Riding a bike VS. Running

[dlock13]

I've been thinking I want to get back in shape, but I'm not sure which approach would be better. I mean personally, I love riding bikes so that would be my first choice. However, I want to stick to something and get the best fitness out of it.

In other words, let's say I were to ride a bike about 5 miles a day for 5 days a week for a month disregarding speed. Would that be healthier/better for me than running the same amount? The way I see it is that I'm riding for 5 miles, but it's a shorter time frame and may not give the same results as running would. Which would actually give me a more substantial workout?

I just really want to get into something outdoors. I'm not really concerned at the moment of cost or anything. I'm just looking at which has better benefits associated with them. I know I can do both, but I want to strictly do one for about a month or so and then try the other. I just need to have some incite on them.

Thanks in advanced.

 

[KingstonU]

Of course if you want the same workout for riding as you do at running then the distance you cover while riding will be far greater for the same amount of effort. Biking is the most efficient means of land transportation there is. This is why I like riding much more, it's more entertaining. Though I love both.

The second reason is that running is bad for your joints (ankles, knees, back). When I used to train for 10k competitions I used to get shin splints badly. Biking on the other hand has no such impact on your joints, and is considered the second best exercise you can do for cardio (swimming is the 1st, as there is no impact, but you also work out ALL more muscle groups compared to running or biking which is mostly legs).

 

[daRkKon]

if you want to get in shape, your workout must raise your heartrate above 120 beats per minute if you plan to loose any weight at all.

i walk about 5 miles a day for my job alone and its been 5 weeks now, i have not lost any weight because even though i sweat, my heart rate does not rise high enough to start burning fat.

so... measure your heartrate when your 10-15 minutes into your workout

 

[Excelsior]

I swim, run, and cycle. Fact is, it takes more time and effort on a bike to get the same level of workout that running and swimming accomplish. This is why I do not cycle as much as the other two. With that said, I find riding a bike to be more enjoyable than running or swimming but I also don't have 2hrs here and there to ride the bike. I'd rather do a 30-45min workout and be done with it.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

You could also try swimming and rowing. It's better, though, for you to do a combination of all four, since they use different sets of muscles. I prefer rowing out of the four, but that's just me.

 

[Smoove910]

Do what I did... Ride 5 miles somewhere, get off bike and jog 1/4 mile, get back on bike and ride home. I happen to have a school which is 5 miles from me. I would ride there at a brisk pace, do my run around the goal posts on the football field, then ride home. I did this for about 3 months and lost almost 55 lbs.

Realize also your diet is important and should be considered.

 

[Ghiedo27]

You'll get the best results with a workout you'll stick with. If you want to get really fit, you can do that on a bike just fine.

Just keep in mind that you're interested in how much time you spend with an elevated heart rate- not how many miles you're doing. So yeah, if somehow you're stuck with a 5 mile track running it would be more of a workout than riding it on a bike. On the other hand, if you lay down and roll 5 miles you'd probably burn more calories that way! :awe:

But seriously, just go with what you'll still be doing in a year. Even if someone could prove doing jumping jacks was 25% more time effective than anything else if you just won't do them then it doesn't really matter.

 

[Doppel]

Did you really just question whether 5 miles biking is the same workout as 5 miles running?

Either one can give you an equal degree of cardio fitness. The difference is that it's impossible for most people to run without a minimum degree of effort but it's easy to ride your bike at 9 mph and spend barely more effort than sitting on a chair.

If you don't think a bike can give as hard a workout as the hardest run go find a hill and do hill repeats and come back to the thread and try and claim the same.

 

[darkxshade]

let's say I were to ride a bike about 5 miles a day for 5 days a week for a month disregarding speed. Would that be healthier/better for me than running the same amount?

I can't believe you actually would even entertain the idea that biking 5 miles is anything close to running 5 miles.

If that were the case, maybe you should just drive a car for 5 miles instead.

 

[tedrodai]

if you want to get in shape, your workout must raise your heartrate above 120 beats per minute if you plan to loose any weight at all.

i walk about 5 miles a day for my job alone and its been 5 weeks now, i have not lost any weight because even though i sweat, my heart rate does not rise high enough to start burning fat.

so... measure your heartrate when your 10-15 minutes into your workout

My friend, you don't even have to break 120 beats a minute to burn fat off your body. I just don't want you to get the wrong idea about the exercise you're doing. You're burning calories by walking 5 miles/day. Sure, if you picked up the pace and therefore got your heartrate beating faster, you'd burn a little more calories. But what keeps you from losing weight, if that is your goal, is that you're consuming approximately as many calories as you're expending per day. I'm not trying to slam you here...just trying to make you more aware and knowledgable.

