# Cycling to lose weight



## harrow1977 (22 Jan 2014)

Hi

I have been cycling to work and back (about 11 miles each way) for a couple of months on and off. According to Strava, I am burning about 400 calories a day doing this, which is good 

One question - am I correct in that to actually lose weight cycling I need to to get myself into a sweat, that is I need to push myself harder and harder? Simply ambling along at a relatively normal pace is not going to help?


----------



## 400bhp (22 Jan 2014)

Calories in < calories out.

Best to go onto health & fitness subforum and ask on there.


----------



## harrow1977 (22 Jan 2014)

Thanks didn't see that forum!


----------



## harrow1977 (22 Jan 2014)

Hi

I have been cycling to work and back (about 11 miles each way) for a couple of months on and off. According to Strava, I am burning about 400 calories a day doing this, which is good 

One question - am I correct in that to actually lose weight cycling I need to to get myself into a sweat, that is I need to push myself harder and harder? Simply ambling along at a relatively normal pace is not going to help?


----------



## ianrauk (22 Jan 2014)

Cut out the crap food and the booze. 11 miles is a good mileage. Keep cycling and eat healthy.
That's all you need to do.


----------



## jay clock (22 Jan 2014)

11 miles each way will be a lot more than that. It depends on your weight and the bike weight, and how fast you go, but I would guess you are burning 1200 to 1400 per day. Any exercise will help burn calories off. Cycling harder will be harder because of the wind resistance (20mph is much more than double the energy needed to do 10mph)

As for sweating, I have to go very slowly not to sweat. How long is 11 miles taking?


----------



## vickster (22 Jan 2014)

40 calories per mile my rule of thumb - 20 miles = 800


----------



## jowwy (22 Jan 2014)

jay clock said:


> 11 miles each way will be a lot more than that. It depends on your weight and the bike weight, and how fast you go, but I would guess you are burning 1200 to 1400 per day. Any exercise will help burn calories off. Cycling harder will be harder because of the wind resistance (20mph is much more than double the energy needed to do 10mph)
> 
> As for sweating, I have to go very slowly not to sweat. How long is 11 miles taking?


12/1400 is way to high an estimate

Im 17st and i worked out after a lot of riding and anylisis that i burn approx 40calories per mile. Using that figure abd eating healthy helped me lose over 4stone last year. Then my partner became ill and 2stone went back on through not riding.


----------



## Blurb (22 Jan 2014)

I think to get fitter you need to be always pushing, but to lose weight you "just" need to do the work. i.e.If you cycle 11 miles in 60 minutes or 11 miles in 50 minutes, you'll burn broadley similar calories. So weight-loss-wise you achieve roughly the same, but the harder you work the fitter you'll get.

On a bike/rider total of about 100kilos I factor 40-50 cal a mile at an average 15ish mph.

I do the same mileage but generally push myself and I'm in my late forties and am fitter than I was 20 years ago. I wasn't overweight when I started but still lost 15% of my weight because of cycling and eating better/smarter. It's amazing how much fat the human body has hidden within it.


----------



## MichaelO (22 Jan 2014)

400bhp said:


> Calories in < calories out..


Not entirely useful when someone first starts cycling - I burnt far more calories than I was taking in when I started cycling...and my body shape changed, but the scales stayed pretty much the same as they did before. Weight alone isn't always the best measure.


----------



## MrGrumpy (22 Jan 2014)

I was about to post the very same, your experience is same as mine.


----------



## uclown2002 (22 Jan 2014)

You're surely not suggesting you are gaining muscle at the same rate as you're shedding fat, as a result of riding a bike a bit?


----------



## Thomk (22 Jan 2014)

harrow1977 said:


> Hi
> 
> I have been cycling to work and back (about 11 miles each way) for a couple of months on and off. According to Strava, I am burning about 400 calories a day doing this, which is good
> 
> One question - am I correct in that to actually lose weight cycling I need to to get myself into a sweat, that is I need to push myself harder and harder? Simply ambling along at a relatively normal pace is not going to help?


How "on and off"?


----------



## 400bhp (22 Jan 2014)

MichaelO said:


> Not entirely useful when someone first starts cycling - I burnt far more calories than I was taking in when I started cycling...and my body shape changed, but the scales stayed pretty much the same as they did before. Weight alone isn't always the best measure.



