# what burns more calories, road or mountain?



## wanderoo222 (Nov 28, 2006)

road biker at work claims road biking burns more calories per mile than mountain biking. I totally disagree. Even if the trail is smooth your still cranking more revs per mile. Is my thinking wrong? II also think it's harder to rotate a mountain bike wheel (especially in dirt). I invited this guy to ride with me. Say's he doesn't own a mountain bike. Now I don't own a road bike either but I do ride my commuter bike with 1 inch diam tires and it seems i can cover a greater distance with less work. What do you think? Would I burn more calories road riding?


----------



## miketech1 (Jun 20, 2006)

I agree with you wanderoo222. Mountain biking burns more calories per mile definitely. On the road you are on tread that is a quarter inch wide (no resistance) and on smooth pavement. Last time I looked mountains are not flat. Seem to be steeper every day I ride them. 

Now if you are racing road and are flat out for a 100 miles or more than maybe road burns more. But for the casual riders mountains all the way.


----------



## ad6mj (Mar 20, 2008)

Too many variables. Speed, grade, surface. For the same speed and grade dirt would require more power.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Per mile? Mountain bikes have more rolling resistance so I'd have to say _in general_ riding a mountain bike burns more calories per mile. Then again, compare rolling downhill gently for a mile versus grinding up a paved 13% grade climb. Point goes to road in that case.

Counting miles isn't a good way to judge effort though. Work done over a period of time would be better. Which burns more per hour? That also depends on a lot of factors, such as speed (i.e., wind resistance), riding surface (i.e., friction), steepness, etc.

If you _must know_ then you should invest in some gadgetry such as heart rate monitors or power meter hubs. Me, I don't care so much to know.


----------



## f3rg (Aug 29, 2007)

*Mountain*

I can ride all day on the road and only stop when I get bored. But point me to a great set of trails, and I'll be out of energy in no time.

On the road, you basically sit for long periods of time, pedaling at a steady cadence. Occasionally, you might stand and sprint uphill.

Trail riding is so random and chaotic, you never get a chance to get a rhythm down. You also need more body English to get your (heavier) bike around or over obstacles. Whereas road riding is mostly a leg (and heart and lung) workout, trail riding requires your entire body.


----------



## rzozaya1969 (Nov 28, 2004)

wanderoo222 said:


> road biker at work claims road biking burns more calories per mile than mountain biking. I totally disagree. Even if the trail is smooth your still cranking more revs per mile. Is my thinking wrong? II also think it's harder to rotate a mountain bike wheel (especially in dirt). I invited this guy to ride with me. Say's he doesn't own a mountain bike. Now I don't own a road bike either but I do ride my commuter bike with 1 inch diam tires and it seems i can cover a greater distance with less work. What do you think? Would I burn more calories road riding?


If you just measure calories per mile, maybe you're right, but on a road bike you cover lots more miles than on a mountain ride.


----------



## scottzg (Sep 27, 2006)

i could believe that road biking burns more calories per hour at a given intensity.


----------



## rlouder (Jun 26, 2007)

miketech1 said:


> Last time I looked mountains are not flat. Seem to be steeper every day I ride them.


We must ride the same trails. I think it's a geological phenomenon.

I agree with the others. In general, I burn more ntn biking.


----------



## Garthhog (May 7, 2007)

My average heartrate is usually higher on road rides than on MTB. I will have higher peak HR on the MTN bike, though. For me, and the trails I tend to haunt, I get too much "down time" after a lot of the short climbs (we don't have too many long climbs in Texas). I've been working hard this year, and my recovery time is pretty short, so after I peak on the wall climbs and start down the other side, my HR drops immediately, and I have to spend more time getting it back up (unless there is a good technical climb). 

On the road, I can ride at a high intensity for a lot longer, averaging a higher HR.

-Ryan


----------



## bikerboy (Jan 13, 2004)

Something that I have not seen anybody bring up is the higher drag you experience on a road bike due to the higher speeds. I am sure that will make the rider work a bit harder than as slower speeds, though it may not equal the addition resistance provided by a fat knobby on dirt. Also, a mountain bike would see a higher number of crank rotations per mile due to the lower gearing, but that should equal to the same amount of work done by a higher gear ratio on a road bike. Remember, work equals force time distance. A lower gear ratio requires a lower level of force, but a greater distance (distance traveled in a circle by your legs rotating the cranks) than a higher level of force with less rotations per mile. So, to me the biggest factors would be tire/surface resistance and wind resistance.


----------



## BBW (Feb 25, 2004)

Nat said:


> *Counting miles isn't a good way to judge effort though. Work done over a period of time would be better. * Which burns more per hour? That also depends on a lot of factors, such as speed (i.e., wind resistance), riding surface (i.e., friction), steepness, etc.


yeap


----------



## c_m_shooter (Mar 8, 2007)

Per hour they are going to be the same, given the same effort. Mountain biking burns way more per mile though. Acording to my heart rate monitor (I know they aren't accurate, but it is just a reference) I burn the same calories in a 12 mile mountain bike ride as a 50 mile road ride.


----------



## eric1115 (Jul 8, 2008)

The way I explain it when a customer says that they won't get a good workout on a road bike because it rolls too fast, is that you can work equally hard on either one; the type of bike just determines how fast you're going to go. I can go kill it on the mountain bike and be totally cooked in less than an hour, or ride slower and be out for hours and hours. I can go try to hang on with the local group road ride and just get destroyed by the hammerhead racer guys, or do a day of RAGBRAI and be just fine. My workout depends on me, not on the bike. Max intensity will net me a lot more miles on the road bike, but not necessarily more calories burned.


