biking miles equals ???? running miles

Elevating and sustaining your effort/heartrate is the key to decent cross-training if left with no alternatives, and measuring time might be easier to manage than counting miles. Say if your average run is 10 miles and your average heartrate is 140 BPM, tinker your workouts within those parameters.

Cycling will tend to range from 3:1 to 4:1 compared to your running miles, based on effort and how many hills you deal with if training outside. Uphill cycling is close to 1:1. Downhills = zero effort. Flat = 4-5:1 distance/effort unless you really crank up the RPMs on the flats.

Since it seems you are 'hammering' the stationary bike fairly hard and not coasting downhills, your mileage ratio is probably closer to 3:1. If you take your bike out hard on rolling hills for 3 hours outside (roads or trails), that's physiologically similar to a solid 9-10-mile run. You'll go much farther on the roads, but the trail is proportionately more difficult and it of course takes more time out of your day.

TIMEwise the ratio is similar to mileage (3/4:1) on a bike, unless you're riding purely uphill, then it's more like 1.5:1 or even closer to 1:1. Note that your (Max) heart-rate on a bike is 7 beats lower than while running because your weight is supported. But if you ride your bike at 160 BPM for an hour, compare that to a solid hour of AT running; that's akin to at least 10-miles, assuming you're a collegiate caliber runner and under 30 years old.

Pool running ... It can be hard and it sucks ass. I always considered 70 minutes equal to a 10-mile+ run, but I ran with no vest and pushed it pretty hard in the water till I was nearly cramping. Going too slowly got pretty boring and the only way to pass time was to make the effort somewhat challenging.

Good luck with the injury.

I'm with ONE KEG.

Pool Running, No vest, 90+ min. per day.

You MUST also do exercise to strengthen connective tissue...Weight liftng (low wt./high reps)

jason

I use the 4:1 ratio as long as I keep the bike average mph at 20 mph by myself. This is outdoor and on course with hills.

100 biking miles = ZERO running miles.

1000 biking miles = ZERO running miles

There is no "trusted standard" from biking to running. Please, do not waste your time trying to convert as it is essentially meaningless. They are two very different excercises which work the systems of the body in very different ways.

Just record the biking miles in your log and leave it at that. That should be enough.

In terms of calories...one hour running at 9mph is about 900 cals...one hour cycling at 16mph is about 600-700 cals. In terms of cardiorespiratory fitness...there is a 10-20 heartbeat difference in equal efforts of run vs cycle with the cycling being lower. Professional cyclists go up to 6 hours a day with 2-3 hours being a recovery ride. I have some experience with cycling and when injured usually go 2-3 hours on a mountain bike on the roads at 90rpm. On a road bike it would probably be easier and you'd be able to go faster and likely further before experiencing the same amount of fatigue.

Alan

i am experienced in both cycling and running and i would say the 4 to 1 ratio is comedy. 70 miles a week running (about 7 to 8 hours) is a walk in the park compared to a 28 to 32 hour week on a bike. period. running is hard, but come on people!

the 7 inch cucumber wrote:

i am experienced in both cycling and running and i would say the 4 to 1 ratio is comedy. 70 miles a week running (about 7 to 8 hours) is a walk in the park compared to a 28 to 32 hour week on a bike. period. running is hard, but come on people!

And yet still it is irrelevant which is harder because it is meaningless to try to "convert" between the two.

Unless, of course, you're trying to lose weight and all you care about is calories burned. That's about the only common denominator.

Didn't Josh Cox count his elliptical miles in his running mileage? I seem to recall that from his website logs Please folks don't start doing silly exercises like this. It's an exercise in trying to "cook" the numbers to make you feel better about yourself. As if you've run more than you have. If you didn't run 70 miles, then you didn't run them.

You lost me there buddy. Please don't tell me that you bike and run at the same speed b/c that is the only reason why you would be doing 4 times as much biking as running (in hours). When I do easy bike rides I am in the 25 mph range, and I'm not what you call an experienced biker.

One Keg

Obviously you are a pure run/jog type.

Biking is kick ass hard in many different ways than a run.

