Running Vs Elliptical
Replies
-
Apples to Oranges comparison my friend. Elliptical distance cannot be compared to running distance for time anymore than biking 5K isn't the same as running 5Kjdawson002 wrote: »
I am impressed. The world best in the 10K (6.2 miles) is just 26:17, or so.
So, the elliptical is an "assisted" run?
No, it is neither a run, nor an assisted run. It's range of motion does not mimic that of a run, and there is much less resistance, think of it as following somewhere in between running and cycling, though probably a little closer to a run.
I don't like the machine as the motion is not directly translatable to anything in the "real world"MeanderingMammal wrote: »
So, is an elliptical a worthwhile form of exercise? Treadmill, stationary bike, elliptical I'm guessing the benefits are different. Which would provide a more "real world" exercise? I prefer to run outside, but just's been just too damned hot.
It's quite boring, but it is a great form of exercise if your goal is to burn lots of calories.0 -
JustMissTracy wrote: »
Apples to Oranges comparison my friend. Elliptical distance cannot be compared to running distance for time anymore than biking 5K isn't the same as running 5Kjdawson002 wrote: »
I am impressed. The world best in the 10K (6.2 miles) is just 26:17, or so.
So, the elliptical is an "assisted" run?
No, it is neither a run, nor an assisted run. It's range of motion does not mimic that of a run, and there is much less resistance, think of it as following somewhere in between running and cycling, though probably a little closer to a run.
I don't like the machine as the motion is not directly translatable to anything in the "real world"MeanderingMammal wrote: »
So, is an elliptical a worthwhile form of exercise? Treadmill, stationary bike, elliptical I'm guessing the benefits are different. Which would provide a more "real world" exercise? I prefer to run outside, but just's been just too damned hot.
It's quite boring, but it is a great form of exercise if your goal is to burn lots of calories.
just keep in mind that the cals burned that an elliptical tells you your burned is often over inflated.0 -
I agree, I use an activity tracker to try to be more close to reality
I would think one or the other might be wrong, but the weight loss doesn't lie..lol 80 lbs down! 1 -
Apples to Oranges comparison my friend. Elliptical distance cannot be compared to running distance for time anymore than biking 5K isn't the same as running 5Kjdawson002 wrote: »
I am impressed. The world best in the 10K (6.2 miles) is just 26:17, or so.
So, the elliptical is an "assisted" run?
No, it is neither a run, nor an assisted run. It's range of motion does not mimic that of a run, and there is much less resistance, think of it as following somewhere in between running and cycling, though probably a little closer to a run.
I don't like the machine as the motion is not directly translatable to anything in the "real world"MeanderingMammal wrote: »
So, is an elliptical a worthwhile form of exercise? Treadmill, stationary bike, elliptical I'm guessing the benefits are different. Which would provide a more "real world" exercise? I prefer to run outside, but just's been just too damned hot.
I wouldn't say pointless, but as a runner treadmill would be next best to outside, stationary bike is pretty good, will help with biking, and lastly the elliptical. If your goal is just to burn cals elliptical is fine, but it will not help much with your running or cycling, other than a little increase in cardiovascular conditioning. Elliptical may also be good if you need to take a short break from running, but want to keep your conditioning.0 -
So, is an elliptical a worthwhile form of exercise? Treadmill, stationary bike, elliptical I'm guessing the benefits are different. Which would provide a more "real world" exercise? I prefer to run outside, but just's been just too damned hot.
It's low impact, so in that respect it's potentially useful to maintain cardiovascular capacity, particularly in recovery. Personally I'd prefer to use a WattBike or a proper bike on a turbo trainer
0 -
The elliptical is a great form of exercise for weight loss. I've lost 18lbs in the last 2 months by doing elliptical and exercise bike. I started by struggling to do 5 minutes elliptical with zero resistance now I do 30 minutes at level 18....6.70 miles and 325 calories!!
I tried jogging but at 16 stone things still wobble and it's uncomfortable. The elliptical doesn't make things wobble and by pumping up the resistance does an awesome workout. Maybe when I lose a bit more weight I will try jogging but at the minute elliptical and bike seems to be working!!2 -
Ijdawson002 wrote: »The elliptical is a great form of exercise for weight loss. I've lost 18lbs in the last 2 months by doing elliptical and exercise bike. I started by struggling to do 5 minutes elliptical with zero resistance now I do 30 minutes at level 18....6.70 miles and 325 calories!!
