| Author | Post |
|---|
terlane
New Member
| Joined: | 12 May 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
|
Posted: 13 May 2008 12:30 pm |
|
Hi..I am new to this forum and I am confused about spinning. I have checked a few websites and each website gives a different amount of calories burnt for spinning. These websites stated about 531 but they don't ask whether it's moderate or vigorous and the others do ask then calculate around 874...so my question is which is right? I take spinning class 2x a week for an hour and the class is quite moderate to vigorous so how can I figure out the correct amount. Thanks for any and all information.
|
CrimsonAnimus
New Member
|
Posted: 15 May 2008 05:57 pm |
|
On this website, spinning falls under the category of stationary bicycling, so you can check that for an estimate.
In my opinion, though, the calorie burn displayed on this site for stationary cycling is a good bit off. According to this site, what I do on the bike is considered to be close to light effort. Other websites, though, have said that it is closer to vigorous.
The best indicator of overall effort on a stationary bike is average watt. This number is determined by both your RPM and your resistance, and should measure the same way regardless of which stationary bike you use.
This was yesterday's workout regimen for me:
Length: 60 minutes
Avg HR: 81% of MHR
Max HR: 94% of MHR
Bike Calories: 859
Miles: 21.1
Avg Watts: 190
Avg MPH: 21.6
The calorie burn on my bike does factor in my weight, which is 315 pounds. According to this site:
Very Light Effort: 429 calories/hour
Light Effort: 786 calories/hour
Moderate Effort: 1000 calories/hour
Vigorous Effort: 1500 calories/hour
Very Vigorous Effort: 1786 calories/hour
Burning 786 calories per hour is FAR from light effort, even for someone who is 315 pounds. The most calories I've burned in a 60 minute period was 953, with an average watts of 214. According to the calculator here, my exercise wasn't even moderate effort, despite the fact that part of that exercise was spent in the highest resistance level on the bike (Level 16 @ over 500 watts).
EDIT: I inputed my weight as 150 on the bike, and cycled for a bit just to make sure that the watts displayed did not change based on weight entered. It doesn't - Resistance Level 6 at around 100 RPM is still 180-190 watts, regardless of whether I input my weight as 150 or 315.
Last edited on 15 May 2008 06:05 pm by CrimsonAnimus
|
CrimsonAnimus
New Member
|
Posted: 16 May 2008 06:27 am |
|
On a further note...
I downloaded Diet Power today, a program designed to keep track of your weight loss. You create a profile with your age, weight, height, gender, etc.
Well, I visited the dictionary in the program to see how many calories it said I would burn from stationary cycling at 200 watts for 60 minutes. It was over 1400!!!
The fact that both the numbers on this site and the numbers in that program are so much higher than mine is starting to make me wonder. 200 watts is 200 watts, though, no matter which bike you're using, how much you weigh, your height, or any other physical attribute.
Calories burned on any exercise equipment are often inflated - this much I know. However, I've never heard about them being DEFLATED by as much as 500 calories. My bike factors in my weight, too. I'll concede that it might be a bit higher because of my age and height, but I cannot fathom that it is 500 calories off...
Last edited on 16 May 2008 06:27 am by CrimsonAnimus
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 16 May 2008 02:22 pm |
|
I don't know if you are going to like this, but according to this website
http://www.unitconversion.org/unit_converter/power.html
it appears that the way to conver a figure in Watts to a kilocalories-per-hour figure is to simply multiply by 0.85985. If this is correct then the two implications are:
1) two riders of different weights will be burning a different amount of Watts (they should be burning at different rates, surely)
2) so your bike's Watts estimate does not take the inputted weight figure into account, only the leg speed.
3) I guess the follow-on question is whether this is the kind of exercise where a heavier person will necessarily be burning much more than a lighter person. It is worth observing that some exercises are more like that than others.
 caution, it has been years since my last Physics lesson.
|
CrimsonAnimus
New Member
|
Posted: 16 May 2008 05:36 pm |
|
Wow.
Well, it makes perfect sense that two people of different weights are going to have different power output. I can clearly see this coming more into play from walking/running, but I didn't think that this was as relevant on a bike, because you're sitting down and most of your body weight shouldn't even enter this equation.
And you're right - my bike does not take weight into account for the Watts estimate. The calorie burn is different based on weight, but I really don't know where that difference comes from, and naturally, the manual says nothing about it.
Surely, though, I'm not really burning 1250 calories in one hour (which would be in the middle of moderate and vigorous according to this site), and only eating 1800 in 24 hours...?!? My RMR is 2431, so even without any activity multiplier, that would be 3681 calories, a daily deficit of 1881 calories 6 days a week, and 631 on my off day. That would be a weekly loss of 11917, which is 3.4 pounds a week...which is...heh. Well, that's about right. :P
OK, I concede. LOL
To the Original Poster: Do the bikes have a computer that measures watts? If they do, try and find out the average watts in your workout. From what I've read on the net:
100 watts is considered light effort.
150 watts is considered moderate effort.
200 watts is considered vigorous effort.
250 watts is considered very vigorous effort.
This will probably give you a pretty good estimate. If you don't know the watts, but you know the RPM and the MPH, I can probably give you a good estimate of your watts. Just post them here.
Oh, and keep in mind, since you are speeding up and slowing down during spinning, this has been shown to keep your metabolism higher for a bit of a longer period after the exercise as well.
|
Current time is 06:10 pm | |
|
|
|
