Distance, when it comes to excersize is basically irrelevant. Three miles to one person may be difficult and to another person it might not take any effort whatsoever.
What is important is your level of exertion and the amount of time you spend at that level.
This can be done with heart rate, perceived rate of exertion, which is surprisingly accurate if one is honest, or in some sports like cycling it can be measured in watts.
Without getting too technical, the higher your exertion, the more calories you will burn, but the higher your effort the less your body will use fat as fuel. This is your objective.
A rule of thumb might be to walk as fast as you can while still being able to breath enough to speak in full sentences but still raising heart rate and your rate of breathing.
Rate of respiration is a good indicator of when your body starts to make that change to using less fat as fuel. The idea is to use as much fat in the amount of time you are excersizing.
Bottom line: if it takes 45 minutes to walk three miles and 20 minutes to ride it you'll burn more calories walking.
Riding might be more calories if you rode the same amount of time depending on how efficient you are at it. THis is why people cross-train. after a certain amount of time you'll get better at an activity and it won't take as much effort or burn as many calories. Switching from 45 minutes of walking to 45 minutes of cycling or rollerblading or tennis, etc. will keep you making progress in your weight loss program.
Another rule of thumb for athletes is that if you're doing the same workout as three weeks ago you need to change it.
Do this, cut out simple sugars like soda and eat more fiber and you'll see solid safe results.
Sorry to be so long-winded, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. Feel free to email me with any other questions.
2006-09-18 07:15:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jeff 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
In general, walking briskly for 3 miles will be a better workout than bicycling 3 miles. Not only are you looking at least 3 times the amount of workout time, but walking also utilizes more muscle groups, especially through the core.
2006-09-19 03:02:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course with the same mile is the more effective Work out would be walking, but try to ride your Bicycle for 30 miles and 2 days a week you will lose 10 pounds in just a Month.
2006-09-18 07:29:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Warhorse X 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
A bicycle is more effecient than walking. Thus a 3 mile walk will require more energy than a 3 mile ride. However, a bicycle is less stressful on the joints than walking. (The bike is consuming some of your body's weight.) Thus, a bike workout could be performed at a higher intensity without causing harm to joints. This could result in more calorie burning. However, for this to work, you would probably need to cycle longer than 3 miles. (You could likely bike 10 miles or more in the same amount of time.)
Cycling also uses different muscles than walking. This could help strengthen those muscles, which could actually lead to muscle weight gain. However, it will help contribute to long term weight loss. Alternating biking and walking may be one of your most effective options.
2006-09-18 08:16:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by LDude7 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Calories/Hour Expended in Common Physical Activities
Moderate Physical ActivityApproximate Calories/Hr
for a 154 lb Person1
Hiking 370
Light gardening/yard work 330
Dancing 330
Golf (walking and carrying clubs) 330
Bicycling (<10 mph) 290
Walking (3.5 mph) 280
Weight lifting (general light workout) 220
Stretching 180
Vigorous Physical ActivityApproximate Calories/Hr
for a 154 lb Person1
Running/jogging (5 mph) 590
Bicycling (>10 mph) 590
Swimming (slow freestyle laps) 510
Aerobics 480
Walking (4.5 mph) 460
Heavy yard work (chopping wood) 440
Weight lifting (vigorous effort) 440
Basketball (vigorous) 440
1Calories burned per hour will be higher for persons who weigh more than 154 lbs (70 kg) and lower for persons who weigh less.
Source: Adapted from Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2005Calories/Hour Expended in Common Physical Activities
2006-09-18 08:09:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Walking is more effective at distance of 3 miles. I suggest you try further distance on bicycle.
2006-09-18 18:05:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by Billy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
you use up more energy walking as the wheels saves you energy: Instead of stopping and accelerating with each step you leave out the stopping, especially if your bike freewheels.
You would use up even more energy if you run the same distance. The faster the speed you can maintain, the more energy you will use. Alternatively you can also carry some weight, though it is not recommended that you carry a lot.
2006-09-18 06:15:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by convictedidiot 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Over the same distance, walking is much, much more strenuous. If you want to compare cycling to walking, you need to compare the same workout times, not distances. I would say 15 miles on a bike would be comparable to 3 miles walking.
2006-09-18 05:56:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Walking definitely. Over a longer distance, cycling may be better, but hey why not combine the two and do a bi-athlon of sorts, get more of a workout and lose more weight that way?
2006-09-18 06:44:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by koko J 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good question. I would say bicycling because it exercises your glutei maximi, which are your body's largest muscles - therefore requiring more oxygenation and blood flow. But you have to make sure you're working and not just cruising.
Vigorous walking is still very good, too, but you don't use your glutes when you walk, only when you run (not jog, but run).
Why not switch it up and do both? Cross-training is best.
2006-09-18 05:56:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
0⤋