Hardly, bud. The fastest XC runners would get killed on C2 vs a 6'6" high level rowers. It's physics.
I have no idea on skiing. I've heard though erging at 3761 ft (my house) gets you about 3% discount time wise so I got that going for me!!
Official vo2 Max Thread
- Thread starter YellowSnow
- Start date
I have no idea on skiing. I've heard though erging at 3761 ft (my house) gets you about 3% discount time wise so I got that going for me!!
I liked this article which adds some context around absolute VO2 Max (irrespective of weight) and relative VO2 Max (using weight as a denominator). Xcuntry skiers end up higher on relative. Rowers higher on absolute.
VO2 Max Just Turned 100. Here’s What It Means.
VO2 Max Just Turned 100. Here’s What It Means.
Hence why the C2 is the single more useful fitness machine ever invented. Nothing else can touch it for getting all the muscle groups (except chest) to start gobbling up oxygen.
Last edited:
EsophagealFeces
Well-known poster
Mrs. Feces is trying to get me to drop $2k on a peloton. I’m sure I’d use it, but that’s a lot of coin, and I have a lot of mouths to feed.
Just get the Peloton app (monthly subscription) and buy a cheap ass exercise bike or treadmill.
It's a useful tool but spendy as Throbber points out. It will take care of increasing your vo2 max, but it's not helpful for strength.
The only machine that will do both vo2 max and add some strength is a C2 rowing machine.
EsophagealFeces
Well-known poster
My shitty back would probably benefit greatly from a rowing machine.
I used to get weird sciatic nerve flares just above my hip that would literally make my legs collapse from the pain. Was an issue that would randomly occur a couple times a year from about 18 to 30. I've not had that happen one time in the 13 years since I started lifting weights.
vo2 max + strength trumps all the other shit we talk about on this forum and it's not close.
I lost 4 to5 lbs during the 100,000 Concept 2 Holiday Challenge.
Been thinking a bit more about VO2 max and cardio exercise as I go forward in 2025. Want to be more "intentional" with my cardio this year as while I did plenty last year there was too much just doing it to do it instead of trying to build to better. Doing cardio just to do it is fine, blood sugar management, something is better than nothing etc., but doesn't really move you forward past a certain point. It made me remember that VO2 max is an outcome of exercise and you actually have to push with various workout structures (fartlek, HiiT, other interval training, harder steady state) to really benefit beyond that baseline.
Something is still better than nothing, but that is loss prevention, not improvement.
I too lost a couple pounds when I upped the volume and intensity on the C2 after Thanksgiving. Keeping it going this month so far.
Something is still better than nothing, but that is loss prevention, not improvement.
I too lost a couple pounds when I upped the volume and intensity on the C2 after Thanksgiving. Keeping it going this month so far.
Seems like the top Tour De France riders are doing massive amount of zone 2 training these days and the results are showing up in their vo2 max scores.
I'm going to experiment with upping the zone 2 hours per week (80%) and then 20% max effort type work and see if I notice any gains.
Was actually reading about that with heart rate zone training for running today. What is 80/20 training and why should you be trying it?
I haven't wore a heart rate monitor in a decade but might try to get that going again, but I did try to capture my heart rate coming off the rower for a couple of pieces in the past week. After finishing jump up and get on a treadmill to walk, holding on to the HR sensors. Was pleased to have it show above the "age predicted max rate" today and for it to show in the 160s while doing a zone 2 consistent piece. And for it to drop down to the 120s within 3 minutes.
I'd be shocked is 160s is Zone 2 (i.e., 60 to 70% of max HR) for you. I wouldn't have been the case even in college.
So when I do some 1000 meter pieces at max effort on the C2 these days, when I take a 10 sec pulse and multiply by 10 my HR is something like 189 to 193 so I think low 190s is close to my max HR. All the age based formulas say it is should be somewhere around 173 to 175 which I know is not accurate for me.
I have a HR monitor with the peleton and have been doing a ton of longer stuff in zone 2 which is about 130 HR and feels on the mark for zone 2 in terms of perceived effort. I did 30 mins this AM at 150 which should be 80% and zone 3 and that feels accurate in terms of perceived effort at well.
Hmmmmm. My understanding was the zones weren't unilateral percentages but can shrink as you are better trained so its not that 10% spread all the time. Shrinking the zones is good - you want zone 2 to be as high as possible - and back in the day I am pretty sure I was Zone 2 in the 160s before hitting Z3 in the 170s, 4 in the 180s and 5 in the 190s. I could still carry on a convo there - it was close but doable. I had kind of assumed 165ish was the place where I'd cross from 2 to 3 now.
