Cycling whilst injured + cycled miles against running miles.

6 watchers
Mar 2014
3:48pm, 17 Mar 2014
844 posts
  •  
  • 0
Pricey
I do about 55% of my training on the bike now due to previous injuries. Like the other comments, I focus on time and effort, rather than distance, which is meaningless. Cycling is great for aerobic fitness, but what you miss is the wear and tear on the legs, so when you return to running be prepared to be slower than before.

"Perceived wisdom" etc. is garbage. I run at 8.5 - 9mph at moreorless a jog. For the same effort, I probably ride at about 19-20mph. So my ratio is closer to 2:1 than 3:1, let alone 4:1.
Mar 2014
4:05pm, 17 Mar 2014
83 posts
  •  
  • 0
50ft jesus
Fair play Pricey considering 9mph a jog :)

I do train at around 8 mph and cycled yesterday at around 16 mph and felt that after the hour I'd had a good training session. I've allowed myself another two weeks off running and start training for a 5k in early May which I had ear marked as doing in sub 20 minutes so the "be prepared to be slower" comment by Pricey does not compute!
Mar 2014
11:39pm, 17 Mar 2014
65,817 posts
  •  
  • 0
Hanneke
I used the effort/time thing when I still ran and cycled as recovery from a running injury. Cycling took over in the end and I am no longer able to run, so just as well, but any other comparisons don't make sense, as there are too many variables!

But, when it comes to perceived effort: a 45 minute fell run feels about as hard as a 2 hour MTB ride. I am sticking to off road disciplines here for better comparison... I'd need to go out on the road for 3 hours or do something hilly to get to the same perceived affort as a 45 minute fell run...
Mar 2014
12:05pm, 18 Mar 2014
72,989 posts
  •  
  • 0
GregP
Is that RPE only, Han, or is it backed up with HR data?

Not challenging the assertion, just trying to evidence to myself as much as everyone else that fat tyres give me more bang per buck even though it isn't reflected in my mileage.
Mar 2014
12:13pm, 20 Mar 2014
845 posts
  •  
  • 0
Pricey
I think a key difference is that whilst effort/time is great for measuring cardiovascular benefit (and therefore maintaining aerobic fitness during injury), it doesn't factor in impact to legs (which may be what Hanneke is getting at?)

My legs will be more tired from a one hour run, than a one hour ride at the same effort. So considering the previous example of running a marathon = riding a century, maybe that is more comparable on the legs. Although that also depends on how much effort you put into the ride.
Mar 2014
5:20pm, 20 Mar 2014
73,019 posts
  •  
  • 0
GregP
There's a (discredited by and large) maxim in triathlon that in terms of impact on the body, a standard distance tri (1.5/40/10) is broadly analogous to a half marathon of the runny variety.

Got something to say?

To join the discussion, sign in or join us.

About This Thread

Maintained by fetcheveryone
I've picked up a potential stress fracture (ok, not physically picked it up) or it might be a reall...

Related Threads

  • cycling
  • training

The Doctor K Cup

This year sees the fifth edition of our annual challenge in memory of the Fetchies who have sadly passed away. It's named after Doctor K, who died of pancreatic cancer in 2017

Are you doing the right training?

See typical mileage, pace and long run stats for every distance and goal. See a comparison with your own training.

Heart Rate Analysis

See your heart rate training data from the last 12 months broken down in technicolour.

Flat as a pancake?

We've collected thousands of your reviews from events, and worked out which races give you the best chance of a fast time!


Back To Top
X

Free training & racing tools for runners, cyclists, swimmers & walkers.

Fetcheveryone lets you analyse your training, find races, plot routes, chat in our forum, get advice, play games - and more! Nothing is behind a paywall, and it'll stay that way thanks to our awesome community!
Get Started
Click here to join 109,066 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here