Hiking vs cycling?

[Cookerhiker]

Just wanted to clarify that when I said cycling was harder than backpacking, I was talking about fully-loaded cycling trips with long and/or steep uphill pulls. Or on an apples-apples comparison, I have done one-day several bike-hikes on the AT i.e. no heavy pack either on bike or hiking. I'd park the car at one trailhead, cycle to the other, and hike back to the car. Not counting the Cumberland Valley which was easy all around, the biking was always harder. One example was the VA roller coaster. The hiking is all up-and-down but so is the biking.

I agree that overnight cycling trips on rail-trails and the C&O are not that difficult. But again using my example of the Great Allegheny Passage's southernmost 23 miles, I defy anyone to claim that backpacking up from Cumberland is harder than cycling it. The grade is gentle enough to hardly notice it hiking but you sure notice it when cycling.

[fredmugs]

I ride an exercise bike to train for hiking because I can do it daily. It's great for hiking. When I ride a real bike it is a whole lot tougher. Once the Tour de France is over I plan on busting out the real bike to do whatever I can to prepare for the JMT is Sept.

[coach lou]

Just wanted to clarify that when I said cycling was harder than backpacking, I was talking about fully-loaded cycling trips with long and/or steep uphill pulls. Or on an apples-apples comparison, I have done one-day several bike-hikes on the AT i.e. no heavy pack either on bike or hiking. I'd park the car at one trailhead, cycle to the other, and hike back to the car. Not counting the Cumberland Valley which was easy all around, the biking was always harder. One example was the VA roller coaster. The hiking is all up-and-down but so is the biking.

I agree that overnight cycling trips on rail-trails and the C&O are not that difficult. But again using my example of the Great Allegheny Passage's southernmost 23 miles. I defy anyone to claim that backpacking up from Cumberland is easier than cycling it. The grade is gentle enough to hardly notice it hiking but you sure notice it when cycling.

I've been doing the same thing this season on day hikes. Dump my fishing bike at one end, drive up the other end hike to the bike. The spin after the hike soothes the aches and pains.

[fiddlehead]

All this talk about which is better or worse, they are both good cardo exercises (depending on how fast you take the uphills in hiking I guess)
But, the real benefit of biking is the speed that you travel.
After 15 years of hiking, I've determined that walking is just too slow and gets boring after a while.
Motorcycle riding gets you outside (compared to a car) but is just too fast.
Bicycling is the perfect speed.

Also, when you are in shape, you can do almost anything: Met a guy once on the CDT who was doing the CDT bike trail. He went 15 miles down a mountain one night cause he had a craving for ice cream. Pedaled to a store and then back up the mountain to where his tent was.
They see a lot more than we (hikers) do.
And out west, they are even allowed on the trails.

They both have their dangers but I think hiking is safer though.

I just got a mountain bike here in Thailand and trying to build up those new muscles for these hills.
Actually I'm finding tennis to be my number one exercise right now and playing an hour every weekday, then bicycling in the evenings.

[Spokes]

I'll keep this short. Hiking is definitely harder. In 2008 I bicycled solo 4464 miles across the country in 69 days. I thought that was tough. Then in 2009 I thru hiked the AT NOBO. Yikes!

http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?..._id=3502&v=138

Cheers!

[10-K]

I'll keep this short. Hiking is definitely harder. In 2008 I bicycled solo 4464 miles across the country in 69 days. I thought that was tough. Then in 2009 I thru hiked the AT NOBO. Yikes!

http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?..._id=3502&v=138

Cheers!

Great journal - read it!

[jwalton]

Hello, ive been lurking for a while and wanted to say hi. Im an older guy (62) but in good shape. Typically i ride my road bike 60-75 miles per week at a 15mpg average pace. Last week my wife and i hiked from Mtn crossings to the top of blood mtn and back down. Frankey, i was a bit astonished at how out of breath I was several times on the way up. Apparently my good cycling shape isnt translating that well into hiking conditioning? Or perhaps its just getting older that is catching me off guard? Any thoughts on how conditiong for one activity compares with the other? Thanks much!

Hawker, just curious...by any chance did you start from Mtn Crossings at a pace that was too fast? I've made that mistake and found that I never recovered. (Climbing Brasstown Bald). do you ride with the guys out of Northstar in Dawsonville?

