How fuel efficient is a biker? A runner?

[Martin]

1hr of biking at 25km/h will consume around 700-750 Calories (assume 739 for simplicity). A litre of gas has 739 grams of fuel, which has a bit over 10 Cal per gram. So, 1 litre will take a biker 250km.

Lets take the fuel consumption of an average car to be 10L/100km (23mpg). Covering 250km will consume around 25 litres.


So, 25x.. that's pretty efficient!

What about running? 10km/h (10min mile) will consume 1000 Cal. It'll take a car 7390 to cover the same distance, making the runner only 7x more efficient.


Of course, all this is theoretical and approximate, but it still gives you a clue.

ref

 

[bobdelt]

Makes sense. Running is going to burn more calories and cover less ground than a bike = less efficient, or if youre trying to lose that belly = more efficient.

 

[mobobuff]

Stop being Canadian, here we be usin' the Imperial system.

But honestly, what's the point of comparing calories to combustion?

 

[DrPizza]

I've always doubted those "how many calories do you burn in an hour doing..." statistics.

700-750 calories for an hour of biking at a leisurely pace seems kinda high.

 

[Bateluer]

Originally posted by: bobdelt
Makes sense. Running is going to burn more calories and cover less ground than a bike = less efficient, or if youre trying to lose that belly = more efficient.

How do you figure that? Cycling is a lower impact exercise, so its easier for your knees, but it burns fewer calories over identical distances when compared to running.

Plus running is considerably more fun than cycling.