Try spending 4 to 6 hours in the saddle. There is no simple equation 4:1, 2:1, etc.

So, comparing them in a workout sense is like saying a

banana is like an orange.

Heck, there are many, many ways to get your heart rate up

other than running or biking.

Running and Biking are not alike.

I find it hard to believe that averaging 25 mph in bike is an easy ride for a recreational biker. I would suggest you have your speedometer calibrated properly.

Very much agree. Everything also depends on the type of bike used (road vs mountain), terrain, type of tire (slick vs nubbed), height of saddle, etc. It is much easier to ride on the road for two hours on a road bike with skinny slick tires and a high saddle (compared to handlebars) than to ride on a mountain bike with thick nubbed tires and a lower saddle. The only realistic way I see to compare running vs cycling is to compare calorie cost and there are many online calculators for that.

Alan

Hmmm...food for thought:

Follow a Coe based, multi-paced running regimen with a long run. (Basically, ALL running is specific quality but, lower miles.)

Replace all recovery or "junk" miles with high rpm, moderate effort cycling of 60-90 minutes.

By eliminating senseless pounding but, replacing it with non-impact aerobic work (pool running if not bike inclined), could a track runner (especially mid-distance) benefit since the aerobic volume is greater?

Discuss.

Not exactly inexperienced in the cycling realm and remember the context -- this poster can't run because s/he's injured so s/he needs to do something else active or s/he might sit around and get fat and sloppy. When I got a stress fracture of my fibula in '93 I was given the choice to either sit on my ass for 6 weeks and have it heal, or ride like a maniac for 12 weeks and have it heal. My alternatives were cross-training or no training. So I rode a lot and physiologically these workouts proved to be similar. For the poster's benefit I used a 10-mile run as a reference point. (I also got to ride with some very good Bay Area riders and the Berkeley Bike Club when I lived out there, i.e., Roger Marquis, Matt Sarna, Bob Ward, etc., so I have ridden somewhat seriously).

5-hour+ rides are indeed killer workouts in many different ways than a run. You can go beyond a marathon physiologically since you are not pounding. Once when I bonked I came home and chowed one-and-a-half boxes of cereal because it was all I had around and I was too tired to shower and go four blocks down the street for a burrito, pizza, etc.

But once you step off the bike and try to run again, you are starting over. You develop a completely different muscle group and your running legs are will be quite atrophied, though your heart and lungs have managed to sustain themselves. Yet once your running legs come back in a few weeks, you are going to be that much better for taking an active break and maintaining your fitness in some way.

when injured in college i would bike and run in the pool. i don't remember how long i biked, but when i did it was on the roads on a mountain bike and i hammered the whole way. and i do recall that my legs gave out before my lungs, but my legs got used to it pretty quick. the great thing about biking is that you can stay below your threshold, just below lactic acid producing effort, for a very long time, much longer than you can while running. if you can get a heart rate monitor, use one while you cross train. i almost never wore one when i ran but i always did when i was biking or running in the pool. it will keep you honest and make you work harder than you might otherwise.

Yeah that is why I was wondering about the equivalent. My goal is to try to come back in even better shape aerobically. I was only running 35 mpw with a day off each week at the time I hurt my foot, because I had been previously coming back from a hip injury.

I know biking obviously isn't the same as running. I just don't want to have to worry about my lungs and heart rate when I get back into it, and have my legs back underneath me as soon as possible.

Cycling will keep your heart and lungs in good shape but the only way to train the muscles to run is to run. Cycling is better than nothing and usually more convenient than pool running.

Interesting stuff from LanceArmstrong.com:

Weekly Training

December 29-January 5

1 x Day off

3 x per-week resistance training

3x per-week 3hours per-day with 300 watt power ceiling, 95-100 pedal cadence, stay in saddle on hills

3 x per-week 2 hours with 4-5 Stomp intervals of 20seconds x 5mins recovery between.

January 6-12

1 x Day off

3 x per-week resistance training

3x per-week 4hours per-day with 300 watt power ceiling, 95-100 pedal cadence, stay in saddle on hills

2 x per-week 2 hours with 4-5 Stomp intervals of 20seconds x 5mins recovery between.

