# how many Calories did I burn?



## thebikingcello (Feb 3, 2011)

is there a calculator for how many Cals I burn when cycling including Weight, speed and length of ride, oh and time it took? I googled it and can't find one. Or is there some kind of formula I can use? thanks guys! Just thought I'd ask because I was thinking "how much?"


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

Did you actually type something in the google query window? Like:

http://www.google.com/search?q=calories+burned+riding+bike


----------



## martinrjensen (Sep 23, 2007)

if you just want a rule of thumb, figure about 700 calories an hour of riding, unless you are just bar hopping...


----------



## thebikingcello (Feb 3, 2011)

I did, the first hit only has cycling for 14-16mph which is to slow.(I do 18 to 23 depending on the day)

I have a close idea but want something a little more exact without spending $$$ for a garmin


----------



## JustTooBig (Aug 11, 2005)

thebikingcello said:


> I did, the first hit only has cycling for 14-16mph which is to slow.(I do 18 to 23 depending on the day)
> 
> I have a close idea but want something a little more exact without spending $$$ for a garmin


if you're averaging 23mph on your rides, counting calories ain't at the top of your list of things to worry about.


----------



## Hooben (Aug 22, 2004)

According to caloriecount.about.com at 16-19 Mph, Racing/not Drafting 
1170 calories per hour

14-15.9 Mph...
975 calories per hour

12-13.9 Mph, Leisure, Moderate Effort 
780 calories per hour


----------



## thebikingcello (Feb 3, 2011)

JustTooBig said:


> if you're averaging 23mph on your rides, counting calories ain't at the top of your list of things to worry about.


when there is a tail wind, thats how fast I go on a good day for a 20 to 30 mile ride. 

its insane how much energy we put down for a 50 mile rides. So thats how I stay in shape.... and eat what ever I want lol thanks guys


----------



## Hundminen (Mar 21, 2011)

This appears to be the most sophisticated cycling calorie calculator I have come accross:

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

For me, a 175 lb rider, averaging 17mph, hands on the hoods, neutral wind and elevation, it calculates about 630 calories/hour. My Garmin 500 estimates a little less.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

Hundminen said:


> This appears to be the most sophisticated cycling calorie calculator I have come accross:
> 
> http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
> 
> For me, a 175 lb rider, averaging 17mph, hands on the hoods, neutral wind and elevation, it calculates about 630 calories/hour. My Garmin 500 estimates a little less.


Thanks for the link. :thumbsup:


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

Hundminen said:


> This appears to be the most sophisticated cycling calorie calculator I have come accross:
> 
> http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
> 
> For me, a 175 lb rider, averaging 17mph, hands on the hoods, neutral wind and elevation, it calculates about 630 calories/hour. My Garmin 500 estimates a little less.


Not so sure about that calculator. I used my weekend ride (78 miles, 21 mph) and simply switching from hoods to drops added 60 watts and 1,000 calories. (160-220; 2,500-3,500)

Odd that, with all the inputs, there's no elevation gain/loss for the calculator. We did a loop - a loop with a lot of rollers and a few very hilly sections - but still a loop so the net gain/loss is 0. So I had to put 0 degrees in slope. It assumes a dead level ride is equal in effort to a hilly ride.... unless I'm missing something (very possible).


----------



## JoelS (Aug 25, 2008)

There is no thing as an accurate calorie counter for cycling. The best "rule of thumb" that I've found is to figure 30 cals/mi for a moderate ride, and 35/mi for a very intense effort. But even that can be off.

To really know how many you burn, you need a power meter.


----------



## JustTooBig (Aug 11, 2005)

JoelS said:


> There is no thing as an accurate calorie counter for cycling. The best "rule of thumb" that I've found is to figure 30 cals/mi for a moderate ride, and 35/mi for a very intense effort. But even that can be off.
> 
> To really know how many you burn, you need a power meter.


^^this^^

Using measured power, I can range from 650 cal/hr on a recovery ride to 1200 cal/hr for harder efforts (>300w avg for 1+hr). Pretty big range.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

I weigh 172 pounds.. and I can burn around 650 riding at a moderate pace... close to 1000 if not more if riding really hard. So if you're going to guess play it safe and estimate low.


----------



## tarwheel2 (Jul 7, 2005)

I use two different apps on my iPhone that track calories for cycling and other exercises. Although not perfect, they do take into account your weight and speed and adjust calories accordingly. LoseIt! is a free app that you can use to track calories from eating as well as exercise. If you don't have a smart phone, you can use their website. The other app I use is Cyclemeter, which tracks your speed, time, pace, distance, route, elevation and calories burned. It is not free and only works with smart phones. When I compare Cyclemeters results with LoseIt!, the calorie consumption estimates are remarkably close (although I think that Cyclemeter also takes into account elevation gain in their calculations).

