Calories

[hubgearfreak]

5040 How much do I need to eat to replace that lot?
Help, I'm wasting away!

that's 20 pints of beer.

[Sue60N]

Can't really follow that last post.... but I must say that I thought it was women who obsessed about calories !

[paulah]

It's usually women who count calories but male cyclists obsess about anything to do with gadgets and bicycles so they're concerned with gadgets to count the calories, the accuracy of the gadget to count the calories and the effect of calorie intake on their cycling.

[Mick F]

Yeah, ok. A "Boy Thing".
I do like gadgets, and my Garmin of course. The calorie calculation is done within the unit, and also within Ascent.

I know that the algorithm in Ascent takes into account loads of things - height gained, speed, weight, weight of bike, type of riding, heart rates, cadence. So it must be quite accurate - or as accurate as possible.

(are the girls ganging up on us poor blokes?)

[kwackers]

(are the girls ganging up on us poor blokes?)

Jealousy, they grew up, we didn't.

That and a bit of female bonding, "shall we be friends?", "lets, and lets gang up on the boys!"

All imho of course

[NUKe]

No. I'm not putting on weight, I just wonder how many calories I'm using and eating. My weight is stable.

I eat like a horse and don't worry what I eat. I enjoy fried breakfasts, and stews and pies for tea, let alone beer and wine in the evening. I just think that the calorie numbers are astronomical! I weigh 13st odd, and am approaching 57 this autumn.

What?
Me worry?

Cycling gives me an excuse for eating apart from giving me a buzz. I enjoy getting the miles in, and riding along the lanes and exploring. Ride, ride, ride - wonderful. Man and machine in perfect harmony.

5000 calories for a day out?

Sounds like the perfect life

[minkie]

I do like gadgets, and my Garmin of course. The calorie calculation is done within the unit, and also within Ascent.

I know that the algorithm in Ascent takes into account loads of things - height gained, speed, weight, weight of bike, type of riding, heart rates, cadence. So it must be quite accurate - or as accurate as possible.

Maybe the Garmin is smarter than I thought then - is the Ascent result similar to the Garmin one?

[Mick F]

....... is the Ascent result similar to the Garmin one?

No. They use different algorithms, Ascent being the most thorough I understand.

Quoted from a thread on the Ascent Forum:
I believe that Ascent's calculation uses the formulas described in "Prediction of energy expenditure from heart rate monitoring during submaximal exercise", by L.R. Keytel, et. al. published in the March, 2005 Journal of Sports Sciences.
Unlike Garmin's proprietary algorithm, at least we know how it's done and that there is some science behind it.


For the record:
Ascent - 5040 calories
Garmin 305 - 4232 calories

This was 65 miles over 5hrs 28mins of pedalling at an average moving speed of 11.91mph and a total ascent of 6139ft.

I was away from home for 6hrs 46mins with a true average speed of 9.62mph.

[minkie]

"Prediction of energy expenditure from heart rate monitoring during submaximal exercise", by L.R. Keytel, et. al. published in the March, 2005 Journal of Sports Sciences.

Sounds like an authoritative source - I also like that the number is even bigger!

[Mick F]

Big grins all round then!!

5000 cals = 50 pints of beer, or 50 bags of chips, or 100 Mars Bars, or a mixture of the lot!!!

The hard part is riding 65 miles every day!

[kwackers]

Big grins all round then!!

5000 cals = 50 pints of beer, or 50 bags of chips, or 100 Mars Bars, or a mixture of the lot!!!

The hard part is riding 65 miles every day!

I'd hold off on the mars bars - at least until you've sussed the maths, you might put a teensy bit of weight on.

[dan_b]

Mars bar ~ 300 kcals, from memory, so yeah.

100kcal for a beer is also a bit low, I think. Definitely doesn't include Guinness

[Mick F]

50 pints, then riding 65 miles the following day ....... weak beer or not!

The trouble is, since Monday's ride, I've not been out again. Bike in bits getting a good fettle in the workshop. It'll be back together tomorrow ready for next week.

The poor thing was manky from the roads - salt, mud, rain, and needed a well-earned clean-up. Meanwhile I'm putting on the pounds and storing up my calories! Reminds me of grizzly bears gorging on fruit ready for hibernation ......

[john_roberts]

This was 65 miles over 5hrs 28mins of pedalling at an average moving speed of 11.91mph and a total ascent of 6139ft.

Hi all

Just a bit of clarification required, as I'm new here and certainly new to all this 'tech-talk,' but your total ascent was 6139ft? I assume the figure you quoted is the *total* of all the ascending sections on the ride you did? I only ask as Ben Nevis is what, ~4400ft above sea level, so I'm not imagining you climbed a 6000+ft mountain from sea level?

If your ride was a loop then won't the total descent also be 6139ft?

Just trying to get a handle on this

[Mick F]

Hi John, I agree with you as I often think that if you did a circular ride and climbed hills, you'd have to come down them again. Net climb equals zero!

The trouble is, riding down hills takes little effort, whereas pedalling up takes a great deal. Therefore, the only thing recorded is the total ascent.

I rode my Grand Tour last summer, and did loadsa miles up and down the country. 1400 of them over 3 weeks. My total ascent was 76,577ft, a bit higher than 3 Everests?