----------



## Mordy (May 31, 2006)

Depends on the course. MTB tends to be higher because you typically climb steep mountain trails to get to the downhill. Road rides tend to be more flat with gradual hills.

However, on the steeper hills, MTB is easier due to gear selection, than a roadie. It comes down to the speed you need to maintain due to gear ratios. You can ride a roadie at about 6mph before you fall over, depending on your balance. You can slow spin a MTB at like 4mph. That's 50% more speed on a roadie. Sure, lower weight helps, but i think it only helps over a long time.


----------



## phoehn9111 (Oct 27, 2006)

This whole thread is absurd. It's all about how hard you ride. I have ridden group rides
on the road with faster riders that left me absolutely devastated, and touring rides in 
which my pulse rate rarely got much over resting. If you go berserk, you can waste
yourself doing jumping jacks, for god's sake!


----------



## nachomc (Apr 26, 2006)

I use a HRM with my Garmin 305 when I ride road or mountain. I know the numbers are typically far off in terms of actual vs. reported, however the device should at least be consistent (ly wrong) over time. Kind of like how they say biometric scales that you can purchase at home may be 4-6% body fat off your real number, but it will report consistently so that you can track progress (in either direction).

In my case, using _my_ HRM data, road burns more calories per hour than mountain biking. Most days after work, I do the same road loop of about 21 miles. I usually finish in about 1:05 and the HRM records about 1700 calories burned. My typical mountain bike loop of 23 miles, which usually takes about 2 and a half hours, records about 2400 calories burned.

Perceived effort? Mountain generally, but I've had some brutal road rides (riding with a bunch of local racers at 27-30mph, or the bike leg of a tri I did this weekend) that have really whipped me.

I'm sure there are a bunch of factors, such as breaks taken (since I road bike with little to no breaks, regardless of distance, and break quite often to get the group caught up, or chat with friends on the mtb), pedal cadence (for example I use the cadence monitor from my Garmin on my road bike, but not on my mountain bike), fluctuating weight, heat and humidity, etc, etc. This is only my data over about 9 months of using the same HRM for both applications.


----------



## rkj__ (Feb 29, 2004)

Nat said:


> Work done over a period of time would be better.


I agree as well.


----------



## Garthhog (May 7, 2007)

I think one issue that is an important difference between the two is that you tend to get beat up on the mountain bike way more than on the road bike, and this gates how long you can ride. For me personally, when my back gets tired, I slow way down (HR included). It doesn't happen to me on the road, and I can push for a lot longer. Of course this is rather meaningless in the calories per mile debate.

-Ryan


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Garthhog said:


> I think one issue that is an important difference between the two is that you tend to get beat up on the mountain bike way more than on the road bike, and this gates how long you can ride. For me personally, when my back gets tired, I slow way down (HR included). It doesn't happen to me on the road, and I can push for a lot longer. Of course this is rather meaningless in the calories per mile debate.
> 
> -Ryan


I feel more beat up on the road bike. 110psi on 25c tires and chip-seal roads hurts the hands and butt after awhile. On the other hand, standing up on the mtb with a suspension fork takes a lot of the sting out.


----------



## trailadvent (Jun 29, 2004)

This is absurb most of this info, have many of you spent time road riding or training!

I am a mtbr first but have also had many years on road bikes!

Calories are one thing recovery, insulin, muscle repair and body burning fat are totally different issues!

Allot depends on the type of riding, training etc.

For a given typical MTB ride vs a Road ride for general recreation its subjective!

MTB usually at a higher heart rate as youre using mtn gear vs road gearing for one youre up and down following the terrain and adjusting to obstacles etc! Maximum heart rate riding is not conducsive to good calorie burning or conditioning, the body requires more fuel to recover and usually allot of what is consumed is required to be replaced just to get the body back to its normal state, within the first hour of finishing is key to recovery!
Road riding terrain is more even if if hills are involved.

if comparing training again it comes down to quality of training zone/areas
If you do allot of long fire roads up and down mixed with single track or similar single track that mirrors fireroads over an extended distance and time peaking no more the 70% of maximum heart rate, ideally training rides should be 60-70% of max hr then for more than 30min minimum you will build a good base burn lots of calories and not flatline your body recovery is easier and endurance levels will be enhanced, Ive trained like this and not only does it work it gets you in shape in no time without leaving you worn out all week!

'Road riding has its advantages for this type of training as its easier to maintain a cadence which will keep you in the 60-70% hr of max zone!
Most mtbers are grinders at best, [gear selection changes and cadence]
inside traniers. wind trainers and road riding helps greatly with this effiecency which also will help with caloire burning when mtbing as you keep a more constant cadence maintian correct heart rate!

Not so critical if Freeriding but for XC endurance a must, if you are to go well.

if you road 3 times a week for 30min minimum @ 60% of your max HR you will be amazed at the results! [aka this was one of Lance Armstrongs secrets] its good once a week to have a full out ride but not for extended time or distance!

Anyways thats my 2c:thumbsup:


----------



## jervana (May 25, 2008)

If he's your size why not ask him to take your mountain bike on one of his road rides? I think he'll see that the size and weight of the mountain bike will require more power to move around than the road bike. Every time I jump on my cheap $400 road bike, I am amazed how fast and easy I can zip around. 

I did my fair share of road biking in the past, and am now going buckwild on the mountain bike, and it all depends on how hard you ride, how often your rest, whatever. I was more focused on riding to exercise on the road bike, but the mountain bike is more about fun, however.


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

same terrain.....a mountain bike.....mtn bikes weigh a lot more and have more rolling resistence


----------