[jburgasser]

compare a runner athlete to say Lance Armstrong?

....People run,walk,hike all day....

Mr. Owl, to compare Lance Armstrong to a runner, that runner would have to be Meb Keflezighi, Ryan Hall, or Abdi Abdirahman. Do you recognize those names? They are the 3 Americans representing the US in the Olympic Marathon next month. They are at the same level in there sport as Lance is at his (cycling). They are capable of running faster than 2:12 which is 34 minutes faster than Lance's marathon PR of 2:46 at New York. I can see where this can get all kinds of crazy going back and forth. My response to the OP was simply an attempt to say that to be a stronger hiker, you should hike more. Or maybe I was trying to say that cycling is not the best way to get in shape for hiking. I do know I was riding a fever the last few days including while I typed that response so maybe it reads a little garbled. If you can't hike consistently enough to gain a training benefit from it, then you need to do the next closest thing: walk or run. If you feel that you can't run, at least give it a try on a treadmill first. They have a lot more give than any sidewalk or asphalt.
If all you do is cycle, then you can be great at cycling. But that doesn't mean you can hike with no effort, just like that means you can't swim with no effort. You've got to practice the hiking, or swimming, part.
You don't have to do anything, but if you would like the hiking to be easier, it is a good idea to do something.

People may walk or hike all day, but very few run all day. Yes, there are the ultramarathoners, but they are the exception, not the norm, obviously.

Ickybod

[Hawker]

Hawker, just curious...by any chance did you start from Mtn Crossings at a pace that was too fast? I've made that mistake and found that I never recovered. (Climbing Brasstown Bald). do you ride with the guys out of Northstar in Dawsonville?

No and No. I don't think I started out too quickly as I was with my wife. I know some of the guys at Northstar but don't ride with them. I've hiked Brasstown and indeed that will get your heart rate up. I've ridden partway up Brasstown but alas...the mountain got the better of me that day.

[Pedaling Fool]

These discussions that attempt to compare one activity to another always seem to turn into a pissing contest of which is best. I've even seen it debated in the cycling community when people argue who's the fittest, i.e. Mountain bikers or Road Cyclists.

As I said in my post I believe hiking is harder simply because I think (suspect) it uses more muscles, therefore oxygenated blood must be delivered to more working muscles during that activity than cycling. However, I said ("In General"). I know what Cookerhiker is saying when he perceives loaded-cycling in the hills tougher than hiking. And in a sense he's correct, because one can't readily stop during a climb; in hiking if you stop, you stop, but in cycling if you stop you start rolling backwards, on a bike you're always fighting gravity, but then I factor in the downhills. Going downhill is so much fun on a bike and the only real problem is keeping from killing yourself.

That's another factor why I think cycling is not as difficult as hiking, but it is all kind of subjective. But then again, I've been cycling for over 25 years, so maybe that really affects my personal subjectivity, thus really puts too much of a bias in my opinion, since I have way more mileage in cycling.

However, what I’m NOT saying is that I believe a hiker is more "fit" than a cyclist. Regardless if one rides a bike, hikes a trail or run in races, the body will become efficient at that and the more one participates in that overtime it will make the body weak in other activities.

I knew a guy who could run like a rabbit, but 20 pushups were tough as hell for him. So yes he was probably the best runner I’ve personally met, but that’s all he did and (IMO) he was weak. In real life if one develops that much expertise in one discipline at the expense of other strengths they die, but in today’s world people can do that because of the ease of our lifestyle.

[WalksInDark]

I spent more than 10 years cycling in WI ---lots of open space, not a lot of hills, and tons of rails to trails plus rural roads--- where I routinely put 30+ miles of mountain and/or road bike miles at least 6 months out of the year. Carrying an extra 10 pounds of body weight over what I think I should weigh, was an inconvenience but not a show stopper.

Then I moved to SW VA a couple of years ago and took up backpacking.

Maybe because I was already in my 60s....or because I was not used to having so much weight on my back...plus elevated trails to boot, I too felt pretty out of shape. Now, having been backpacking a couple of times a month for the last three years; I still get tired. But it usually means that I am carrying too big a load or trying to cover too much ground. Oh yeah, that darned extra body fat plus a heavy pack ---I would rather have what I need, than need something I don't have-- does add an additional degree of difficulty.

