Commavee

Thank you for the explanation and also the formula--I actually feel a little smarter for it! The million dollar question is: Why doesn't Nordic Track just put it in mi/ki in the first place?

You rock! My GED educational dilemma was solved by your equation! My 12 year old son was rattling off the numbers as I was reading your above work!

Thanks!
Jim in Alaska

Glad to hear that. Thanks.

Thank you for sharing your calculations. I really appreciate this article.

Thank you John Minnihan - really appreciate the information. :)

Hey folks - thanks for the visits & recent comments.

I get a chuckle out of the fact that this post seems to remain the authoritative discussion on this topic, well over two years since I wrote it.

Many of these calculations seem logical, but as some have mentioned, simply converting a machine rotation to a distance to derive a running (or biking) distance is very complex. Not only is it dependant on the machine, elliptical geometrics and incline, it also has to do with the resistance selected. Since this is almost negligible when running on a flat surface, the best way to approximate the distance is to take the amount of calories burned into account.

I'm in the Navy and they require a bi-annual fitness test which, in part, relies on time to complete a 1.5-mile run. Not to long ago they have allowed the use of stationary bikes and elliptical machines to complete the cardio portion of the test. The caloric data from 12 minutes on the machine is plugged into a calculator with the model of machine used to give an equivalent 1.5-mile run time. This method supports the idea that the distance can best be determined from the amount of calories burned and how the machine calculates those calories.

Anyone interested in downloading the "elliptical and bike calculator" can get it at http://www.npc.navy.mil/CommandSupport/PhysicalReadiness (link is on the right side of the page.) You will notice that NordicTrack's AudioStrider is not on there, but if you use one of the models listed, you will see that it is fairly accurate.

Hey, thanks for the comments & the link to that calculator tool. That will be helpful to lots of folks.

And you're right - this is a complex problem because there are simply too many variables over which we have no control. Declaring a constant, such as an 8-minute mile as used in the Navy model, allows us to normalize away these variables & plug assumptions into our model, which is the approach I took as well. ("determine the distance that the wheel would travel if it rolled freely").

Thank you so much for launching this discussion. I know you have to be continually amazed at its ongoing nature, but it's just evidence that we really want to know how far we've gone if we work up a dripping sweat on this piece of machinery. And the answer seems to be: Not nearly as far as we'd thought! Which is probably why Nordic Track avoided the whole question! : )

I know there's no question I burn more calories and get my heart rate higher on the elliptical than I do by walking....I think I will just stick to measuring my walking miles and concentrate on the fact that when I use my elliptical, I am doing something good for my cardiovascular health.

I own the audio strider as well, and was wondering how to figure out the measure of distance it was using. this was soooo helpful to me, and now i know that when i see 1,600 i know that it means i have gone over a mile! thank you so much for this!

Your calculations are correct for the wheel portion only. Let me explain why. The wheel will roll freely a distance of 65 inches. (one revolution) BUT, the way the pedals are positioned while your body spins the wheel one revolution is much less distance traveled by the actual human body. Let's say you step forward 6 inches on the elliptical. You have turned your wheel 1/4 turn to do that. The wheel will then rotate another .75 and when you take your next foot forward you finish the last .25 to be equal to 1 rotation of the wheel. The wheel moved 65 inches forward but you only moved 12 inches forward. So in actuality the human body has only moved 12 inches forward per 1 revolution. In theory if you were using the pedals to power the elliptical and flat surface and it would move forward 65 inches per 1 revolution but you have only pedaled a stride of 12 inches to do that. So to accurately calculate how far the human is going and not the machine it would be 12 inches per revolution. In order for the human to stride 63, 360 inches (1 mile) you would need to divide by 12, so in actuality you would need to do 5280 revolutions to actually have physically walked 1 mile. The machine will go 1 mile in 974 revolutions. The machine moves much farther along than the human physically does. Remember one revolution moves the machine 65 inches forward. One Revolution only is equivalent to 12 inches for the human. This is important if you want to accurately calculate miles for the person and not the machine. A more accurate formula would be 2 X your stride length X the number of rotations equals your distance traveled divided into 63,360. Using this formula, if I did a total of 2585 revolutions I actually will have walked just under 1/2 mile, but the machine would have traveled 2.65 miles. So if you want to actually walk 1 mile on an elliptical machine you must do 5280 revolutions. Because the stride on the elliptical is not as efficient as the wheel distance you have to spend more time on the machine to accomplish the distance. It took me 78 min to go 2585 revolutions, I used a high resistance to burn more calories (1500) but I only physically traveled just under 1/2 mile. If you are not going to use high resistance you will burn fewer calories. Don't let this frustrate anyone from trying to achieve a mile it just takes you longer on an elliptical than it would a treadmill for example.

