Marathon

[aberal]

What is the cycling equivalent of running a marathon? How many miles might that be? Is that sort of thing measurable at all, and if so how is it measured, energy expended, calories used, time taken? I would have thought time taken would be roughly equivalent - so that if you took say 4 hours, to run a marathon and compared that to cycling for 4 hours you would be using up similar amount of energy. The difference, I suppose would be that in running you are moving constantly whereas on a bike you have at least the luxury of free-wheeling now and again so perhaps a 5 hour cycle is equivalent. Or is it? Just curious.

 

[carolonabike]

Well I don't really know, but here's my two pence worth anyway .

I haven't ran a marathon but I have ran a half. It took me 2 hours 20mins, it's the hardest thing I've done. I was absolutely knackered when I finished and my legs were sore for about 4 days even though I'd trained. On the other hand I can cycle 2.5 hours and still feel as fresh as a daisy over similar terrain.

I cycled 60 miles in 4.5 hours at the weekend with some tough hills and wasn't overly tired. So, going by how tired I felt at the end of the half I would reckon the equivalent cycling effort would have to be in the region of 120 miles for me, so 10ish times?

It probably also depends on how fast you go, I'm neither a fast runner or cyclist.

Basically I think it depends

 

[amaferanga]

This is often discussed, but there is no definitive answer. My opinion is that the cycling equivalent of a marathon is something like a 100 mile time trial. Not just a 100 mile bike ride - a time trial where you are giving it your all for the whole 100 miles. I don't think a marathon can be compared to a leisurely bike ride of any length.

 

[Hacienda71]

When you are running you are giving your body a beating from the impact. Cycling is much kinder on your joints so even if your CV workout is similair imho running will be a far harder physical test. The two exercises just can't be directly compared. The people to ask are the duathletes and triathletes among us who do both. They will train for both disciplines, but I think even they will have differeing views.

 

[overgeared]

the vast majority of runners would describe a marathon as something like "the most demanding event you can take on in a day", so the answer is probably to identify the cycling equivalent.

i dont beleive the answer is a 24 or even a 12 hour time trial, because so few people are insane enough to tackle these, so i think a 100 mile time trial or a hard cyclo sportive such as the 100-150 mile etape du tour must qualify as a riders marathon.

 

[Spin City]

aberal

I have cycled the Etape du Tour (2006 Gap - Alpe d'Huez) and ran a marathon.

Both events were hard and probably similar in difficultly. The difference for me was that the time taken to recover after the marathon was a lot longer.

Also remember that the training is very different. The cycling takes a lot more time but the pounding your feet/legs take when running is in a different league.

 

[aberal]

Thanks everyone. I appreciate that its difficult to compare the two - its the proverbial apples/pears argument. But I do have a notion that it should be possible to measure the two disciplines and compare directly, somehow.

 

[stephec]

I reckon it's either a Kit Kat, or more likely a Mars.


































I'll get me coat.

 

[zigzag]

having cycled long distances and ran a marathon just under 4hrs (i'm not a runner..) i would compare exertion during marathon to a 300km fast ride or medium effort 400km rides with 1km/100km climbing. neither too hard nor too easy.

 

[lukesdad]

Try an mtb marathon or a 24hr event you may want to stick to running one instead