This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/velo by /u/fallenedge on 2023-10-02 08:53:02.

Training via heart rate (and accounting for recovery, condition, cardiac drift) is very popular in running, but not in cycling. You could say that’s due to the proliferation of power meters in cycling. Is that the whole story? How come Zone2 heart rate is generally lower for cycling than running? The explanation is that running uses more muscles. But how does that impact on aerobic adaptations of the heart and lungs, since they do not know whether you are cycling or running. I gather that zone2 adaptations are both cardiovascular and also in the muscles, but surely, the different stress on the heart (given the differing heart rates) would drive different levels of adaptations?

A typical running training plan would involve a LOT less hours per week. I understand that to be limited by your muscles/tendons in running as it is such an impact movement - i.e. the reduced volume is only due to injury prevention. Does that mean that there are a lot more cardiovascular adaptations for typical runners if they subject their heart and lungs to more volume via a few more hours of added zone2 work swimming/cycling?

Even down to the single workout. I have heard on trainerroad that a zone2 workout should be at least 45mins-1hr, if not at least 1.5hrs, since adaptations only begin at 45mins? If I apply that principle to running, does that mean an easy run 45mins and below are similarly useless?

I am not trying to drive a point anywhere, just trying to learn the physiological mechanisms of why.