Thanks, great comments.

As I've maintained since writing the post (now more than 2 years ago... hey!), I'm comfortable with my analysis & conclusion. Since the mileage travelled on an elliptical will always be theoretical only, there's no strictly right or wrong answer, and there's certainly no agreement on what to measure (ie.. what is rotating?)

I continue to be amused & slightly humbled that this post has emerged as the authoritative reference on this question. I say today, as always: use whatever measurement makes sense to you.

Enjoy.

Hi John,

I found the link to this conversation in January. It really is the only ongoing conversation. You can't get this stuff from Nordictrack. I tried and their 3rd party support people sent me a cycle conversion. They admitted they did not have anything for the elliptical after I called them on it.

I recently got a 990 pro Audio Strider. Real nice system that gives a good workout. My search started because in the gym I use there is LifeFitness systems. Nice commercial item that measures in MPH and Miles (theoretical miles). They do meet at the 18inch stride setting so I thought it would be simple to find a way to figure this out. Key word "thought".

I started with the basic 1760 strides count and realized pretty soon that this could not be right. I liked your calculation method but it still did not work for me 100%.

I had decided to just not worry about it and focus on effort and time. I guess us analytic types just can't.

So, I have taken some less than 100% accurate measurements to back into the Rotations Per Mile (2X = Strides). I have worked my way up to 40 minutes of solid work on both systems. During a recent LifeFitness session the indication was 3.59 miles total or 5.385 MPH. As I vary the resistance the first mile is faster 5.825 MPH. During the first mile I counted rotations for 2 minutes. I got an RPM of 67.

Basically what I calculated was 690 revolution = 1 mile. I used this to back into finding R and got 14.6 inches. Well the well is not that big. It's pretty much the same as the 990p system.

This 690 RPM doesn't translate directly to the 990p. I hit this many revolutions in much less than 10-11 minutes and I know I am not moving that much faster.

So then throw all that out. Differences in manufacturing styles kind of blow out comparing 2 systems. You can't count on the Pulse count on the systems either.

What I can say for sure is on the gym system my current effort gives me about 3.6 miles on 40 minutes. On the 990p I get about 4500 strides. Both of these get me to the point of needing to wring my shirt out and I need to stop.

If someone wants to get a pedometer (and I might) you need a good one. Consumer Reports likes the Omron Pocket Pedometer HJ-112 best. From reading about it you should get an accurate reading from walking as well as on the elliptical.

In the end we might forget all of this and focus on the cardio aspects. Getting your heart rate to your target (220-age) for 15+ minutes. Of course you will need a good pulse monitor.

John, All,

The reason that it is so hard to find a definitive answer to the "revolutions per mile" question concerning elliptical machines is because the answer is fairly complex. Most of the geometric calculations I've seen here on your blog are correct as far as they go but are a measure of "machine miles" rather than the actual equivalent miles a person with a normal stride would have run on level ground.

Elliptical machines only approximate a runner's stride - which is why most stride length measurements come up with really large numbers of revolutions per mile (1000+). If you were to adopt a stride on level ground like that of an elliptical you'd be taking really small steps. Movement on an elliptical machine is more akin to running uphill but with the ability to raise or lower gravity - so you can be running up something steep, with short strides, but with low resistance (if you choose).