What's the title of the thread?


----------



## Cubist (22 Jan 2014)

uclown2002 said:


> You're surely not suggesting you are gaining muscle at the same rate as you're shedding fat, as a result of riding a bike a bit?



Someone who has led a totally sedentary lifestyle will soon pack muscle on if they're exercising. For a large person riding a bike is serious exercise to start with, and leg muscles in a mesomorph will absolutely balloon. 

It ain't the same for some skinny regular cyclist on an efficient road bike.


----------



## esrite (22 Jan 2014)

ianrauk said:


> Cut out the crap food and the booze. 11 miles is a good mileage. Keep cycling and eat healthy.
> That's all you need to do.



On top of this cycling before eating breakfast or drinking anything with sugar is good way to burn fat. (the distance can't be too far else you will hit the wall- 11 miles should be ok).


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

jay clock said:


> 11 miles each way will be a lot more than that. It depends on your weight and the bike weight, and how fast you go, but I would guess you are *burning 1200 to 1400 per day*. Any exercise will help burn calories off. Cycling harder will be harder because of the wind resistance (20mph is much more than double the energy needed to do 10mph)
> 
> As for sweating, I have to go very slowly not to sweat. How long is 11 miles taking?



That's a ridiculous overestimate. I don't burn that and my commute is 50+ miles round trip.


----------



## Rob3rt (23 Jan 2014)

Maybe jay clock is refering to overall daily burn, not just the bike ride. I don't know....


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> Maybe jay clock is refering to overall daily burn, not just the bike ride.



Ah. That is in fact a possibility. But that would be a bit of an underestimate unless the OP is a slight female.




MichaelO said:


> Not entirely useful when someone first starts cycling - *I burnt far more calories than I was taking in* when I started cycling...and my body shape changed, but the *scales stayed* pretty much the *same* as they did before. Weight alone isn't always the best measure.



So how do you account for this apparent contradiction?


----------



## Stu Plows (23 Jan 2014)

You’ll definitely be burning a lot on an 11 mile commute. As long as you’re getting you’re heart rate up you will be. The rate at which you will do it as you can see from some of the posts vary from person to person… According to my HRM I have been known to burn 700 calories in half an hour and even 3000 calories on a 50 mile ride. I take it with a pinch of salt and fuel as I see fit. 

Riding along at a steady pace will benefit you too and you will still lose weight as long as you keep a good diet, that’s not to say balls out won’t benefit you either.


----------



## Koga (23 Jan 2014)

Not sure of the above, I thought at a steady pace (say at least 18 mph on average) you will do well to burn 500 calories per hour. I may be wrong, comments from others ?


----------



## e-rider (23 Jan 2014)

harrow1977 said:


> Hi
> 
> I have been cycling to work and back (about 11 miles each way) for a couple of months on and off. According to Strava, I am burning about 400 calories a day doing this, which is good
> 
> One question - am I correct in that to actually lose weight cycling I need to to get myself into a sweat, that is I need to push myself harder and harder? Simply ambling along at a relatively normal pace is not going to help?


although exercise is essential for good health, the best way to lose weight is through diet. That doesn't mean you should stop cycling - certainly not. However, you will see better results quicker if you adjust your diet to lower cal, lower fat, lower sugar


----------



## MichaelO (23 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> So how do you account for this apparent contradiction?


If you read the whole post - when I *first started* riding I was definitely putting on muscle & losing fat - but to begin with, these were pretty much equally themselves out - I was disappointed when the scales hadn't moved much more than a pound over the first month. Since then I've consistently lost weight with the same amount of cycling.


----------



## e-rider (23 Jan 2014)

Koga said:


> Not sure of the above, I thought at a steady pace (say at least 18 mph on average) you will do well to burn 500 calories per hour. I may be wrong, comments from others ?


it was once thought (not long ago) that steady exercise was best for burning fat and losing weight - it is now believed (by many, but not all) that more intense exercise is best for this


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

MichaelO said:


> If you read the whole post - when I *first started* riding I was definitely putting on muscle & losing fat - but to begin with, these were pretty much equally themselves out - I was disappointed when the scales hadn't moved much more than a pound over the first month. Since then I've consistently lost weight with the same amount of cycling.



