Is running really that much harder?

Options
cannonsky
cannonsky Posts: 850 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I started doing couch to 5k in the beginning of this year (repeating weeks if I felt I need to) and I was making progress. But I"ve been using a stationary bike the past three weeks because of an IT band injury. What I'm curious about is the huge difference in my hear rate from jogging (5-6 mph) to biking (12-14 mph, moderate resistance). When I bike my heart rate slowly increases and tops out in the 150s, but when I jog it will get up to 170's quickly and drops back to the 140's or 150's when I walk. And what's weird is that when I'm biking I can feel my heart rate increasing more so than I can when I'm running. I'm just wondering if anyone has noticed that sort of difference.

Replies

  • cannonsky
    cannonsky Posts: 850 Member
    Options
    guess it's just me :)
  • Reckabek
    Reckabek Posts: 487 Member
    Options
    No but i notice i burned just as many calories doing c25k for 30 mins as i do riding my bike for 50 mins which is 7.5 miles! I'd rather learn to run! Cause i will burn so much more! But riding my bike is sooo much easier and peaceful! In week four day one of c25k! And it was sooooo hard! Sigh! I didnt like it much!
  • elfy66
    elfy66 Posts: 138 Member
    Options
    Any weight bearing exercise will burn more cals than a seated one, it makes you work harder, so will increase your heart rate more.
  • G30Grrl
    G30Grrl Posts: 377 Member
    Options
    Any weight bearing exercise will burn more cals than a seated one, it makes you work harder, so will increase your heart rate more.

    That makes sense! I noticed a similar thing in the difference between the bike and elliptical machines.
  • wolfchild59
    wolfchild59 Posts: 2,608 Member
    Options
    Stationary bike burns about half the amount that running does for me. Even pushing myself as much as I can on the bike can't get my calorie burns up anywhere near running. The only non-running cardio that matches my running burns is the ARC trainer.
  • GuruOnAMountain
    GuruOnAMountain Posts: 489 Member
    Options
    I find it the same. I have been doing cardio at least 3 times a week for the past 5 years approximately and take a pretty tough cardio class (Les Mills Body Attack) and particularly recently, as I've lost the weight, I really push it at that class. Like give it everything the whole class through.

    I've always struggled with running and thought that maybe as my fitness was obviously improving due to the fact I could totally beast myself at Attack now and make it to the end, that maybe I should try running again. Went out the other day and it still kills me!

    An hour at the gym on a bike, cross-trainer etc. or at a class like Attack and I'm fine but the minute I start running, I struggle massively. Only just managed to run 0.75k last time before I had to stop! And then my chest was kinda funny all day afterwards. I guess that means it is really effective, though.
  • lindsyrox
    lindsyrox Posts: 257 Member
    Options
    I've found mt biking burns as many (if not more!) calories than running! then again thats w/ rocks/ roots/ and mostly uphill, its a killer!
  • mamabear272
    mamabear272 Posts: 268 Member
    Options
    The only non-running cardio that matches my running burns is the ARC trainer.

    Oh you mean the death machine? :laugh:
  • cannonsky
    cannonsky Posts: 850 Member
    Options
    thanks for the responses! I guess it makes sense that weight bearing activities would burn more calories... for some reason that never crossed my mind. I've definitely noticed some benefits to biking too though! my quads feel more toned now (which is awesome because I don't want to do lower body weight lifting- legs are big enough already). So I think I'm sticking with a combo of the two.
  • wolfchild59
    wolfchild59 Posts: 2,608 Member
    Options
    The only non-running cardio that matches my running burns is the ARC trainer.

    Oh you mean the death machine? :laugh:

    Lol - I know exactly what you mean. My husband is the one that told me to give one a try. First time I tried one I only went a few minutes and went back to an elliptical. Told him he was insane when I got back home. But last year I severely injured my leg in a fall and was supposed to be running (I still did, shhhh... ;) ) but did some research and found that ARC trained were good, minimal impact, alternatives to running. So I cut my running miles with the ARC trainer and have ended up loving it. I feel more worked after a go on the ARC then I did even combining bike and ellipitical. Now I do it for all my cross train days in my training schedule. :)
  • mamabear272
    mamabear272 Posts: 268 Member
    Options
    Oh it's a good workout for sure but the first few times you do it is so terrible. lol Have you ever been on a Jacob's Ladder? My trainer put me on it once and said like 30 seconds and I thought "huh??" But really the first time, 30 seconds was so hard!
  • theoneandonlybrookie
    theoneandonlybrookie Posts: 341 Member
    Options
    Nothing makes me burn more calories than running. That's just my personal experience. Not spinning, or P90X, or body pump classes (when I did those)... nothing.

    I also find that I'm in the upper level 4 of my heart rate zone most of the time I'm running, sometimes jumping up to lower 5 when I have to sprint, but I'm not as uncomfortable in those zones while running as I am when doing other activities. I'm not sure if it's because I've been running for so many years, or if it's because it's my favorite thing to do.

Categories