Activity level with a stationary bike

TannerF2F
TannerF2F Posts: 2 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Greetings all! New member and my first post. Have a question for everyone. Just got a stationary bike to help with getting some exercise since I can’t do a lot of walking due to severe back problems ( being overweight doesn’t help things ). I have tried logging in my exercise activities today and I am lost when ask if I did light effort, moderate effort or vigorous effort. On the bike it has 1-8 for the tension on the bike. I am doing a 5 for 2 hours staying at a 20-25 mph. Which one would you say I am doing?

Replies

  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 24,828 Member
    Light.

    You might be doing more but go with light. The calorie burn is likely to be a bit more accurate.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Remember activity level and exercise aren't related - you could do no exercise or a load of exercise and have any activity setting from sedentary to highly active as on MyFitnessPal exercise is added on top of your daily goal.

    The speed given by indoor bikes isn't a good guide at all as you can't compare to speeds seen in outdoor cycling, I see speeds indoors that I would only get down a very big hill outdoors....

    Resistance settings also vary enormously between brands.

    If it displayed power (Watts) that could be used to give a very accurate estimate.

    But without that you are down to just using your perceived effort - did it feel like light or moderate effort?
    (I'd save vigorous effort for intensity level that you can't maintain for long durations.)
  • vollkornbloedchen
    vollkornbloedchen Posts: 2,243 Member
    Machka9 wrote: »
    Light.

    You might be doing more but go with light. The calorie burn is likely to be a bit more accurate.

    This
  • neugebauer52
    neugebauer52 Posts: 1,120 Member
    I had trusted the stationary bike read - outs at the gym. It programmed all my measurements, age etc. and after an hour trying my best that machine told me that I had burned nearly 1.000 (one thousand!) calories! False peace of mind, I am sorry to say - I did eat all those "calories burned" back and ended up on a 9 months "plateau". Now I understand (thank you MFP) that those readings are not always accurate. After having gained all that weight back (just eating in frustration of not losing further weight) I am now with MFP and its amazing members with all their support. Any exercise I do I half the suggested calories burned and slowly the weight is coming off again.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,012 Member
    If you're doing a resistance 5 for 2 hours, I'd say you should call it "light". Two hours is quite a long exercise session (nice work! :) ). It's a long enough session that you wouldn't be able to sustain a truly objectively "vigorous" effort regardless of your fitness level, and probably not even "moderate" as a beginner.

    Please understand: This is no kind of diss of your effort, or commentary on how it felt to you! I'm impressed that you hung in for a 2-hour ride.

    What I'm saying is that those effort levels might be expected to cover quite a range of experience levels, fitness, strength, and effort levels, from petite beginner to seasoned 6'5" muscular athletes. Also, speaking as a long-term recreational (and occasional competing) athlete, pretty much no one would (accurately ;) ) say they can sustain a "vigorous" effort for 2 hours. Subjectively, while there aren't strict, precise definitions, if a person can do X for 2 continuous hours, it's not "vigorous" by definition.

    All of us started somewhere (I started from mostly-sedentary at age 46, and became a quite-active rower; I'm now 63, but that's not so long ago that I've forgotten the beginning). Things can feel hard at first (like a particular speed/resistance), and they totally are . . . but as our fitness improves, we can quickly reach a point where that initial speed/resistance feels so much easier. Then, if we choose, we can go longer, harder, or with higher resistance, and burn even more calories, while still feeling great.

    You've got a great start on your new bike: Nice work! :flowerforyou:
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,292 Member
    If you can go for 2 hours, most likely light, vigorous I can only go like 15-20 minutes, otherwise, I couldn't call it vigorous.
  • jlklem
    jlklem Posts: 259 Member
    I am very fit cyclist and do a lot of riding. Upwards of 800 hours a year. When I go easy for an hour I burn 500 calories. My easy is most people’s moderate or hard. When I am completely not trying I do 300-350 an hour. When I go hard I can do 900+ in an hour. Pretty good for a 129 pounds 49 year old.

    My wife is also pretty fit but rarely does 600 an hour when working hard. 600 calories is 170 watts for 1 hour which might be possible for a untrained man but there are so many variables.

    John
  • TannerF2F
    TannerF2F Posts: 2 Member
    jlklem wrote: »
    I am very fit cyclist and do a lot of riding. Upwards of 800 hours a year. When I go easy for an hour I burn 500 calories. My easy is most people’s moderate or hard. When I am completely not trying I do 300-350 an hour. When I go hard I can do 900+ in an hour. Pretty good for a 129 pounds 49 year old.

    My wife is also pretty fit but rarely does 600 an hour when working hard. 600 calories is 170 watts for 1 hour which might be possible for a untrained man but there are so many variables.

    John


    Today I did 30 miles in an hour and a half and burned 730 Calories according to the bike. Personally I think I burned more because how much I was sweating but not too sure. Tomorrow I’m going to go for 40-50 miles. I’m in pretty bad shape 300 pounds at the age of 23 and will be 24 this Friday and want to get into better shape.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    TannerF2F wrote: »
    jlklem wrote: »
    I am very fit cyclist and do a lot of riding. Upwards of 800 hours a year. When I go easy for an hour I burn 500 calories. My easy is most people’s moderate or hard. When I am completely not trying I do 300-350 an hour. When I go hard I can do 900+ in an hour. Pretty good for a 129 pounds 49 year old.

    My wife is also pretty fit but rarely does 600 an hour when working hard. 600 calories is 170 watts for 1 hour which might be possible for a untrained man but there are so many variables.

    John


    Today I did 30 miles in an hour and a half and burned 730 Calories according to the bike. Personally I think I burned more because how much I was sweating but not too sure. Tomorrow I’m going to go for 40-50 miles. I’m in pretty bad shape 300 pounds at the age of 23 and will be 24 this Friday and want to get into better shape.

    Sweating is no indication of calorie burn during exercise, it just means you got hot, as you get fitter and lighter you may well sweat less despite burning more.
    Your weight also isn't a factor for net calorie burns as stationary biking isn't a weight bearing exercise so don't compare yourself to @jlklem as he is an outstanding athlete (I've seen his VO2 max numbers!).

    But...
    Depending on your fitness and power (as a young big guy you could well have strong legs) 730 for 90mins sounds very reasonable if not on the low side and for estimating exercise calories during weight loss reasonable is good enough. That's about 135 watts which isn't a lot. You should be fine using your bike's estimates.

    Best of luck.
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 24,828 Member
    TannerF2F wrote: »
    Personally I think I burned more because how much I was sweating but not too sure.

    I have hot flashes that rival an hour's workout on a spin bike in terms of sweat. But I doubt I'm burning any extra calories during those hot flashes ... it's just somewhat salty water.

Categories