A much better way to approximate your mileage, as has been suggested by others, is the"work equivalent" mile. The calculations involved in doing this are both laborious and will vary somewhat from person to person. This probably accounts for the difficulty in getting a straight answer from NordicTrack or other manufacturers concerning this issue. The upshot is that for most individuals on machines with a 20" stride length (or average stride length if adjustable) the work equivalent revolutions per mile is between 700 and 800 revolutions.

I made these measurements on a NordicTrack Audiostrider 990. My body mass is about 92kg (205lbs) and I am 6'3" tall.

I hope that this helps. This blog is one of the highest rated in a Google search (which is how I found it) so I hope that this helps other runners make sense out of the confusing data supplied by their elliptical machines.

Hey guys (John) I agree with your calculations mathematically, but logically they make no sense based on my experience! I just got off my 800 and I ran 364 "Distance" in exactly 6 minutes, now I am not in the same shape I was in, in my highschool days but I could easily run a 6 minute mile in those times. I was moving at a good pace and there is no way I could have kept up that pace for another 644 "Distances" which would have been a total of an 18 minute mile! The 300 estimate sounds much more realistic,have you watch. My only thought is maybe you are only calculating the revolutions that are completed by one foot, rather than two, which would put you at 504, rather than 1008, which makes a heck of a lot more sense to me (and would explain my being out of shape!! haha) The main reason it's confusing for me is that the machine doesn't count revolutions, it just says "Distance" whatever that means! The questions is how many revolutions are in one "distance" is it 1 or 2???

Make any sense to you?

In each revolution, your foot travels the circumference of an ellipse with length of 51 inches and height of 22 inches. That comes to a "stride" of roughly 123 inches or 11 ft. That puts a mile at 480 revs. At my normal pace of 50 rpms, that would give a 9.6 minute mile or roughly 6 miles per hour. This agrees pretty well with reality. Using the 1008 rev per mile and my 50 rpm pace would make my average mile 20 minutes, which is walking pace and I know I'm going at a jog, not a walk. However, using the factory estimate of 300 revs per mile would make my 50 rpm pace a 6 minute mile and I know that's not the case. So for a rough measure, I'm using 500 revs as a mile.

Hey Doug,

Great analysis. What's the source of the ellipse dimensions you used?

OH MY GOODNESS!!!! THANK YOU!!!!!!!! This just made everything soooo much easier(and I didn't have to remember any fancy formulas.... JUST KIDDING) This was super helpful.
I really don't understand why they don't automatically convert that into miles. I actually spoke with a representative and asked if they had a quick formula. They told me there was no possible way to measure distance on an elliptical. I then pointed out that the manual said ever 640 revolutions was 1/4 mile, but never specified the stride length. They couldn't quite answer but by that time I found your super helpful advice. Thanks again!!!

My manual said same thing, but it just seems like alot for just 1/4 mile, ya know? Oh well, in 20 minutes with 15 inch stride, I get about 900 revolutions on my elliptical. Still don't really understand the conversions. I just wish I knew in miles what I was doing on this Nordic Track.

wow. how ridiculous is it that Nordictrack couldn't just have a setting for mileage???? We have had our machine for about a year and I noticed the distance issue immediately. I asked my husband to look into it and he came back to me saying, " I found only one site online where a bunch of people were calculating strides and it seems complicated - I can't really explain it to you, you should go and check it out."

While I have two SMALL children and work full time, I found this to be a great excuse to not focus on me and my working out!! All because of a reporting distance issue. Now, a year later, I am on a mission to put me first again and have worked out every day for 10 days so far.

The distance was bugging me so I got online to see what I could find out. I didn't remember until I reached the end of all these posts, that I had my husband research this a year ago ( I had completely forgotten). I do believe this is the same site he had found last year and I find it incredulous that I did to and its still the only one addressing this issue!!!

So thanks to all who have posted. I will be taking some notes tomorrow when I get back on the elliptical. Off the top of my head though, I think somewhere between the 586 and 1008 seem most likely for me! Thanks to all!

Thanks, Becki.

I agree that the vendors should make this data available on their websites. But, as you can tell from this discussion, there isn't universal agreement on exactly what to measure or how.