When you see verbage about "heart rate" and "burning fat", it's usually in the context of the optimal heart rate for burning fat, or something along those lines. Your body does not require you to hit a certain heart rate to burn fat...just to burn fat more efficiently. Also, it doesn't matter how much fat you burn a day if you replace it each day by eating extra calories to make up for it.

The fat-loss sticky in this forum goes over it in more detail. Exercise can definitely help you lose weight, but not by itself...nutrition is still the key.

 

[brad310]

FWIW if I bike at a 75% effort for say 20 minutes, I might burn 125 calories. If I run at 75% effort for 20 minutes, its 250 calories.

In addition to the direct calorie burn, running seems to have a much longer "after burn" as far as weight loss goes.

Granted, it does have the impact factor, so if thats an issue for you think about a treadmill. Most gym treamills have some spring to take the bite out of the impact.

In my opinion, i havent researched or anything, but i feel the greatest benefit for running in my body. My muscles get more sore, I can feel the inner chest get sore from the breathing and lung work. To get the same feeling out of a bike you pretty much have to go 100% all the time. I for one dont feel like the road hazards are worth it.

The only thing I'll say good about biking is that it is fun - depending on where you do it. It is also easier for me to do the HIIT style for a longer period time...but as i said before, it takes 100% effort to get your heart rate up there. I can do HIIT style running on a treadmill for 20 minutes and im toast. I can do HIIT on a bike for much longer...which may have a better net effect, but ill never know because i gave up on the bike for a means of cardio a long time ago. Running, elliptical, and stairclimber all beat biking easily.

 

[apac]

There is a lot of discussion about cardio here. I'd like to point out that you can certainly strength train (to a certain degree) on a bicycle as well. Sprints, hills, and long distance at a low cadence all work your leg muscles quite well. Working those muscles hard definitely burns a lot of calories, and builds significant leg and glut strength.

I pushed 40 miles yesterday on the bike, trying to stay high speed at low cadence, and am very sore today.

Lower cadence = strength
Higher cadence = cardio

Just keep in mind that you need to build up the tendons in your knees before you can handle too much low cadence work.

 

[MiniDoom]

it depends. for part of my training i do sprints on my bike. sprint for 20 seconds, recover for 20 seconds, repeat for 20 minutes. After this I'm a lot more exhausted than running a 5k. For extra fun, throw in a few hill repeats. done.

 

[Ghiedo27]

FWIW if I bike at a 75% effort for say 20 minutes, I might burn 125 calories. If I run at 75% effort for 20 minutes, its 250 calories. In addition to the direct calorie burn, running seems to have a much longer "after burn" as far as weight loss goes.

I'm curious how you're measuring your caloric burn and effort. Other factors like cadence will have a huge impact on how much your musculature is loaded.

If you want a more direct comparison to running you can ride at a lower cadence (while maintaining your heart rate through a higher gear). The thing is, you're trading cardiovascular benefits for greater potential calorie burn and muscle development.

 

[brad310]

I'm curious how you're measuring your caloric burn and effort. Other factors like cadence will have a huge impact on how much your musculature is loaded.

Stationary bike and treadmill.

 

[tedrodai]

I've always been a sprinter as opposed to a distance runner. The impact of running is a pretty big deal to me. I met my mortal enemy towards the end of my junior year of high school running track on asphalt: Shin Splints. I've been battling him for years since, and there is plenty of bad blood between us. He shows up in seconds if I try to jog/run on hard surfaces, and even if walk on concrete/asphalt for extended periods of time...and then it can be months before I'm able to run again.

I've found that I can keep up a routine on treadmills or rubberized tracks as long as it's kinda slow (6-7.5 mph or so), but if I try to go faster (thus increasing the impact), I run a big risk of bringing back my shin splints. So anywho, that injury effectively gets rid of my favorite type of running.

When shooting for a cardio workout, I still enjoy running a LOT more than biking. However, I do LOVE the bike for the ability to do higher intensity stuff without the impact, and for the more strength-focussed exercises people have mentioned. You can definitely turn your legs to jelly with a bike.

But OP, the 2 are not mutally exclusive. Feel free to choose 1 or mix up your workouts in a way you enjoy. Both are beneficial towards improving your fitness. You'd definitely have to turn up the biking intensity to get the same workout from 5 miles as you would from running; but if you bike for the same amount of time you'd have spent running that 5 miles (keeping a similarly challenging pace), the difference is much smaller.

