11 ms·

The most important fact is that riding a bicycle is 3 to 5 times more energy efficient than walking. Depending on the road, bicycle, terrain and weight of the r

The most important fact is that riding a bicycle is 3 to 5 times more energy efficient than walking. Depending on the road, bicycle, terrain and weight of the rider. Riding a bicycle is the most efficient self-powered means of transportation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_performance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_performance

Cthulhu_ 4y ago
I had a look and the source cited for it being the most efficent self-powered means of transportation is from March 1973; I wonder if there's been any new developments since then. Random things off the top of my head: Some time ago they built a self-propelled helicopter, which also used bike technology (gears etc). I vaguely recall that people did state that rowing is what you should use to get the most energy out of a human body - it is (or can be) a full-body motion, including the large muscles in the back and legs and the smaller ones in the arms, while cycling mainly uses the legs. But the mechanism to translate rowing energy into the propellers was too heavy, or something like that. Actually it might have been a HN thread. Here's one from 10 years ago, and it just so happens that I had made my account by then so this was probably it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6028326 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6028326
- fnfjfk 4y ago
  In terms of efficiency of bicycles alone, aero frames, deep wheels, carbon fiber. Clipless is also an incredibly significant change, but not as much of efficiency as the others.
  - amluto 4y ago
    Carbon fiber? As I understand it, reducing unsprung weight (which is not very much for a bicycle with no suspension beyond the tires) can have an outsized effect, but actually reducing weight mostly matters for ascending. For non-competitive cycling, other factors seem like they should be much more significant. A big one, which is banned in most competitive formats, is a fairing. This is much more effective than having a human hunker down and try to be aerodynamic. Even for an upright cargo bike (which is generally extremely heavy), a fairing in front can make a dramatic difference on level ground with no wind.
    - adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
      Carbon fiber isn't better because of strength, but because it's a lot easier to keep somewhat light while making aerodynamic shapes.
    - simlevesque 4y ago
      The most important is carbon wheels. Lowering the weight of the wheels makes it easier to turn them, especially uphill.
      - scott_w 4y ago
        It’s only a slight improvement when accelerating. At steady state, the wheel weight is balanced out (half moves backwards, half moves forwards). GCN have done some non-scientific experiments on their YouTube channel on this. The biggest benefit to carbon wheels is you can make them deeper for less weight penalty (vs aluminium) which gives you a significant aero benefit.
    - tpm 4y ago
      It's also very stiff so less power is lost due to the flex of various parts.
      - SyzygistSix 4y ago
        Which is great if one is racing but not so much for long distance riding or riding for the joy of it. Most riders are not racing at any level where it makes a difference. A well made steel frame is a joy to ride. They are incredibly comfortable and track exceptionally well, unlike stiff frames.
  - r00fus 4y ago
    Recumbents are noticeably more efficient than uprights. In fact any tech or method that's been banned by UCI should make bikes even more efficient.
  - kitkat_new 4y ago
    carbon fiber is a lot less efficient regarding manufacturing though, compared to aluminum. The difference is even bigger with respect to steel or the life time of the materials
- playingalong 4y ago
  The idea is older: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-powered_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-powered_aircraft
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  If we take distance passed as a measurement, intuition tells me that bicycle is more efficient, since it doesn't have to lift the whole body, just move it around on wheels which provide very small friction. Perhaps if we had bicycles with comfortable seats we can recline in, we could save up energy needed to balance our body on a bicycle. Something like a pedal boat, but with wheels.
  - AlbertCory 4y ago
    Wouldn't that be a simple mod to a recumbent bike?
    - bheadmaster 4y ago
      Honestly, this is the first time I've heard that word. Pretty expected that someone came up with it already, in retrospective.
      - citrusybread 4y ago
        check out velomobile, recumbent bicycles with a fiberglass shell that can go crazy fast (60km/h is not unheard of).