It's physically impossible to increase muscle mass by a pound per week (or anywhere near that) through cycling.


----------



## Dusty Bin (23 Jan 2014)

Manage your weight in the kitchen. Manage your fitness on the bike. Expecting the weight to fall off simply by riding a short distance a day is unrealistic.


----------



## Rob3rt (23 Jan 2014)

Stu Plows said:


> You’ll definitely be burning a lot on an 11 mile commute. As long as you’re getting you’re heart rate up you will be. The rate at which you will do it as you can see from some of the posts vary from person to person… According to my HRM I have been known to burn 700 calories in half an hour and even 3000 calories on a 50 mile ride. I take it with a pinch of salt and fuel as I see fit.
> 
> Riding along at a steady pace will benefit you too and you will still lose weight as long as you keep a good diet, that’s not to say balls out won’t benefit you either.




The values you quote seem to be large over estimates. Esp the latter.


----------



## vickster (23 Jan 2014)

How much does the Op weigh? This will have an influence too I believe on calories burnt for a given amount of effort?


----------



## Stu Plows (23 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> The values you quote seem to be large over estimates. Esp the latter.


Hence my comment about taking that with a pinch of salt. 

I’ve never really fussed about calories burnt during exercise, just interesting to see, it’s the fitness I’m more worried about and being quicker ride by ride (or not as it seems).


----------



## MichaelO (23 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> It's physically impossible to increase muscle mass by a pound per week (or anywhere near that) through cycling.


It was my experience though. I went from practically no exercise to 100-120 miles a week (as well as eating a far healthier diet), and lost approx 1 pound in the first month. Far less than I would have otherwise expected. But I did notice the change in my waist & overall shape/fitness - so it was definitely doing a lot of good, just not on the scales


----------



## ColinJ (23 Jan 2014)

Koga said:


> Not sure of the above, I thought at a steady pace (say at least 18 mph on average) you will do well to burn 500 calories per hour. I may be wrong, comments from others ?


I used to ride the Manchester 100 in 6 hours and burn a pound of fat each time. I was averaging just under 17 mph, and burning about 575 cals/hr.


vickster said:


> How much does the Op weigh? This will have an influence too I believe on calories burnt for a given amount of effort?


It doesn't make a lot of difference on the flat. I put the numbers into some bike calculator software and what a 150 lb cyclist burned 543 cals doing would only cost a 250 lb cyclist an extra 27 cals. It makes a huge difference when climbing though - the same speed up a mere 2% drag would cost the 150 lb cyclist about 1,000 cals/hr and the heavier cyclist about 1,200.


----------



## vickster (23 Jan 2014)

Interesting, we have no idea of the OP's 11 miles. In Yorkshire, it would all be uphill, in London, mostly flat


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

vickster said:


> Interesting, we have no idea of the OP's 11 miles. In Yorkshire, it would all be uphill, in London, mostly flat



Of course if it was all uphill, he'd eventually run out of oxygen and suffocate...


----------



## Thomk (23 Jan 2014)

vickster said:


> Interesting, we have no idea of the OP's 11 miles. In Yorkshire, it would all be uphill, in London, mostly flat


We also have no idea how often the OP commutes by bike.


----------



## vickster (23 Jan 2014)

Indeed we know very little about the OP


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

ColinJ said:


> I used to ride the Manchester 100 in 6 hours and burn a pound of fat each time. I was averaging just under 17 mph, and burning about 575 cals/hr.
> 
> It doesn't make a lot of difference on the flat. I put the numbers into some bike calculator software and what a 150 lb cyclist burned 543 cals doing would only cost a 250 lb cyclist an extra 27 cals. It makes a huge difference when climbing though - the same speed up a mere 2% drag would cost the 150 lb cyclist about 1,000 cals/hr and the heavier cyclist about 1,200.



The 250lb cyclist would have to be phenomenally strong to ride uphill for an hour at a speed that would net him 1200 calories. Like pro level strong. Even 1000 cals/hour requires well above average level of fitness.