1 x per-week 2 hours with 5 x 6minute MuscleTension intervals x 5minutes recovery between

January 13-19

1 x Day off

3 x per-week resistance training

3x per-week 4hours per-day with 300 watt power ceiling, 95-100 pedal cadence, stay in saddle on hills

2 x per-week 2 hours with 4-5 Stomp intervals of 20seconds x 5mins recovery between.

1 x per-week 2 hours with 5 x 6minute MuscleTension intervals x 5minutes recovery between

January 20-30

USPS Team Training Camp in CA

--------

Weekly training

March 11-17

2 x per-week 4 hours over hilly terrain with 2 climbs of 20-30 minutes @ 170-175 heart rate, 90 pedal cadence on the climbs, 60-65 pedal cadence on flat terrain followed by 2 hour behind the motorcycle @ 170-185 heart rate, keep pedal cadence fast 100+rpms.

2 x per-week 5 hour rides with 150 minutes Tempo @ 150-155heart rate, 60-65 pedal cadence over rolling terrain.

3 x per-week recovery rides of 2-3 hours at 115-135 heart rate,

March 18-24

2 x per-week 4 hours over hilly terrain with 2 climbs of 20-30 minutes @ 170-175 heart rate, 90 pedal cadence on the climbs, 60-65 pedal cadence on flat terrain followed by 2 hour behind the motorcycle @ 170-185 heart rate, keep pedal cadence fast 100+rpms.

Recovery rides till Milan-San Remo

March 23 - Milan-San Remo

March 25-31

30-31 Criterium International

2 x per-week 4 hours over hilly terrain with 2 climbs of 20-30 minutes @ 170-175 heart rate, 90 pedal cadence on the climbs, 60-65 pedal cadence on flat terrain followed by 2 hour behind the motorcycle @ 170-185 heart rate, keep pedal cadence fast 100+rpms.

3 x per-week recovery rides of 2-3 hours at 115-135 heart rate,

April 1-7

2 x per-week 4 hours over hilly terrain with 2 climbs of 20-30 minutes @ 170-175 heart rate, 90 pedal cadence on the climbs, 60-65 pedal cadence on flat terrain followed by 2 hour behind the motorcycle @ 170-185 heart rate, keep pedal cadence fast 100+rpms.

April 7 - Tour of Flanders, Belgium

April 10 - Gent-Wevelgem, Belgium

April 12-14 - Ride for the Roses in Texas

April 17-21 - Tour of Aragon, Spain

April 22-28

2 x per-week 4 hours over hilly terrain with 2 climbs of 20-30 minutes @ 170-175 heart rate, 90 pedal cadence on the climbs, 60-65 pedal cadence on flat terrain followed by 2 hour behind the motorcycle @ 170-185 heart rate, keep pedal cadence fast 100+rpms.

April 28 - Amstel Gold, Netherlands

------

I never said I was a recreational biker, just not experienced. I am a runner (hence I am posting on this site), and I supplement my running with biking once a week. I bike with a purpose, not as a leisure activity. I ride a stationary bike and this past Saturday I did an hour ride between my speed-day and long run. In that time I the bike said I had covered 23.57 miles/kilometers (I warmed up for the first 5 minutes). Since I live in the United States of America I figured the distance was measured in miles. I am fairly fast for a high school runner but nothing special outside of my region (4:25 miler). Do you honestly think I would try to lie about how fast I bike?

chgray wrote:

I find it hard to believe that averaging 25 mph in bike is an easy ride for a recreational biker. I would suggest you have your speedometer calibrated properly.

Agree...considering LA (from his website) is going about 31mph in a time trial with superb aerodynamics. And most cycling sites I've seen consider anything over 20mph (on flats) racing speed. Now, I'd believe 25 kph...which is a more believable 15mph.

Alan

Cragg Advocate

Stationary bike mph and actual road bike mph are not even close. I am a triathlete that is taking a year to just run because running is my passion. However the bike is my best event so I know a little about this topic.

Also bike miles are bike miles and running miles are running miles do not try and compare them. Just look at your HR and the time you spend in that zone if you want to compare anything at all.