        tromp 4y ago
        And 144km/h is possible, but only for the world record holder: https://www.cbc.ca/sportslongform/entry/the-worlds-fastest-human-is-canadian https://www.cbc.ca/sportslongform/entry/the-worlds-fastest-h...
        vbarrielle 4y ago
        60km/h is sprint speed for elite cyclists on road bikes, I guess recumbent bikes can go way faster than that.
        lmm 4y ago
        I hit 90 km/h on my recumbent as a fat bloke loaded up for touring. It was on a downhill though :).
- kqr 4y ago
  I read somewhere (lost to the fickle beasts of memory and time, of course) that rowing and the like is not particularly effective, precisely because it requires big, slow movements against resistance, which the human body is not that efficient at[1]. What we are efficient at is quick, light, repetitive movements – like pedaling with the proper gear selected. This is why Ivan Illich phrased it as the bicycle being "the perfect transducer to match man's metabolic energy to the impedance of locomotion". [1]: This is also why rowing and weightlifting are such a good type of exercise to get stronger, and why bicycling requires that you put in a lot of hours to get stronger from it.
- Psychlist 4y ago
  > I vaguely recall that people did state that rowing is what you should use to get the most energy out of a human body The limit for athletes is normally cardiovascular, commonly oxygen - VO2max the the measurement there. For less fit people it can be the cardio side, their heart just isn't up to it so their muscles fail and they lie on the ground twitching. Oxygen-deprived people pant and gasp. So recruiting more muscle groups really doesn't help. What does is increasing oxygen intake, and this is where recumbent bikes come in. The laid back position opens the thorax and increases effective lung capacity. As well as reducing air resistance, except that that's a very subtle thing that mostly depends on the rules governing the sport in question (fairing on bike and kayak, for example, are variously restricted or banned in most relevant sports). You can also reverse that and exercise at high altitude... less oxygen for everyone!
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    > So recruiting more muscle groups really doesn't help. What does is increasing oxygen intake, and this is where recumbent bikes come in. The laid back position opens the thorax and increases effective lung capacity. As well as reducing air resistance, except that that's a very subtle thing that mostly depends on the rules governing the sport in question (fairing on bike and kayak, for example, are variously restricted or banned in most relevant sports). Recumbent riders generally have much lower peak power and ftp but higher sustained so VO2 differences wouldn't explain it. The main attribution I've seen is aero and marginally less muscle power used for motions that aren't related to pedalling.
    - Psychlist 4y ago
      My limited experience is that it's easier to recruit more muscles on an upright, so your peak power can be higher. In my 30's I would hit double for a 30s trial on an upright vs a recumbent (last time I had a decent power meter was in my 30's). But over 5 minutes the recumbent was better even if both were fixed to stands. So I don't think it's the balance issue. For an hour or more the recumbent wins just for comfort, and unfaired records it wins on air resistance (that's why the UCI banned them, it let povo scum beat gentlemen athletes). But then the UCI doesn't have faired records... it's only the IHPVA et al that make that distinction. Interestingly the PBP etc records (we don't have records, this isn't a race!) are all uprights AFAIK. But that's xenophobia rather than technical skill from what I know. And the Round Australia record is an upright, largely because no-one on a recumbent has been inclined to attempt it. RAAM is held by a bent (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_Across_America#Records https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_Across_America#Records).
- swyx 4y ago
  > the source cited for it being the most efficent self-powered means of transportation is from March 1973 what was the source please? ive actually tried to track this down for the steve jobs quote but couldnt find it
  - rdubz 4y ago
    I had saved the chart here, Google reverse image search led me to this article https://streets.mn/2014/05/22/chart-of-the-day-travel-efficiency-calories-per-gram-per-kilometer/ https://streets.mn/2014/05/22/chart-of-the-day-travel-effici... which says it's from Scientific American. There were a few other hits as well. This one mentions the Steve Jobs quote and corroborates "Scientific American, 1973" https://www.smestrategy.net/blog/using-the-6-thinking-for-strategic-planning https://www.smestrategy.net/blog/using-the-6-thinking-for-st...
simlevesque 4y ago
Recumbent bicycles in particular.
alt227 4y ago