----------



## Dusty Bin (23 Jan 2014)

User3094 said:


> According to Endomondo - 40 minutes of turbo training does 650 calories.



what, even 40 minutes of spinning 34/25 at 60rpm..??


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

User3094 said:


> According to Endomondo - 40 minutes of turbo training does 650 calories.



If you're 350w rider maybe... and subject to @Dusty Bin comment.


----------



## redcard (23 Jan 2014)

esrite said:


> On top of this cycling before eating breakfast or drinking anything with sugar is good way to burn fat. (the distance can't be too far else you will hit the wall- 11 miles should be ok).


 
Not sure that cycling before breakfast or drinking anything with sugar would have any effect on fat burning. Your point about distance is just words.

I'd like to know the science behind that.


----------



## jowwy (23 Jan 2014)

Ok - i'm 240lbs - last night i did a gut wrenching 10mile TT on the turbo - time was 27.52 with average speed at 21.6mph average 89rpm and my garmin and turbo data said a calorie burn of 402 calories.

i personally have always worked on the premise of 40cals per mile, rightly or wrongly so both my data readings are not far out.

so there is no way you can spin at 60rpm for 40mins and burn 650 calories


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

User3094 said:


> theres no link to effort - could be churning a 52/12 on resistance 5 and it would be still be the same.



And that my friend tells you all you need to know about the usefulness of Endomondo.


----------



## MrGrumpy (23 Jan 2014)

At 220lbs myself, I can do a lumpy 10 mile TT in under 28mins, but climbing is much harder, found that out on the local 1mile 8% on average climb at the weekend  on the fixed.

However as everyone else is saying, to lose weight you need to change your diet and excersise can help with that but I`m guilty and sure the rest are as well,if you think that you can commute 20+ miles everyday and stuff your face with all sorts, you will lose weight.

I know what my vice is and its the weekend wines, I reckon if I could cut that out alot then I could shift a stone at least


----------



## screenman (23 Jan 2014)

I can do a 10tt on the turbo in less than 15 minutes quite easily, I just do not have the tyre touching the roller

Sorry but TT on a turbo is meaningless unless used as a reference for next time you do the same, of course you will need to calibrate the turbo, to get the same reading.


----------



## Dusty Bin (23 Jan 2014)

User3094 said:


> Heres how I measure turbo effort...
> 
> 10x3, 5x4, 10x3, 5x4, 10x3 [130]
> 
> ...



Wow - and you think sports science is a load of hoodoo..


----------



## screenman (23 Jan 2014)

Do you calibrate your turbo to come up with a consistent score. Must admit I now only cycle for pleasure and exercise so I do not get as technical as I used to. I do 2 road sessions, 3 swims and 2 turbo sessions a week, so maybe a bit more than just exercise. But with nasty arthritus my racing days are over.


----------



## Rob3rt (23 Jan 2014)

User3094 said:


> theres no link to effort - could be churning a 52/12 on resistance 5 and it would be still be the same.



There is a link to work done, and you would be doing more work in the same period of time if you increase effort. Further, the higher effort will stimulate further calorific burn beyond the power directly delivered to the pedals.



screenman said:


> I can do a 10tt on the turbo in less than 15 minutes quite easily, I just do not have the tyre touching the roller
> 
> *Sorry but TT on a turbo is meaningless unless used as a reference for next time you do the same, of course you will need to calibrate the turbo, to get the same reading.*



If replying to Jowwy, he knows, as he sent me a message a few days ago about this and I told him the same thing. He is just using the 10 mile TT efforts as a benchmark.

If you get quicker on the turbo, then you will go quicker on the road. In general terms, without looking for smallprint


----------



## jay clock (23 Jan 2014)

sorry, looked again at my 12-1400 cals and see it is wrong. I was guessing. My comment also related to the full 22 mile round trip. I use this site and it says 1081 for me http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/4/4_1/94.shtml doing that distance. It may be on overestimate, so lets say 700. Still allows space for extra food and a deficit


----------



## screenman (23 Jan 2014)

If you get quicker on the turbo, then you will go quicker on the road. In general terms, without looking for smallprint [/quote]

I agree with that, the turbo calibration just stops you kidding yourself.


