Cycling to running miles conversion
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,450
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4415 Post(s)
Liked 4,867 Times
in
3,012 Posts
I'm no runner, but I don't understand how people train for marathons by running shorter distances. Doesn't it make sense to go out on a Saturday and walk 3mph for about 9 hours? If you can do it, you have completed a marathon and that is your time. Next time, try to do it a little faster. After a few practices, add some racewalking or jogging intervals to get your time down more.
No, this doesn't make sense. What does make sense is running shorter distances at first and then slowly building up to running a full marathon. That's what pretty much everyone actually does. I do the same with cycling. Most of my key events are Centuries, but I rarely ride full Centuries in training. Most of my training rides are well under half that distance.
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Eastern Shore MD
Posts: 884
Bikes: Lemond Zurich/Trek ALR/Giant TCX/Sette CX1
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 569 Post(s)
Liked 772 Times
in
404 Posts
Never tried "running", not built to be a runner... Can't comment on the differences.
What I can comment on - I know a few runners that came over to the cycling world & the main issue they had was with food/feeding themselves. 3 hour events are different than 5-6 hour events... I see the same cracks with people jumping from a metric to their first century - mile 70-80 seems to be the point of bonking.
Your reserves get depleted, and you need the ability to keep up with fueling for the next 45 min of work. For many of us, it takes some training to be able to do that.
What I can comment on - I know a few runners that came over to the cycling world & the main issue they had was with food/feeding themselves. 3 hour events are different than 5-6 hour events... I see the same cracks with people jumping from a metric to their first century - mile 70-80 seems to be the point of bonking.
Your reserves get depleted, and you need the ability to keep up with fueling for the next 45 min of work. For many of us, it takes some training to be able to do that.
#53
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 1,995
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2700 Post(s)
Liked 486 Times
in
351 Posts
No, this doesn't make sense. What does make sense is running shorter distances at first and then slowly building up to running a full marathon. That's what pretty much everyone actually does. I do the same with cycling. Most of my key events are Centuries, but I rarely ride full Centuries in training. Most of my training rides are well under half that distance.
#54
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,951
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3953 Post(s)
Liked 7,300 Times
in
2,948 Posts
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,515
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3241 Post(s)
Liked 2,512 Times
in
1,510 Posts
A marathon doesn't really get any easier the slower you go. No load on your cardiovascular system. It's all on the muscles at that pace. It's probably the easiest somewhere between your PR pace and 30 seconds slower. Once your pace gets around a mimute + slower, it starts dragging and is awful. The real hardcore people are the ones at the back walking trying to stay ahead of the sweepers. They have to push pace the whole way. The contenders at the front just have more talent, which enables them to train harder, longer, etc. Otherwise, the contenders get the best of everything at the event. The best weather, best of the SAGs, crowds, etc. The 3 main things you have to learn to have a successful marathon are: Pacing, fuel and hydration. You don't get those right and it will be a bad, long day.
In the fall of 2020, Richmond VA still ran an altered version of their marathon. We had this big, O-line looking guy that signed up for one of the full training teams. He told me he'd lost around 100lbs before the start of the training schedule in June. He still weighed 300+ lbs. That guy showed up and ran every long run on the weekends and did his regular runs during the week. The total training miles not including the actual marathon on that team is 596 miles. He'd leave 30-60 minutes before the rest of the teams and finish about 30 minutes behind. On race day, the temps started in the mid 50's and ended in the mid-high 80's. Some of the later SAGs ran out of water. The dude finished in 6:37 something. The crowds were gone when he crossed the line. His family was there. A lot of the team went back out and walked/ran the last couple of miles in with him. The drive that guy had to finish was inspirational. What he did that day was way more impressive than whoever had the fastest time!
The Richmond Marathon Training Teams have a walking team. All of the coaches are former running team coaches. They'll tell you that walking it is way, way harder. Hats off to all of the military people who had to endure those long marches.