I tried jogging but at 16 stone things still wobble and it's uncomfortable. The elliptical doesn't make things wobble and by pumping up the resistance does an awesome workout. Maybe when I lose a bit more weight I will try jogging but at the minute elliptical and bike seems to be working!!
I agree with this. I can walk, I can do the elliptical. Running HURTS. My knees just can't take it yet and the last thing I need is an injury. I do know the difference between normal strain and actual pain that is telling me to avoid an activity. I used to play a lot of sports and have played through pain plenty of times.2 -
Okay, I know this has had many conversations and there are plenty of articles but I still am unsure between which is best. I really enjoy the elliptical I go to my campus gym but between breaks it cant be consistent and I often wonder if I am missing out on some fitness benefits and honestly if the elliptical is doing anything at all for my body (my goal is weight loss). I recently considered running outside and possibly races I look up to my co-worker who is a runner, of the outside sorts, and I know I'm younger but I am worried about my knees and possibly ankles too. I already feel like they are not as strong as they should be. I did play soccer competitively as a child since age 5 and I always blame it on that but I'm not 100% positive.
Bottom line: Would I benefit more from running outside and if so is it worth the possible toll on my knees?
If you want to run, run. The elliptical will help greatly with your cardio base if used correctly, and if you have the right type can help with a lot of specific muscle groups as well. That said, it's doubtful that any elliptical will be really close to movement for your natural form of running.
We own a Precor machine, and the one area I've found it lacking to train for running is that no matter the resistance or ramp levels, it won't account for the "bounce" that takes place when you actually run. The first couple of times I actually ran after training on our machine, certain muscle groups felt it more due to that.
But overall, a great machine and very flexible for training on. I made big strides in my VO2max, heart rate per given pace, and endurance on our machine. These improvements put me much more in touch with my heart rate and efforts on the bike and running as well.jdawson002 wrote: »
Something on those metrics seems off. If in fact you are that fast, I'd still check against another machine or actual run. The thing that really stands out to me is the calorie burn. At your weight you should be burning that many calories walking that distance. Since it seems most machines overestimate if anything, I would expect the machine to be up higher.
If the machine allows you to program weight, make sure you do that. The machine we own defaults to a weight if you don't program it. That would alter your calorie burn metrics.
Also bear in mind that for at least some machines, miles is not directly related to strides and distance. On our Precor machine the distance display is a miles equivalent reading, based on power output. It essentially is more a reading of total work performed. For that reason it would also quickly skew the numbers if you don't program weight, since it's obviously less work for a light person to run a mile than a larger person.
But either way, sounds like good improvements have been made. If the programming is right and you are that fast at your size, you should run some races and blow some minds!
No, it is neither a run, nor an assisted run. It's range of motion does not mimic that of a run, and there is much less resistance, think of it as following somewhere in between running and cycling, though probably a little closer to a run.
I don't like the machine as the motion is not directly translatable to anything in the "real world"
Blanket statements about machines that vary greatly are really nothing other than a stab in the dark. While every exercise is unique and I agree that most elliptical machines can't be exacting in running motions, for a lot of people the workouts translate well. On the machine I own it made improvements in my run times and helped a lot on the bike as well.
As for the statement about less resistance, I'd challenge anyone on that one as it applies to the machine I own. The system it uses can provide resistance to over 700 watts, and measures estimated calorie burn to over 25 calories a minute. I can do a Tabata protocol HIIT on it.3 -
robertw486 wrote: »Okay, I know this has had many conversations and there are plenty of articles but I still am unsure between which is best. I really enjoy the elliptical I go to my campus gym but between breaks it cant be consistent and I often wonder if I am missing out on some fitness benefits and honestly if the elliptical is doing anything at all for my body (my goal is weight loss). I recently considered running outside and possibly races I look up to my co-worker who is a runner, of the outside sorts, and I know I'm younger but I am worried about my knees and possibly ankles too. I already feel like they are not as strong as they should be. I did play soccer competitively as a child since age 5 and I always blame it on that but I'm not 100% positive.
Bottom line: Would I benefit more from running outside and if so is it worth the possible toll on my knees?
If you want to run, run. The elliptical will help greatly with your cardio base if used correctly, and if you have the right type can help with a lot of specific muscle groups as well. That said, it's doubtful that any elliptical will be really close to movement for your natural form of running.