Only on flat smooth surfaces which are a relatively recent invention. Take them on any natural environment and it falls very quickly below walking.
- csours 4y ago
  The difference between riding on grass and riding on a dirt trail is VAST - grass is like 3x worse; but when that dirt trail turns into a mud trail, the grass is better.
- bluishgreen 4y ago
  Humans made trails by walking for eons before roads were envisioned. Maybe for a chariot you need a proper road, but a human made trail is just fine for a bicycle.
  - sharkweek 4y ago
    Not only just fine but often times way more fun! I rode my mountain bike A TON as a kid, gave it up for the more "prestigious" road cycling as an adult, but maybe 2 years ago bought a mountain bike to ride with my kids. My goodness it took about five minutes on a local trail to feel like that same little kid I was back in the day, the feeling of speed, focus, and flow. There's nothing really like it for me, as it puts me square in the moment.
- sebazzz 4y ago
  I hope you're not implying that people in countries with hills don't use a bicycle because that's not true ;-) Check Denmark and Sweden for instance.
  - paganel 4y ago
    Denmark doesn't have hills. It might have "hills", but not real ones. The same goes for the inhabited parts of Sweden. Colombia could have been a better example, they have real mountains and people over there do use bicycles to do their thing. Granted, not a great percentage of the population does it because you do need to be really fit in order to handle 10% slopes, but of those that do you might get future Tour de France winners.
matthewmcg 4y ago
It's no coincidence that other human-powered transport mechanisms (aircraft, boats, etc.) commonly use pedals for the drivetrain. It's a lightweight way to use the body's strongest muscles, especially when high power is critical. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacCready_Gossamer_Condor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacCready_Gossamer_Condor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacCready_Gossamer_Albatross https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacCready_Gossamer_Albatross https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Daedalus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Daedalus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroVelo_Atlas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroVelo_Atlas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocycle
- midoridensha 4y ago
  I wouldn't say it's common at all in boats. The two main human-powered boats are canoes and kayaks, and both use the arms, not the legs. There's also rowboats, which again use the arms. Pedal-powered kayaks do exist, but are rare. It would make more sense to use the legs, but it's a much bigger engineering challenge than making a simple paddle and a boat that floats with no holes in the bottom.
  - rstupek 4y ago
    Rowing is not solely an arm mechanism but his actually driven by the legs
    - prodent 4y ago
      As a rower myself I wanted to type the same correction initially, but then realized that the parent comment is probably referring to a rowboat rather than a racing shell. No sliding seat, no leg drive.
    - midoridensha 4y ago
      Rowing in a real rowboat has little to do with the legs: the seat is fixed. It has a lot to do with the back, however. "Rowing machines" have very little to do with real rowboats. Real rowboats don't have sliding seats.
tomcar288 4y ago
And, in the very very long term 200yrs+, it's one of the few truely sustainable forms of transportation.
twawaaay 4y ago
I think it is closer to 9-10 times (on level asphalt road on a "normal" bike) although it heavily depends on some factors like speed, type of bike and your proficiency, terrain and type of ground. Riding a bike is most efficient at a certain speed and becomes less efficient very quickly as you get faster. So when I mean 9-10 times more efficient, I mean a person walking at a comfortable speed vs cyclist riding at a comfortable speed (on relatively level asphalt road).
ttepasse 4y ago
Back in the 80s Steve Jobs cited this fact in an interview and used it for one of my favourite metaphors: A computer is a bicycle for our minds. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob_GX50Za6c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob_GX50Za6c
karmelapple 4y ago
Steve Jobs studied movement efficiency, and that’s was why he called the Macintosh a “bicycle for the mind” https://www.themarginalian.org/2011/12/21/steve-jobs-bicycle-for-the-mind-1990/ https://www.themarginalian.org/2011/12/21/steve-jobs-bicycle...
- swyx 4y ago
  "studied" is a strong word. he read an article once and then talked about it for the rest of his life because it suited his pitch. i doubt he cared about the scientific veracity
  - ketzo 4y ago
    man, Jobs would have killed on VC Twitter, huh