A health factor (asthma) which had only been an intermittent concern when I cycled, is something I have to be very careful of when I backpack. If the temps/humidity high, pollen count high, air quality low, or even when it gets too cold out; my asthma severely reduces my lungs ability to process oxygen and I have to be very careful not too overtax myself. Using an inhaler pre-hike, when necessary during the hike, and certainly after the hike if I need it, all combine to reduce the effects of my asthma. This may or may not be an issue for you as well.

All in all, I find backpacking uses much more energy from many more muscle groups than cycling ever did. Still I enjoy both activities...but am a little more patient with myself when backpacking.

[Pedaling Fool]

In the interest of showing no bias I've been cycling for over 25 years, primarily as a commuter, but also a few loaded tours. However, I believe (in general) hiking is more difficult, simply because it involves more muscles in the upper body (primarily stabilizing muscles).

I would argue that biking has a more upper body component most of the time than hiking except for steep uphills/downhills when you are scrambling and using poles. your upper body and core have to stabilize your bars on the bike the full ride. when on flat hiking your arms swing along for the ride.

I wasn't counting just the arms, yes I agree cycling uses the arms more than hiking, especially the triceps, but that ain't saying much, both cyclists and hikers (and runners) don't really have much use for arms.

However, in my experience, the stabalizing muscles in the upper body is used much more in hiking, especially since one is carrying a load that is off center. Most of cycling, exception when going slow, doesn't really need much from stabilizing muscles, when riding fast your momentum keeps you upright more than your muscles and that's why its easy to ride hands free at speed than when going slow. (and "fast" is not really all that fast to develop the momentum necessary)

This is a very shocking finding and it supports my claim that not much muscles in the upper body are used during cycling, but probably doesn't apply to mountain bike riders -- serious mountain bike riders, not just anyone that rides a mountain bike on a trail. http://www.afpafitness.com/articles/...pid-bone-loss/


Excerpt:

"Using dual photon absorptiometry technology, the researchers found a mean increase in bone density of 18% in the lumbar spine (lower back) and 32% in the femoral neck (upper thigh) in the 21 high-performance weight lifters studied. These findings were encouraging, but not surprising. However, in the control group of cyclists, the scientists were shocked to find that over the three week period of racing in the Tour de France, the athletes experienced a mean loss of about 25% of their spinal bone mass. The investigators believe that these values are indicative of whole body bone mass, which means that extremely heavy exercise over a three week period may cause the body to lose as much as 25% of its total bone mass!"


A major reason I lift free weights!

[WingedMonkey]

I bike 20 miles a day to prevent GLOBAL WARMING.

[Cookerhiker]

These discussions that attempt to compare one activity to another always seem to turn into a pissing contest of which is best. I've even seen it debated in the cycling community when people argue who's the fittest, i.e. Mountain bikers or Road Cyclists.

As I said in my post I believe hiking is harder simply because I think (suspect) it uses more muscles, therefore oxygenated blood must be delivered to more working muscles during that activity than cycling. However, I said ("In General"). I know what Cookerhiker is saying when he perceives loaded-cycling in the hills tougher than hiking. And in a sense he's correct, because one can't readily stop during a climb; in hiking if you stop, you stop, but in cycling if you stop you start rolling backwards, on a bike you're always fighting gravity, but then I factor in the downhills. Going downhill is so much fun on a bike and the only real problem is keeping from killing yourself.

That's another factor why I think cycling is not as difficult as hiking, but it is all kind of subjective. But then again, I've been cycling for over 25 years, so maybe that really affects my personal subjectivity, thus really puts too much of a bias in my opinion, since I have way more mileage in cycling.

However, what I’m NOT saying is that I believe a hiker is more "fit" than a cyclist. Regardless if one rides a bike, hikes a trail or run in races, the body will become efficient at that and the more one participates in that overtime it will make the body weak in other activities.

I knew a guy who could run like a rabbit, but 20 pushups were tough as hell for him. So yes he was probably the best runner I’ve personally met, but that’s all he did and (IMO) he was weak. In real life if one develops that much expertise in one discipline at the expense of other strengths they die, but in today’s world people can do that because of the ease of our lifestyle.