To those who are skeptical about these trackers, I have lost more than 20 lbs. since Christmas by tracking my calories on LoseIt! -- so there is definitely something to it even if not perfect. BTW, LoseIt! shows that I burn 928 calories/hour when cycling at 16-19/mph and 760 calories/hour when cycling at 14-16 mph. The calorie counts adjust for your weight, so you burn fewer calories as you take off pounds if riding at the same speed. However, it does not take into account factors such as wind, elevation gain and any extra weight you are carrying on the bike such as water bottles, panniers, etc.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Probably not enough to make you happy. So ride more.


----------



## Andy69 (Jun 14, 2008)

I usually just take the mileage/2 * 100, so a 30 mile ride is 1500. That's less than what most calorie counters give you by a long shot, but I think more realistic.


----------



## cdhbrad (Feb 18, 2003)

Two of my bikes have power meters, one a Powertap, the other an Ergomo and those are about the readings I get too about 30 - 35 calories/mile. Most of the "estimators" tend to be much higher than that.


----------



## MadRoc92 (Mar 24, 2004)

tarwheel2 said:


> To those who are skeptical about these trackers, I have lost more than 20 lbs. since Christmas by tracking my calories on LoseIt! -- so there is definitely something to it even if not perfect. BTW, LoseIt! shows that I burn 928 calories/hour when cycling at 16-19/mph and 760 calories/hour when cycling at 14-16 mph. The calorie counts adjust for your weight, so you burn fewer calories as you take off pounds if riding at the same speed. However, it does not take into account factors such as wind, elevation gain and any extra weight you are carrying on the bike such as water bottles, panniers, etc.


I have lost 12 pounds since I started using LoseIt and logging everything daily a little over a month ago. The calorie burn for cycling strikes me as extremely optimistic. Part of it is the range it offers; 16-19 mph solo is a pretty big jump in effort but it all gets handled the same (with the odd result that the same loop will report fewer calories on faster days because it measures time, not miles). I log my rides but I take the calorie estimates with a grain of salt.

OTOH, I'm losing weight faster than my reported calorie deficits would predict so it's washing out somewhere.


----------



## fontarin (Mar 28, 2009)

Hundminen said:


> This appears to be the most sophisticated cycling calorie calculator I have come accross:
> 
> http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
> 
> For me, a 175 lb rider, averaging 17mph, hands on the hoods, neutral wind and elevation, it calculates about 630 calories/hour. My Garmin 500 estimates a little less.


I used this one, and put my data from a century in (I left slope/wind speed alone, was roughly 4500 ft of climbing and a headwind that picked up later in the day). It came out about 250 lower than what my power meter read, so it seems to be pretty accurate, at least in that case. 

Tried out my commute, and it seemed to be fairly spot on from the times I've done some all out efforts on the way to work also.


----------



## nismo73 (Jul 29, 2009)

Andy69 said:


> I usually just take the mileage/2 * 100, so a 30 mile ride is 1500. That's less than what most calorie counters give you by a long shot, but I think more realistic.


1500 seems a little high...

According to my Garmin 500 w/ heart rate monitor I did this weekend:
Time:	01:52:04
Distance:	30.35 mi
Elevation Gain:	482 ft
Calories:	870 C
Avg Temperature:	61.5 °F
Avg Speed:	16.2 mph
Avg Moving Speed:	16.3 mph
Max Speed:	25.0 mph
Avg HR:	128 bpm
Max HR:	153 bpm
Avg Bike Cadence:	83 rpm
Max Bike Cadence:	107 rpm


----------



## SlurpeeKing (Jul 23, 2010)

we all burn cals different. I'm going to burn alot more than a smaller guy. If we ride the same ride and I'm at 235# vs 175# I will burn much more cals.


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

According to my Powertap with normal metabolic efficiency making 1 kilo joule approximately 1 Calorie and 3 representative rides



Hooben said:


> According to caloriecount.about.com at 16-19 Mph, Racing/not Drafting
> 1170 calories per hour


Not if you're a normal 150 pound guy (or would be without your belly fat). I might theoretically manage 840 kilo joules in a one hour time trial; although on a representative threshold ride I wasn't delivering any power 12.2% of the time (traffic lights, corners) and was running 720 kilo joules/hour. 



> 14-15.9 Mph...
> 975 calories per hour


No way outside the mountains and even then you might need to be very heavy. Stats from a short 1.5 hour ride at a pleasant all-day endurance pace averaging 15.4 MPH work out to 504 kilo joules/hour in spite of dragging my fat belly (total weight 180 pounds) up and down 900 feet of nearby hills.



> 12-13.9 Mph, Leisure, Moderate Effort
> 780 calories per hour


Absolutely not. At a 13.3 MPH recovery pace on flat ground I'm averaging 85W or 306 kilo joules/hour.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Totally wrong*



Hooben said:


> According to caloriecount.about.com at 16-19 Mph, Racing/not Drafting
> 1170 calories per hour
> 
> 14-15.9 Mph...
> ...


