10 weeks what can I acheve

Stinky

Stinky

Stinky

Soldato
Joined
28 Mar 2005
Posts
9,250
I've just got a 10 week job away and have signed up to the local gym! Will be spending 12 hours a night doing not a lot finishing at 7am and going to the gym for about 1.5 hours before sleep!

So I am currently 5'11" and weigh roughly 13.8 stone but do have abit of a flabby belly I'd like to work on!

Running is something i struggle badly with so cycling is likely to be my main cardio along with some free weights

I will be going between 5/6 days a week (I have to go to shower so might as well go gym while I'm there)

So I guess I'd like to lose the belly / some weight and tone up abit! What can I realistically acheve In this time frame!
 
Ditch the bike to begin with. If you want to drop bodyfat this is done by expending energy and burning calories thus creating a deficit or energy debt so the body will burn it's resources (fat) to pay this. Cycling does not burn as many calories as rowing or using a x-trainer (cycling is fine for CV but burning calories there are better options).

Ready GordyR's sticky at the top.
 
Last edited:
Not sure I agree with that.

I regularly hit the turbo on an evening and expend 700 calories per hour (measured by a powermeter so very accurate)

According to the Livestrong app vigorous rowing is a little less calories per minute
 
Sagalout said:
Not sure I agree with that.

I regularly hit the turbo on an evening and expend 700 calories per hour (measured by a powermeter so very accurate)

According to the Livestrong app vigorous rowing is a little less calories per minute
Click to expand...

A cross trainer will burn nearer to 900-1000 calories per hour.

I fail to see how you think that a CV exercise recruiting only legs can burn more calories than that of a full body CV requiring legs, core, back, arms (minimally). The more you're moving the more energy used and thus calories burned.

People who use cross trainers but then used the fixed handles as burning less calories than indicated.

You can burn more calories in less time by not using a static bike.
 
Does saying 'x burns more calories than y' make total sense? Surely it depends on how fast you're peddling or how fast you're rowing? E.g. rowing at level 4 four twenty minutes might burn the same number of calories as cycling on level 7 for twenty minutes.

I personally use the rower as it's a full body exercise and I find it fun, but not because it burns more calories, because if that was my aim I could surely just use the bike and peddle faster.

The only angle I can see is if you have to peddle that hard on the bike to burn as many calories as you would on the rower, your legs will get tired before they do on the rower because only your legs are employed.

I'm utterly prepared to be corrected on the above...as following through my logic one could say why not go on the little toe waggler machine and wiggle your toe at 5000rpm for ten days :p.
 
I say X-Trainer, easy to use and you get a good workout from it. You can use your whole body or just your legs.

Edit: When i say whole body, I mean arms and legs.

Also, does this gym have a pool? Can you swim? This is fantastic exercise.
 
Robbie G said:
Does saying 'x burns more calories than y' make total sense? Surely it depends on how fast you're peddling or how fast you're rowing? E.g. rowing at level 4 four twenty minutes might burn the same number of calories as cycling on level 7 for twenty minutes.
.
Click to expand...

Precisely. It's much easier to burn more energy on a rower or cross trainer than it is on a bike. Therefore more calories are burned.

Not to mentioned the increased aerobic capacity, VO2 max and general fitness from a full body CV over a lower body specific CV. Along with the increased musculature recruited.

Edit: Agree to disagree.
 
Sagalout said:
The NHS disagrees with you

Stationary rowing, moderate: 604 cals per hour
Stationary rowing, vigorous: 733 cals per hour

Stationary cycling, moderate: 604 cals per hour
Stationary cycling, vigorous: 906 cals per hour

Similar stats on the Livestrong website. Just do what you prefer doing.
Click to expand...

Oh dear, not the NHS...the same people wasting millions each year on being unable to write a cheque for the correct amount or whom think BMI is an accurate measure of fat or health.

BennyC is correct, rowing is full body, cycling is legs only therefore rowing will essentially 'do more.' Of course as raised this is in terms of similar intensity, not slowly going on level 1 on the rower compared to level 15sprints on a bike
 
Also have to say I think the rower would be the best option. It can absolutely destroy me! I would have to go a long time on a bike to feel anywhere near that bad. I don't go on the x-trainer so don't really have an idea of how that would fare

I'm not interested in how many calories I burn so have never really looked at that, but I would be extremely surprised if I burnt more doing cycling than rowing.
 
mpledge52 said:
Also have to say I think the rower would be the best option. It can absolutely destroy me! I would have to go a long time on a bike to feel anywhere near that bad. I don't go on the x-trainer so don't really have an idea of how that would fare

I'm not interested in how many calories I burn so have never really looked at that, but I would be extremely surprised if I burnt more doing cycling than rowing.
Click to expand...

Being smashed has no bearing on a comparison of kcals burned.

Quite surprised that static bike is better than rowing tbh, do we have more sources?
I would have thought the same load on both machines for the same time would burn more kcal on a rower. While you need the same amount of kcals to do the same load, the body is working more to make that work.
 
Activity:rowing, stationary, 200 watts, very vigorous effort
Calories burned:
428.652 (Kcals) in 30 minutes for a person weighing 150 pounds (68.04 kg)

Activity:bicycling, stationary, 200 watts, vigorous effort
Calories burned:
375.0705 (Kcals) in 30 minutes for a person weighing 150 pounds (68.04 kg)


Looks like my thoughts above are confirmed by that.
 
^ In the above example, one rowing is listed as very vigorous effort and cycling is listed only as vigorous. Is this just a description of the difficulty of each exercise?
 
Why not just do either or both depending on what you feel like on the day - both are clearly good, there's no specific requirement for a particular training outcome and you will benefit no matter what you do.
 
Robbie G said:
^ In the above example, one rowing is listed as very vigorous effort and cycling is listed only as vigorous. Is this just a description of the difficulty of each exercise?
Click to expand...

They are both 200watt, the difference is that to achieve 200watt on the rower is harder.

This is the best way to compare really.
 
Anyway back to the question :p you can achieve a hell of a lot in 10 weeks if you put the effort in and have a good diet.
Personally I use cycling for my cv because its what I prefer and find comfortable, there's no point in trying to force yourself to do something you don't enjoy or you wont keep it up.
 
Morba said:
They are both 200watt, the difference is that to achieve 200watt on the rower is harder.

This is the best way to compare really.
Click to expand...

Its not really the best way to compare at all - you cant compare wattages for different activities! You have to compare the intensities, and I can guarantee that if you do proper intervals on a bike (say 5 mins 95% MHR / 5 mins easy) you will expend just as many calories (and be just as knackered) as rowing and not be able to finish the hour.

I don't disagree that rowing is a more all round exercise for arms and back muscles etc, but if you're just talking about calorie expenditure you're wrong.
 
Sagalout said:
you cant compare wattages for different activities!
Click to expand...

Thinking about it, the 200W quoted is the output of the machine. In order to make the machine generate 200W, you have to do more work on the rower than on the bike. This is the same as saying that it's an activity with a higher intensity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom