Heart Rate

[ndwgolf]

Guys
Today I did a 68 kilometre bike ride on my MTB on a very scenic road in Phang-Nga North of Phuket Thailand........the road has an elevation change of 1772 ft so its quite hilly.
A few days ago I did a 48 kilometre ride with an elevation change of 515 ft that is generally flatfish.

Todays ride was obviously a lot harder than the previous one but even after 2 x 15 to 20 minute stops for drinks I noticed that my heart rate was right back up in the 140s 5 minutes after resuming the ride....see below


My previous ride that was a lot easier I didn't notice the elevated heart rate as much.


So I am now back home about 2 hours after the ride and my heart rate is back down to normal of ~70 and I feel good.......a little tired but good.

So my question is this; is it safe to ride for over an hour with your heart rate in the high 140s ? I am nearly 61 and weigh 117 kg, and working on the last number to try and get down to around 105kg

Neil

[eileithyia]

I don't see why 140 ish HR for an hour would be worrying. I time trial and at top end of 50's expect to race at top end 150's to mid 160's for over an hour for 25's (would prefer it to be sub hour lol), for 50's 100's and 12 hours the HR will be up in 140's for a much longer time.

[foxyrider]

I often have rides of 100km or more, sometimes with 1500m climbing or as low as 500m. My average HR will typically be @130. On the hilly rides and 120 on the flatter. OTOH when I ride a climb heavy sportive I might get @ 140 for a 5-6 hour effort (eg. The recent Eddy Merckx Classic in Austria was 170km with 2100m of climbing over 6.5hrs! Av. HR rate was 145)

Clearly, on rides where you put in less effort your av. HR should be lower. (some rides I will do extended periods of flatter riding at 112bpm!)

Danger signs to watch for are erratic readings and a HR that stays elevated after exercise. If you get either see your doctor urgently!

Keep riding, enjoy your rides, your body will tell you to slow down if need be, eat sensibly and you can lose those kg - don't over compensate for your rides.

[Cugel]

There's a lot to be said for just riding your bike and feeling the state of your body with its already built-in sensors. You can frighten yourself with data. You can distract yourself with data. You can limit yourself with data. In the end, you'll turn your cycling into a data-generating and analysis event, perhaps failing to notice the more visceral pleasures and effects of riding a bike. You'll also end up subject to the orders of a data-scheme imposed by someone else.

A similar point can be made about your body weight. Better to consider how healthy you feel, what you can and can't do, what you look like and other factors that are not mere absolute data measurements. Aiming for some particular bodyweight, especially if done within the context of some other data-driven procedure such as a calorie-counting diet, almost always leads to a failure of achievement, generated by a perceived failure to adhere to some arbitrary data-pattern, such as rate of measured weight loss per week. Perhaps it's just best to eat well and avoid junk food?

What do you want from cycling? Is it a means to an end or an end in it's self? I'll here mention that all means are ends, since we live through time. If you perform certain acts (such as riding a bike vigorously in various ways) you might find that you achieve what you fundamentally want, rather than what some gizmo, training plan or diet plan-seller says you ought to want. You might find that you're achieving it moment by moment in the mode known as "a pleasurable and invigorating bike ride".

Cugel

[Pastychomper]

The guideline I was told in A level biology is you shouldn't push your heart rate past 220 - your age (in years). That would give a 60-year-old an upper limit of 160 bpm. Like most numbers in biology it's only a rough guide, but by spending an hour in the high 140s the chances are you're not only safe but doing yourself a favour.

I agree with going by your built-in sensors, but still think a heart rate target can be useful. Personally (40 years and counting) I aim to get mine over 150 bpm for at least an hour and a half a week, on the grounds that a definite number stops my highly-efficient* self from slacking off when a given route starts feeling easy. It works, at least I haven't dropped dead yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeedc



*efficient is a much better way to spell lazy.

[kwackers]

I'm 57, weigh 86Kg and during a half marathon my hr sits around 160-165 for an hour and half.
During my dinner time jogs (about 40 mins) its about 150-155.

Riding my bike it sits around 140-150 depending on how lazy I'm feeling for 2 x 1 hour sessions during my commute, bit higher on the way home, bit less on the way to work.

I doubt you've got anything to worry about.

[robc02]

The guideline I was told in A level biology is you shouldn't push your heart rate past 220 - your age (in years). That would give a 60-year-old an upper limit of 160 bpm. Like most numbers in biology it's only a rough guide, but by spending an hour in the high 140s the chances are you're not only safe but doing yourself a favour.

The "rough guide" bit is important. I have only occasionally used a heart rate monitor when cycling but, in my late 40's and pretty fit, I could never get mine above the mid 150s. I recorded that in a 5 mile, training time trial - pretty close to throwing up level. The best I recorded in competition was 152(ish) on the Cat and Fiddle hillclimb. I concluded that I have a naturally low maximum heart rate. Also my resting heat rate was around 48 (and still is, aged 60)

[Cugel]

The guideline I was told in A level biology is you shouldn't push your heart rate past 220 - your age (in years). That would give a 60-year-old an upper limit of 160 bpm. Like most numbers in biology it's only a rough guide, but by spending an hour in the high 140s the chances are you're not only safe but doing yourself a favour.