So for now, I'm happy to let this post act as the clearinghouse for this question.

I was wondering this today. I have the NordicTrack CX 990, with a stride length of 18".

If it were a matter of dividing that distance into a mile, then: 1 revolution is 2 strides is 36", or 1 yard; the track shown on the screen is 440 revolutions, or 440 yards; 4 times around the track is 1760 revolutions, or 1760 yards, or 1 mile.

But doing 1760 revolutions took me almost 30 minutes, which is much longer than it would take me to run 1 mile; and it said I burned 500 calories, which likewise is much more than running 1 mile would burn.

On the other hand, the 300 revolutions per 1 mile doesn't work either.

I notice something in two of the comments here, which compare numbers on the elliptical machines with experience running on actual ground:

Lisa wrote:
On machine: 2050 revolutions in 35 minutes
On ground: 1 mile in 10 minutes
That calculates to: 585.7 revolutions equivalent to 1 mile

KevinF wrote:
On machine: 4400 revolutions in 60 minutes
On ground: 7.5 miles in 60 minutes
That calculates to: 586.7 revolutions equivalent to 1 mile

Notice how close those two figures are? Here's something else I notice. If we divide that 1760 figure by 3, we get 586.7. I don't know why that number should be correct, but the coincidence is notable. And it fits with my own experience today. So I propose: For a machine with an 18" stride, rounding, 587 revolutions = 1 mile.

Fantastic deductive reasoning.

As mentioned a few times, my calcs make sense to me (I used the diameter of the wheel as the basis), but your also make sense.

I think the key difference is whether we're considering theoretical distance traveled by a bike (and thus the wheel is superior to the stride) or by a human runner (and thus stride is the important factor [x number of strides] ).

Either approach *makes sense* and continues to be theoretical only. I'm amazed that so many folks have enjoyed this post & that it has generated so much interesting & differing analysis.

I have a nordic track treadmill and have had the console replaced 4 times and it broke again less than a year old it slightly ticks me off, would like a new one or my money back.

Don't you also have to take into consideration the resistance that you use? Like a bike, the same stride will get you further on a harder resistance. I know this isn't a bike, but it uses some of the same concepts.

Hey Amber,

You're right - friction would play a role in a real bicycle situation (I think I mentioned this as slippage or friction originally), but I think since we're talking about theoretical travel of the wheel, we can ignore friction.

This isn't a perfect measurement, and you can see from all the comments that even the vendors disagree on how to measure their own machines.

Thanks!

I just bought an AudioStrider 990, like the original poster and I was wondering the same thing about the mileage. My first comment is I think you have to consider the stride length as if you are actually running. If you consider the wheel in the distance, then you are saying the machine is a bike with a 20" diameter wheel. So, the real question becomes "Is the elliptical more like riding a standup bike or running on a smooth floating treadmill?"

The one comment I can make about the numbers presented here concerns my normal running routines. I run 7.5 miles in an hour on a consistent basis 3 or 4 times a week. I was able to run 4400 revolutions in one hour on the 990 this morning, which is an average of 73.33 RPMs. According to John's original calculation of 1008.4 revs per mile, that means I ran 4.36 miles in an hour. If I use the stride length method that says I traveled 40 feet per revolution, I only ran 2.77 miles. If I use the answer from NoricTrack at 300 revs per mile, I ran 14.667 miles.

I am not sure which one is correct, but I know I did not excert myself the same as running 7.5 miles. However, I certainly felt like I ran more than 2.77 miles. I know I am contradicting my original statement, so the answer may lie somewhere in between.

Thanks for posting this a year ago. It has helped me conclude the elliptical machine total distance covered in an hour is not really related to how far I can run in the same amount of time. Due to my recent knee problem, I will continue to use it until I can get back out onto the road with the knowledge it is different, but still good for my heart. :-)

Wow, thanks, all. I'll go with the 1008. Thanks, thanks.

I spoke with nordictrack about my 800 and they said count how many times your knees go up and 1760 = 1 mile

Thank you so much!
I should be able to figure mine out now!

