How many calories does road cycling burn?

[tuxbailey]

^^^

Thanks. One of the goals I have this year is do a charity century again. I haven't done it for many years and the excuse is always I don't have time to train with work and family, blah, blah, blah.

The death march thing describes me exactly for this longer rides. I uusually finish long after others, barely making the cut off.

[echappist]

Originally Posted by tuxbailey

Closing the loop.

I did a 30 minutes ride last night and the calories calculated by Wahoo Kickr is similar to what Strava estimated for Monday's ride. And they are about 2/3 of what the online calculators estimated. The number of calories I burn is about 400/hr or 600/90 mins, so not 900s.

I am surprised that the Strava estimated average power (107) is very close to the Kickr's value (116.)

Monday's ride:




Last night:

I hope this comes out the right way, but strava ought to be more accurate at low speeds. Among all the drag forces your output overcomes, aero is the one that doesnt scale linearly and is unpredictable (nothing in the algorithm accounts for wind speed, direction, and any shielding you could get, whereas gradient changes are known)

At low speeds, that contribution (power to overcome aero) is reduced, thus also reducing the associated error.

Conversely, if this were from a criterium, Strava would spit out a nonsensical power estimate

[Tony T]

Originally Posted by tuxbailey

….. I am surprised that everyone who are trying to lose weight doesn't pick up cycling. That is like one meal worth in calories.

That (and eating more fruits and vegetables) is how I dropped the pounds

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by uber

Just a thought; wattage is very cadence dependent. Many find more efficient power output at a cadence of 90. Shifting to a slightly easier gear and maintaining a faster cadence might allow you to have a higher wattage. Maximal speed should be related to wattage as well.
If the goal is to control weight, nothing impacts my weight more than diet. Enjoy!

It's not quite as simple as this. Watts at the pedals are the same (for the same speed and load) regardless of pedal cadence. However, the efficiency of the human can change with cadence. But it goes in the opposite direction than what is implied above - higher cadences actually decrease human efficiency. Maximum human efficiency actually occurs at lower cadence than most experienced rider pedal (closer to 60 rpm). Why do experienced cyclists pedal faster? Because there are more important considerations than mere energy efficiency - the limitation for most cyclists is muscle fatigue and glycogen depletion, and higher cadences can improve these.

What you say about weight control is true though - diet typically has a bigger impact on weight than exercise.

[tuxbailey]

Originally Posted by echappist

I hope this comes out the right way, but strava ought to be more accurate at low speeds. Among all the drag forces your output overcomes, aero is the one that doesnt scale linearly and is unpredictable (nothing in the algorithm accounts for wind speed, direction, and any shielding you could get, whereas gradient changes are known)

At low speeds, that contribution (power to overcome aero) is reduced, thus also reducing the associated error.

Conversely, if this were from a criterium, Strava would spit out a nonsensical power estimate

Thanks.

Now I am seriously thinking about getting a power meter since there are so many viable options.

[FlashUNC]

Originally Posted by tuxbailey

^^^

Thanks. One of the goals I have this year is do a charity century again. I haven't done it for many years and the excuse is always I don't have time to train with work and family, blah, blah, blah.

The death march thing describes me exactly for this longer rides. I uusually finish long after others, barely making the cut off.

The LSD thing isn't necessary to get to fitness goals either. I've found power invaluable for making the most of the time I've got with training structured accordingly.

https://thesufferfest.com/blogs/trai...nched-athletes

[XXtwindad]

I'm a little confused here. Do you want to lose fat, or become a fitter (and possibly) cyclist? If fat loss is the ultimate goal, I don't think outdoor cycling is necessarily the best vehicle. (Unless you're consistently doing longer rides)

[tuxbailey]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

I'm a little confused here. Do you want to lose fat, or become a fitter (and possibly) cyclist? If fat loss is the ultimate goal, I don't think outdoor cycling is necessarily the best vehicle. (Unless you're consistently doing longer rides)

Both, but I do enjoy riding outdoors when I can.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by tuxbailey

Both, but I do enjoy riding outdoors when I can.

Well, if fat loss is the main concern, I'd focus on consistent low-grade movement and adjusting your diet.