----------



## ColinJ (23 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> The 250lb cyclist would have to be phenomenally strong to ride uphill for an hour at a speed that would net him 1200 calories. Like pro level strong. Even 1000 cals/hour requires well above average level of fitness.


I just noticed that the calculator dropped the speed of the fat cyclist on the flat and the climb.

[I'm assuming that the calculator is coming up with sensible numbers. I have looked at some of the things that I have done in the past and the numbers look sensible.]

For both cyclists to do 17.7 mph for an hour on the flat, the thin cyclist would need to put out 150 W and burn 543 cals, and the fat cyclist 168 W and burn 609 cals so that is actually 66 cals more.

To do 17.7 mph on the 2% slope, thin guy would have to generate 276 W & burn 999 cals, and fat guy 369 W & burn 1335 cals .

I don't have a long enough hill to ride up for an hour, but the local Cragg Vale climb averages 3.3% for 5.5 miles and I did that in 23.5 mins in 2006 when I was between thin guy and fat guy in weight. I averaged 290 W and burned 390 cals. If I had a long enough hill and could have sustained the effort for an hour (which I think I could have at the time) I would have burned about 1,000 cals. 

Yes, finding another 20% would have been difficult, but I wasn't at peak fitness so I think 20% more would have been doable with another year of hard training effort. Unfortunately, I had a crappy year, piled weight on and lost most of my fitness!


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

Let's put it this way, at the Vuelta Nibali stated (in a bit of a pointed attack on Horner) that he couldn't ride at 400w for 20 minutes. Not many can.


----------



## Rob3rt (23 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> Let's put it this way, at the Vuelta Nibali stated (in a bit of a pointed attack on Horner) that he couldn't ride at 400w for 20 minutes. Not many can.



Hmm not intending this to become a pissing contest but... I can do about 360-370W (at 75kg) for 20 minutes so 400W doesn't sound that outlandish (depending on body weight).


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> Hmm, I can do about 360-370W (at 75kg) for 20 minutes so 400W doesn't sound that outlandish.



Nibali is a bit smaller than you Robert  and it was in the context of being tacked onto the end of a six hour stage.

Before we get too sidetracked by your awesomeness (good numbers BTW) the point was that not many 250 pound recreational cyclists will be fit enough to produce 369 watts for an hour.


----------



## screenman (23 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> Hmm not intending this to become a ****ing contest but... I can do about 360-370W (at 75kg) for 20 minutes so 400W doesn't sound that outlandish (depending on body weight).


Impressive, but then again so are your times.


----------



## ColinJ (23 Jan 2014)

VamP said:


> Nibali is a bit smaller than you Robert  and it was in the context of being tacked onto the end of a six hour stage.
> 
> Before we get too sidetracked by your awesomeness (good numbers BTW) the point was that not many 250 pound recreational cyclists will be fit enough to produce 369 watts for an hour.


I got a bit immersed in the numbers and forgot that I was actually making the same point as you! 

I wasn't suggesting that 250 lb leisure cyclists are whizzing up hills at good speeds - I was saying that riding up hills quickly is hard work, which we all agree on!


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

ColinJ said:


> I got a bit immersed in the numbers and forgot that I was actually making the same point as you!
> 
> I wasn't suggesting that 250 lb leisure cyclists are whizzing up hills at good speeds - I was saying that riding up hills quickly is hard work, which we all agree on!



Absolutely. And it puts into context anyone who trusts their HRM or whatever when it tells them that they are using up 1200 calories per hour of cycling. Regardless of weight or how hilly their rides are.


----------



## screenman (23 Jan 2014)

One thing out of all of this is that, cycling burns calories and hopefully makes you fitter and feel better.

Keep smiling


----------



## Bodhbh (23 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> 12/1400 is way to high an estimate
> 
> Im 17st and i worked out after a lot of riding and anylisis that i burn approx 40calories per mile. Using that figure abd eating healthy helped me lose over 4stone last year. Then my partner became ill and 2stone went back on through not riding.



