miles cycling = how many miles running?

I should also note, that in my opinion, as you close in on 400 miles of cycling/week, it's really not fair to compare it to a 100-miles of running/week. Once you're up in the 400 mpw on the bike, things are different. A 400-mile bike week is much, much more difficult, both mentally and physically, than a 100-mile running week.

i used to cycle wrote:

I should also note, that in my opinion, as you close in on 400 miles of cycling/week, it's really not fair to compare it to a 100-miles of running/week. Once you're up in the 400 mpw on the bike, things are different. A 400-mile bike week is much, much more difficult, both mentally and physically, than a 100-mile running week.

Either you're a crap cyclist or I'm a crap runner, maybe both. The most I have run in a week is about 65 and I felt totally spent, while I have done at least 3 400 mile biking weeks and didn't feel so bad. I just had to eat a lot for the biking.

I am a bit on the heavier side, so that may explain why putting in high mileage running is tougher for me than biking

I have a similar question. I recently purchased a road bike and hope to compete in some Tri's this summer. I hope to do a half ironman in July or August. For now I am training for a important running race in March/April. How many days a week is the norm for someone running 60-75 a week to add in biking? Has anyone actually had results from running and biking that=running faster? I have gone on some 30-40 mile rides so far. I also did a couple 20-25 mile rides after a hard 10 mile run.

I know running is running. I just tend to get injured when I go above 80-95 miles a week, like I did a few years ago. I am looking to use biking to supplement my running. Any help or suggestions?

"Either you're a crap cyclist or I'm a crap runner, maybe both"

Likely, it's both :) Seriously, who knows. These are just my opinions.

heyyo wrote:

We get that running doesn't not equal cycling so stop repeating it.

Will do. Just as soon as you stop talking about how to "convert" it.

sigh... wrote:

heyyo wrote:

We get that running doesn't not equal cycling so stop repeating it.

Will do. Just as soon as you stop talking about how to "convert" it.

I haven't talked about how to convert it in terms of miles. Some people might have, but I have not.

I can't run so I would like to know should I spend 1 hour, or 8 hours on the bike so I can get similar EXERCISE as running 1 hour. I'd also like to know if its more beneficial to have high RPMs or high resistance. Also what heart range should I target? How should my effort vary if at all. NONE of these questions ask for an explicit conversion factor, instead they ask what is the best way to utilize the bike as a workout tool for running?

i used to cycle wrote:

I should also note, that in my opinion, as you close in on 400 miles of cycling/week, it's really not fair to compare it to a 100-miles of running/week. Once you're up in the 400 mpw on the bike, things are different. A 400-mile bike week is much, much more difficult, both mentally and physically, than a 100-mile running week.

Let me revise my formula then:

(If (Cycle miles < 400 mi, Cycle miles/4,Cycle miles/3.5)) * 0 = Miles Run

No, the math doesn't work out. Cycle miles ``400 will approach running strain at a rate of (6 miles running=25 miles cycling). However, cycle miles %%= 400 yields a benefit greater than 100mpw running. However, the mental and physical strain from the 400 miles cycling trumps, by far, that of a 100-mile week. I only have a mathematics minor, so I'm not very good at explaining myself with numbers.

hey yah!

I think the most you can hope for from your biking workouts while you are injured is to use it as a tool to keep the weight off. There is some cardio cross over benefit but you will not really notice that when you start running again because it will take you several weeks to get your legs under you again. You will feel slow and out of shape because your legs will be sore while readusting to the impact of running. 3 to 1 is a good ratio to use for equivalent calorie burning.

For summer XC training, Coach Boyd had 5 miles biking = 1 mile running.

heyyo wrote:

I can't run so I would like to know should I spend 1 hour, or 8 hours on the bike so I can get similar EXERCISE as running 1 hour. I'd also like to know if its more beneficial to have high RPMs or high resistance. Also what heart range should I target? How should my effort vary if at all. NONE of these questions ask for an explicit conversion factor, instead they ask what is the best way to utilize the bike as a workout tool for running?

If you have time on your hands, I recommend reading Joe Friel's Triathlete's Training Bible. In it he discusses similar workouts for biking and running. For example, there are certain things you would do in what he calls the Base Period as compared to the Build Period on the bike. Your base will include high RPM rides (90 rpm) in an easy gear. Later on you can do cruise intervals on the bike. These are similar but obviously not the same as cruise intervals running. His website has a lot of information and he bases training "speeds" on heart rate. He says that your heart rate on the bike will generally not get as high as with running so he gives different biking heart rate numbers than running heart rate numbers for the same athlete. He is very educated and well researched... someone you can trust.

From200mTo8k wrote:

If you have time on your hands, I recommend reading Joe Friel's Triathlete's Training Bible. In it he discusses similar workouts for biking and running. For example, there are certain things you would do in what he calls the Base Period as compared to the Build Period on the bike. Your base will include high RPM rides (90 rpm) in an easy gear. Later on you can do cruise intervals on the bike. These are similar but obviously not the same as cruise intervals running. His website has a lot of information and he bases training "speeds" on heart rate. He says that your heart rate on the bike will generally not get as high as with running so he gives different biking heart rate numbers than running heart rate numbers for the same athlete. He is very educated and well researched... someone you can trust.

Lol... you do know this is a 2 year old thread right?

if cycling miles = zero benefit to running... how come a triathlete who has never run more than 50 miles in a week run a 2:38 marathon and a 1:14 half?

Better late than never?

Just chill little man. Maybe the dude has a running injury and just wants to get an equivalent workout on the cycle to what he would normally be doing when running. Runners do that all the time. Maybe you need to step out of your little world and help people out a bit.

Hey marijuologist, you still around?

Cardio is cardio. I agree with the general estimation of 3 miles of biking being equivalent to 1 mile of running. Like another post said, I focus on heart rate when I'm riding. I don't care if it's not running......If I bike for 2 hours at 160 average heart rate, that is 2 hours of high quality cardio that will keep you fit. If you have access to a pool, you may want to also pool run every week to keep the muscle memory of the running mechanics.

Zero