Thank you!!!

The manual says that one complete cycle around the matrix (the track that is displayed is 1/4 mile), double check the count when the matrix goes blank (it does that after each completed lap) then multiple by 4, but I like the approx. 1000 count for now..

Thank you!! This was very helpful!

Thank you so much for providing the information I was looking for. This is very helpful. When we set up our new elliptical Nordictrack, lack of knowledge of the miles was my only complaint so far. Have a wonderful weekend. Misty

Thank you so much for providing the information I was looking for. This is very helpful. When we set up our new elliptical Nordictrack, lack of knowledge of the miles was my only complaint so far. Have a wonderful weekend. Misty

no sure on the distance - are the calculation based on riding a bike or running. There is a big diffence going 1 mile by running or riding a bike.

Thanks for the recent comments everyone.

It would be great if manufacturers took this as cue to improve the information that they make available on their websites - clearly many people have this question. Even those folks that are generous enough to comment here don't completely agree on exactly how or what to measure to derive this piece of data.

Hey NordicTrack - are you listening? We'd love to hear directly from you.

Did anyone ever figure out what the odometer (X100) calculated and how?

John thank god for guys like you I just spent over half an hour with Nordictrack asking them the same question and they had no answer....you rock!!!!!

I have a NordicTrack CX 1300 and have also been wondering this.

I figure that you go 40" every time one revolution goes by, because the machine's stride length is 20" and I have two feet.

40" stride per revolution
5280 feet/(40in/12) = 1584 revs per mile

On the other hand, when you wonder how much the wheel has gone,

Diameter of my wheel: 22.25 inches (self-calculated)
5280ft*12ft/in = 63,360 inches per mile

C = pi*d = pi*22.25 = 69.898
= 906.464 revolutions per mile

So I'm unsure of which should be considered the correct value. I would have thought these should have come out to be the same thing, no? When we calculate a bike don't we use the circumference? Why would you measure it based on what your feet were doing, rather than the output?

Sincerely,
Confused

This is a confusing topic because each machine is different and I've made the assumption here that "revolution" refers to the rotation of the wheel, while the manufacturers seem interested in measuring the stride of the pedals.

Don't forget that the lateral stride increases or decreases when you adjust the pitch of your sliding pedals (which aren't really pedals at all) if yours are adjustable; mine are. So any calculations involving stride become immediately suspect. That's another reason why I choose to use the wheel as the authoritative element of measurement.

Since the wheel is round (a perfect circle) & the pedals are delivering work in the form of rotation of that wheel (a traversal of the circumference of the circle), it makes sense to me to use the calculation I describe in the post.

In my mind, since the miles travelled by the trainer are theoretical only, it is perfectly reasonable to use the measurement that makes the most sense to you & best meets your exercise goals.

I discussed this issue a while with my brother. He said that measuring the stride using an ellipse is probably the most authoritative method. With this method, I measure a major and minor axis of motion and plug these axis lengths into an ellipse circumference calculator (google it).

With this method I got close to 1500, vs 907, revs per mile.

Our circumference-of-the-circle method was treating the elliptical like a huge bike, which it is not. But, that would definitely be the way to measure how far the elliptical would have gone if it was not stationary (imagine that).

The stride method will give us a linear approximation but modeling the motion using an ellipse is even more accurate. I believe the elliptical measurement will also account for any incline, etc. But keep in mind that Work = Force*Distance. Just because the distance is the same doesn't mean the human body is doing the same work! So, none of these measurements prove anything except the distance part. The force of an elliptical and a treadmill is different on our body.

I'm amused that this post has generated so much interest over the past year...

You've certainly put a lot of thought into this, and I am intrigued by the notion of elliptical circumference. This doesn't change (for me) the fact that the only "thing" rotating is the rear wheel to which the pedal mechanism is attached. As stated above, that's one of my basic assumptions.

It would very interesting to study a video of someone using an elliptical trainer, and markup the frames of video to prove/disprove that the ellipse maintains the same size throughout a workout, without regard to adjusting the pedal mechanism.

