Having just got on my bike again and being very unfit (again), I wondered what's burning more calories for ME - cycling 2.75 miles (in about 20 mins) or walking 2 miles (40 mins). Spark gave me far fewer calories for cycling even though at the end of the ride I was breathing heavily and sweating whereas I feel no signs of exertion with the walking I could walk/hike for miles and miles before developing my achilles problem (which is being treated and expected to improve in the next 3 months).
I'm just thinking that for at least some activities it depends on more than just your weight, for how many calories are burned. An unfit (or perhaps more specifically an unfamiliar/ unconditioned for the task) person will surely burn more calories for the same task as a fit person of the same weight? Presumably when my muscles used in cycling become more conditioned, then the calories burned will drop dramatically compared to the struggle of my first few rides?
I do have a HRM that came with my garmin, one of these days I should get it out and use it instead of wondering.
Hoping to get my cycling to a stage where I can comfortably ride 5 miles in about 30 mins, so that I can commute to work by bike (10-12 mile round trip). It seems an ideal way to save a bit of money, help weight loss and improve fitness during the summer.
edit: No idea how this ended up in the motivation forum.
Edited by: IZZY37 at: 5/6/2013 (08:29)
Only I can make this happen.
| current weight: 155.0