Hungry?

[Bikerchick]

I think us cyclist are keeping the supermarkets in business!!! Maybe we should be going for sponsors

 

[Moodyman]

Cycling does make you hungry for the first few months but then it settles down to the point where you eat as you did before.

 

[ianrauk]

Cycling does make you hungry for the first few months but then it settles down to the point where you eat as you did before.

8 years later and I'm still waiting for it to settle down.
But then again i'm a mile muncher which makes me a food muncher too.

 

[Moodyman]

I think it does depend on your miles. I speak mainly as a commuter whereas you also century rides.

 

[briantrumpet]

I think it does depend on your miles. I speak mainly as a commuter whereas you also century rides.

Yes, but it also depends on your effort level. 20 miles at 20mph is going to use more calories than 20 miles at 15mph, as the effort needed to push your way through the air rises exponentially (I think) above about 14mph, if something I read on the internet once is true (and if I remember it correctly). I work on the basis of using 700 calories per hour at my reasonably high effort level.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

I have the same problem, I don't even do that much cycling but I'm always hungry lately. I seem to always be eating but I haven't put a single pound on. I feel like I have to eat all the time just to keep my weight stable, its quite low as it is, my BMI is only 18.7.

Have you done this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18770328 ? Where do you come on the scale?

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

I don't use Strava to calculate calories, but instead any one of the online calculators. I just tried this one and got a similar result:
http://www.bikemetro.com/calculators/calorie.asp

Even completely flat, it says that at 16 mph doing 16 miles, you burn 970 calories. Of course, there's no way my commute is completely flat - there probably isn't a single stretch of flat road along the whole route, you're always going either up or down a hill - so if the calculator is accurate, I might even be entitled to more, but I'll play it safe for now.

It most definitely is not.

 

[Kookas]

It most definitely is not.

How do you know it isn't? Pretty much every calorie calculator I've tried gives similar results.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

How do you know it isn't? Pretty much every calorie calculator I've tried gives similar results.

Do you seriously think, that some calculator you googled is capable of telling you how many calories you burn in 1hr cycling at 16mph - Given the generally little info they require to churn out a number???

 

[Kookas]

Do you seriously think, that some calculator you googled is capable of telling you how many calories you burn in 1hr cycling at 16mph - Given the generally little info they require to churn out a number???

It's approximate, by accurate I wasn't talking to the nearest calorie but the nearest couple hundred or so. The body isn't that precise anyway.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

It's approximate, by accurate I wasn't talking to the nearest calorie but the nearest couple hundred or so. The body isn't that precise anyway.

You seemed very sure that the figure was accurate in a previous post.

 

[Kookas]

You seemed very sure that the figure was accurate in a previous post.

Not to the nearest calorie. Accurate enough that I can trust that it won't actually be half that.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Not to the nearest calorie. Accurate enough that I can trust that it won't actually be half that.

How exactly do you know it isn't half?

 

[Kookas]

How exactly do you know it isn't half?

In all honesty, I don't. But it's all I have to go on, and to be honest, I don't really care.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

In all honesty, I don't. But it's all I have to go on, and to be honest, I don't really care.

I'm glad we could clear that up