Bike HR v Running HR

Forum guidelines BT super discount
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Bike HR v Running HR Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
2008-05-11 3:33 AM

User image

Extreme Veteran
446
10010010010025
Auckland, New Zealand
Subject: Bike HR v Running HR

I know that I should do a test on the bike as well as the run to workout my MHR and use the karvonen method to workout my training zone.  However, I was just wondering whether or not HR's for the bike are lower than running HR's?

 * I know that thie may vary from person to person etc...

2008-05-11 4:04 AM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Elite
4235
2000200010010025
Spring, TX
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
I use the Friel method of finding Lactate Threshold.

I think it depends on how well trained you are in either sport. A cyclist who has done little running will probably have a much higher LT on the bike than the run. For a runner, the threshold on the run would be higher because he's better trained to run.

I know for me, my threshold on the run is 178 and last I checked it was 163 on the bike. Over the past two months I've been focusing on cycling and I'm sure it's up over 170bpm now.

2008-05-11 4:17 AM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Extreme Veteran
446
10010010010025
Auckland, New Zealand
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR

Cheers for the info.  I'll look into what you said.

 BTW: Keep say in Afghan. My brother just got back from 6 month in the Helmund province (British Army).

2008-05-11 4:27 AM
in reply to: #1394620

User image

Elite
4235
2000200010010025
Spring, TX
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
ForrestGump - 2008-05-11 3:17 PM

Cheers for the info.  I'll look into what you said.

 BTW: Keep say in Afghan. My brother just got back from 6 month in the Helmund province (British Army).



I'm heading down to Helmund next month for the rest of my tour. It's HOT down there. (in more ways that one)

2008-05-11 5:53 AM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Extreme Veteran
370
1001001002525
Arnhem
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
In general I think the bike LT will be a little lower than run LT.
That's what I have at least. From a TT field test I got 179 run and 172 bike last year.
2008-05-11 6:36 AM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Regular
88
252525
Hickory, North Carolina
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
I'm a long-time cyclist turned triathlete. My run HR is waaaaaay higher than my cycling. On a hard ride my HR never gets above 160bpm... on my runs... it pretty much stays in the 160's and 170's for the entire run! I'm working on that.

2008-05-11 7:35 AM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Expert
986
500100100100100252525
Michiana
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
My run LT is 169, and bike is 160.  Generally, bike LT is 5-10bpm lower than run LT.
2008-05-11 8:03 AM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Regular
545
50025
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
I will make an echo that my LT for bike is lower than my LT for running by around 5bpm. I am a better runner (not a good runner, though) than cyclist if that matters.
2008-05-11 8:18 AM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Bob
2194
2000100252525
Binghamton, NY
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR

In training, my bike HR is always lower than my run HR. On a hard ride I have a hard time getting my HR into the 160's where on a hard run (T-pace or fast M-pace) mid 160's is easy to achieve.

Racing is a different story. I went into a 20K TT last year with the intentions of keeping my HR in the 160's but when I looked at my watch 15 seconds into the race I saw 176 and it never came down. I held about the same HR for a 4 miler run that I did last year. My race HR's are always higher than my training HR's, adrenaline effect I guess!

2008-05-11 4:02 PM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Extreme Veteran
446
10010010010025
Auckland, New Zealand
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
Thanks for all the replies.  I've never maxed on the bike or the run lately for that matter, so I guess a few TT's are needed.  On the bike at the gym the other week my HR went up to 180bpm quite easily and I wasn't maxing out, so I'm sure it'll go higher.
2008-05-12 7:23 PM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Member
27
25
Virginia Beach
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
Friel, in Total Heart Rate Training, says that on average the bike LT is 7 points lower than the run LT. I'm sure that is for well trained athletes in both sports.