When counting calories I've always called it 50kcal/mile. I'm not saying one number is more accurate than the other, but that's what I've gone with. This is maily riding a MTB converted into a tourer/commuter with fat slicks and mudguards and generally a bit of luggage (bike + luggage 20kg+, me 80-100kg). I can't see it's far from the truth anyhow. With cycling as my main exercise, and when I've used calorie counting to loose weight and aimed to loose a kg a week - I've lost a kg a week - and over a sustained period of time. It may be I've overestimated the calories in what I'm eating, or underestimated how much I burn 'doing nothing' or workign in an office - but anyhow the 'balance sheet' seems about right.


----------



## screenman (23 Jan 2014)

Not forgetting to lower the calories as you lose weight, that is if you are calories counting, which I must say worked for me.

I am glad of the fact that you lot cannot see me here with a glass of bubbly, celebrating nothing apart from we got the cork out.


----------



## uclown2002 (23 Jan 2014)

*lose *weight not loose weight


----------



## jowwy (23 Jan 2014)

TBH all i care about is what works for me - when i need advice or help with training etc theres a limited few on here that i ask advice off via a pm.

And i respect their help and advice. I'm also thankful of their personal time answering my questions.


----------



## campagman (23 Jan 2014)

your cycling is to improve your cycling
losing weight should be by your diet
cycling to lose weight is not needed if these are controlled


----------



## 400bhp (23 Jan 2014)

Man, some of you are obsessed with calories burnt

Just ride your bike. Ride it harder you burn more.

Same with food. Eat a bit less and/or eat more healthily.

It annoys me that a "lifestyle" becomes a counting game (and an incorrect counting game at that).

I've not looked into it (cos I shouldn't need to) but calorific intake/outake will be stochastic in nature. A potato aint the same as another potato.


----------



## ColinJ (23 Jan 2014)

400bhp said:


> Man, some of you are obsessed with calories burnt
> 
> Just ride your bike. Ride it harder you burn more.
> 
> ...


In case anybody doesn't know what 'stochastic' means - read this.

Ok, if you still don't understand what it means - try _again_. Several times ...


----------



## VamP (23 Jan 2014)

A lot of things are stochastic...


----------



## jack smith (24 Jan 2014)

Hi all, just after abit of help with this, I'm 240lbs, got abit if fat but mainly muscle, I'm due back with the army later Thisyear, I cycle daily, usually 12 miles a day but sometimes over 20, there are some decent hills in my area but I really struggle on them,( probably because of my weight) I can pick up top 20's on the flat with no issues and hold it for miles as I have very powerful legs....but hills I just can not do whatsoever, is hill climbing good for losing weight? Or am I better off keeping the high pace on "lumpy" routes , my leg muscles look ridiculously big since starting on the bike to the point I needed to buy new jeans lol so I, worried with what I'm doing I could be putting on more muscle than fat. The issue with the army is they are very strict on bmi, so I need to loose both muscle and fat if possible.


----------



## Shut Up Legs (24 Jan 2014)

uclown2002 said:


> *lose *weight not loose weight


... and technically it's kilocalories, not calories .


----------



## david k (24 Jan 2014)

Koga said:


> Not sure of the above, I thought at a steady pace (say at least 18 mph on average) you will do well to burn 500 calories per hour. I may be wrong, comments from others ?


18mp is rapid for me, certainly not the average


----------



## screenman (24 Jan 2014)

18mph is a breeze, my internet riding speed is 28mph and that with no hands.

18mph steady pace would normally be for somebody who can race at 25mph+I would say.


----------



## david k (24 Jan 2014)

Endomondo doesnt know if im on my heavy hybrid or road bike so surely that would affect calorie burn?

I just use the figures as a rough guide, they dont mean a lot to me, just something to add a little interest in looking over previous similar rides.

In short you will burn calories when cycling and the more you do the more you burn, so if you want to lose weight have a healthy diet and cycle as much as you feel you can


----------



## screenman (24 Jan 2014)

I know I have just eaten 210 calories I did not need to, but I did enjoy them. 15 extra minutes on the turbo needed tonight at about 200w to get rid of them.


----------



## Old Plodder (24 Jan 2014)

@jack smith 
Keep the legs as they are & get some dumbbells for toning up the upper body, (exercise sheet should be included, if new).


----------



## screenman (24 Jan 2014)

jack smith said:


> Hi all, just after abit of help with this, I'm 240lbs, got abit if fat but mainly muscle, I'm due back with the army later Thisyear, I cycle daily, usually 12 miles a day but sometimes over 20, there are some decent hills in my area but I really struggle on them,( probably because of my weight) I can pick up top 20's on the flat with no issues and hold it for miles as I have very powerful legs....but hills I just can not do whatsoever, is hill climbing good for losing weight? Or am I better off keeping the high pace on "lumpy" routes , my leg muscles look ridiculously big since starting on the bike to the point I needed to buy new jeans lol so I, worried with what I'm doing I could be putting on more muscle than fat. The issue with the army is they are very strict on bmi, so I need to loose both muscle and fat if possible.


I doubt you are putting much noticeable muscle on with those rides.

Does the Army not offer you advice and training facilities.


----------



## jack smith (24 Jan 2014)

my upper body is the same lol, big chest shoulder's and biceps, i just need to loose the bit of fat i have but i think i might be pushing myself too hard, this is a snapshot from tonights ride, not pushing myself and with no meals beforehand at 4pm is this a good pace to be cycling for weight loss? or do i need to speed up?



^^^^
they do, but only to people who can achieve their bmi, i physically cant no matter what i do, and ive fasted and exercised to exhaustion for weeks pre joining to even get considered, and before then i was very muscular, when i became the dweeb after it all i was still a good 10kg over


----------



## screenman (24 Jan 2014)

jack smith said:


> my upper body is the same lol, big chest shoulder's and biceps, i just need to loose the bit of fat i have but i think i might be pushing myself too hard, this is a snapshot from tonights ride, not pushing myself and with no meals beforehand at 4pm is this a good pace to be cycling for weight loss? or do i need to speed up?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Get a dietician, fasting is certainly noy the way to do it.

The ride is no way long enough to lose weight, get some 3 and 4 hour rides in and write down everything you eat for a month.


----------



## jack smith (24 Jan 2014)

t


screenman said:


> Get a dietician, fasting is certainly noy the way to do it.
> 
> The ride is no way long enough to lose weight, get some 3 and 4 hour rides in and write down everything you eat for a month.


 
that is just a ride i do twice a day, to the other halfs, on weekends i do 30-40 miles at a time with a slightly lower average pace


----------



## jack smith (24 Jan 2014)

jack smith said:


> t
> 
> 
> that is just a ride i do twice a day, to the other halfs, on weekends i do 30-40 miles at a time with a slightly lower average pace



and honestly mate i tried everything else before that and that was the only thing that worked for me, my metabolism is abnormal.


----------



## screenman (24 Jan 2014)

jack smith said:


> and honestly mate i tried everything else before that and that was the only thing that worked for me, my metabolism is abnormal.


Out of interest what is your waist and chest measurements. How do you know that your metabolism is at fault?

Try googling slow metabolism, you may find some good points.


----------



## jack smith (24 Jan 2014)

36 waist and 46 chest, neither have fat on them and are solid. the only fat i've got is abit in the thighs and arse tbh so thats what i am trying to loose although my leg look very big and toned til i sit down then the thighs bulge out but when stood upright they are very muscular, im stumped at how to go about it to be honest


----------



## screenman (24 Jan 2014)

I thought they were changing to the tape method which would see you OK.


----------



## jack smith (24 Jan 2014)

never happened, infact its gotten worse, if you are over your bmi from just a height and weight measurement you cant even apply. i had lots of issued and complained appealed allsorts at first and they wouldnt use a tape measure or calipers, i only got through it by proving i could run a mile and a half in sub 9 mins.


----------



## Jon George (24 Jan 2014)

jack smith said:


> The issue with the army is they are very strict on bmi.



How are they measuring this? If it's a chart of weight versus height it's too simplistic. TBH I'd a have thought overall fitness was a better indicatory of performance for someone in your line of work. Oh, if you're building muscle it will have been constructed from using the food you eat - you can't bulk up on fresh air - so diet is something to look into.


----------



## jowwy (24 Jan 2014)

The calorie count on that ride is way to high an estimate

5 miles @ 40 calories a mile = 200 calories burnt at the most.


----------



## screenman (24 Jan 2014)

I would roughly agree with the posts above.


