Stationary Bike

Ask or answer questions, discuss and express your views

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, darshana, stuward

TimG
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 8:09 am

Stationary Bike

Post by TimG » Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:52 pm

I have been lifting moderate weights twice a week for many years and have used an upright indoor stationary bike for regular aerobic exercise several times a week for 12 years.

When I replace my stationary bike (a high-quality Tunturi, which has lasted many years), is it better to replace it with another upright stationary bike or a recumbent bike? Or is it a matter of personal preference? I am 60 and in excellent physical condition.

Anyone have an thoughts, opinion or experience to share?

User avatar
TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Va Beach, Va

Post by TimD » Sun Jul 12, 2009 4:39 am

Just my opinion here, but the idea of cardio is just to get the heart rate elevated, be it with a bike, running, weight intervals, or whatever. I've used both an upright and a recumbant, and didn't see that there was much difference. I do mostly HIIT style intevals, and found it easier to get your all into it with an upright, but that's just me. They both provided a resistance to mimic being on a real bike. I'd say try both out, and see which version you're most comfortable with, and choose the one you're most likely to use more often.
Tim

jeffrerr
Associate Member
Associate Member
Posts: 451
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:30 am
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

Post by jeffrerr » Sun Jul 12, 2009 4:57 am

I think this may be just a personal thing, but I find the recumbent can sometimes get uncomfortable for the testicals if you don't have enough support in you underwear. That's the only difference I've noticed, sorry for what could be considered a crude comment, but it's an honest one!

John

User avatar
Stephen Johnson
Exalted Seer
Exalted Seer
Posts: 2097
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 11:20 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Stationary Bike

Post by Stephen Johnson » Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:05 am

TimG wrote:When I replace my stationary bike (a high-quality Tunturi, which has lasted many years), is it better to replace it with another upright stationary bike or a recumbent bike? Or is it a matter of personal preference?
It depends on how you use the bike for cardio - interval training or long slow distance - as well as individual comfort. I use the exercise bike strictly for interval cardio, and even then as a third option behind the stepmill and the elliptical machine. Despite the discomfort for me, no cardio fries the quads like a bike. Many distance runners have found cycling useful for bringing their relatively weak quads up to the level of their hamstrings.

There is little doubt that upright cycles allow for greater force generation, which is why you won't see recumbent bikes in races. But the upright position can lead to discomfort in the crotch (and worse) if done for long periods of time. That's the reason why recumbents were introduced in the first place. But the crotch problems seem to be more of an issue for some people than others. Lance Armstrong, for instance, hasn't suffered physically despite all the time he spends on the bike. Your sticking with cycling for 12 years probably puts you in the problem free group.

If you've had good experiences with your Tunturi bike, it would make sense for you to look at Tunturi's newer equipment. Tunturi has a good reputation and they make good products.

TimG
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 8:09 am

Post by TimG » Sun Jul 12, 2009 6:36 pm

Thanks for your straightforward, helpful answers to my question about the stationary bike. The seat on the Tunturi, with an extra padded cover, has been pretty comfortable and not caused significant issues with the genitals. (What did do a number on them was prostate-removal surgery for cancer three years ago. )

I, too, use the bike to do interval training, including HIIT, on a regular basis. I use a high-end Polar heart monitor, which helps me know with my heart rate more precisely.

Before I bought the Tunturi ($600) twelve years ago, I tried a cheap ($25) upright bike from Play It Again Sports to see if I'd like it. I've tried recumbents at stores, but it's not the same thing as long-term, day-to-day use. The recumbent bike seems to work the hamstrings more than the recumbent does.

Maybe what I ought to do is to try a short-term membership at a local gym and try the recumbent over a longer term to see which best suits me
recumbent or upright. Recumbent is definitely easier on the groin area.

