Anyway to convert biked miles in ran miles?

[Hogmanlolz]

Sounds weird but everyday I attempt to bike 10-20 miles a day before wow. Takes anywhere from 1-2 hours depending how hard I pedal. Lets say this week I do 75 miles, anyway to see how many miles that would be if I were to run it?

[the kins man]

There is no set conversion ratio that I am aware of in terms of a pure exercise ratio. I would look at how long it takes you to do x miles on a bike, the estimate how many miles you could run/jog in that same time. That will probably be the easiest way to do it.

[bals]

People used to say that 1 mile ran ~ 4 miles biked.
They are different exercises though

[dawawe]

It would be 75 miles.... walked, ran, or biked. Miles are all the same. The effort is different.

[Nero Duskwind]

Sounds weird but everyday I attempt to bike 10-20 miles a day before wow. Takes anywhere from 1-2 hours depending how hard I pedal. Lets say this week I do 75 miles, anyway to see how many miles that would be if I were to run it?

Ermm... it'd still be 75 miles. The distance from Point A to Point B won't be any different, only how long it would take you to cover that distance running as opposed to cycling.

[Denpepe]

not sure that you can compare due to the difference in exercise, what I would suggest is to look up how much energy it takes to cycle for a mile and then how much to run for a mile and then do some math.

[tenzing21]

Remember, all research, all of it, shows that walking and running for a certain time period burns the same calories. You just go farther running is all.

[Slavrick]

Well if you wanted to just know how far you could run in that allotted time, it really just depends on how long it takes you to run a mile. Lets say you run an 8 minute mile. If you were to run for an hour, you would run 7.5 miles. For 2 hours it would be 15 miles. Not sure if this is what you meant, but oh well.

[Neave]

http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc

input your values for minutes biked, and get a calories burnt result. then adjust some numbers for minutes ran until you get the same calories burnt running, as you did biking.

[Foto]

People used to say that 1 mile ran ~ 4 miles biked.
They are different exercises though

This is generally the rule to go by and, for those interested
0.25 swam ~ 1 mile run ~ 4 mile ride

thats not to say that because you can swim a quarter mile you can therefore ride 4 miles in the same time its just a rough comparison of time taken. You're better off switching to running for about 1/5 or 1/6th of the time if you have that base fitness and seeing how you go.

Different people, different muscles, different exercises

[Spectral]

The effort levels are oh-so-very-different that it's not really useful to convert between them in that fashion. The rough numbers people have posted are fine if you just want rough numbers, but it's not really useful for much of anything. From a caloric standpoint, I can ride about 25 miles on 1K calories or run about 7.5 miles on 1K calories, depending on pace and hills. They aren't really comparable in terms of effort and fatigue though.

[Ravock]

There is pretty much zero carry over between running and riding a bike. They tax your body completely differently.

[Aldred]

Interesting question, but I guess it's pretty hard to answer precisely since it depends on how hard you'd be cycling/running, and running is typically a more intense exercise to begin with. Hence, same as the difference with walking a mile or running a mile, you'll burn far more calories per mile with the more intense exercise. Plus a bike is more efficient than running.

Anyway, I quite like the 0.25 swim = 1 mile run = 4 mile bike ride equivalence that was posted. Easy to remember too!

If you can manage a 2-5 mile run say once or twice a week, you could do that in place of your bike rides on those days and the results would be even better. Keep your body guessing.

---------- Post added 2013-05-20 at 08:37 PM ----------

Remember, all research, all of it, shows that walking and running for a certain time period burns the same calories. You just go farther running is all.

No - that's not correct. You don't burn the same calories at all, in fact it's roughly twice as many per minute when running compared with walking. Here's an article on the subject with links to some research, for example:

http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-l...-will-you-burn

[Spectral]

Remember, all research, all of it, shows that walking and running for a certain time period burns the same calories. You just go farther running is all.

That's absolutely dead wrong. Even varying the pace of running changes the calories burnt significantly. If your claim were true, driving speed would not have any affect on gas mileage.