We own a Precor machine, and the one area I've found it lacking to train for running is that no matter the resistance or ramp levels, it won't account for the "bounce" that takes place when you actually run. The first couple of times I actually ran after training on our machine, certain muscle groups felt it more due to that.
But overall, a great machine and very flexible for training on. I made big strides in my VO2max, heart rate per given pace, and endurance on our machine. These improvements put me much more in touch with my heart rate and efforts on the bike and running as well.jdawson002 wrote: »
Something on those metrics seems off. If in fact you are that fast, I'd still check against another machine or actual run. The thing that really stands out to me is the calorie burn. At your weight you should be burning that many calories walking that distance. Since it seems most machines overestimate if anything, I would expect the machine to be up higher.
If the machine allows you to program weight, make sure you do that. The machine we own defaults to a weight if you don't program it. That would alter your calorie burn metrics.
Also bear in mind that for at least some machines, miles is not directly related to strides and distance. On our Precor machine the distance display is a miles equivalent reading, based on power output. It essentially is more a reading of total work performed. For that reason it would also quickly skew the numbers if you don't program weight, since it's obviously less work for a light person to run a mile than a larger person.
But either way, sounds like good improvements have been made. If the programming is right and you are that fast at your size, you should run some races and blow some minds!
No, it is neither a run, nor an assisted run. It's range of motion does not mimic that of a run, and there is much less resistance, think of it as following somewhere in between running and cycling, though probably a little closer to a run.
I don't like the machine as the motion is not directly translatable to anything in the "real world"
Blanket statements about machines that vary greatly are really nothing other than a stab in the dark. While every exercise is unique and I agree that most elliptical machines can't be exacting in running motions, for a lot of people the workouts translate well. On the machine I own it made improvements in my run times and helped a lot on the bike as well.
As for the statement about less resistance, I'd challenge anyone on that one as it applies to the machine I own. The system it uses can provide resistance to over 700 watts, and measures estimated calorie burn to over 25 calories a minute. I can do a Tabata protocol HIIT on it.
If it estimates over 25 cals/min I would say it is doubling the real cal burn, unless you are 350+lbs. The machine may have helped your running and biking, but imagine how much a treadmill would have helped the running and a stationary with the cycling. So while an elliptical is better than nothing, it will not help as much as doing the exercise you want to improve in.0 -
Unfortunately the machine doesn't allow you to enter your weight.
I understand the machines over estimate the calories burnt; maybe this pic helps clarify the effort I'm putting in?
Yeah I'm looking forward to being able to use the treadmill but until I lose more weight and things don't wobble i'll stick to elliptical and bike!!0 -
Apples to Oranges comparison my friend. Elliptical distance cannot be compared to running distance for time anymore than biking 5K isn't the same as running 5Kjdawson002 wrote: »
I am impressed. The world best in the 10K (6.2 miles) is just 26:17, or so.
So, the elliptical is an "assisted" run?
No, it is neither a run, nor an assisted run. It's range of motion does not mimic that of a run, and there is much less resistance, think of it as following somewhere in between running and cycling, though probably a little closer to a run.
I don't like the machine as the motion is not directly translatable to anything in the "real world"MeanderingMammal wrote: »
So, is an elliptical a worthwhile form of exercise? Treadmill, stationary bike, elliptical I'm guessing the benefits are different. Which would provide a more "real world" exercise? I prefer to run outside, but just's been just too damned hot.
I'm a little late, but:
I think ellipticals are absolutely worthwhile, but are not really a substitute for running, if that's what one is trying to do.
Last year, I was using the elliptical and figured I could handle running very easily, and was quickly proven wrong. Nowadays I prefer running, but will use the elliptical on gym days that do not coincide with run days. I also like using it if I'm sore or have a bit of an injury I'd rather not run through (sore hips, crabby shins, etc). The fact that I can easily handle an elliptical when a run would hurt speaks volumes, I think, about the difference.
I run on treadmills during the week because of time and heat (like hell I'm running at 5pm!), but Sundays I really like trying to get up early and run - staring at a wall on a treadmill is so boring (even with Zombies Run going) that the heat seems like a mild inconvenience in comparison.0 -
Before starting a running routine spend 2-3 months strengthening your core, quads, adductors and calves. You will notice less pain in your joints. At least I did.
