Running vs swimming - which burns more calories per hour??

Options
ultimatekatie
ultimatekatie Posts: 12 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Hi all,

I'd like to start swimming at my gym a couple days a week. However, I feel like I'm getting some conflicting information as I'm looking into some exercise plans and calculating calories. I'd always been under the impression that swimming was generally a more energy-intensive workout than running, because it it a full-body exercise and you have the water resistance. But I've Googled a couple different swimming calculators, and they are all giving me (varying) results that show me burning fewer calories per hour than running. I'm very confused.

So, what I'm looking for is any kind of estimated, generalized "standard" to start with - for example, we generally say that running burns roughly 100 calories per mile. Can any swimmers out there help me with this? Does swimming 1000 yards burn a rough average of X calories??

Replies

  • EzRemake
    EzRemake Posts: 128 Member
    Options
    I'm afraid you can't generalize exercise. Running a mile might burn 100kcal for one person, and 400 for another. It's the same with swimming. That being said, I believe swimming to be superior in terms of overall burn.
  • Scott_2025
    Scott_2025 Posts: 201 Member
    Options
    check this site out. Lots of good information.
    https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    Options
    it's not about the specific exercise you perform...there are many factors that go into calorie burn such as your stats, overall fitness level, level of intensity of exercise performed, etc.
  • Commander_Keen
    Commander_Keen Posts: 1,181 Member
    Options
    Its not a fair comparison, running uses legs and thighs, Swimming uses arms, shoulders, core, legs and thighs, but I would use a HRM to determine which exercise burns more calories
  • Scott_2025
    Scott_2025 Posts: 201 Member
    Options
    activities are listed in METS burned per hour. there is a formula to converts METS to calories. calorie burn depends on age, weight and a few other factors
  • Cherimoose
    Cherimoose Posts: 5,209 Member
    edited December 2015
    Options
    Try comparing your heart rate for both of them. Whichever is higher is probably burning more calories.

    You may hear it said that exercise is for fitness, while fat loss should come from a calorie reduction. I like this concept. I think a good fitness plan should include some running (if possible) and also full-body strength training. This is regardless of their calorie burn. :+1:
  • madammags
    madammags Posts: 97 Member
    Options
    In addition to the factors already mentioned, technique and skill level will also have a significant impact on your burn. A good swimmer would use much less energy than a poor one to swim the same distance, but is likely to be able to keep going a lot longer (particularly without injuring themselves).
    Also, for distance swimming, the use of legs is (again for a good swimmer) actually fairly minimal. In distance freestyle, about 90% of the thrust comes from the upper body.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    Cherimoose wrote: »
    Try comparing your heart rate for both of them. Whichever is higher is probably burning more calories.

    Only in a narrow set of circumstances.

    fwiw the pace required in swimming to maintain a higher level of calorie expenditure is quite high, so you're talking competitive performance levels on a time based comparison.

    Running, as a weight bearing activity also has a load of benefits around the skeletal system as well as improving leg strength far more than swimming will.

    To me the two compliment one another, rather than an either/ or it's more yes/ and
  • RuNaRoUnDaFiEld
    RuNaRoUnDaFiEld Posts: 5,864 Member
    Options
    Time is a consideration for me, by the time I get my swim things together, change for the lockers, money for the swim, towels, hairbrush, deodorant etc. Then I drive there, pay, get changed, lock stuff away, swim, then dry, change, drive home etc. I've wasted 2 1/2 hours of my day.

    Or I can spend 5 minutes stretching, 5 minutes changing then go out my front door to run for 40 minutes.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    Unless you are quite a good swimmer and swimming somewhat hard, running probably burns more. Try out the calculators and make sure you put in how many miles per hour and how many yards or meters per hour for each and see.

    I think swimming burns fewer calories overall for me, even apart from the added time that the pool requires, and even though I'm a decent swimmer who mainly does laps and drills to train for triathlon. However, it's still definitely worth including and makes my body feel much better than just running would, and I'm not running everyday whether I swim or not.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    Cherimoose wrote: »
    Try comparing your heart rate for both of them. Whichever is higher is probably burning more calories.

    You may hear it said that exercise is for fitness, while fat loss should come from a calorie reduction. I like this concept. I think a good fitness plan should include some running (if possible) and also full-body strength training. This is regardless of their calorie burn. :+1:

    Heart rates during swimming are 15-20 beats/min lower than when performing similar intensity work on land. (Primarily due to prone body posture). So any calorie estimator that is based on HR will underestimate swimming calories.

    That does not negate the benefits of swimming in any way.

Categories