Cthulhu_ 4y ago

I had a look and the source cited for it being the most efficent self-powered means of transportation is from March 1973; I wonder if there's been any new developments since then. Random things off the top of my head: Some time ago they built a self-propelled helicopter, which also used bike technology (gears etc). I vaguely recall that people did state that rowing is what you should use to get the most energy out of a human body - it is (or can be) a full-body motion, including the large muscles in the back and legs and the smaller ones in the arms, while cycling mainly uses the legs. But the mechanism to translate rowing energy into the propellers was too heavy, or something like that. Actually it might have been a HN thread. Here's one from 10 years ago, and it just so happens that I had made my account by then so this was probably it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6028326 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6028326

fnfjfk 4y ago
In terms of efficiency of bicycles alone, aero frames, deep wheels, carbon fiber. Clipless is also an incredibly significant change, but not as much of efficiency as the others.
- amluto 4y ago
  Carbon fiber? As I understand it, reducing unsprung weight (which is not very much for a bicycle with no suspension beyond the tires) can have an outsized effect, but actually reducing weight mostly matters for ascending. For non-competitive cycling, other factors seem like they should be much more significant. A big one, which is banned in most competitive formats, is a fairing. This is much more effective than having a human hunker down and try to be aerodynamic. Even for an upright cargo bike (which is generally extremely heavy), a fairing in front can make a dramatic difference on level ground with no wind.
  - adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
    Carbon fiber isn't better because of strength, but because it's a lot easier to keep somewhat light while making aerodynamic shapes.
  - simlevesque 4y ago
    The most important is carbon wheels. Lowering the weight of the wheels makes it easier to turn them, especially uphill.
    - scott_w 4y ago
      It’s only a slight improvement when accelerating. At steady state, the wheel weight is balanced out (half moves backwards, half moves forwards). GCN have done some non-scientific experiments on their YouTube channel on this. The biggest benefit to carbon wheels is you can make them deeper for less weight penalty (vs aluminium) which gives you a significant aero benefit.
  - tpm 4y ago
    It's also very stiff so less power is lost due to the flex of various parts.
    - SyzygistSix 4y ago
      Which is great if one is racing but not so much for long distance riding or riding for the joy of it. Most riders are not racing at any level where it makes a difference. A well made steel frame is a joy to ride. They are incredibly comfortable and track exceptionally well, unlike stiff frames.
- r00fus 4y ago
  Recumbents are noticeably more efficient than uprights. In fact any tech or method that's been banned by UCI should make bikes even more efficient.
- kitkat_new 4y ago
  carbon fiber is a lot less efficient regarding manufacturing though, compared to aluminum. The difference is even bigger with respect to steel or the life time of the materials
playingalong 4y ago
The idea is older: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-powered_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-powered_aircraft
bheadmaster 4y ago
If we take distance passed as a measurement, intuition tells me that bicycle is more efficient, since it doesn't have to lift the whole body, just move it around on wheels which provide very small friction. Perhaps if we had bicycles with comfortable seats we can recline in, we could save up energy needed to balance our body on a bicycle. Something like a pedal boat, but with wheels.
- AlbertCory 4y ago
  Wouldn't that be a simple mod to a recumbent bike?
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    Honestly, this is the first time I've heard that word. Pretty expected that someone came up with it already, in retrospective.
    - citrusybread 4y ago
      check out velomobile, recumbent bicycles with a fiberglass shell that can go crazy fast (60km/h is not unheard of).
      - tromp 4y ago
        And 144km/h is possible, but only for the world record holder: https://www.cbc.ca/sportslongform/entry/the-worlds-fastest-human-is-canadian https://www.cbc.ca/sportslongform/entry/the-worlds-fastest-h...
      - vbarrielle 4y ago
        60km/h is sprint speed for elite cyclists on road bikes, I guess recumbent bikes can go way faster than that.