----------



## jack smith (24 Jan 2014)

simple shop bought scales and a ruler stuck on the wall...thats how high tech they are.... they defer you on medical grounds cause " your fat" and if you are over your bmi apparently you are prone to injury if you exercise so they wont let you prove your fitness either.. rediculous, 
first time i went to selection i asked to talk to one of the doctors after the nurse said i was too much over my bmi to carry on to explain that i am fully fit, and he answered extremely blunt and rudely. "no your just fat nothing we can do. go home" ( they are all heartless stuck up overly glorified civvy gp's that get to come to the barracks for a few hours a week and think they are servicemen/women) i made sure i got the same doctor to check me over next time i went up to selection and i made sure i was very sarcastic when showing him my fitness records i got done by private healthcare and run results i did with the recruitment office  fair to say he was speechless and didnt even mutter a word about any of his previous words that i reminded him of


----------



## Dusty Bin (24 Jan 2014)

sarcasm always works brilliantly with medical professionals - they love that...


----------



## jack smith (24 Jan 2014)

this was after i was passed and the actual soldiers there told them what idiots they were. anyway back on topic, dont want this thread to get closed!


----------



## montage (25 Jan 2014)

jack smith said:


> simple shop bought scales and a ruler stuck on the wall...thats how high tech they are.... they defer you on medical grounds cause " your fat" and if you are over your bmi apparently you are prone to injury if you exercise so they wont let you prove your fitness either.. rediculous,
> first time i went to selection i asked to talk to one of the doctors after the nurse said i was too much over my bmi to carry on to explain that i am fully fit, and he answered extremely blunt and rudely. "no your just fat nothing we can do. go home" *( they are all heartless stuck up overly glorified civvy gp's that get to come to the barracks for a few hours a week and think they are servicemen/women)* i made sure i got the same doctor to check me over next time i went up to selection and i made sure i was very sarcastic when showing him my fitness records i got done by private healthcare and run results i did with the recruitment office  fair to say he was speechless and didnt even mutter a word about any of his previous words that i reminded him of



The military is heavy with red tape as I am sure you know. There are rules and procedures in place which are strictly adhered to, and you obviously failed to comply with these due to your bodyweight. This is not the fault of the doctor, it is yours, so show some kind of respect rather than taking your own shortcomings out on the messenger.

You are doing the right thing to address your weight and I wish you the best of luck with bringing it down. Time your rides so that your meals follow straight after to avoid snacking, avoid junk calories and get as many hours in on the bike as you can (mix it up a bit, some days go and smash the hills, some days go easy, some days try and get the highest average speed for a route as possible). Cycling IMO helps the loss of bodyweight, but is just one cog necessary in the change in lifestyle needed to shift those kilos.


----------



## jack smith (25 Jan 2014)

unless you have met said doctors ( not sure if you have for all i know you could of but i doubt you have) you will know they have very poor and rude attitudes and often care more about getting off early than properly assesing people or taking extra time to further investigate and have had so many complaints that said doctors have now been given the boot. i think i will try to mix it up abit, some mid distance fast rides and some long hilly rides


----------



## screenman (25 Jan 2014)

According to Mr Garmin the 30 mile ride I did this morning at a proper ( not internet speed) 16mph burned 871 calories. 29 calories per mile, now where did I put those 3 Mars bars.


----------



## 50000tears (25 Jan 2014)

All this talk over how many calories burnt over what effort is irrelevant to the OP. One of the first things you do if you take up a sport with any serious intent is to cut a lot of the crap you eat out of your diet. Doesn't mean you have to always eat healthy but those sneaky chocolate bars, biscuits and crisps should be cut out. Do that and perhaps watch portion sizing too is all you need along with your exercise for the weight to come off slowly but surely. Sadly far too many people, and I work with a lot of them, think that any exercise gives them a free pass to then stuff themselves with goodies from the vending machine. Than again you cannot count these people as having any serious intent at all!


----------



## Shaunthesheep (26 Jan 2014)

Eat less move more simples says a fat man on a bike lol


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (26 Jan 2014)

Shaunthesheep said:


> Eat less move more simples says a fat man on a bike lol


And probably end up under eating.


----------

