Originally Posted by
Happy Feet
The muscles used when running are not just weight bearing, they are actively countering the body weight being thrown off balance.
One can skew results to get any result. For example, comparing gentle jogging to standing and mashing in a sprint. I imagine a 100m dash peaks more watts 4han a Sunday ride in the park.
But the OP is talking about how long they have to ride to get a comparable workout from running. This is correct. Run 10 kms and ride 10 kms. You expend more energy doing the former. To expend the same energy you have to ride a lot further/longer because the bicycle is providing a notable mechanical advantage over running.
You can max out the watts when cycling but the time to cover the distance will then be much less so your energy expenditure will, overall, be less.
Cover a set distance running or cycling. Your use more energy doing the former. That's it.
So how many times do you want me to explain that I'm talking about energy expenditure over a given time and not distance?
If the OP is asking about how long they have to ride to get a comparable workout (as you put it above in bold) in terms of energy expenditure that means we are talking about TIME, not distance.
There is no need to keep explaining that a bicycle covers distance faster than running. I know that. Literally everyone in the world knows that!