2008-05-12 8:52 PM
in reply to: #1394612

User image

Coach
10487
50005000100100100100252525
Boston, MA
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
Yes in general the bike LTHR and run LTHR difference will be around 5-10 bpm (more for unfit athletes) but as you get fitter on both legs the difference will be closer although never the same even if you are very fit on the bike and not so much for the run.
2008-05-12 9:10 PM
in reply to: #1398097

User image

Pro
4311
20002000100100100
Texas
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
amiine - 2008-05-12 8:52 PM

Yes in general the bike LTHR and run LTHR difference will be around 5-10 bpm (more for unfit athletes)


Great, so how f*cking unfit am I with a 37bpm difference? 179 for the run, 142 for the bike.
2008-05-12 9:13 PM
in reply to: #1398145

User image

Extreme Veteran
446
10010010010025
Auckland, New Zealand
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR

JBrashear - 2008-05-13 2:10 PM
amiine - 2008-05-12 8:52 PM Yes in general the bike LTHR and run LTHR difference will be around 5-10 bpm (more for unfit athletes)
Great, so how f*cking unfit am I with a 37bpm difference? 179 for the run, 142 for the bike.

 

LOL!  I haven't even been there yet, so I'll probably be in the same boat!

2008-05-12 9:14 PM
in reply to: #1398151

User image

Pro
4311
20002000100100100
Texas
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
ForrestGump - 2008-05-12 9:13 PM

JBrashear - 2008-05-13 2:10 PM
amiine - 2008-05-12 8:52 PM Yes in general the bike LTHR and run LTHR difference will be around 5-10 bpm (more for unfit athletes)
Great, so how f*cking unfit am I with a 37bpm difference? 179 for the run, 142 for the bike.

LOL! I haven't even been there yet, so I'll probably be in the same boat!



Maybe I'll change over from Gu to Haagen Daas so my fat a*s can get the proper intake.

Edited by JBrashear 2008-05-12 9:15 PM
2008-05-12 9:24 PM
in reply to: #1398145

User image

Master
1410
1000100100100100
White Plains NY
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR


Great, so how f*cking unfit am I with a 37bpm difference? 179 for the run, 142 for the bike.


That was me 5 months ago!....and could only run 90 seconds @ a time. Now I am about a 5-10 BPM difference and can run 5 miles. I never thought I would reach this point of fitness.

Just keep trucking and you will see improvement!

2008-05-12 9:48 PM
in reply to: #1398156

User image

Champion
10471
500050001001001001002525
Dallas, TX
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
JBrashear - 2008-05-12 9:14 PM

ForrestGump - 2008-05-12 9:13 PM

JBrashear - 2008-05-13 2:10 PM
amiine - 2008-05-12 8:52 PM Yes in general the bike LTHR and run LTHR difference will be around 5-10 bpm (more for unfit athletes)
Great, so how f*cking unfit am I with a 37bpm difference? 179 for the run, 142 for the bike.

LOL! I haven't even been there yet, so I'll probably be in the same boat!



Maybe I'll change over from Gu to Haagen Daas so my fat a*s can get the proper intake.


I personally love Oreo's and a Coke on my long rides! Yummy!
2008-05-13 6:08 AM
in reply to: #1398195

User image

Pro
4311
20002000100100100
Texas
Subject: RE: Bike HR v Running HR
vrljc - 2008-05-12 9:24 PM



Great, so how f*cking unfit am I with a 37bpm difference? 179 for the run, 142 for the bike.


That was me 5 months ago!....and could only run 90 seconds @ a time. Now I am about a 5-10 BPM difference and can run 5 miles. I never thought I would reach this point of fitness.

Just keep trucking and you will see improvement!


Here's the thing though, I can run a half-mary and I'm basically in 'olympic distance' shape. I mean I'm not competing for any AG trophies and I'll probably be in the last half of all finishers, but I'm not out of shape imo. I know he didn't mean any offense by it and I'm not really offended, it's more he hit on a spot of frustration for me at just the right(or wrong ) time...when I just finished my first LT test on the trainer. I was expecting an LT pretty close to my run LT(which I've done a couple times and it's pretty consistent) and instead I get that weird result.
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Bike HR v Running HR Rss Feed