N※N

Cycling vs. Running: Which Cardio Wins for Heart, Joints, and Muscles?

85

  //health-fitness.news-articles.net/content/2025/ .. ch-cardio-wins-for-heart-joints-and-muscles.html
  Published in Health and Fitness on Monday, December 22nd 2025 at 16:50 GMT by Health

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-22 245 x 206 / 12294 Bytes

2025-12-22 224 x 224 / 9566 Bytes

2025-12-22 225 x 224 / 13273 Bytes

2025-12-22 234 x 216 / 6529 Bytes

Cycling vs. Running: Which Cardio Workout Is Better for Your Heart, Joints, and Muscles?
An in‑depth look at the science, the pros and cons, and the right choice for you.

Cardiovascular exercise is the cornerstone of a healthy lifestyle, but when it comes to picking the right routine, many people are torn between two of the most popular options: cycling and running. Both activities are proven to boost heart health, burn calories, and strengthen muscles, yet they differ in impact, intensity, and suitability for different body types and goals. A recent feature on MSN Health (which we followed through several embedded links for deeper context) breaks down the evidence so you can make an informed decision.

1. The Heart Health Showdown

Running is often hailed as the gold standard for cardiovascular fitness because it elevates heart rate quickly and consistently. The article cites a study from the American Heart Association (AHA) that shows that even short bouts of brisk running can lower resting heart rate, reduce blood pressure, and improve arterial stiffness. Running’s high impact forces also stimulate the heart’s pumping ability more aggressively, potentially leading to greater improvements in VO₂ max over time.

Cycling, on the other hand, offers a low‑impact alternative that still delivers substantial cardiovascular benefits. The MSN piece links to research from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) indicating that moderate‑to‑vigorous cycling reduces the risk of heart disease by up to 25%. Because cycling allows for longer sessions without the same risk of overuse injuries, many people can sustain higher total cardio time per week, which also contributes to heart health.

Bottom line: Both activities lower cardiovascular risk, but running may provide a slightly stronger stimulus for heart strengthening in short bursts, while cycling’s endurance‑oriented nature offers comparable long‑term benefits with less joint stress.

2. Joint Health: Impact vs. Weight‑Bearing

One of the most common concerns with running is the load it places on the knees, hips, and ankles. The article references a review from The Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy that shows a higher incidence of patellofemoral pain and tibial stress fractures among regular runners, especially those who increase mileage too quickly.

Cycling eliminates much of that vertical impact. An embedded link to the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) explains that cycling’s non‑impact, seated or standing motion allows the joints to move through a smoother range of motion, making it a preferred choice for people with osteoarthritis, previous joint surgery, or anyone who wants to minimize joint loading. However, cycling does have its own risk profile: improper bike fit can lead to knee valgus or hip pain, and over‑use can cause repetitive strain in the knees and ankles.

The MSN article stresses the importance of: - Proper running form: short strides, mid‑foot strike, and good footwear. - Bike fit: saddle height, handlebar reach, and cleat placement.

3. Muscle Development: Power, Endurance, and Balance

Running engages a broad range of muscle groups in a dynamic, weight‑bearing way. It’s a natural test of leg strength, core stability, and balance. The article notes that regular running builds quadriceps, gluteus maximus, hamstrings, and calf muscles while also demanding core control to maintain upright posture. Because of this, runners often experience improved functional strength and a lower risk of falls.

Cycling is a highly specialized, repetitive motion that predominantly targets the quadriceps, hamstrings, gluteal muscles, and calves. The MSN piece points out that cycling is an excellent way to develop muscular endurance in these lower‑body muscles without the need for heavy external loads. Upper‑body engagement is also possible on a stationary bike or in a standing position on a road bike, which can strengthen the back, shoulders, and arms.

In terms of hypertrophy, the article suggests that if your goal is to build larger, more defined lower‑body muscle, running (especially hill sprints and interval training) combined with strength training will give you a broader base of muscle activation. Cycling, while effective for endurance, tends to produce leaner muscle mass with less bulk.

4. Calorie Burn and Weight Management

When it comes to calorie expenditure, the general rule of thumb is that running burns more calories per minute than cycling. The MSN article quotes a comparison from Healthline where a 155‑lb person burns approximately 12–13 calories per minute running at a moderate pace versus about 9–10 calories per minute cycling at a similar intensity. However, the “low‑impact” nature of cycling allows many people to maintain longer workouts. Over an hour, a vigorous cyclist can equal or surpass the calorie burn of a shorter running session.

The embedded links to Harvard Health research highlight that total weekly cardio volume matters more for weight loss than the type of activity. Thus, a person who can cycle for 60 minutes daily may lose more weight than someone who runs three times a week for 30 minutes each.

5. Injury Risk and Recovery

Running’s higher impact contributes to a higher incidence of acute injuries such as shin splints, plantar fasciitis, and ACL strains. The MSN article emphasizes proper training progression: increasing mileage by no more than 10% per week, incorporating cross‑training, and maintaining adequate rest days.

Cycling injuries tend to be overuse conditions—knee pain, hip flexor tightness, or even bike‑related back pain. A correct bike fit, wearing proper shoes, and varying cadence can reduce these risks. The article links to a Sports Medicine guide on preventing over‑use injuries in cyclists.

In recovery terms, cycling is often favored because it can be used as a “active recovery” day after hard running workouts. The lower impact keeps the blood flowing to muscles without adding extra load.

6. Accessibility, Convenience, and Lifestyle Fit

Both running and cycling share several lifestyle benefits—no need for fancy equipment, adaptability to various weather conditions (especially with indoor cycling), and the potential for social engagement (running clubs, bike groups). However, there are differences:

7. Who Should Choose Which?

Running is ideal for: - Individuals seeking a high‑intensity, weight‑bearing workout. - Those who enjoy outdoor exploration and the mental benefits of jogging. - People with a goal to build functional strength and improve balance.

Cycling is a great fit for: - Those with joint concerns or a history of injury. - Individuals who want a longer, steadier cardio session with lower impact. - People who enjoy group rides or the convenience of commuting by bike.

8. Final Verdict

There is no definitive “better” cardio activity—it depends on your personal goals, body mechanics, and lifestyle. Running offers superior short‑term cardiovascular stimulus and functional strength, while cycling delivers comparable heart benefits with minimal joint stress and excellent endurance potential.

As the MSN article concludes, the best exercise is the one you can sustain consistently. Experiment with both modalities, listen to your body, and consider incorporating cross‑training to keep your routine balanced. Whether you lace up your running shoes or hop onto your bike, you’re moving toward a healthier, stronger you.