I concur whole heartedly. After attempts at running without having had this type training, I had pain in my knees and gave up. Yes, my knees have some discomfort but I recover from it. I attribute this to the strengthening described from the post above.0 -
-
If it estimates over 25 cals/min I would say it is doubling the real cal burn, unless you are 350+lbs. The machine may have helped your running and biking, but imagine how much a treadmill would have helped the running and a stationary with the cycling. So while an elliptical is better than nothing, it will not help as much as doing the exercise you want to improve in.
Once again, a blanket statement with no relation to the actual machine.
700 watts is over 40 calories per minute, and the machine is rated to provide resistance to over 700 watts. If anyone thinks that 700 watts isn't enough resistance, I'd say they are probably a pro level cyclist that wants to practice sprint intervals or similar.
Agreed that any machine or alternate exercise is usually not as good as the specific thing a person wants to improve at, but that applies to any type of cross training. In my case my primary concern was raising my VO2max and general cardio endurance, so having a machine available 24/7 in a climate controlled area opened up a lot of time windows where I couldn't get to a gym, and also helped me avoid traffic (or a drive away from traffic) during a workout.jdawson002 wrote: »Unfortunately the machine doesn't allow you to enter your weight.
I understand the machines over estimate the calories burnt; maybe this pic helps clarify the effort I'm putting in?
Yeah I'm looking forward to being able to use the treadmill but until I lose more weight and things don't wobble i'll stick to elliptical and bike!!
To be honest, those numbers just seem all over the place and contradict each other. It might be worth checking with the manufacturer to see if watts and METs are average or instantaneous readings. Even then, hard to figure out what the readout numbers are being based on. Based on METs or watts, the calorie burn might be close if it is factoring gross calories (including BMR), but then the distance and speed part is very high for those numbers.
This link will give you a ballpark idea of METs vs speed and calorie burn for walking and running, and the elliptical probably falls somewhere in between the two for calorie burn.
exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html
And in any case, if the readouts on that machine are consistent and you are making improvements, that is all that really matters. The one thing I will mention is that if you are working out with your average heart rate that high, it may actually be slowing down your improvements as far as cardiovascular health. Though it's not an exacting thing, most recommend heart rate zones and target ranges for improvements.0 -
No way anyone can burn 40 cals/min.... I would assume your machine is just plain wrong and the manufacture puts false calculation of watts in to make people think they are burning more than they are, in order to get them to use the machine over others.
you may think my statements are blanket, but they are based in reality as the numbers you put forth are achievable. You can keep thinking your are burning what you think you are, but I assure you, you are not. What makes you think your machine is calculating cals and watts correctly? did you do a study that determined that it is doing what it says it is doing? If not, the manufacture is just fooling you so you continue to use their machine.0 -
No way anyone can burn 40 cals/min....
First incorrect statement. Though I doubt that most non professionals will do it, and most pro level athletes will do it for long, people output greater power for short periods on a regular basis. Some of the Tour riders went over 900 watts for brief periods.
As for myself, the highest I recall was doing Tabata protocol HIIT, and the work period ended up being in the 31 calorie per minute range, which works out to a little over 500 watts.I would assume your machine is just plain wrong and the manufacture puts false calculation of watts in to make people think they are burning more than they are, in order to get them to use the machine over others.
you may think my statements are blanket, but they are based in reality as the numbers you put forth are achievable. You can keep thinking your are burning what you think you are, but I assure you, you are not. What makes you think your machine is calculating cals and watts correctly? did you do a study that determined that it is doing what it says it is doing? If not, the manufacture is just fooling you so you continue to use their machine.
You would assume. I would do the homework and inform myself to the system of the machine, and how it has been tested. Though I haven't done metabolic testing on the machine I own, the US Navy has, and deemed it accurate enough to use for physical fitness testing to substitute for an actual run.
Then again, the machine produces numbers that when adjusted for net calorie burn vs gross which it displays, also line up with peer reviewed studies on energy consumption when walking or running.
I actually bike and run as well. I can put down real miles outside easier than a mile equivalent on the elliptical, and know my paces as well as calorie burns per multiple studies. Your statement that an elliptical machine has less resistance than running is grossly wrong for my machine. If you think it won't provide enough resistance, I'd challenge you to max the resistance on one. 700 watts is no joke.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions