Originally Posted by
PeteHski
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.
I think the cycling calorie numbers may be a bit high on that calculator. If you assume 25% rider efficiency, my 15 mph calculation equates to 200W, which is maybe right for a full upright, but considerably high for a drop bar bike.
Anyway, I tend also to find running tedious in comparison to cycling. Fast walking less so. However, in warm weather I mostly cycle, partly because it’s more comfortable with the greater air cooling.
In the cold half of the year, it depends. With more darkness, wind and cold, there will be times when I’d rather walk or run than ride outdoors. Although last year I still mostly slogged through the cold and mud on the MTB and rather enjoyed it. We shall see how it goes this winter.
Otto