In the fall of 2020, Richmond VA still ran an altered version of their marathon. We had this big, O-line looking guy that signed up for one of the full training teams. He told me he'd lost around 100lbs before the start of the training schedule in June. He still weighed 300+ lbs. That guy showed up and ran every long run on the weekends and did his regular runs during the week. The total training miles not including the actual marathon on that team is 596 miles. He'd leave 30-60 minutes before the rest of the teams and finish about 30 minutes behind. On race day, the temps started in the mid 50's and ended in the mid-high 80's. Some of the later SAGs ran out of water. The dude finished in 6:37 something. The crowds were gone when he crossed the line. His family was there. A lot of the team went back out and walked/ran the last couple of miles in with him. The drive that guy had to finish was inspirational. What he did that day was way more impressive than whoever had the fastest time!
The Richmond Marathon Training Teams have a walking team. All of the coaches are former running team coaches. They'll tell you that walking it is way, way harder. Hats off to all of the military people who had to endure those long marches.
Last edited by seypat; 02-08-24 at 03:04 PM.
Likes For seypat:
#56
Grupetto Bob
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Seattle-ish
Posts: 6,222
Bikes: Bikey McBike Face
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2585 Post(s)
Liked 5,644 Times
in
2,922 Posts
No, this doesn't make sense. What does make sense is running shorter distances at first and then slowly building up to running a full marathon. That's what pretty much everyone actually does. I do the same with cycling. Most of my key events are Centuries, but I rarely ride full Centuries in training. Most of my training rides are well under half that distance.
__________________
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Likes For wheelreason:
#58
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: NW Minnesota
Posts: 209
Bikes: Lemond Poprad, Cervelo Soloist, Cannondale F4, RANS Velocity Squared
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked 67 Times
in
45 Posts
I think the easy way is to look at the iron man distances. The swimming/cycling/running/ were measured out that way for a reason. Well, probably not.
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,450
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4415 Post(s)
Liked 4,867 Times
in
3,012 Posts
I find metric centuries are plenty long enough in training. I usually do one full century event per month anyway during the season. The idea of only doing full event distance century rides/marathons is nonsense to me.
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 877
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 528 Post(s)
Liked 230 Times
in
161 Posts
There is no comparison.
Wait, there is. It's just that time, miles, and speed fail to really capture it well and the results are so easily skewed so as to be effectively meaningless.
Running is harder. The minimum energy expenditure to run, not jog, but run is much higher than sitting on a bike. Something on the order of 100-120-ish calories per mile. To "run" a mile with reasonable enough form to actually be "running" takes ~8 minutes or so at the slowest possible pace. An hour would take you 7.5 miles and about 750-900 calories.
The same number of calories expended on a bike might very well be a personal time trial of 30+ mph average speed for an hour. Impossible. A more reasonable 18-20 mph speed is (off the cuff) ~8 calories per minute equals a depressingly low 480 calories per hour. It would take about 1 hour 45 to 2 hours of reasonably high effort cycling to equal runnings 750-900 calorie expenditure. So...36-40 high effort cycling miles in 2x the time running takes to do 7.5 miles. 40 miles in 2 hours is awfully fast.
All variable and subject to externalities, of course.
I've been told that a 4 hour marathon (slow) is about equivalent to a double century. I don't know if that is true or not. The math suggests 3500-4000 calories to do a marathon depending on fitness. Personal experience of ~7500 calories measured for a double century in 3-4x the time is close enough to be plausible from an "effort x time" perspective.
Useful? I'm not sure.
Wait, there is. It's just that time, miles, and speed fail to really capture it well and the results are so easily skewed so as to be effectively meaningless.
Running is harder. The minimum energy expenditure to run, not jog, but run is much higher than sitting on a bike. Something on the order of 100-120-ish calories per mile. To "run" a mile with reasonable enough form to actually be "running" takes ~8 minutes or so at the slowest possible pace. An hour would take you 7.5 miles and about 750-900 calories.
The same number of calories expended on a bike might very well be a personal time trial of 30+ mph average speed for an hour. Impossible. A more reasonable 18-20 mph speed is (off the cuff) ~8 calories per minute equals a depressingly low 480 calories per hour. It would take about 1 hour 45 to 2 hours of reasonably high effort cycling to equal runnings 750-900 calorie expenditure. So...36-40 high effort cycling miles in 2x the time running takes to do 7.5 miles. 40 miles in 2 hours is awfully fast.