My wife and I are fans of the Tour de France and enjoy watching that race every July. I read that serious cyclists tend to get osteopenia and osteoporosis because they sweat out too much calcium and don't do enough weightlifting. According to some experts, one should increase the proportion of strength training and decrease the aerobic training as one ages.

User avatar
Stephen Johnson
Exalted Seer
Exalted Seer
Posts: 2097
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 11:20 pm
Location: New York City

Post by Stephen Johnson » Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:41 pm

@TimG:

First of all, congratulations for your successful comeback from prostate surgery. I'm not that far behind you in age (56), and it's a downer knowing that all men will develop prostate problems (though not necessarily prostate cancer) if they live long enough. Hopefully, the saw palmetto and phytosterol suppliments I'm taking will keep me from the surgeon's knife.

Secondly, you bring up a good point about the cycle seat and comfort. Since I use the cycles at my gym, the seats suck.

Recumbent cycling seems to require more effort to me than upright cycling - the motion doesn't seem as natural - but it seems to raise my heartrate just as much as upright cycling. Maybe I'll try it more often. And I agree with you that recumbent cycling seems to work the hamstrings and butt more than upright biking.

I wasn't aware of the link between bone density losses and competitive cycling, but cyclists aren't the only athletes who abuse their bodies. Having spinal osteoporosis at the end of a career must be a real bummer.

You're right about the need for weight training for older adults. Nursing homes are full of people who can't move because they failed to keep up their strength. Years ago, I read a story about a personal trainer who designed a strength program for a man in his late eighties. When the elderly man finished the program, he was able to discard his walker and was able to climb stairs. Prior to starting the program, the elderly man was being considered for a wheelchair.

shockware
n00b
n00b
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 4:45 am

Used Stationary Bikes

Post by shockware » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:00 am

I would go for the upright stationary bike than the recumbent ones. I believe the upright bikes moves more muscle than recumbent. if you are on a budget why don't you try buying used stationary bikesinstead?
Last edited by shockware on Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:13 am, edited 2 times in total.

Nevage
Member
Member
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 4:31 pm

Post by Nevage » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:02 pm

:spam2:

User avatar
TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Va Beach, Va

Post by TimD » Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:25 pm

Did you check out the link? Before you yelled spam? I'm the first one (besides Ironman) that's going to delete or ban something, but I checked out the link, and it's informative on the different types available. I didn't see any sales pitches in there.
Tim

Nevage
Member
Member
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 4:31 pm

Post by Nevage » Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:38 am

Sorry I hovered over it to look at the site at the bottom, didn't recognise it and just assumed it was. Should've checked it out but I didn't wanna click it. And I thought I had my first one, remove my post please :sad: .

User avatar
Jungledoc
moderator
moderator
Posts: 7578
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea

Post by Jungledoc » Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:23 am

No. I think that the post should stay, as a public symbol of your shame and disgrace, for falsely posting a Spam Can. :twisted: Since this is only an online community, we can't sentence you to public caning, so this will have to do.

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6616
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Post by stuward » Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:34 am

I'm not convinced it's not spam. The page linked to was part of a site that sells equipment although it was done in a sneaky manner so it didn't look like it. The fact that the poster posted such a link to a page that was almost a month old suggests that it was strategically placed. I think Nevage's first post was correct by accident.

User avatar
Jungledoc
moderator
moderator
Posts: 7578
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea

Post by Jungledoc » Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:40 am

Hmmm.... <stroking> Hmmmm.
Last edited by Jungledoc on Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

Nevage
Member
Member
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 4:31 pm

Post by Nevage » Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:43 am

Haha, all I wanted was my first spam post! The public shaming works very well but if it is spam I'll go with that too!

User avatar
Jungledoc
moderator
moderator
Posts: 7578
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea

Post by Jungledoc » Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:48 am

Strange. No matter how many words you type between the < >, only the first word comes through. In the above I was [stroking my beard to convey the full force of my sagacity.] I wanted my "Hmmm"s to make me seem really, really sage, not just smart.

Post Reply