how to calculate steps when riding recumbant bike.

[nursewhite]

Hi, I am new to fitbit. I did 1 hr on a recumbant bike. 7 1/2 miles. My fitbit showed only 2500 steps for this. My rpm was around 60 to 65. What am I doing wrong?

[Odyssey13]

@nursewhite  Some things, such as cycling, needs to be logged as an activity - click to learn how.

[Colinm39 · Accepted solution]

---

@nursewhite wrote:

Hi, I am new to fitbit. I did 1 hr on a recumbant bike. 7 1/2 miles. My fitbit showed only 2500 steps for this. My rpm was around 60 to 65. What am I doing wrong?

---

@nursewhiteDepending on your Fitbit the only way you can register 1/2 the steps is to have the Fitbit clipped onto the knee area or your ankle. When finished you would then add a manual activity for the time and double the amount of steps. Your cadence will only measure one revolution each time, hence the doubling. Experiment.  Keep in mind any manual activity is not included in badges and achievements. Based on your numbers you should have received about 3600 steps and then double that.

[nursewhite · Accepted solution]

Thank You . I will do that. Now I am a happy biker.

[Colinm39]

---

@nursewhite wrote:

Thank You . I will do that. Now I am a happy biker.

---

@nursewhiteOn one of my Groups we have a very ardent cyclist who rides 50 miles/day typical and uses his Fitbit on the leg of his Lyrca.  When we were posting he realised he only had half of his 21,000,000 steps.

But it is all movement, keep it up and good to hear back..

[NewbieJohn]

That's good to know.  The recumbent bike question also has other things to consider.

For example, my bike has levels 1-20.  I typically do a complete cycle once every second and in about 5 mins, I've "biked" a mile.  I wear my FitBit on my ankle during those times so I can count the steps.

However, depending on the level, it's either easier or harder than walking and I would also guess this is individuals' numbers would vary depending on factors like heart rate, physical condition, length of stride walking converted to the equivalent in cycling, etc.  

If a normal "walk" gets the heart rate to 100 and the bike at level 4 gets you to 100bpm, then my thinking is that level 4 recumbent biking is where you have to be to "fairly" and accurately track steps according to FitBit's benchmark.

Any thoughts on this?

[Heybales]

---

@NewbieJohn wrote:

That's good to know.  The recumbent bike question also has other things to consider.

For example, my bike has levels 1-20.  I typically do a complete cycle once every second and in about 5 mins, I've "biked" a mile.  I wear my FitBit on my ankle during those times so I can count the steps.

However, depending on the level, it's either easier or harder than walking and I would also guess this is individuals' numbers would vary depending on factors like heart rate, physical condition, length of stride walking converted to the equivalent in cycling, etc.  

If a normal "walk" gets the heart rate to 100 and the bike at level 4 gets you to 100bpm, then my thinking is that level 4 recumbent biking is where you have to be to "fairly" and accurately track steps according to FitBit's benchmark.

Any thoughts on this?

---

So that walk at HR 100 has a calorie burn that goes along with it.

Say you found bike level 4 gets same HR 100, then indeed the calorie burn would be correct.

But it's only going to see 1 foot going down, maybe accurately, doubtful though.

So only getting 1/2 steps. So walking usually has 50-60 turnover rate per leg, that's pretty slow cadence for biking, and for enough tension to make up for turning so slow, would likely tear up your knees.

Here's the actual accurate match from studies.

bicycling moderate 150 watts = walking level 4.7 mph (pretty fast)