Not like the Airdyne

[KEG_]

Hi Folks,

I just got on my Model D for the first time.
What a rush.

I've been riding an Airdyne since Xmas and I can go for an hour and burn 1000 calories or so.

After 30minutes on the rower my hands were blistered, I was covered in sweat and I was done.
I was only able to burn 350 calories though for my 5900 m.

I was kind of expecting to burn more claories than the Airdyne and I'm wondering why I did not???
I felt like more work but the heart monitor says I get more bang for my buck on the Airdyne.

Any comments would be appreciated.

Keith

[gregsmith01748]

Hi Keith,

I found that it took a few weeks of rowing to get to the point where I was burning a lot of calories on the erg. I think it's because you are using a unique set of muscles in a very specific way on the rower and it takes a while to develop a technique that is efficient in terms of power applied to the machine.

Now I am able to exceed 1000 calories per hour, especially if I am going for an hour exactly. When I go for longer times, like 90' or longer, I tend to burn between 900 and 1000 calories per hour. On the erg, I have also "discovered" much higher heart rates than I have seen in any other exercises. But it took me about 6 months before I started to see higher heart rates during intervals on the erg than, say, running sprints.

One thing to be careful of is the calorie readout on the erg. It makes a bunch of assumptions about you and your rowing to "guess" at calorie burn and might not be accurate Most folks on the forum set the PM to display 500m splits. I use a Polar HR monitor watch to estimate calorie burn.

[slwiser]

Hi Folks,

I just got on my Model D for the first time.
What a rush.

I've been riding an Airdyne since Xmas and I can go for an hour and burn 1000 calories or so.

After 30minutes on the rower my hands were blistered, I was covered in sweat and I was done.
I was only able to burn 350 calories though for my 5900 m.

I was kind of expecting to burn more claories than the Airdyne and I'm wondering why I did not???
I felt like more work but the heart monitor says I get more bang for my buck on the Airdyne.

Any comments would be appreciated.

Keith

I talk about my experience with the Airdyne and learning about the C2 in my exercise journal at Cardio Rehab. Here I show my heart rate profiles over the seasons I have been working with both. Initially I show my Airdyne work then moving over to the C2.

You are so right about the the C2 not being the Airydyne.....Enjoy, I sure do..and it has been over two years now since I got my own C2. My first one was the E model and now I have the Dynamic and going toward 6 million meters. My first season, 2009, I did an average of 134 watts with my second season (2010) coming in at 145 watts. This season I am working at 155 watts so far around an average split of 2:12 for every meter done this season. Building strength as I go slowly develop is my goal with of course fitness and weight loss as my primary goals.

[Citroen]

I've been riding an Airdyne since Xmas and I can go for an hour and burn 1000 calories or so.

The number of calories recorded by most gym equipment (including Concept2 rowers) is based on a flawed calculation and doesn't take into effect your age, gender, height and body weight. Therefore should be taken with a pinch of salt. Comparing one manufacturer against another will never give comparable results (think apples vs oranges).

If you have a HR monitor that can give your calorie score that's going to be much more useful for comparing one piece of equipment vs another. Although the maths/physics used may be wildly adrift of realiity at least it will be conistently wildly adrift of reality.

[KEG_]

Hi Folks

I should have mentioned that I was using the same heart rate monitor for both the C2 and the Airdyne....

thanks