All variable and subject to externalities, of course.
I've been told that a 4 hour marathon (slow) is about equivalent to a double century. I don't know if that is true or not. The math suggests 3500-4000 calories to do a marathon depending on fitness. Personal experience of ~7500 calories measured for a double century in 3-4x the time is close enough to be plausible from an "effort x time" perspective.
Useful? I'm not sure.
Taking your upper calorie per hour estimate for running, 900, then that means at a speed of around 32km/h a 4 hour marathon would be a 6 hour ride.
However, that is just energy. I dare say a 4 hour run is harder on the body than a 6 hour ride, if the ride is flat. I have done 5+ hour rides with climbs and I dare say they are pretty tough, but on a flat? Don't think that feels right to compare.
#61
Rider. Wanderer. Creator.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 774
Bikes: Bike Friday Pocket Rocket, Cinelli Hobootleg, Zizzo Liberte
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 781 Times
in
377 Posts
I'm no runner, but I don't understand how people train for marathons by running shorter distances. Doesn't it make sense to go out on a Saturday and walk 3mph for about 9 hours? If you can do it, you have completed a marathon and that is your time. Next time, try to do it a little faster. After a few practices, add some racewalking or jogging intervals to get your time down more.
If the goal is to run a marathon, training by walking won't work all that well.
__________________
--------------------------------------
Rider. Wanderer. Creator.
JohnMFlores.com | YouTube: JohnMFlores
Insta: JohnMichaelFlores | TikTok: @johnnymotoflores
--------------------------------------
Rider. Wanderer. Creator.
JohnMFlores.com | YouTube: JohnMFlores
Insta: JohnMichaelFlores | TikTok: @johnnymotoflores
#62
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,515
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3241 Post(s)
Liked 2,512 Times
in
1,510 Posts
There's a fundamental difference between running and walking in terms of muscle groups engaged. I ran a hilly 50k some years ago and I made one mistake in training. My plan all along had been to power walk some of the uphills, but I had not done much walking during my training. So during the event, when I tried power walking, I found my walking muscles to be lacking and fatiguing quickly. So, quite ironically, I had to run up the hills because I could not walk them.
If the goal is to run a marathon, training by walking won't work all that well.
If the goal is to run a marathon, training by walking won't work all that well.
Likes For seypat:
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,450
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4415 Post(s)
Liked 4,867 Times
in
3,012 Posts
With power data you can get pretty accurate energy consumption for cycling. 29-32km/h (18-20mph) on a flat will require more than 480 calories unless you are Dan Bigham aero. Reasoning - it felt low so I found the first ride I could of mine that is on a flat. 33 minutes 29.7km/h 305kJ which is more less 1:1 to calories. That's 554 scaled to one hour. And the speed is in the lower third of your range. To get to 31km/h or even 32km/h one would need to spend disproportionately more energy to overcome draft so that would be around 600 calories per hour. To check that I actually looked for a ride where I had that speed and found it, 32.2km/h in 29:59 was 307kJ so yes, 32.2km/h for an hour would be 614 calories in this instance.
.
.
#64
I am potato.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 3,116
Bikes: Only precision built, custom high performance elitist machines of the highest caliber. 🍆
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1789 Post(s)
Liked 1,630 Times
in
934 Posts
With power data you can get pretty accurate energy consumption for cycling. 29-32km/h (18-20mph) on a flat will require more than 480 calories unless you are Dan Bigham aero. Reasoning - it felt low so I found the first ride I could of mine that is on a flat. 33 minutes 29.7km/h 305kJ which is more less 1:1 to calories. That's 554 scaled to one hour. And the speed is in the lower third of your range. To get to 31km/h or even 32km/h one would need to spend disproportionately more energy to overcome draft so that would be around 600 calories per hour. To check that I actually looked for a ride where I had that speed and found it, 32.2km/h in 29:59 was 307kJ so yes, 32.2km/h for an hour would be 614 calories in this instance.
