Walking equivalent to Aerobics?

mrsamyhicks
mrsamyhicks Posts: 63
edited October 5 in Fitness and Exercise
I need to know, is burning 300 calories by walking/jogging the same as burning 300 calories doing moderate to heavy aerobics? Just wondering because Im thinking of walking/jogging 3-4 times a week and aerobics only once a week. Is there a difference in the calories burned or weight loss speed/results or not?

Replies

  • chevy88grl
    chevy88grl Posts: 3,937 Member
    Well, the aerobics is going to increase your heart rate a lot more than the walking will. You'll definitely feel the 300 aerobics calories more than you'll feel the 300 walking calories. Some people will say "It's all about getting your heart rate high and keeping it up" while others will say "Burning 300 calories is burning 300 calories regardless of the activity".

    I also think it would depend on your lifestyle. For me, walking is what I do all day, everyday at work. So, really? It is just part of my daily activity since I work on my feet. I wouldn't count it as exercise simply because I do it so much. For other people (those who have a desk job and don't get around much), walking would definitely be considered exercise.

    So, it varies from person to person. :)
  • jvan1957
    jvan1957 Posts: 114
    60 min 2.0 mph walking = 280 cal burn
    30 min low impact aerobics = 279 cal burn
  • annabellj
    annabellj Posts: 1,337 Member
    i find i usually lose faster with aerobics but it is prob bcuz I love classes and will do those more. I think you prob burn a lot more calories than 300 in a class. my step class for one hr says 673 cal.
    thats a huge difference
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Well, the aerobics is going to increase your heart rate a lot more than the walking will. You'll definitely feel the 300 aerobics calories more than you'll feel the 300 walking calories. Some people will say "It's all about getting your heart rate high and keeping it up" while others will say "Burning 300 calories is burning 300 calories regardless of the activity".

    I also think it would depend on your lifestyle. For me, walking is what I do all day, everyday at work. So, really? It is just part of my daily activity since I work on my feet. I wouldn't count it as exercise simply because I do it so much. For other people (those who have a desk job and don't get around much), walking would definitely be considered exercise.

    So, it varies from person to person. :)

    My everyday walking is far less strenuous than my exercise walking, and the exercise walking gets my heart rate up quite high. Add in hills, and it's equivalent to jogging.
  • tfuji
    tfuji Posts: 1
    If you burn 300 calories walking versus 300 calories doing aerobics, it's the same 300 calories. It does make a difference in other ways, so depending on your other goals, moderate-high impact aerobics may accomplish more. For example, aerobics will get your heart rate up more than walking, which will help you to build endurance. Aerobics also works different muscles, so you'll tone and strengthen different muscle groups, whereas walking/jogging is always working the same muscles. But if you like walking/jogging better than aerobics and you'll stick to it, then stick with that! Exercise feels better when you don't hate it!
  • If you burn 300 calories walking versus 300 calories doing aerobics, it's the same 300 calories. It does make a difference in other ways, so depending on your other goals, moderate-high impact aerobics may accomplish more. For example, aerobics will get your heart rate up more than walking, which will help you to build endurance. Aerobics also works different muscles, so you'll tone and strengthen different muscle groups, whereas walking/jogging is always working the same muscles. But if you like walking/jogging better than aerobics and you'll stick to it, then stick with that! Exercise feels better when you don't hate it!

    That is along the lines of what I was thinking, makes perfect sense. Hmmmmm decisions, decisions...
  • chevy88grl
    chevy88grl Posts: 3,937 Member
    Well, the aerobics is going to increase your heart rate a lot more than the walking will. You'll definitely feel the 300 aerobics calories more than you'll feel the 300 walking calories. Some people will say "It's all about getting your heart rate high and keeping it up" while others will say "Burning 300 calories is burning 300 calories regardless of the activity".

    I also think it would depend on your lifestyle. For me, walking is what I do all day, everyday at work. So, really? It is just part of my daily activity since I work on my feet. I wouldn't count it as exercise simply because I do it so much. For other people (those who have a desk job and don't get around much), walking would definitely be considered exercise.

    So, it varies from person to person. :)

    My everyday walking is far less strenuous than my exercise walking, and the exercise walking gets my heart rate up quite high. Add in hills, and it's equivalent to jogging.

    I walk at a fast pace at work - it's just what I have to do in order accomplish everything I need to do. So, when I get on a treadmill and walk? I can't get my heart rate up (My legs are short and once I get over 4.1 or so, I have to jog) when I am walking. I have to start jogging to get it up at all.

    So, as I said - it depends on the individual. Walking - even fast paced walking on a treadmill doesn't make me break a sweat anymore.
  • ShapeUpSidney
    ShapeUpSidney Posts: 1,092 Member
    High intensity exercise will elevate your metabolism more than low intensity exercise.

    Do this experiment - walk 100 yards. Then sprint 100 yards. You're likely to burn more calories sprinting, because your HR will be elevated long after you've finished the sprint.

    Apply that principle to your daily workouts, and you will see the difference.
  • SueInAz
    SueInAz Posts: 6,592 Member
    If you burn 300 calories walking versus 300 calories doing aerobics, it's the same 300 calories. It does make a difference in other ways, so depending on your other goals, moderate-high impact aerobics may accomplish more. For example, aerobics will get your heart rate up more than walking, which will help you to build endurance. Aerobics also works different muscles, so you'll tone and strengthen different muscle groups, whereas walking/jogging is always working the same muscles. But if you like walking/jogging better than aerobics and you'll stick to it, then stick with that! Exercise feels better when you don't hate it!
    I have to agree with this. If you're only worried about calories, then 300 calories = 300 calories. If you walk very fast (3.5 - 4 MPH depending on your height), you'll keep your heart rate up enough to make it a good cardio workout. In its favor, aerobics works more muscles so you'll get more toned overall. However, I'm also a firm believer in doing things you enjoy doing. I didn't even get a gym membership when I decided it was time to get back into shape last March because I knew I just wouldn't go. Instead I started walking and then running.

