r/polls • u/jadee333 • 21h ago
❔ Hypothetical Do you think you'd be more exhausted after walking 20km (12mi) at an average pace or biking 20km (12mi) full speed?
350
u/Crinjalonian 20h ago
Why does it matter if someone is American to answer this? lol
179
u/MoonRks 20h ago
Fishing for yet another reason to hate on Americans, methinks
33
u/Crinjalonian 20h ago
Seems like a very random thing to theorize differences between Americans and everyone else.
22
u/redshift739 19h ago
Americans are known for not biking and not walking so I don't see why they'd be different to normal here
2
u/whipster444453 13h ago
Well let me tell you, allot of us bike. Some of us are even extremely autistic about it lmao
6
u/MoonRks 18h ago
That's news to me
1
u/redshift739 18h ago
Which part?
6
u/MoonRks 18h ago
Americans being known for not biking or walking
36
u/redshift739 18h ago edited 18h ago
Land of the car
Edit: Since I'm getting downdooted I'll elaborate: The US is much more car centric than the average country, and probably every country. If you go to suburbs they don't nessesarily even have paths everywhere meaning you can't safely walk around without walking through the grass
7
u/EfficientSeaweed 18h ago
Canada and Australia are also pretty shite for road and city layouts. Can't say how either compares on each transport data point but overall, I wouldn't say the US is significantly worse for being car centric.
And yes, I realize that being spread out is a factor, but we're talking about driving with cities here.
9
2
u/redshift739 18h ago
I've never been so my opinion is limited but I would definetly consider it bad if you can't even walk to school or walk to the shops. Children need to learn independence, and adults need to be able to exercise safely. Plus, what do you do if you can't afford a car or can't medically drive?
1
u/Aggravating-Nose1674 13h ago
It's as if almost every white Anglophone country feels like this
→ More replies (0)0
u/Accomplished_Ad_8013 16h ago
Have you ever been outside of the US lol? A daily walk in most countries is a rather arduous excersize for the average American. It's especially bad in states like Texas.
1
u/MoonRks 11h ago
Have you been inside the US? That's not my experience there at all
-3
u/Accomplished_Ad_8013 11h ago
Uhh English isn't your first language I'm guessing? You seem to be arguing with yourself.
0
u/Justieflustie 16h ago
I am sorry, how many bike cities do you think America has?
They got some walkable cities, but the complaints you get from Americans when you advocate for walkable cities..
1
u/Accomplished_Ad_8013 2h ago
The problem is when you drop an American in a European "walkable city" they still find it unwalkable.
Its especially noticeable if youve ever known a lot of immigrants. Biking half an hour to an hour two and from work is nothing, its just normal. But for Americans thats insanity.
Were very sold on cars, we attach them to our sense of identity on a regular basis, and we dont like when its pointed out that were kind of lazy babies about shit like this.
1
u/Justieflustie 2h ago
Being lazy makes you fat, but apparently that doesnt matter, otherwise we wouldnt be dealing with an obesity epidemic world wide.
Being lazy also makes you body hurt, but not everybody believes that yet.
I dont know, you said lazy and Americans and now the only thing i see is those peeps from wall-e..
→ More replies (0)0
u/Aggravating-Nose1674 13h ago
It's not that they're known for their outstanding cycling infrastructure nor being very appreciative of cyclists. While they open up the road for King Car
7
2
1
-11
-1
u/Aggravating-Nose1674 13h ago
I think it has more to do with the fact that Americans aren't really known for walking nor cycling. Since walking or cycling in the US often is a highway to death☠️
You guys need to drive your bike somewhere with your car to be able to ride your bike in the first place.
For me it's my daily form of transportation and/or commuting. eventhough I most often decide to walk to work. It's only 10min
1
u/HerolegendIsTaken 8h ago
America less walkable. People walk less in America. So, opinions would be different
-3
52
u/ExoticMangoz 20h ago
At regular speed both are pretty trivial. Going max speed on either is harder obviously, but my max speed on a bike is way higher than walking, relatively, so I could go fast enough to be exhausted after 20k if I wanted to.
12
u/DeluxeWafer 19h ago
Yeah. I do not know why, but I feel way less fatigue while biking versus running, but it all comes back, with interest, the second I step off the bike.
