Both cycling and walking are popular, accessible forms of low-impact cardiovascular exercise used for fitness and weight management. Determining which activity burns more calories requires understanding the mechanics of energy expenditure. While one activity generally offers a higher calorie-burn rate per unit of time, the true answer depends on the intensity and duration of the effort.
Understanding Energy Expenditure
The body uses energy, measured in calories, to fuel movement. The rate of consumption is quantified using the Metabolic Equivalent of Task (MET). One MET represents the energy expenditure of sitting quietly at rest, and activities are assigned a MET value indicating how many times more energy they require than resting.
For example, an activity with a MET value of 5 means the body expends five times the energy it would while stationary. Calculating the actual calories burned involves incorporating the MET value with an individual’s body weight and the duration of the activity. A heavier individual naturally burns more calories performing the same task because more energy is required to move a greater mass.
Baseline Comparison: Walking Versus Cycling
Under standard, moderate conditions, cycling generally burns more calories per hour than walking. For a person weighing 155 pounds, a brisk walk (3.5 mph, MET 4.3) burns roughly 215 calories in one hour. In contrast, moderate-paced cycling (10–12 mph, MET 6.0) results in an hourly burn of around 428 calories for the same person.
This difference is largely due to the mechanical advantage of the bicycle, which allows for sustained, higher-intensity effort. Cycling engages larger leg muscle groups against resistance, enabling a higher speed and heart rate that is difficult to maintain while walking without running. Cycling is typically the more time-efficient option for maximizing energy expenditure.
Factors Modifying Calorie Burn
The baseline calorie comparison is significantly altered by various factors, making the final calorie count highly variable for both activities. Increasing the intensity or speed dramatically boosts energy expenditure. For example, pushing a bicycle pace to a vigorous 14–16 mph can increase the hourly burn to over 680 calories, while walking at a very brisk 4.5 mph reaches around 456 calories per hour.
The duration of the activity also plays a crucial role in the total calories burned. Because walking is lower-impact and easier on the joints, it is often more sustainable for very long periods. Someone who walks for two hours will likely surpass the total calorie expenditure of someone who cycles intensely for only 30 minutes.
Terrain and Resistance
Terrain and resistance introduce significant variability into the energy equation. Walking uphill increases the metabolic demand drastically, as the body must work harder against gravity. Similarly, cycling against a headwind or utilizing higher gear resistance forces the muscles to exert greater force, increasing the MET value and calorie burn. The “better” activity depends on individual goals, such as maximizing burn within a limited time window or prioritizing a sustainable, lower-impact activity for extended duration.