You have to work really hard on a bike in order to get the same aerobic workout as running?

konakona wrote:

Been riding on the road bike lately wearing a HRM. It seems that you have to work alot harder on a bike in order to get anywhere near the heart rate of running. The only way to get the heart rate up for a prolonged period of time is climbing a really long climb. It's really hard to get the heart rate elevated for a prolonged period of time on the flats. Anyone else experience this? Is it because it's all non-loadbearing form of exercise whereas running you use more muscles? Does anyone else agree that it also feels like you're working much harder than you actually are on a bike. When my heart rate on a bike is at the equivalent of what would be an easy run I could feel lactate build-up in my legs.

You're doing it wrong. I can get my HR maxed out on a short climb or a flat section, no problem. The only thing I'll concede is that it takes a wee bit longer to get your heart rate up since, when you want to crank it up a notch, you have to go through the process of finding the ideal gear and cadence, whereas in running you just accelerate to a faster pace in a split-second.

Not sure how long you've been riding but I noticed the same thing while cross-training while getting over PF. I found once I trained my muscles to be able to push it harder for longer, the HR stayed up there. It could be your quads are just not conditioned enough to give your already well conditioned CV system a run for its money. Wait until the capillaries start spreading and the usual sundry other changes occur in your quads, and you'll find you can really give it a good hoofing. Your mileage may vary, as they say.

If you cross-train you have to make a fairly significant commitment to whatever the other discipline is. If you continue to do a lot of cycling your thigh muscles will get a lot stronger and resistant to fatigue, at which point you can push yourself harder and your aerobic energy system will get pushed harder.

One of the great virtues of running is that you can get a great aerobic workout on your first day off the couch.

Try to find a rolling section, like a large loop and do out and backs or loops on that. On the uphills push as hard as you can. The downhills will go by quickly and bring you to another uphill. And the cycle continues.

Yes, biking is more efficient, which is why it is harder to get a higher heart rate. Running is pretty inefficient in the long run.

Heart rate on a bike is always lower than when running at the same level of exertion. This is because when biking your weight is partially supported on your arms and because you aren't completely upright as you are when running. This is easily demonstrated and measured in an ex phys lab. So you may be working just as hard but your heart rate will be lower. There are standard formulas to adjust for this.

Cycling is on average 7-8 beats / minute slower than running for equal perceived effort because your weight is supported on the bike.

Quill wrote:

I found once I trained my muscles to be able to push it harder for longer, the HR stayed up there. It could be your quads are just not conditioned enough to give your already well conditioned CV system a run for its money.

this...once you build base over a period of time, the HR will go pretty high. however, i find that my all out time trial effort HR will get no higher than my tempo or 10m race pace. i can't quite get to 5k HR on the bike.

You're not used to biking. Cyclists say the same thing about running.

So take a fit cyclist/runner and have him hammer on the flats with calm winds until he gets to what would be a tempo running effort in terms of heart rate. Because almost all the work is concentrated on the legs, would it be more difficult to sustain this effort than running because of things like lactate build-up in the legs? What I'm asking is will it feel harder for him cycling at say 90% HR than running at 90% HR because the legs are doing almost all the work when cycling?

You do realize that bikes were invented for that very reason..to be a more efficient mode of transportation than walking or running.

Its like complaining that your smaller car gets better gas mileage.

Yes, I have a hard time getting my heart rate above 110 on a stationary bike although my quads are burning. On a moderate training run at around 8:30 pace, my heartrate is in the 130s. I hardly ever get on a bike, but am hoping to bike more as both a cross-training technique and to prepare for a couple triathlons this summer.

Hopefully if I can get on the bike a few times a week, my quads will strengthen enough so I can get my heart rate up.

After about 6,000 miles of riding hard in training, I have no problem getting my HR up for hours on the bike. On tough climbs, I can get er' up past 180 no problem. I can ride a 3 hour ride at 150 which is a great workout...Running for 3 hours at a HR of 150 would beat my legs.