        lmm 4y ago
        I hit 90 km/h on my recumbent as a fat bloke loaded up for touring. It was on a downhill though :).
kqr 4y ago
I read somewhere (lost to the fickle beasts of memory and time, of course) that rowing and the like is not particularly effective, precisely because it requires big, slow movements against resistance, which the human body is not that efficient at[1]. What we are efficient at is quick, light, repetitive movements – like pedaling with the proper gear selected. This is why Ivan Illich phrased it as the bicycle being "the perfect transducer to match man's metabolic energy to the impedance of locomotion". [1]: This is also why rowing and weightlifting are such a good type of exercise to get stronger, and why bicycling requires that you put in a lot of hours to get stronger from it.
Psychlist 4y ago
> I vaguely recall that people did state that rowing is what you should use to get the most energy out of a human body The limit for athletes is normally cardiovascular, commonly oxygen - VO2max the the measurement there. For less fit people it can be the cardio side, their heart just isn't up to it so their muscles fail and they lie on the ground twitching. Oxygen-deprived people pant and gasp. So recruiting more muscle groups really doesn't help. What does is increasing oxygen intake, and this is where recumbent bikes come in. The laid back position opens the thorax and increases effective lung capacity. As well as reducing air resistance, except that that's a very subtle thing that mostly depends on the rules governing the sport in question (fairing on bike and kayak, for example, are variously restricted or banned in most relevant sports). You can also reverse that and exercise at high altitude... less oxygen for everyone!
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  > So recruiting more muscle groups really doesn't help. What does is increasing oxygen intake, and this is where recumbent bikes come in. The laid back position opens the thorax and increases effective lung capacity. As well as reducing air resistance, except that that's a very subtle thing that mostly depends on the rules governing the sport in question (fairing on bike and kayak, for example, are variously restricted or banned in most relevant sports). Recumbent riders generally have much lower peak power and ftp but higher sustained so VO2 differences wouldn't explain it. The main attribution I've seen is aero and marginally less muscle power used for motions that aren't related to pedalling.
  - Psychlist 4y ago
    My limited experience is that it's easier to recruit more muscles on an upright, so your peak power can be higher. In my 30's I would hit double for a 30s trial on an upright vs a recumbent (last time I had a decent power meter was in my 30's). But over 5 minutes the recumbent was better even if both were fixed to stands. So I don't think it's the balance issue. For an hour or more the recumbent wins just for comfort, and unfaired records it wins on air resistance (that's why the UCI banned them, it let povo scum beat gentlemen athletes). But then the UCI doesn't have faired records... it's only the IHPVA et al that make that distinction. Interestingly the PBP etc records (we don't have records, this isn't a race!) are all uprights AFAIK. But that's xenophobia rather than technical skill from what I know. And the Round Australia record is an upright, largely because no-one on a recumbent has been inclined to attempt it. RAAM is held by a bent (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_Across_America#Records https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_Across_America#Records).
swyx 4y ago
> the source cited for it being the most efficent self-powered means of transportation is from March 1973 what was the source please? ive actually tried to track this down for the steve jobs quote but couldnt find it
- rdubz 4y ago
  I had saved the chart here, Google reverse image search led me to this article https://streets.mn/2014/05/22/chart-of-the-day-travel-efficiency-calories-per-gram-per-kilometer/ https://streets.mn/2014/05/22/chart-of-the-day-travel-effici... which says it's from Scientific American. There were a few other hits as well. This one mentions the Steve Jobs quote and corroborates "Scientific American, 1973" https://www.smestrategy.net/blog/using-the-6-thinking-for-strategic-planning https://www.smestrategy.net/blog/using-the-6-thinking-for-st...

simlevesque 4y ago

Recumbent bicycles in particular.

alt227 4y ago

Only on flat smooth surfaces which are a relatively recent invention. Take them on any natural environment and it falls very quickly below walking.