Taking your upper calorie per hour estimate for running, 900, then that means at a speed of around 32km/h a 4 hour marathon would be a 6 hour ride.
However, that is just energy. I dare say a 4 hour run is harder on the body than a 6 hour ride, if the ride is flat. I have done 5+ hour rides with climbs and I dare say they are pretty tough, but on a flat? Don't think that feels right to compare.
Taking your upper calorie per hour estimate for running, 900, then that means at a speed of around 32km/h a 4 hour marathon would be a 6 hour ride.
However, that is just energy. I dare say a 4 hour run is harder on the body than a 6 hour ride, if the ride is flat. I have done 5+ hour rides with climbs and I dare say they are pretty tough, but on a flat? Don't think that feels right to compare.
#65
Cheerfully low end
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,978
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked 1,044 Times
in
667 Posts
Here’s a link to a blog on calculating running power and relating that to expected race time:
https://blog.stryd.com/2020/01/10/ho...-target-power/
About one-third of the way down is an equation that estimates race time based on distance and target power during the race, expressed in SI units.
From this, I derived 27.9 as the product of a runner’s pace in minutes per mile and target power ratio in Watts/kg. Similarly 17.3 would be the product of a runner’s pace in minutes per km and Watts/kg.
Otto
https://blog.stryd.com/2020/01/10/ho...-target-power/
About one-third of the way down is an equation that estimates race time based on distance and target power during the race, expressed in SI units.
From this, I derived 27.9 as the product of a runner’s pace in minutes per mile and target power ratio in Watts/kg. Similarly 17.3 would be the product of a runner’s pace in minutes per km and Watts/kg.
Otto
Likes For ofajen:
#66
Perceptual Dullard
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,421
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 919 Post(s)
Liked 1,156 Times
in
494 Posts
Very nice. Those are close to my rule-of-thumb that running pace in m/s is about equal to watts/kg. My "equivalent" ratios would be 26.8 and 16.7, i.e., about 4% different. I would say that 4% difference in rules of thumb ain't bad.
Likes For RChung:
#67
The Wheezing Geezer
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Espańola, NM
Posts: 1,056
Bikes: 1976 Fredo Speciale, Jamis Citizen 1, Ellis-Briggs FAVORI, Rivendell Clem Smith Jr.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 414 Post(s)
Liked 920 Times
in
447 Posts
Running = cycling + 2/3 running distance in feet X a baseball bat hitting the bottom of your shoes.
Likes For WaveyGravey:
#69
Senior Member
I've ridden 350km in a day, but the most I've ever run is about 11km. It took me much longer to recover from my longest run than it did to recover from my longest bike ride. I don't think I'm cut out to run marathons.
#70
Cheerfully low end
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,978
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked 1,044 Times
in
667 Posts
Otto
#72
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,111
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3432 Post(s)
Liked 3,567 Times
in
1,793 Posts
At a fairly easy jog, one can run a mile in 8 minutes. Do you think you can pedal a bike 8 miles in 8 minutes? Because you can't.
#73
Cheerfully low end
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,978
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 646 Post(s)
Liked 1,044 Times
in
667 Posts
Of course, there is a threshold question of whether someone who can cycle can actually run for any relevant period of time. Also a question of the effect of the impact trauma from running which affects how long a person can run and how quickly they can recover compared to a presumably less traumatic cycling effort.
As an aside, the fraction of people who regard running a mile in 8 minutes as an easy jog (like a zone 2 effort) is fairly small. That is about 3.5 W/kg.
Otto
Last edited by ofajen; 02-14-24 at 08:18 PM.
Likes For ofajen:
#74
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 1,995
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2700 Post(s)
Liked 486 Times
in
351 Posts
for me cycling 8 miles is easier on the body than running a mile, if both are done at a “mild to moderate pace.” For me running that’s probably like a 10-12.5 minute mile, I probably couldn’t even run an 8 minute mile right now, used to be able to break 6
#75
Grupetto Bob
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Seattle-ish
Posts: 6,222
Bikes: Bikey McBike Face
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2585 Post(s)
Liked 5,644 Times
in
2,922 Posts