Bike:Running and Doubles

A general rule of thumb is 2:1 biking to running is about equivalent time or 4:1 biking to running is about equivalent mileage.

The caveat is that biking and running work different muscle groups and work muscle groups differently so they aren't strictly equivalent. To optimize your running fitness you have to run so we're talking more of a general fitness benefit. As you noted you felt your quads (strength limited) rather than being aerobically stressed on the bike.

To your point about sweating, one of the nice things about cycling is that it is a lot more tolerable than running in very hot weather because you have so much more air flow. On the other hand cycling in very cold weather is a lot more miserable than running in the same.

I've never had any success in maintaining shape on the bike. But what worked best for me was to ride with the same frequency as I run. Also I did a lot more intervals (uphill) than when I'm running. Kind of 5k-intensity intervals to try and prevent my VO2max from plunging. I'd say, spend your time running unless you're injured.

Part of why I'm riding is because I live in Florida and it has been ridiculously hot for the last couple months. My running dropped off with the heat (miles not pace) and I'm hoping to add the bike for muscle stimulus not cardio.

Thanks for the input!

I don't know how people can get good aerobic workouts in on a bike. Even when I'm biking at a hard effort I'm probably breathing as hard as I do at my easy run pace. My legs burn like hell, though.

bigtool05 wrote:

I don't know how people can get good aerobic workouts in on a bike. Even when I'm biking at a hard effort I'm probably breathing as hard as I do at my easy run pace. My legs burn like hell, though.

You're probably in too big a gear, but I think no matter what you're going to feel your legs more than your lungs in comparison to running.

That's weird because I'm much better running, have run many road races and marathons, but on a bike I get out of breath. My quads don't hurt at all, but I don't have strong quads like bikers. Is that due to the higher cadence that I use? Also I can usually run away from similar ability (overall) cyclists on hills, but they can thrash me on the flats.

96 rpm wrote:

That's weird because I'm much better running, have run many road races and marathons, but on a bike I get out of breath. My quads don't hurt at all, but I don't have strong quads like bikers. Is that due to the higher cadence that I use? Also I can usually run away from similar ability (overall) cyclists on hills, but they can thrash me on the flats.

Your handle answers your question. To the poster above, big gears will burn up your legs before your HR has a chance to come up.

I've read in cycling mags that beginning bikers should log 1000 miles before even using their big front chain ring.

redux wrote:

Part of why I'm riding is because I live in Florida and it has been ridiculously hot for the last couple months. My running dropped off with the heat (miles not pace) and I'm hoping to add the bike for muscle stimulus not cardio.

Thanks for the input!

Did you consider the bike-run-bike concept, where you bike to different running trails, run the trails, then bike home.

Really expands your training routes.

garland823 wrote:

bigtool05 wrote:

I don't know how people can get good aerobic workouts in on a bike. Even when I'm biking at a hard effort I'm probably breathing as hard as I do at my easy run pace. My legs burn like hell, though.

You're probably in too big a gear, but I think no matter what you're going to feel your legs more than your lungs in comparison to running.

Yeah that was definitely a mistake I made at first. Even in a lower gear though I don't really feel like I get a good workout. Fortunately I only have one more week of cross training before I can start running again

codger wrote:

Did you consider the bike-run-bike concept, where you bike to different running trails, run the trails, then bike home.

Really expands your training routes.

I have but haven't mapped the non-interstate route to the trail.

I'm 42, bike commute about 100 miles/week and run 18:00 for 5k. I think there is probably some aerobic benefit to running from biking, but there is no substitute for real running miles. I enjoy cycling and do it because it fits with my lifestyle, but if you want to maximize your running performance stick to running with perhaps some occasional cross-training for injury prevention/mental health. With respect to your question about B/R ratio, if I had to give you an answer it would probably be something like 4 or 5 miles of cycling = 1 mile of running, but only to the extent that your heart/lungs don't know the difference between running and cycling. Your LEGS, on the other hand, really need the specificity.

Track bike? Sweet - you're definitely getting a good workout, but consider it a complement to your fitness and not a substitute for running.

I hear you Hick. I am looking at it like a supplement not a replacement. Like I said, I'm hoping to use it to get in additional muscle stimulus whenever its too hot for cardio or to add a strength-based workout to my day.

i've added cycling to my running for several years now. what i found is that if i ride enough or with enough intensity, i am always running and biking on tired legs. i'm running on tired legs because of the biking, and i'm biking on tired legs because of the running.

while this seems like a bad idea, i really think it's made me an overall stronger runner. i 'overachieve' @ half marthon and up distances based on what the my 5k times are. I often wonder it is because of all of the biking.

Where are the hills in Florida. Do you mean overpasses?

Anyway, 3:1 is a good estimate, timewise and distance. You have to consider that a lot of the time on a bike you are doing no work at all, just coasting. You'll never get in as good shape biking, but it is a good supplement to running and a calorie burner.