[cgates66]

1) Always good to ride, and more riding is better.
2) Long-slow has a place, but if you are time-limited, then adding more sustained peak efforts in your rides (e.g., 30 seconds, 1 minute - even if just a couple per ride), which, if you don't delight in sprinting will hurt, will improve your fitness and fat loss much faster, and help build some muscle.
3) You can burn a lot of calories riding, but as others have said, without a power meter, its' difficult to get reliable estimates due to the dominance of aero effects above ~15MPH, and the many variables.
4) The more you ride, the more calories you'll burn. The more you ride fast, the more calories you'll burn off the bike. You have an 800W peak up there - the more of that you see, the more you'll burn sitting on your duff drinking beer.
5) Diet and sleep matter, for motivation and performance. Make sure to eat mindfully, including enough good fats. Low fat diets *can* be bad for fat loss because you sub in carbs, mess up your hormones etc. There are exceptions to this - dietary stuff is complicated and very personal - but the old food pyramid nonsense was based on fabricated research by some zealot. I don't remember the details, but the net is, don't hide from fats.
6) If you are really getting after it, obviously you have to eat enough.
7) If you have time, any amount of weight training will help. You don't need much to get a big difference (just a few exercises really), but again, the limited work you do has to be focused.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by cgates66

1) Always good to ride, and more riding is better.
2) Long-slow has a place, but if you are time-limited, then adding more sustained peak efforts in your rides (e.g., 30 seconds, 1 minute - even if just a couple per ride), which, if you don't delight in sprinting will hurt, will improve your fitness and fat loss much faster, and help build some muscle.
3) You can burn a lot of calories riding, but as others have said, without a power meter, its' difficult to get reliable estimates due to the dominance of aero effects above ~15MPH, and the many variables.
4) The more you ride, the more calories you'll burn. The more you ride fast, the more calories you'll burn off the bike. You have an 800W peak up there - the more of that you see, the more you'll burn sitting on your duff drinking beer.
5) Diet and sleep matter, for motivation and performance. Make sure to eat mindfully, including enough good fats. Low fat diets *can* be bad for fat loss because you sub in carbs, mess up your hormones etc. There are exceptions to this - dietary stuff is complicated and very personal - but the old food pyramid nonsense was based on fabricated research by some zealot. I don't remember the details, but the net is, don't hide from fats.
6) If you are really getting after it, obviously you have to eat enough.
7) If you have time, any amount of weight training will help. You don't need much to get a big difference (just a few exercises really), but again, the limited work you do has to be focused.

Strength/resistance training isn't optional for being fit.

[echappist]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

Strength/resistance training isn't optional for being fit.

yep, especially for the overwhelming majority of recreational cyclists (regardless if one is racing).

maybe the flyweight climber may not want that additional weight, but for most of us, strength training helps with a lot of things (e.g. sprinting power, holding a posture when time trialing, etc)

[tuxbailey]

Originally Posted by cgates66

1) Always good to ride, and more riding is better.
2) Long-slow has a place, but if you are time-limited, then adding more sustained peak efforts in your rides (e.g., 30 seconds, 1 minute - even if just a couple per ride), which, if you don't delight in sprinting will hurt, will improve your fitness and fat loss much faster, and help build some muscle.
3) You can burn a lot of calories riding, but as others have said, without a power meter, its' difficult to get reliable estimates due to the dominance of aero effects above ~15MPH, and the many variables.
4) The more you ride, the more calories you'll burn. The more you ride fast, the more calories you'll burn off the bike. You have an 800W peak up there - the more of that you see, the more you'll burn sitting on your duff drinking beer.
5) Diet and sleep matter, for motivation and performance. Make sure to eat mindfully, including enough good fats. Low fat diets *can* be bad for fat loss because you sub in carbs, mess up your hormones etc. There are exceptions to this - dietary stuff is complicated and very personal - but the old food pyramid nonsense was based on fabricated research by some zealot. I don't remember the details, but the net is, don't hide from fats.
6) If you are really getting after it, obviously you have to eat enough.
7) If you have time, any amount of weight training will help. You don't need much to get a big difference (just a few exercises really), but again, the limited work you do has to be focused.

Thanks for the advice. I am going back to the gym and starting beginner weight training. I am using the GZCLP beginner routine to get into it. The complication is that I have a herniated disk and I have to be careful or it will trigger lower back pains.

[Mikej]

Maybe caloric restriction?

[tuxbailey]

Originally Posted by Mikej

Maybe caloric restriction?

I am doing that. Currently doing intermittent fasting plus calories reduction.

According to my scale reading this morning, I have lost 23 lbs since New Year.