Very silly question - or is it?

Gixxerman

Guru
Location
Market Rasen
Was thinking today whilst out on my ride.
Why is it more efficient cycling that running?
Afterall I am using the same muscles.
OK the gears give you some mechanical advantage, but it doesn't make you stronger, it just allows you to use your strength better.
Then it hit me. When running, you are always stopping and starting at each step, whereas with the bike, you keep some momentum from the previous stroke.
 

Debian

New Member
Location
West Midlands
Funnily enough I've often thought the same question myself. Never have been able to convince myself of the answer.
 

vernon

Harder than Ronnie Pickering
Location
Meanwood, Leeds
You have not factored in the work that you do in raising your centre of gravity when you are running. It's probably this that makes the difference.

I think that you will find that your body does not stop and start with each step as you are running but it will bob up and down.
 
There is nothing to buy when you run, and nothing to break because you run over potholes. There is nothing to complain about because runners are selfish and run solo - not in groups - for extended periods of time. Apart from that, more power to your elbows - but next time....bring a bike!
 

vernon

Harder than Ronnie Pickering
Location
Meanwood, Leeds
jamesxyz said:
I always assumed it's because when you're running you're carrying the whole weight of your body, but when cycling the bike takes the weight of your upper body ... but I'm no scientist
It's not the carrying of the weight but the constant raising and lowering of it that causes the difference in energy consumption.
 

Bman

Veteran
Location
Herts.
Aperitif said:
There is nothing to buy when you run, and nothing to break because you run over potholes. There is nothing to complain about because runners are selfish and run solo - not in groups - for extended periods of time. Apart from that, more power to your elbows - but next time....bring a bike!

Not around here. They do lots of group runs for charity. Motorists moan about cyclists riding two abreast, what about a pack of 50 joggers taking up the whole width of a cycle track?
 

classic33

Legendary Member
Bongman said:
Not around here. They do lots of group runs for charity. Motorists moan about cyclists riding two abreast, what about a pack of 50 joggers taking up the whole width of a cycle track?
What would a motorist be doing on a cycle track to be held up by 50 joggers?

Doesn't the opening post relate to the Ironman competitions.
 

vernon

Harder than Ronnie Pickering
Location
Meanwood, Leeds
Aperitif said:
Stats. on ankles in potholes v wheels in potholes vern?
I know what you mean, and I post tongue in cheek (for a change) but the 'critical mass' of joggers doesn't exist in the metropolitain majority - ref. Bongman's post.
Most of the runners that I see in Leeds are training groups from the local rugby club and the boxing clubs.

I can't see the point in jogging especially at my weight - the resultant seismic activity would cause chaos in the neighbourhood.
 
Location
Midlands
Another very silly question

Gixxerman said:
Back on topic then.
Anyone know scientifically why cycling is more efficient than running?
How do you define efficient? as a matter of - context - speed - power use
 
OP
Gixxerman

Gixxerman

Guru
Location
Market Rasen
psmiffy said:
How do you define efficient? as a matter of - context - speed - power use
Well I can go out and do a fifty mile ride without any great effort, and I can do it in about 3 hours. There is no way I could run fifty miles, and even if I could it would be a huge effort and I could never do it in 3 hours.
So I can travel faster and longer cycling than I can running. But why?
 
Top Bottom