40 min walk v 10 min road ride…

Overview Chat Bike Members News Women

This topic has 22 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by thisisnotaspoon.

Viewing 23 posts - 1 through 23 (of 23 total)

40 min walk v 10 min road ride…
dobo
Free Member

So would a 40 min walk offer greater aerobic reward over a 10 min road ride on an mtb? twice a day (to work and back)??

Anything else to consider to get the most benefit from going to and from work?

Posted 15 years ago

ton
Full Member

walk would be loads better if done quickly.

Posted 15 years ago

Jamie
Free Member

This website might help.

Posted 15 years ago

jam-bo
Full Member

if you’ve got 40 mins to spare then why not a 40 min ride to work?

Posted 15 years ago

simondbarnes
Full Member

What jam bo said.

Posted 15 years ago

dobo
Free Member

oh, i should have said that calorie burning is not the aim of this, but makes for interesting comparison

thats a fair point jam bo, in the evening i guess i could take a long route back, in the morning though i’d probably go straight in

i dont know about any of you but sometimes i can take a while to get my bike stuff ready which would eat into the 40 mins anyway.

but now im just making excuses, i need to really get disaplined into cycling to work i guess if i want greater benefits

anyway BACK TO THE ORGINAL QUESTION DAMIT 😉

Posted 15 years ago

MrNutt
Free Member

get up earlier?

Posted 15 years ago

dobo
Free Member

i’ve been trying to get up earlier all my life, i’ve not quite got the hang of it yet

Posted 15 years ago

rs
Free Member

20 minute jog/run!

Posted 15 years ago

grizzlygus
Free Member

I’m no expert, but surely walking can’t ever be described as an “aerobic” exercise ?

Well, not unless you’re a fat git and the strain of walking makes you huff & puff and pushes your HR right up.

Now jogging for 20 mins would definitely be better than a 10 mins bike ride imo.

Posted 15 years ago

Surfr
Free Member

I seem to recall that exercise starts to become beneficial at around 40 minutes duration.

Posted 15 years ago

dobo
Free Member

i often go for a run, but wouldnt ever consider it on the way to work with a bag, too hot n sweaty.

so is walking aerobic exercise? whether you are fit or not?

Posted 15 years ago

rs
Free Member

only if you live at the bottom of a great big hill and you work at the top.

Posted 15 years ago

nickc
Full Member

but surely walking can’t ever be described as an “aerobic” exercise ?

Well, Aerobic just means with oxygen, hence Jogging is, sprinting hard isn’t. Any moderate exercise could be described as Aerobic really, so why not walking, maintain a good pace, swing your arms…better than nothing.

Posted 15 years ago

djglover
Free Member

stay in bed, crack one off to the hollyoaks omnibus, then ride to work?

A more rounded work out?

Posted 15 years ago

tails
Free Member

drive 😈

Posted 15 years ago

molgrips
Free Member

Walking would be better for your bike speed, certainly. 40 minutes if you walk really fast is enough to get you going for sure, and it’ll help you lose weight which, unless you are skin and bone to begin with, will make you a faster rider. 10 mins on a bike will do nothing for you at all – not even enough time to warm up. If you hammer, it’ll be just enough time for your legs to get full of lactate and then just sit there all day which will fatigue your muscles, if you go easy then you’re not doing anything.

Although, one coudl theorise that by filling your legs with lactate and letting it sit there, you could be increasing your lactate tolerance which would help with the riding.. hmm… When I was in Uni a lot of my riding was like this – short fast rides about town. I don’t know if it helped much, but I became good at sprinting hard from a cold start.

Posted 15 years ago

IanMunro
Free Member

Ride.
40 minutes of walking you’ll work up a decent sweat.
10 minutes of riding and you’ll still be nice and cool when you get to work.
Of course this completely fails to answer your actual question 🙂

Posted 15 years ago

TandemJeremy
Free Member

I have often seen it quoted that a mile of cycling and a mile of walking uses the same calories. I doubt it myself but the logic is that although walking is easier you are exercising for longer to do that mile.

Posted 15 years ago

HoratioHufnagel
Free Member

depends on how fast you go! work done = force * distance.

fast biking = more air resistance = more force. therefore more work done.

Posted 15 years ago

ampthill
Full Member

It depends how fit you are. Brisk walking for about 40 mins a day dug me out of a very unfit hole. Its enough so that I can now go for a short but proper ride at the weekends.

But your probably fitter than me so will benefit less. But I would still rate brisk walking. Short commutes are worse than slightly longer ones for never feeling right

Maybe cycle on a Wednesday and take the long way home

Posted 15 years ago

molgrips
Free Member

I have often seen it quoted that a mile of cycling and a mile of walking uses the same calories.

Rubbish. If that were true, walking and cycling would be equally efficient in terms of energy in versus distance travelled. Consequently you’d be able to cover 150 miles in a day on foot, which is clearly nonsense.

Posted 15 years ago

thisisnotaspoon
Free Member

both will help you lose weight, the walking will burn off more calories probably.

Even 15 minutes to and form work every day, over a period of a week is still 2.5 hours riding. And you’ll probably notice the benifit of being fitter at the weekend because your body keeps its metabolism/glycogen stores up.

Posted 15 years ago