 

[dlock13]

Wow. A lot of info in this thread and a lot of people essentially being jerks about a lot of stuff. Thanks to those that actually gave me some insight.

I've decided I'm definitely going to mix it up. One week, I'll ride a bike the next will be running and so on.

Can anyone give me a recommendation on a bike to purchase? I really don't know any good online retailers and around my area we have one bike shop that the guy has overpriced bikes. I'm really looking for something like a hybrid or maybe even just a road bike/mountain bike. I don't really know what brands are good and what aren't. I'd like a bike that would last me a while and not fall apart within a month. What I'm essentially looking to spend is around $100-200.

So yeah, if any of you have any expertise in what is good and what would be the best bang, I'd really appreciate your insight.

Thank you so much for everything so far all of you.

 

[GoSharks]

Can anyone give me a recommendation on a bike to purchase? I really don't know any good online retailers and around my area we have one bike shop that the guy has overpriced bikes. I'm really looking for something like a hybrid or maybe even just a road bike/mountain bike. I don't really know what brands are good and what aren't. I'd like a bike that would last me a while and not fall apart within a month. What I'm essentially looking to spend is around $100-200.

Any decent new bike will start at about $400 and go up...

 

[highland145]

For a decent bike cheap, craigs list, local trade mags, good will, yard sales. People buy and never ride then get rid of them. Other wise you'll have to spend more $$.

Haven't read the thread to find out the # of days/week you'll be doing cardio but I'd mix it up in the same week if you can. 3 bike/2 run and switch it the next week.

 

[goobernoodles]

I think the question is - what kind of biking?

I recently got back into mountain biking and I luckily have a nice park with a number of miles square of singletrack trails within a ten minute drive from my house. If it's nice outside, I like to toss my bike in the back of my car and go immediately after I get home from work. Definitely a great stress killer.

Anyway, I basically just ride through the trails all out until I feel burned out (which happens quickly as I'm not in great shape) then head back to the car to get some water. I usually go out and back 4-5 times then call it a day. I'm probably riding for about an hour or so and I'm not doing a great amount of distance, but I am getting quite a cardio workout. I think it really depends on what you can see yourself doing on an ongoing basis.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Can anyone give me a recommendation on a bike to purchase? I really don't know any good online retailers and around my area we have one bike shop that the guy has overpriced bikes. I'm really looking for something like a hybrid or maybe even just a road bike/mountain bike. I don't really know what brands are good and what aren't. I'd like a bike that would last me a while and not fall apart within a month. What I'm essentially looking to spend is around $100-200.

So yeah, if any of you have any expertise in what is good and what would be the best bang, I'd really appreciate your insight.

$100-200 will only get you a new bike from Walmart/Target. Those bikes will be ride-able (caveat: as long as they have been assembled correctly, people have reported assembly issues with cheap bikes in the past) but they for sure will be heavy and will have crappy components, so do not expect great shifting, and expect to huff and puff going up a hill. Or you could go to craigslist and look for used bikes, although if you go that way you really need to know your stuff, last time I checked craigslist there were lots of people who wanted near MSRP price for a 10 year old bike in "top condition", f that.

If you can up your budget a bit you can probably get a new bike on a closeout or something with decent components. Such a bike will be lighter and will shift better, have quality components that will last you longer. Realistically you should expect to pay $300+ minimum on a decent bike, $400-600 for a good one if you wait for a sale.

For example some deals in the past

$400 REI Mountain bike
http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?sduid=948952&t=3009453

$600 REI touring bike
http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?sduid=948952&t=2978261

If you do not want to wait for a sale and don't mind getting off brand http://www.bikesdirect.com/ sells decent bikes for cheap.

In any case first and foremost I would advise you to settle on what kind of a bike you really need/want. A bike is a bike, but components and geometry will vary a lot depending on the type, from different tires to different handlebars, to shifters, to drivetrain, it's all going to be different. You need to decide if you want to get a mountain bike, hybrid bike, touring, or road race bike. What it comes down to is you need to decide what kind of riding do you expect you will be doing. If you want to do mountain biking, you NEED mountain bike, if you want to ride mostly level surfaces on local trails of hardpack soil/pavement, you'll want hybrid/touring bike, if on the other hand you want to ride on the actual roads a road/race bike will be best, although a hybrid/touring will do as well.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

I alwys found that running forced me to keep my upper body in better control while cycling just gets your upper body in a locked position.

<== many years of mountain biking.