Question to people who cycle for fitness

[Thursday guy]

I see quite a few of these people on weekend mornings. I do wonder, if they're cycling for fitness, why don't they use heavier, less top-of-the-range aerodynamic bikes? By riding a bike which is requires more energy input to maintain speed, would you not get more out of your exercise for the same amount of time?

This also applies to lycras as well. Wearing normal t-shirt and shorts would be less aerodynamic, but it would surely force you to increase your energy output. I'm think of taking up cycling as an regular exercise, and I wonder whether I would be wiser to use my commuter bike which is on the heavier side at 14kg instead of selling it and investing in a proper sporty road bike.

 

[ColinJ]

I don't ride at a given speed, I ride at a certain level of exertion so it doesn't matter what I wear or ride, I am always making the same effort.

I enjoy riding better bikes and feel more comfortable wearing cycling kit, so that's what I do.

So, my advice is to do what you want to do, and to try as hard as you want to!

 

[Dogtrousers]

The rider determines how much they get out of their exercise by how much effort they put in.

Changing clothes or machine wouldn't automatically make the rider try harder.

 

[HarryTheDog]

Your theory only works if you were doing the same distance and course on 2 very different bikes, if you are excercising for the same time the effort needed is no different. On the lighter more aerodynamic bike with more aerodynamic clothing you will just go further and faster. When I change from my MTB with 2.3 inch wide tyres ands then jump on my carbon road bike with skinny tyres I dont go " oh well I can take it easy now".

 

[nickyboy]

Lighter bike, better gear means I can try as hard as I would with a heavy bike etc but I go faster and I go further which is a nice thing

Regarding selling your commuter, I wouldn't. I'm sure it's fine for your day to day commute and it's almost certainly fine for leisure/training rides

 

[Drago]

No matter what bike we have we tend to hammer them as fast as we can anyway.

 

[mjr]

There are two good reasons: to go further for the same time or effort; and to be more comfortable.

Bad but common reasons are fashion, to look the part, posing and to comply with petty club rules.

 

[tallliman]

Going further and faster for my energy is a big plus for me. It also makes commuting 20miles each way a little quicker.

 

[Cubist]

This bloke will win next year's Tour, mark my words

 

[Citius]

I see quite a few of these people on weekend mornings. I do wonder, if they're cycling for fitness, why don't they use heavier, less top-of-the-range aerodynamic bikes? By riding a bike which is requires more energy input to maintain speed, would you not get more out of your exercise for the same amount of time?

Flawed logic. And flawed physics.

 

[Specialeyes]

As well as the go-further-for-a-given-amount-of-exertion factor, there's also rider comfort to consider in relation to clothing. I'm much less inclined to ride for long periods in civvies than I am in a wicking fabric and lycra...

 

[vickster]

Surely people can ride what they want, when they want, how they want, wearing whatever they want regardless of the reason for doing so. Cycling is a broad church

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

Ride a heavy bike in uncomfortable clothes. Get knackered or injured. Give up.
Great philosophy.

Why not just get out and have fun when you can?
Sod fitness, thats a handy by-product.

 

[Thursday guy]

Ride a heavy bike in uncomfortable clothes. Get knackered or injured. Give up.
Great philosophy.

Why not just get out and have fun when you can?
Sod fitness, thats a handy by-product.

T shirts and shorts are uncomfortable?

 

[Thursday guy]

Flawed logic. And flawed physics.

Heavier bike requires greater physical exertion from the legs, resulting in a more intensive exercise per unit length ridden. What part about that is flawed?