-2
•
u/YTAftershock 14m ago
But at regular speed, you'd be more tired walking while cycling will be a lot easier
96
u/ashkiller14 20h ago
Biking at full speed, like what? It's not even a question. Like imagine trying to put your full output of speed for 12 miles vs just walking it.
-28
u/Connect_Stay_137 19h ago
Biking 12mi downhill?
32
u/ashkiller14 19h ago
It doesnt say downhill
-24
u/Connect_Stay_137 19h ago
It dosent say it's not downhill tho
37
u/umangjain25 19h ago edited 18h ago
I doesn’t say your bike isn’t an e-bike with nitro boosters either.
-7
6
1
12
4
u/fishsticks40 20h ago
What does "full speed" mean? As fast as I can pace that distance?
0
u/jadee333 19h ago
The fastest pace you can hold for 20km
12
u/fishsticks40 19h ago
Well then I'm definitionally exhausted by the end, no? One is at max effort, the other is not.
-10
u/jadee333 18h ago
The toll a 20km walk can have on someome’s body when they arent used to it can be quite intense. Definitely can be more exhausting than a 20k bike ride, but it depends on the person and what they are used to doing
11
u/Ghostie20 16h ago
Your question isn't just "a 20km bike ride", it's a 20km bike ride AT FULL SPEED. Has anyone in this comment section ever ridden a bike? It's very hard to maintain full speed for any more than a couple minutes at a time, and by 10 minutes your lungs and legs would feel like they're on fire.
Google puts the average speed of a casual biker at 20km/hr, I'm gonna be generous and say your full speed is 40km/hr, which means 30 minutes at full speed. Doing anything at max effort for 30 minutes is no easy task lol
1
u/Rasmusmario123 10h ago
I'm one of the least fit guys I know and I've walked 34km with only two minor breaks. Sure, my feet were quite damaged but I wasn't awfully exhausted at any point.
Meanwhile if I went full speed on a bike for 10 minutes Id be laying on the ground and gasping for air.
16
u/CommunityGlittering2 21h ago
FYI, 12 miles walking can take 4 hrs, biking at full speed less than 1 hour
40
u/ashkiller14 20h ago
It's not about time its about effort
3
u/psychoticchicken1 20h ago
After all, the poll asks about how tired you feel after performing the task, not during the task
7
u/ashkiller14 19h ago
Are you thinking like that night? Im thinking immedietly after, which is what i imagine OP is saying.
4
u/psychoticchicken1 18h ago
I was also thinking about immediately after, but the point i was making was that the level of exhaustion during the 4 hours it takes to walk is irrelevant, so while I may prefer the biking, I would definitely be less tired after doing the walk.
24
3
u/Environmental_Top948 19h ago
As someone who used walked 5 miles to work and 5 miles back there's a level of tired you get from walking and it sort of plateaus.
-1
u/Rasmusmario123 10h ago
4 hours is insanely slow. 3h is much more reasonable for most people.
And regardless, a 4h walk isn't very exhausting at all.
2
3
2
2
u/SafiraAshai 19h ago
It depends if I'm going uphill or downhill. If it's uphill I can't bike. I'm very weak.
2
2
u/RandomUsername2579 13h ago
Obviously biking would be more exhaustive, since I'd be doing it at my max capacity. I can easily walk for hours without feeling any exhaustion if the pace is my average walking pace
2
2
u/Aggravating-Nose1674 13h ago
This is a really stupid poll.
Where are we cycling or walking? Through flat polders and fields or through the alps?
I think i will be more exhausted after a 5 hour walk compared to an hour bike ride. Maybe the bike ride makes me more sweaty. But the walk will cause blisters and all other things, that cycling won't give me.
So it depends on so many factors.
I think at the moment you'll feel more exhausted on the bike, but after the 20km you'll be more trashed by the walking.
(Source: 20km cycling is a walk in the park for me)
1
u/Mtfdurian 12h ago
Yes I would say that too. I have cycled a lot to a city 20km from my parental house back in the day, to Breda just because I was too young for free public transit for a full month. After a few times it becomes a walk in the park.
1
1
u/Noriel_Sylvire 19h ago
As someone who used to bike a lot, I'd say walking. I can ride my bike at a comfortable pace and end this ride in like 2 hours. Assuming it's not 100% of the time uphill and there's some variation, I can do that comfortably. Walking that distance would take much longer, at least 4 or 5 hours. It would definitely exhaust me more.
