improve. You should always be trying to push on and get faster so you burn more. There are plenty of hiit wokouts for variety if you google them.

I find the rower is more involved and gives me a better overall workout. Its the person on the CV machine that matters based on their intensity, duration. Dont fool yourself that just pedaling fast means you are having a good workout, it needs to be for a period and at a decent resistance to get your heart and other muscles working hard.

You love doing it. It raises your heart rate. You feel invigorated. So what's bad about it?? A trainer once told me that half the battle of improving overall health and losing weight is finding an exercise you like doing so you can stick with it for the long haul. For every opinion on the Internet (expert or otherwise) you'll find a contrasting opinion telling you the total opposite.

Stick with the bike and ignore the naysayers.

I bike for my cardio. I do the variable hill settings with resistance and am up to 12 miles/30 min. To up the intensity I started using 8lb hand weights while riding. Really has upped my burn I believe.