Heart Rate Monitor Question
427
Member
343 days
Sully800 posted 25 weeks ago.
I have a hard time getting my HR up on a trainer as well. Just wait until it warms up and you can do some long hard climbs, then you will definitely see a higher HR on the bike.
It's true that your max HR for run and bike will be slightly different, but I wouldn't expect that difference to be more than 5-7 bpm.
877
Member
251 days
TriSooner posted 25 weeks ago.
eblum06 wrote:
When I'm on the trainer I'm working really hard, sweating and really working my legs, but my average rate is only in the 120's which seems really low, especially compared to when I run.
So it sounds like your legs are giving out or are working harder than your cardio system is. Or to phrase it differently, your cardio system could support more effort from your legs, but the legs can't hack it just yet and your cardio system is in better shape than your biking legs - which would make sense if you run a lot. Your running legs can move you fast enough to require a higher heart rate - which you can support - but the biking legs are lagging behind your VO2 max, conditioned from running. I suggest that as the season progresses your biking legs and cycling legs will be more evenly matched and you will get a better idea about your average heart rate differences on the bike and run.
It is not that your max is different. A MHR is a MHR regardless of what you are doing. It doesn't suddenly change just because you are running or biking. Your AVERAGES are different, yes? Or, you might reach a really high HR - say, 190 - one time during run, but on the bike, you can't reach 190 again. Yes, they are 'different.' Is it really important that you didn't reach your max HR on the bike? Don't think so. Average HR is probably a better indicator than whether you reached - just for one or two beats - the same HR at or near your MHR. If this is the case, with your avg HR on the run is 150 and your average on the bike is 110, then that is revealling of less conditioning on the bike (or just going really slowly on the bike). I think an average difference of say 10bmp is about right, but that's just from my experience.
3330
Member
1316 days
RV posted 25 weeks ago.
Lots of things influence your HR.
Dehydration, stress, fatigue, warmup etc.
Some mornings when I get up early and am on the bike within about 15 minutes after waking, even with a 10-15 min warmup my HR is slow to move up and through the zones.
Tho if I am up for a couple hours and then hit the bike - doing the same warmup and workout - the HR gets up in the zones and settles in much much quicker.
So it is more of a guide than an absolute. I more look at my gearing and cadence to do the work that I am expecting to do for the session ... now if I only could afford a PowerMeter...
RV
It takes a long time to get good. - Scott Molina
Slow is smooth; smooth is fast. - Rich Strauss
18
Member
1128 days
eblum06 posted 25 weeks ago.
Thanks for the input. It would make sense that my legs aren't ready to match my cardio, as I spent most of the winter focusing on running and swimming, and need to find my biking legs again, which I hope is soon.
622
Member
469 days
Iron Dan posted 25 weeks ago.
I second Sully on the point that I have a hard time getting my HR up on the trainer while I can get it up into the right zones on the road. On the trainer I try to pace myself off of perceived effort. My legs poop out if I try to keep my heartrate up and I equate that to the trainer having more resistance that the road so I puts more of a strain on your legs than typical which leads to what Trisooner is talking about.
17
Member
248 days
emtridoc posted 25 weeks ago.
As Trisooner pointed out, your max HR is your max HR - that's as fast as your heart can go (short of an arrhythmia like SVT - but you don't want to go there). True that there may be a difference between the calculated MHR and your actual MHR, which you can come by via testing. It tends to be harder to reach your MHR or any comparable training zone on the bike vs. run, so many coaches recommend that the equivalent scale is 5-10 beats lower on the bike and lower still while swimming (but do you really want to stop in the middle of the set to count your HR?). It's also why you can use scales of perceived effort or lactate threshold ("feel the burn") as rough equivalents. Most of the HR training is aimed at getting your muscles to increase glycogen storage and operate more efficiently in anaerobic (low oxygen) states as well as to stay in the aerobic state longer.
I'm starting to use a heart rate monitor for training, and have read in some places that your max heart rate for biking and running will be different, with running being higher. The calculated max for my running seems about right, as the different percents the monitor gives matches up to the intensity I'm doing. I've only used the monitor for biking on my trainer, I live in upstate NY so its too cold still to be outside, so I haven't had a chance to do a real max HR test on it yet. My question is how big of a difference between max HRs will there be between biking and running, like 10 beats, or many more? When I'm on the trainer I'm working really hard, sweating and really working my legs, but my average rate is only in the 120's which seems really low, especially compared to when I run. Thanks for any help or suggestions.