Might try to ease off and see what it feels like.
Might try to ease off and see what it feels like.
Yeah, I don't know. I've always understood them as percentages of max HR.
I will be going some max effort Peleton Stuff soon and will report back on what my HR gets too. Don't have HR monitor for my C2.
Do you recall doing any "step" tests at UW?
We used to do them a few times per season.
8 Mins at max HR of 150 at 20 S/M
8 Min at max HR of 165 at 24 S/M
4 Mins at max HR of 180 at 26 S/M
See how many meters you can go at set heart rates and see how much you improve over the season.
I think the percentages are derived assumptions the same way a max heart rate per age is an assumption. They are in the ball park but everyone is different.
I don't ever remember taking a HR test at UW, but definitely had the step measurements with S/M constraints.
I don't ever remember taking a HR test at UW, but definitely had the step measurements with S/M constraints.
Bumpitty
Seen comments on this study in my twatters feed. It’s basically the same thing as all the VO2 max discussion. You have to MOVE first. Otherwise all other risk factors increase.
Impact of lifelong exercise "dose" on left ventricular compliance and distensibility - PubMed
Seen comments on this study in my twatters feed. It’s basically the same thing as all the VO2 max discussion. You have to MOVE first. Otherwise all other risk factors increase.
Impact of lifelong exercise "dose" on left ventricular compliance and distensibility - PubMed
Post college I've never been a couch potato and always been fit. I just wish I had been more consistent with 210 mins of zone 2 year in year out.
I'm sure my heart of pretty damn strong still given what I can do on Mt Bikes, Peleton, C2 etc relative to peers.
Couldn't decide which thread to put this in but thought it was a nice display of exercise benefits plus glycemic index reactions for certain types of food.
Me yesterday:
Woken up by low blood sugar alert, ate a banana, can see how it rockets up but then quits. No insulin taken.
Eggs slowly raise, along with the creamer, but then stays there cause fat/protein. No insulin taken.
At like 1pm, its lunch time with a big ole Italian sub. Order a footlong and split with the wife, thank goodness she only needs 4 inches (huh?) and I get to enjoy 8. NTAWWT. White bread. For nutrition estimation I would say it was similar to the Jersey Mike's regular #13 Italian which is published.
910 cal
54g fat
62 carb
45g protein
Need to add 10% to that roughly since the nutrition info was based on a 7 inch sub and I enjoyed an extra inch.
Normally I would approximate 16u of fast acting insulin to eat something like that, and in many cases would need more. But instead I went straight to the gym and got on the rower for an hour. Zone 2 work, kept the heart rate in line, but knocked it down. And as soon as I stopped, took off like a rocketship. All that fat and protein digesting starts to hit. I took 6 units on the way up, so as the blood sugar was taking off the insulin worked its way into my system and then finally counteracted to bring back down.
Its good for your heart and preventing any type of insulin resistance. It's so good to move and to do so after eating less than healthy stuff.
Zone 2 work (ignore the early variability as the monitor figured it’s shit out)
Those zones are defaults and there is no way I leave Z2 until at least the high 150s. I feel great today so had to have been Z2.
Me yesterday:
Woken up by low blood sugar alert, ate a banana, can see how it rockets up but then quits. No insulin taken.
Eggs slowly raise, along with the creamer, but then stays there cause fat/protein. No insulin taken.
At like 1pm, its lunch time with a big ole Italian sub. Order a footlong and split with the wife, thank goodness she only needs 4 inches (huh?) and I get to enjoy 8. NTAWWT. White bread. For nutrition estimation I would say it was similar to the Jersey Mike's regular #13 Italian which is published.
910 cal
54g fat
62 carb
45g protein
Need to add 10% to that roughly since the nutrition info was based on a 7 inch sub and I enjoyed an extra inch.
Normally I would approximate 16u of fast acting insulin to eat something like that, and in many cases would need more. But instead I went straight to the gym and got on the rower for an hour. Zone 2 work, kept the heart rate in line, but knocked it down. And as soon as I stopped, took off like a rocketship. All that fat and protein digesting starts to hit. I took 6 units on the way up, so as the blood sugar was taking off the insulin worked its way into my system and then finally counteracted to bring back down.
Its good for your heart and preventing any type of insulin resistance. It's so good to move and to do so after eating less than healthy stuff.
Zone 2 work (ignore the early variability as the monitor figured it’s shit out)
Those zones are defaults and there is no way I leave Z2 until at least the high 150s. I feel great today so had to have been Z2.
Last edited: