Originally Posted by
Random11
More evidence that running is more taxing than cycling.
For me yes, running is definitely "harder" because I'm a trained cyclist and don't run at all.
But regarding energy expenditure a quick Google of calorie calculators for running and cycling gives the following results for
me:-
Running: 800 calories (80 kg, 7 mph, 1 hour)
Cycling: 1150 calories (80 kg, 20 mph, 1 hour)
The calculator for both activities is here:-
https://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1350958587
You can play around with the inputs i.e. speed being the main driver. The above calculator suggests I would need to run at 11 mph to match my cycling calorie expenditure. That ain't going to happen!
The obvious thing here is that this result is going to vary depending on your personal running vs cycling speed.
For example if I cycled at 15 mph and ran at 6 mph, then energy expenditure would be identical for both. But I can cycle faster than that, but probably struggle to run at 6 mph for an hour.
Also I can cycle non-stop for at least 9 hours, but there's no way I could run for that long. So total energy expenditure for me is way higher overall when cycling. My biggest ride this year used 5000 calories according to my power meter.