We just bought a NordicTrack Audio 990 and, like so many others here, have wondered what distance we are "traveling". In fact, when I did a web search on this question, this was the site that had the most rational discussion, so compliments to Mr. Minnihan and the others who have commented on this topic.

With regard to pure distance travelled, I think the JH approach using the diameter of the wheel is the most accurate (though I measured 18 inches for the axle movement diameter, rather than 20 inches). The elliptical movement approach is interesting, but if that mimics the movement of our feet, we don't usually include the distance travelled by our feet as it arcs upward and downward as we run or hike, but rather the distance along the ground we have traveled; so, I fall back to the distance travelled by the wheel as it is translated to a linear distance (like a bicycle).

Now, I wondered why my heart rate was so high after walking only 0.6 of a mile and in only 20 minutes. When you factor in an incline of only 10 degrees (the minimum angle setting), it is like climbing a hill 0.6 miles along the incline and an elevation gain of 550 feet. That is equivalent to a 55-story building! A distance of 0.6 miles on a perfectly flat surface is much different than climbing 0.6 mile along an incline that is 550 feet high.

(The resistance setting I suppose is like simulating walking through snow, dry sand, or mud, so that's a whole other complication, but it doesnt effect distance.)

So, that's my 2-cents.

John, I think that's the difference between your calculation and the manufacturers. I too have a 990 and just got off. I looked at the odometer and it said 25. I was like ok, I'm going to figure out what the heck that means and I came accross your post (thank you). In comparing the explanations, it would appear that while the wheel revolution is important, one cannot discount the stride. It's either the wheel revolution or the stride (wheel up and down on the guide ramp). So in your example, you've calculated the revolution of the wheel, however it doesn't take into account the actual stride, that can vary, of the individual and I think it needs to. Imagine taking the two "pedals" and spacing them far apart. Each revolution of the wheel would result in two very large steps, possibly longer than the circle, correct? Somewhere in that is the answer but of course I agree that it cannot be exact because your foot placement ultimate determines the actual distance. I'm looking at the stride right now to ensure it's 18", if not 20". Then I calculate from there based on simple tests. Regardless of the elevation the stride appears to remain the same, as I've used a pencil to make the points of the wheel guide depending on the height. It first appeared that the stride changed but it was just the wheel moving in relation to the elevation, the length or "stride" appears to always be the same. So it's 1760/mile for 36" strides or 1584/mile for 40" strides, if that's what you feel is authoritative.

Hey but in the end, if anyone doesn't agree, make it whatever you want as long as it motivates you right? I have a treadmill that WAAYYYYY over estimates calories burned. My wife and I still laugh at it but it became a great motivator in the end to see who could out do each other.

Again, great post and thanks for sharing your calculations.

"...make it whatever you want as long as it motivates you right?

Absolutely.

John, your math is correct, that is the distance traveled as far wheel rotation. The distance of one's stride is yet something else. An 18" or 20" stride is a linear number and serves no purpose in figuring an eliptical stride.

The debate rages on.

Yes, you're right John, this is getting funny, but all this calculation on our part shouldn't be necessary. The makers of the Nordictrack should have provided their customers with this basic information in the manual.

This topic is getting a lot of mileage... now see, that's funny.

I advocate using whatever technique or values work for you. My technique & equation are based upon the wholly circular wheel that rotates when you pedal. In classic mileage calculations on a free-wheeling bicycle, that's what is measured.

So - pedal on!

Ok, this isn't all that scientific, but after reading all the posts here, I tried to do some logical deductions.

I'm using the Nord 600 and the stride I measured is 18 in., so a revolution would be 3 ft. That would put a mile at 1760 revolutions. That seems a bit much to me, so I watched the track on the display as I was jogging. (the motion of the elliptical resembles a jog more so than the peddling of a bicycle ).

Logically, if the designers of the elliptical calculated that the track should be a quarter mile, as is pretty much the standard, it was completed in 360 revolutions. Therefore, a mile would consist of 1440 revolutions.