These numbers are totally bogus. 25 mph is about 1200 calories per hour (300+ watts). 24 mph is about 980 calories per hour (275 watts). 22 mph is about 780 calories per hour (220 watts). The only way you could burn this many calories at these speeds would be if your metabolic efficiency was around 10% (vs. 24% actual). The fact that they give a speed range of 2-3 mph should be enough information to know that they are clueless.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Wrong again*



Hundminen said:


> This appears to be the most sophisticated cycling calorie calculator I have come accross:
> 
> http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
> 
> For me, a 175 lb rider, averaging 17mph, hands on the hoods, neutral wind and elevation, it calculates about 630 calories/hour. My Garmin 500 estimates a little less.


And both this web site and your Garmin are wrong. 17 mph on the flats is about 120 watts, or 400 calories per hour. Garmins have a reputation for overestimating, and the Kreuzotter web site likewise.


----------



## mcsqueak (Apr 22, 2010)

I take whatever my Garmin tells me, cut it in half, and figure whatever that number is, it's better than sitting on my ass at home. :thumbsup:


----------



## fontarin (Mar 28, 2009)

Kerry Irons said:


> And both this web site and your Garmin are wrong. 17 mph on the flats is about 120 watts, or 400 calories per hour. Garmins have a reputation for overestimating, and the Kreuzotter web site likewise.


It seems pretty close to me on most of the rides I've put in. I haven't messed with wind speed or elevation, but it's alot closer than any other calculator I've seen.


----------



## Hundminen (Mar 21, 2011)

Kerry Irons said:


> And both this web site and your Garmin are wrong. 17 mph on the flats is about 120 watts, or 400 calories per hour. Garmins have a reputation for overestimating, and the Kreuzotter web site likewise.


Okay, how about the other posters that claim 30 calories per mile of moderate effort. In my world, 17mph is a moderate effort. That's equivalent to 510 calories, according to the 30 calories per mile rule of thumb. which is 27% more than your estimate of 400 calories. Is that rule of thumb no good?


----------



## repartocorse40 (Feb 23, 2009)

For those who are calculating based on kilojoules from a powertap (or other power meter)...I thought a kilojoule does not equal a kilocalorie? I thought it was more like 4-1 kj to kcal which makes the expenditure seem too low. If you type 1000 kilojoules into google the calculator brings up 239 calories and change. Thoughts?


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

repartocorse40 said:


> For those who are calculating based on kilojoules from a powertap (or other power meter)...I thought a kilojoule does not equal a kilocalorie? I thought it was more like 4-1 kj to kcal which makes the expenditure seem too low. If you type 1000 kilojoules into google the calculator brings up 239 calories and change. Thoughts?


Cyclists' measured net efficiency (scientists hook research subjects up to hoses and measure transpired gasses) varies from 20-25% and there are 4.2 kilo joules to the Calorie. 

Multiply and you have 1 Calorie consumed = .84 to 1.05 kilo joules delivered to the drive train. or 1 measured kilojoule = .95 to 1.2 Calories burned.

Net efficiency improves with training so as recreational cyclists we're at the more efficient end of the spread and can use 1 Calorie = 1 kilojoule cycling as a reasonable approximation.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Relativity*



Hundminen said:


> Okay, how about the other posters that claim 30 calories per mile of moderate effort. In my world, 17mph is a moderate effort. That's equivalent to 510 calories, according to the 30 calories per mile rule of thumb. which is 27% more than your estimate of 400 calories. Is that rule of thumb no good?


Round numbers (150 lb rider), 17 mph is 24 calories per mile, 20 mph is 30 calories per mile; 25% more calories per mile for that 3 mph increase. On an hourly basis, it's 410 calories per mile at 17 mph, and 600 calories per mile at 20 mph, a 47% increase. You can't just go on "moderate effort" but rather have to be specific about the rider speed (and weight). This is another reason not to have any trust whatsoever in a site that quotes calorie consumption over a range of 2-3 mph. The variation is too large to put a single number on it.

In general, it appears that the numbers often reported by these apparently ignorant sites (and most heart rate monitors and bicycle computers) assume a completely out of shape couch potato riding a beach cruiser with severely underinflated tires. If you want some real data, see Bicycling Science, Wilson, MIT press. The analyticcycling.com web site uses the formulas and data from that book (at least they agree very closely across a range of rider weights, slope, and speeds).


----------



## wetpaint (Oct 12, 2008)

With 1.5 years of power data, and assuming 1Kj=1 Calorie and a weight of 140#. I average around 35-40 cal/mi for normal riding which works out to around 700-750kj and hour while riding.


----------

