Old 06-27-21, 04:14 AM
  #371  
Trakhak
Senior Member
 
Trakhak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,338
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2429 Post(s)
Liked 2,885 Times in 1,646 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions
Max deliberately constructed his argument to be per mile, not per hour, just so he can avoid the implications of this rather clear example.
In that case:

I ride for 30 miles on my 18-pound TT bike. I use an 85" gear and maintain a cadence of 85 and a power level of 225 watts. Takes me 2 hours. I burn 800 calories.

The next day, I ride for 20 miles on my 38-pound old Schwinn touring bike. I use a 70" gear and maintain a cadence of 85 and a power level of 225 watts. Takes me 2 hours. I burn 800 calories.

The distance is irrelevant. The weight of the bike is irrelevant.

Edit: there is one special case in which the arguments of U.R. and like-minded logicians apply, sort of. That is the case of direct head-to-head competition with other riders on hilly terrain.

Of course, that case also explains why competitive riders ride the lightest bikes they can afford. Riding a heavier bike won't result in a better workout if you burn yourself out trying to keep up and have to limp home.

Last edited by Trakhak; 06-27-21 at 04:22 AM.
Trakhak is offline