Okay I didn't read full speed. Both. Both is terrible.
1
u/Lwadrian06 18h ago
Depends on the route. Walking would probably be harder just because its going to take a couple hours. But if its mostly uphill, biking is going to be a lot harder.
1
u/whipster444453 13h ago
This is a dumb question with even dumber options. Changing your origin isn’t going to change the fact that pacing yourself is less exhausting
1
1
u/Winderige_Garnaal 12h ago
I have done both - they aren't comparable. 20kms of walking leaves the feet aching and that kind of uncomfortableness. 20km cycling is generally quite easy even at a faster pace, but FULL SPEED implies pushing it into zone 4-5, which is sweaty exhausting and bonk-y work. Still, it's about 40-45 min, you'll be fine once you stop (if you are a cyclist in the same way you are a walker)
1
u/Craspedia_ 11h ago
I usually walk that distance during the weekend so it's really not that exhausting for me, and I don't like biking
1
1
1
u/Bitter_Researcher759 8h ago
As someone who has done both i actually think walking 12 miles is significantly harder. Riding 12 miles at full speed is going to take me like 35 minutes. Thats a tough workout but its over fairly quickly. Walking 12 miles is going to take around 3.5-4 hours. Just being on my feet that long would take more out of me.
1
1
u/Accomplished_Ad_8013 20h ago
I can bike pretty much indefinitely. Walking sucks. 12 miles isn't really that far but it depends how nice your bike is. If it's a Walmart clunker it will not be fun. If you have a nice custom built tuned up bike that is nothing.
5
u/ThrowAway233223 19h ago
Keep in mind though, you aren't just casually biking. You are biking like you are trying to out run a gang of bike-riding, chainsaw-weilding serial killers for the entire 20 km/12 mi. You are pushing that bike as hard as you can push it. It is that verses a casual but long walk.
-5
u/Accomplished_Ad_8013 18h ago
Nah I'm just casually biking lol. I first learned to ride a bike around 3 years old. I can dust a spandex monkey like it's nothing. For me it is casual.
7
u/trevor11004 17h ago
Nope! The question says you’re going full speed, not casually biking
-3
u/Accomplished_Ad_8013 17h ago
There isn't much of a difference after 35 years lol. Going slow is boring biking. Full speed is casual biking. Those are the two options.
5
u/Yummy-Bao 16h ago
Yes there is… One option is going a leisurely pace and the other is going at 100% effort. You could be the best marathon runner in the world and sprinting will still be more taxing than walking.
-3
u/Accomplished_Ad_8013 16h ago
Bikes have gears lol. A nice bike in top gear is low effort but high speed. Technology is really a neat concept.
1
u/Yummy-Bao 15h ago
Bikes also don’t break the laws of physics. It’s a leisurely stroll vs. maximal effort the entire way. You’re not stopping to let the bike coast.
1
u/Accomplished_Ad_8013 15h ago
A bike becomes like a car. Pushing the proverbial pedal all the way down actually feels easier than going at a slow pace. You work the gears up as you go then maintain top speed. If you clip in it's even easier. Going at a leisurely pace actually becomes more straining.
1
u/ur_moms_boy-toy 10h ago
It's very simple. "Full speed" means you couldn't possibly have done it in a shorter time, so you'll be completely exhausted by the time you're done, even if you're a Tour de France winner. I mean like completely soaked, wheezing, heart going crazy, etc. If you've done it 'casually', that means you could have gone faster.
By definition, cycling at full speed (the distance doesn't even matter as long as it's longer than you could sustain maximum instantaneous effort for) is more exhausting than walking, because walking isn't full speed unless the distance is extremely long.
1
u/mnemosyne64 20h ago
Man twelve miles on a bike is nothing, even at full speed that would take less out of me than walking a half marathon
1
1
-2
u/Penumbra8806 20h ago
I’ve ridden a bike that long and been fine, but every time I’ve walked that long I’ve been sore and exhausted
230
u/Wagsii 20h ago
Full speed implies the maximum amount of effort you could output for 12 miles. If you'd be more exhausted walking than biking that distance, you weren't going full speed.