This, of course, is based on assumption and speculation. But it works for me and that's what I'll be using to calculate my mileage.

@Karen: I'm not sure why in the world they do it that way, but I believe the x100 thing is part of the revolution count. For instance, if your odometer reads 250 x 100, then you multiply the two to get 25,000 revolutions. Seems like a strange way to do it though. Why doesn't it just say "25,000"???

Just wanted to note that if the figure of 300 revs/mile were correct, each full stride (revolution) would have to carry us 5,280'/300 revs = 17.6'/rev. Don't think so. Using the figure of 1,008.4 revs yields 5,280'/1008.4 revs = 5.236' (the same number calculated for the wheel circumference above) - to me, that seems much more realistic. I can see a full stride (allowing a given foot to travel the full elliptical path of the pedal once, which would translate to two steps - one left, one right - on land) carrying me 5+ feet. That seems like a perfectly reasonable estimate. So the 1,008 revs/mile number seems like a good one to me. Hope that helps.

Hey thanks for figuring that out. I also have the 990 and have wondered that many times. To me the 300 revolutions makes one mile just seems like too low a number. I was thinking just as an experiment to try using my pedometer because that measures miles. I wasn't sure how accurate that would be though.

Hey Lisa,

The calcs I did on my Nordictrac work for me. If you notice that the overall mileage calculated on your machine varies w/ velocity, then the machine's measuring technique is flawed - the rate at which "distance" is covered varies, but the distance *itself* does not. In other words, whether it takes you 20 minutes or 40 minutes to cover 2 miles, you still have covered 2 miles.

This is clearly a topic that is very interesting to many people. I'm a bit surprised that the vendors don't cover this better on their websites. I would start w/ my calcs (appiled to your machine) and then go from there.

Apparently not, I was hopeful someone would at least respond to it. Thanks!

So, has anyone figured out the odometer yet? What the X 100 means?

I too have always wondered about the distance thing. I didn't do the math stuff though...I just figured if I can run or ride a mile in ten minutes then I was doing the same on the elliptical. Hmmm! I sure like the 300 revolutions per mile vs. the over 1,000 per mile. Yikes! Either way...it is still a great work-out!

Hey Barry,

If you trust the company (no reason not to), then stick w/ their calculations. As stated in the above, the companies may be using a completely different definition of revolution than me.

Speaking strictly as a math problem though, my approach above will accurately reflect distance traveled per revolution of a wheel on an actual bike that is moving.

Is this a perfect match? In theory, yes. In practice - every single bike will be slightly different. They key will *always* be the circumference of the revolution under consideration (i.e. is it the wheel, the pedal "rotational sphere", or something else?)

Hi John,
I am so confused. I used your equation above, and it said I have to ride 1260 revolutions for one mile. I rode for an hour and only went 250 revolutions. My old bike, had miles on it, and I used to ride 10 miles in an hour. HELP! Any suggestions. Something just don't add up here? I even called the company that made the bike...they said 3000 revolutions per ten miles...none of this adds up at all!
Thanks for any help!!!
Barry

Hey Barry,

The math above may be used to determine the mileage for any type of exercise bike. Simply measure the wheel & plug it into the equation above.

How can I figure out how many miles is in a revolution. I have a exercize bike WESLO HORIZON ERGOMETER Model EB7720!
Any help will be greatly appreciated...thanks!
Barry

Hey Melodie... the math will be the same no matter what brand or model you have. Just try to get an accurate measurement of the diameter of the wheel & go from there.

Wait....will this work for me, I don't have a nordic track, I have a Gold's Gym Stride Trainer 500 Elliptical.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU for figuring this out. I've been looking online for 20 minutes and can't find anything. I want to get this answered NOW, and can't find anything about the "distance" even being mentioned in my owners manual so that didn't help other than listing a phone number I can call, which I was going to do tomorrow. Instead I'll just do a math equation :-)

Good question about the number x 100 = what distance. I have an ASR 630 model. The tech at nordic trac also told me somewhere around 300 rev = 1 mile. They compare it to a stationary bike, you need to adjust that number according to your stride. I am thoroughly confused.
I was running outside a ten minute mile( yes i am a newbie), on this machine it shows 2050 total rev. in a matter of 35 mins at an rpm of 70/72. According to the track on the display it tells me only 2/2.25 miles.Am I traveling slower or are the calculations of the machine off? or do i use the 300 ( give or take) calculation?