    Do what you enjoy because you're more likely to actually do it on a long term basis. Keep in mind, however, that your body will get used to the level of activity you're doing on a regular basis. You'll need to keep upping the intensity over time if you want to continue to see results.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    I need to know, is burning 300 calories by walking/jogging the same as burning 300 calories doing moderate to heavy aerobics? Just wondering because Im thinking of walking/jogging 3-4 times a week and aerobics only once a week. Is there a difference in the calories burned or weight loss speed/results or not?

    A lot is going to depend on the terrain and speed but I would think that jogging would be a fairly equivalent burn to the average aerobic class. Walking would likely be less.
  • SueInAz
    SueInAz Posts: 6,592 Member
    High intensity exercise will elevate your metabolism more than low intensity exercise.

    Do this experiment - walk 100 yards. Then sprint 100 yards. You're likely to burn more calories sprinting, because your HR will be elevated long after you've finished the sprint.

    Apply that principle to your daily workouts, and you will see the difference.
    Actually, she'd probably find that she burns about the same amount of calories. Walking 100 yards takes longer than sprinting the same distance so there's more time to burn calories. Studies have been done which show that walking a mile or running a mile both burn approximately 100 calories. Yes, you get better benefits by running but you also risk more injuries (I'll show you my toes some day!)
  • Jeff92se
    Jeff92se Posts: 3,369 Member
    Time is the factor here. As said, it would take longer to burn the same amount of calories. And I think the aerobeics would provide additional benefits that walking woudln't. (as said). But anything is better than nothing.

    I don't think it's the same thing though. Walking might work for awhile but I'd bet your body would get used to walking pretty quickly. But you could try turning walking into hiking. Add inclines and trails etc... or add steps or hills to your walk.
  • High intensity exercise will elevate your metabolism more than low intensity exercise.

    Do this experiment - walk 100 yards. Then sprint 100 yards. You're likely to burn more calories sprinting, because your HR will be elevated long after you've finished the sprint.

    Apply that principle to your daily workouts, and you will see the difference.

    Certainly will thank you =)
  • Time is the factor here. As said, it would take longer to burn the same amount of calories. And I think the aerobeics would provide additional benefits that walking woudln't. (as said). But anything is better than nothing.

    I don't think it's the same thing though. Walking might work for awhile but I'd bet your body would get used to walking pretty quickly. But you could try turning walking into hiking. Add inclines and trails etc... or add steps or hills to your walk.

    That is true as well and that's why I want to slow it down and walk more for now because I know I will eventually have to increase intensity. I would hate to do aerobics and have to step it up and wear myself out before I accomplish anything. Rather start slow that way my increase won't have to be so drastic.. (This is how I see it, im also taking into consideration the dreaded "plateau" that I see soooo many people fretting over)
  • If you burn 300 calories walking versus 300 calories doing aerobics, it's the same 300 calories. It does make a difference in other ways, so depending on your other goals, moderate-high impact aerobics may accomplish more. For example, aerobics will get your heart rate up more than walking, which will help you to build endurance. Aerobics also works different muscles, so you'll tone and strengthen different muscle groups, whereas walking/jogging is always working the same muscles. But if you like walking/jogging better than aerobics and you'll stick to it, then stick with that! Exercise feels better when you don't hate it!
    I have to agree with this. If you're only worried about calories, then 300 calories = 300 calories. If you walk very fast (3.5 - 4 MPH depending on your height), you'll keep your heart rate up enough to make it a good cardio workout. In its favor, aerobics works more muscles so you'll get more toned overall. However, I'm also a firm believer in doing things you enjoy doing. I didn't even get a gym membership when I decided it was time to get back into shape last March because I knew I just wouldn't go. Instead I started walking and then running.

    Do what you enjoy because you're more likely to actually do it on a long term basis. Keep in mind, however, that your body will get used to the level of activity you're doing on a regular basis. You'll need to keep upping the intensity over time if you want to continue to see results.
    I meant to add my comment to THIS post.... That is true as well and that's why I want to slow it down and walk more for now because I know I will eventually have to increase intensity. I would hate to do aerobics and have to step it up and wear myself out before I accomplish anything. Rather start slow that way my increase won't have to be so drastic.. (This is how I see it, im also taking into consideration the dreaded "plateau" that I see soooo many people fretting over)
  • ShapeUpSidney
    ShapeUpSidney Posts: 1,092 Member

    Actually, she'd probably find that she burns about the same amount of calories. Walking 100 yards takes longer than sprinting the same distance so there's more time to burn calories. Studies have been done which show that walking a mile or running a mile both burn approximately 100 calories. Yes, you get better benefits by running but you also risk more injuries (I'll show you my toes some day!)

    Wrong, wrong, wrong...I'm sorry but you're wrong. Running requires different mechanics than walking, and that accounts for the calorie offset. You burn more calories running. You also CONTINUE to burn calories AFTER intense exercise because your HR stays elevated long after you stop working out. So while you may burn 100 calories walking 1 mile, you'll stop burning calories as soon as you sit. The runner will keep burning them...
  • ShapeUpSidney
    ShapeUpSidney Posts: 1,092 Member
    http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-242-304-311-8402-0,00.html


    For all the nay-sayers out there, that don't have it in them to run...
This discussion has been closed.