All good points, but I don't think this WB discussion has been a "pissing contest" - everyone's been respectful. Also, I realize the OP merely asked about the effect of cycling on getting in hike shape. I was the first to bring up the "which one is more challenging" point for which I apologize for a slight thread drift. However, the discussion's been civil.

One more anecdote: I met numerous mountain bikers when thruhiking the Colorado Trail last summer. In every single instance, we got along just fine. Even some who were speeding past us on one of the sponsored events still wished us well on our hike. Later during the course of many conversations at points along the trail, the bikers expressed admiration for what we were doing - lugging heavy packs for 480 miles, sleeping outdoors, etc. I was quite awestruck watching them pedal steep, rock-strewn slopes. I felt their challenge was greater but more importantly, we were both engaged in outdoor physical exercise with each activity entailing its respective challenges.

[BabySue]

Hawker, don't be too hard on yourself. You climbed one of the AT's toughest in Georgia and did so in 90+ degree heat (I was there last week too). Since hiking is not your main gig, you probably weren't quite as well prepared as you would have been for a serious bike outing (for example, the weight you carried & what you ate the night before). I am not a biker, so I compare your experience to me going to a long hill that zaps good bikers and riding up it. Just keep on biking and cross training in ways that you enjoy and let the chips fall where they may.

[ChinMusic]

Garlic is in the process of doing a Nothern Tier thru-bike. He is also a triple crown hiker.

I met up with him last week. He said a 100-mile day on a bike feels similar to a 25-mile day backpacking.

[coach lou]

Garlic is in the process of doing a Nothern Tier thru-bike. He is also a triple crown hiker.

I met up with him last week. He said a 100-mile day on a bike feels similar to a 25-mile day backpacking.

Very true, but the aches and Pains are NOBO of your typical hikeing aches.

[coach lou]

I bike 20 miles a day to prevent GLOBAL WARMING.

Gee Wiz WM, Climate Change, Climate Change....you don't want to open another can of worms. Everyone is just calming down from this weeks festivities!

[Pedaling Fool]

All good points, but I don't think this WB discussion has been a "pissing contest" - everyone's been respectful. ... However, the discussion's been civil.

I agree. Too much Kumbaya crap on here lately.

Also, I realize the OP merely asked about the effect of cycling on getting in hike shape. I was the first to bring up the "which one is more challenging" point for which I apologize for a slight thread drift.

I don’t see any of your posts as thread drift. This is just a topic that interests us all and we want to share our experiences and thoughts. I was not thinking of your post when I said: “These discussions that attempt to compare one activity to another…” I was actually looking at WOO’s post #20, but again, I know we’re not being uncivil here; it just reminded me of the pissing matches I’ve witnessed.

I met numerous mountain bikers when thruhiking the Colorado Trail last summer. In every single instance, we got along just fine. Even some who were speeding past us on one of the sponsored events still wished us well on our hike.

There we go with that Kumbaya crap again.

Later during the course of many conversations at points along the trail, the bikers expressed admiration for what we were doing - lugging heavy packs for 480 miles, sleeping outdoors, etc.

The grass is always greener on the other side. I know I’ve, on occasion, wished I were doing a hike during a bike tour or vice versa. I guess that’s just natural when you’re pushing yourself in one event.

I was quite awestruck watching them pedal steep, rock-strewn slopes. I felt their challenge was greater but more importantly, we were both engaged in outdoor physical exercise with each activity entailing its respective challenges.

When I say hiking is tougher than cycling, I understand there is some subjectivity in my opinion and I don’t mean to make an absolute judgment, it’s just my take on the two activities as a whole.

However, I do agree that when comparing the simple task of going uphill, i.e. pedal stroke to foot step, cycling is tougher.

For an illustration of this, one only needs to watch the Tour de France. Here’s a race in which some of the top elite athletes in the world are competing and these guys can easily attain at least 40 mph on the flats in a sprint and average around 25 mph. Yet when they get to the mountains you got these fat, drunken idiots can run next to them waving their stupid flag. And if it’s a French guy than you know you he’s a: “Cigarette-smoking, fat, drunken idiot…”

[Pedaling Fool]

I bike 20 miles a day to prevent GLOBAL WARMING.

Yeah, what are you doing, trying to start a fight

Anyway, I guess it's the thought that counts http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0722-bikes.html