csours 4y ago
The difference between riding on grass and riding on a dirt trail is VAST - grass is like 3x worse; but when that dirt trail turns into a mud trail, the grass is better.
bluishgreen 4y ago
Humans made trails by walking for eons before roads were envisioned. Maybe for a chariot you need a proper road, but a human made trail is just fine for a bicycle.
- sharkweek 4y ago
  Not only just fine but often times way more fun! I rode my mountain bike A TON as a kid, gave it up for the more "prestigious" road cycling as an adult, but maybe 2 years ago bought a mountain bike to ride with my kids. My goodness it took about five minutes on a local trail to feel like that same little kid I was back in the day, the feeling of speed, focus, and flow. There's nothing really like it for me, as it puts me square in the moment.
sebazzz 4y ago
I hope you're not implying that people in countries with hills don't use a bicycle because that's not true ;-) Check Denmark and Sweden for instance.
- paganel 4y ago
  Denmark doesn't have hills. It might have "hills", but not real ones. The same goes for the inhabited parts of Sweden. Colombia could have been a better example, they have real mountains and people over there do use bicycles to do their thing. Granted, not a great percentage of the population does it because you do need to be really fit in order to handle 10% slopes, but of those that do you might get future Tour de France winners.

matthewmcg 4y ago

It's no coincidence that other human-powered transport mechanisms (aircraft, boats, etc.) commonly use pedals for the drivetrain. It's a lightweight way to use the body's strongest muscles, especially when high power is critical. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacCready_Gossamer_Condor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacCready_Gossamer_Condor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacCready_Gossamer_Albatross https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacCready_Gossamer_Albatross https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Daedalus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Daedalus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroVelo_Atlas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroVelo_Atlas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocycle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocycle

midoridensha 4y ago
I wouldn't say it's common at all in boats. The two main human-powered boats are canoes and kayaks, and both use the arms, not the legs. There's also rowboats, which again use the arms. Pedal-powered kayaks do exist, but are rare. It would make more sense to use the legs, but it's a much bigger engineering challenge than making a simple paddle and a boat that floats with no holes in the bottom.
- rstupek 4y ago
  Rowing is not solely an arm mechanism but his actually driven by the legs
  - prodent 4y ago
    As a rower myself I wanted to type the same correction initially, but then realized that the parent comment is probably referring to a rowboat rather than a racing shell. No sliding seat, no leg drive.
  - midoridensha 4y ago
    Rowing in a real rowboat has little to do with the legs: the seat is fixed. It has a lot to do with the back, however. "Rowing machines" have very little to do with real rowboats. Real rowboats don't have sliding seats.

tomcar288 4y ago

And, in the very very long term 200yrs+, it's one of the few truely sustainable forms of transportation.

twawaaay 4y ago

I think it is closer to 9-10 times (on level asphalt road on a "normal" bike) although it heavily depends on some factors like speed, type of bike and your proficiency, terrain and type of ground. Riding a bike is most efficient at a certain speed and becomes less efficient very quickly as you get faster. So when I mean 9-10 times more efficient, I mean a person walking at a comfortable speed vs cyclist riding at a comfortable speed (on relatively level asphalt road).

ttepasse 4y ago

Back in the 80s Steve Jobs cited this fact in an interview and used it for one of my favourite metaphors: A computer is a bicycle for our minds. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob_GX50Za6c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob_GX50Za6c

karmelapple 4y ago

Steve Jobs studied movement efficiency, and that’s was why he called the Macintosh a “bicycle for the mind” https://www.themarginalian.org/2011/12/21/steve-jobs-bicycle-for-the-mind-1990/ https://www.themarginalian.org/2011/12/21/steve-jobs-bicycle...

swyx 4y ago
"studied" is a strong word. he read an article once and then talked about it for the rest of his life because it suited his pitch. i doubt he cared about the scientific veracity
- ketzo 4y ago
  man, Jobs would have killed on VC Twitter, huh