The "rough guide" bit is important. I have only occasionally used a heart rate monitor when cycling but, in my late 40's and pretty fit, I could never get mine above the mid 150s. I recorded that in a 5 mile, training time trial - pretty close to throwing up level. The best I recorded in competition was 152(ish) on the Cat and Fiddle hillclimb. I concluded that I have a naturally low maximum heart rate. Also my resting heat rate was around 48 (and still is, aged 60)

This is the point - heart rates vary a lot in individuals who might be said to be of broadly equal aerobic fitness. I'm 69 but my max is 182 and I can maintain 160 for an hour. The resting beat is 42. Many who are significantly fitter than me have both greater and lesser rates for the same effort levels. Ditto for the less fit. It is of interest to see these figures once in a blue moon when on the static bike in a gym 'cause Hurricane Gerty's blowing but ....

....Why bother measuring it, really? Well, you could argue that you can use your own HR rates as benchmarks for your own "training sessions". But HR varies for all sorts of reasons besides exercise. Perhaps you just had a poor kipper for breakfast; or last night's take-away was full of queer meat from some god forsaken place where they stuff the beasts with large amounts of chemicals? Perhaps you have seen a comely figure up the road and your HR is not just due to forlorn attempts to catch her? Perhaps you have just caught man-flu?

Cugel

[kwackers]

....Why bother measuring it, really? Well, you could argue that you can use your own HR rates as benchmarks for your own "training sessions". But HR varies for all sorts of reasons besides exercise. Perhaps you just had a poor kipper for breakfast; or last night's take-away was full of queer meat from some god forsaken place where they stuff the beasts with large amounts of chemicals? Perhaps you have seen a comely figure up the road and your HR is not just due to forlorn attempts to catch her? Perhaps you have just caught man-flu?

Cugel

I find my heart rate is a good measure of effort and is fairly consistent for a given effort.
Conversely I find my estimate of how hard something was completely random.

My heart rate matches average pace whilst perceived effort matches some combination of health and laziness.

Comparing them is pointless though. I can push mine up to 200 for a short period - by all accounts I should be dead. A guy I worked with had a resting HR of 42 but weighed 20 stone and got a sweat on going up the stairs.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Individual heart rate is meaning less!

Hear rate zones.............................get into 3 & 4 level and job is done.
Assessing max heart rate to base zones is a little harder but age - previous exercise experience - ex / none smoker will affect your fitness, thus you could be over estimating your max heart rate, fitness will limit your max so see how you go.

[100%JR]

I'm 50.Using the 220-age as a guideline my Max HR should be 170 and 80% HR is 136bpm.If I ride at 136bpm I'm just pootling along!I generally ride at 150-155bpm.Even at that rate I'm not breathing too heavily and I can still chat away to whoever I'm riding with.On a long climb in Mallorca(Sa Calobra) my HR was 175+ for most of the 9.5km climb.It soon dropped back down as a went over the summit.
I don't bother with the HR now as my body will tell me if I'm doing too much!
A lady I/we regularly ride with is 39.She goes into panic mode if her HR reaches 180bpm even though she's perfectly OK.I/we have told her to leave the HR monitor at home

[ndwgolf]

For some reason I stopped getting notifications for this thread.......anyway still riding an average of 70 kilometres 3 times a week on my mountain bike and thourerly enjoying it. Heart rate has been great with an average of 125 to 130 over the ride at an average speed of 25 kph......I've got a new road bike coming so will start pushing the distance and speed when that arrives before the end of the month
Neil

[Canuk]

I have two rather expensive HR monitors sitting gathering dust in a drawer And a fancy HR blood pressure watch which is suffering the same fate.

I don't find much use for HR monitoring at all. I've a friend who's a mad keen triathlete and he's always wittering on about it, but gets no meaningful results from all his training. Every time I ride out with him I'm always waiting at the side of the road waiting... Worse at the top of a hill.

The four physical cues I use for health and well-being are :

1. Appetite. If I'm hungry when I come back from a ride, it's been a good productive day out.

2. Sleep. If feel tired and start yawning at 9pm and I sleep 8hrs straight through then I've done what I needed on the bike and it was enough.

3. Urine colour. I always aim for 'light straw', any darker than that and I'm not properly hydrated. A bad idea for me.

4. The local club. I normally start off in the B ride, and then try and catch the A ride at some point in the day. These are mostly young guys and gals in their 20's, half my age. If I can do this regularly, it's been a good season and I can give myself a pat on the back. The look on their faces when an old biffer like me rolls up, freewheel clicking loudly behind them is reward enough though.

I have nothing on my handlebars, and I don't even wear a watch. I actually like being out in the countryside just enjoying the sunshine and the birds and the bees. Anything else (to me) is simply a distraction. To watch all these young folk religiously beep and record and monitor the day away seems faintly ridiculous. They've forgotten the sheer joy of cycling, just the rise of the road and the silent steed you sit upon. Poor fools!

I could see the point of an HR monitor if I had a medical condition which elevated or low HR was a danger. Mercifully I don't, so my best advice to anyone paranoid about their HR on a ride is leave your monitor in a drawer and let it grow old, like Dorian Gray, whilst you stay blissfully young out on the road

[ndwgolf]

I'm definitely not parinoid but conscious of my heart condition so its important to me to make sure I don't go over 156 as recommend by my doctor.
Neil

I'm a trendy consumer. Just look at my CLT-L29 using hovercraft full of eels.

[Canuk]

This medical grade Omron blood pressure watch on the other hand is extremely useful. The first generation of true accuracy wrist mounted watches, which next year will combine EKG monitoring also, ideal for those with heart complications.

https://www.cnet.com/news/omron-heartgu ... watch-ces/