I think the secret lies with Charlette...hehe I thought I'd throw that in...anyone know from where?? Anyway, if you click the odometer button on the center of the console of the 990, it tracks distance, the trouble is making sence of it. It will record a number x 100 at the end of the workout.(It changes while exercising if you scroll that screen whileon it). So the question is, that number times 100 = what distance?

I would tend to agree with your calculations vs. the company. I generally get around 3000 revolutions in just over an hour. There is no way I have gone ten miles in that time. I also have a 990. I felt that for a thousand dollar machine I should be able to get a clear answer from the company. Thank you for your help.

Thanks for commenting here. This is certainly an interesting topic.

It would seem that the company & I are either using different definitions for 'revolution' or they are factoring in/out something I'm not considering.

In my case, I'm comfortable w/ my calcs. I measured my trainer & did the math. It's all theory, though, since the trainer is never going to actually travel anywhere.

I was looking up this recently, and tried the service department, they confirmed the 300 revolutions = 1 mile number. Or referencing the chart, 1500 revolutions was 5 miles.

It doesn't sound like enough, but they checked twice.

This was with an audiostrider 990

The wheel - where the energy is delivered & converted to work (rotations) - is circular. Expressed that way, one can state that n rotations of the wheel is equivalent to x mile[s] in *theoretical* travel.

The assumption here, of course, is that the machine & I are defining 'revolution' the same way. Since the wheel is the only part of the machine that actually revolves, I'm using 'revolution' to refer to a full circle rotation of it.

The line that the wheel would traverse when rotated (if free to "roll") is fixed & independent of other factors (assuming no slippage/excess friction etc.).

I'm not sure that calculation is correct. It's an elliptical trainer, which means that it pedals in an elliptical shape, not a circular shape. And you calculations were for a circle.

I just spoke to a rep and she told me that 300 revolutions = 1 mile on my model which is a nord.800. I bought mine from sears. I too have been trying to find out how many miles I go and it doesnt say. That is really bad I think. My husband tried to be nice and surprise me and didnt know that was something I had to have on it. I cost enough you would think it would have it there.Thanks for the info. T

Hi Renee,

I'm sticking with my 1008 revolutions per mile.

The stride can adjusted w/ the angle of the pedal; the actual circumference of the wheel is fixed, so it is authoritative.

So are we going with the 1008 revolutions per mile or the 1760 revolutions per mile? This is very helpful thanks for taking the time to figure it out and post it for the rest of us. I do love my Nordictrack 990.

That was really helpful for me as well!!!

Yes, your 990 would be the same as mine unless you've modified it in some way.

Glad to help - this bugged my wife & I when we began using it and I too searched online for what I thought was a simple piece of information. That's what prompted me to sort it out.

Thanks for the feedback. So could we assume that my Nordictrack 990 would have the same radius as yours? I'd rather not take the screws out to find out. Do you have the 18" stride? If so, I will incorporate your measurements to calculate the miles. I believe yours more so then what the company states because if I workout for 45 minutes at an average of 60 rpms, that calculates to about 2500 revolutions and based on their figures, I would have gone a little over a mile in 45 minutes. Thanks again.

The stride can be changed by altering the angel of incline; since the axis of rotation is fixed, this means the lateral stride is reduced at a steeper incline.

So the radius of the wheel - the one constant that is fixed without regard to the angle of incline on the pedals - would be the authoritative base measure.

I have a Nordictrack 990 and the company said that since it has an 18" stride that one revolution would be 3 feet thus 5,280/3 would equal 1,760 revolutions per mile. So which one would be more accurate, the radius of the wheel or the 18" stride?

The machine is a NordicTrack AudioStrider 990.

I'll check later & update the post w/ the model number. What model do you have?

Which model are you using?