Turbo Trainer Vs. Ride

Wilby_89

I have found that from originally using my bike as a primary workout on the turbo trainer that I go out on rides less and less and use the turbo as a substitute.
I think I use the turbo more as I think am getting more out of it (fitness wise).
I use the turbo for an hour everyday.
When I do go for a ride I normally only do around 20-40 miles but I will also throw in an hour on the turbo.
Should I not worry so much as what is better for fitness and start using my bike more and more outside instead of using the turbo as the primary tool.
Out of interest does anyone know what the equivalent of doing around 1 hour on the turbo and covering 23 miles compared to cycling on the road thanks.

taon24

I find static training allows you to do whatever you want in terms of intervals, distance, speed and resistance.
On the road there are more variables; traffic, lights, junctions, wind and hills all make a difference, and I find it harder to do 'focussed' training like an interval session and get the same physiological benefit.
However road riding is more fun, can be social, can be used to push yourself (by riding with other people) and helps with bike handling. People seem willing to do longer rides on the road than on a turbo.
I'd go for a mixture of the two in most cases, but for fitness I'd do more turbo sessions, while if you have a longer event on the road I'd prioritise road training.

sloppyschleckonds

Wilby_89 wrote:

Out of interest does anyone know what the equivalent of doing around 1 hour on the turbo and covering 23 miles compared to cycling on the road thanks.

Its probably about an hour of tempo.

sungod

Wilby_89 wrote:

I have found that from originally using my bike as a primary workout on the turbo trainer that I go out on rides less and less and use the turbo as a substitute.
I think I use the turbo more as I think am getting more out of it (fitness wise).
I use the turbo for an hour everyday.
When I do go for a ride I normally only do around 20-40 miles but I will also throw in an hour on the turbo.
Should I not worry so much as what is better for fitness and start using my bike more and more outside instead of using the turbo as the primary tool.
Out of interest does anyone know what the equivalent of doing around 1 hour on the turbo and covering 23 miles compared to cycling on the road thanks.

depends on what you want out of it, typically i save the turbo for doing shorter structured high intensity sessions which can be tricky to do on the road, such as descending intervals where by the end i expect to be wasted

equivalence needs to be based on an objective measure such as average power for the session, not time or 'distance' on the turbo which have no relationship to the level of effort involved

if you know the power curve of the turbo you can extrapolate to road based on assumptions, but it'll still be just a guess, simplest is to assume that if you can do an hour on the turbo at perceived level of effort x then you can do an hour at the same effort on the road

Alex_Simmons/RST

Do whatever you enjoy or whatever helps you achieve your goals. The landscape of indoor training technology has changed a lot making indoor sessions more interesting than ever.

Turbos for some are more enjoyable/safer than outdoors, while others would prefer to scratch out their eyeballs than get on a turbo.

The only way to compare indoor and outdoor riding is with effort level (power measurement preferably) and duration. Speed is a poor measure of effort.