How many calories should I eat a day?

I need to know how many calories I should eat a day. My goal is to lose fat but not muscle. I would like to gain some muscle if possible. Here is my info

RMR avg 2593 calories based on this sites calculator.
Height 6.1
Weight 260 lbs
BF% 25.5

I lift 3 days a week spilt with 20 min of cardio. I do indoor cycle class for 45 min on my off days, the weekend I rest. I have a heart rate monitor I use when I work out it tells me how many calories I burned and what % of that was from fat. So how many calories should I be eating a day?

Thx for the help.

Depending on you and how many calories you burn in a day. 3000 is probably about right.

Will according to the heart rate monitor I burned 837 calories 60% from fat today. Of course that changes when I do cycle I burned 1059 calories 30% from fat last time. So a good staring point is 3000 calories a day, so do I eat more calories to make up for what the heart rate monitor say I burned during my work out, or just make sure I eat 3000 a day period and see how that goes for a week?

[QUOTE=jast14]Will according to the heart rate monitor I burned 837 calories 60% from fat today. Of course that changes when I do cycle I burned 1059 calories 30% from fat last time. So a good staring point is 3000 calories a day, so do I eat more calories to make up for what the heart rate monitor say I burned during my work out, or just make sure I eat 3000 a day period and see how that goes for a week?[/QUOTE]


3000 Calories a day to lose fat??

Umm, that seems pretty high to me.



If your RMR/BMR is 2500, then you need to be eating no more than 2250 a day, in addition to the calories burned during cardio. You should strive to create a calorie deficit (Calories Consumed - Calories Burned) of 500 cal. per day...


1LB of FAT ~ 3000 Calories

[QUOTE=jast14]I need to know how many calories I should eat a day. My goal is to lose fat but not muscle. I would like to gain some muscle if possible. Here is my info

RMR avg 2593 calories based on this sites calculator.
Height 6.1
Weight 260 lbs
BF% 25.5

I lift 3 days a week spilt with 20 min of cardio. I do indoor cycle class for 45 min on my off days, the weekend I rest. I have a heart rate monitor I use when I work out it tells me how many calories I burned and what % of that was from fat. So how many calories should I be eating a day?

Thx for the help.[/QUOTE]

RE: Cardio

Your 20 minute sessions are good (do HIIT for 20 minutes to get max results)...

HOWEVER

Prolonged cardio (30+ Minutes -- eg 45 min cycle classes) is definitely NOT muscle sparing.

Practicle Example
100 Meter sprint runners = broad shouldered/legged musclar bodies (they train for quick bursts of power aka HIIT -- eg Michael Johnson or Jackie Joyner Kersey)

Marathon runners/Cyclists = skinny/narrow shouldered-chested/thin legged bodies (they train for endurance power aka prolongued cardio -- eg Lance Armstrong)

[QUOTE=TexasLift]RE: Cardio

Your 20 minute sessions are good (do HIIT for 20 minutes to get max results)...

HOWEVER

Prolonged cardio (30+ Minutes -- eg 45 min cycle classes) is definitely NOT muscle sparing.

Practicle Example
100 Meter sprint runners = broad shouldered/legged musclar bodies (they train for quick bursts of power aka HIIT -- eg Michael Johnson or Jackie Joyner Kersey)

Marathon runners/Cyclists = skinny/narrow shouldered-chested/thin legged bodies (they train for endurance power aka prolongued cardio -- eg Lance Armstrong)[/QUOTE]

I have to disagree with this logic. Marathon runners, etc. are not lean b/c of long distance cardio, they are lean b/c they a)incorporate little to no heavy lifting and b) their diets are carb heavy and protein sparse.
The key to retaining muscle lies in proper nutrition. As long as your nutrition is in check and you haven't dropped calories too much, the type of cardio you do matters very little with regard to muscle loss.
HIIT is the best cardio routine but, moderate extended cardio works very well also (bodybuilders have been doing it for years). The choice is up to you, just keep in mind HIIT takes a toll on your joints after a while. Which is why I rarely do HIIT anymore. I've had excellent results from moderate extended cardio (heart rate @ 150-160 bpm for 45 min.)

[QUOTE=Mythos219]I have to disagree with this logic. Marathon runners, etc. are not lean b/c of long distance cardio, they are lean b/c they a)incorporate little to no heavy lifting and b) their diets are carb heavy and protein sparse.[/quote]

"Lean" is an understatement. I believe there is a big difference in what most people on this board consider "lean", and what marathon runners look like... Most world class maraton runners look like citizens of 3rd world counties -- thin and ravished in their overall appearance.

When you demand extended periods of high aerobic activity, the body's natural responce is to reduce the size of muscles necessary to carry out the activity, thus improving efficiency due to the reduced weight....

This reduction in size yields higher efficiency in regards to these prolonged periods of intense exertion. Lance Armstrong is an interesting case study, (I brought it up in case anyone has read into his unique makeup) in that his heart has actually increased in size due to his cycling which is much closer to HIIT (various cycling terrain requiring high AND low amoungs of exertion) than marathon runners who are constantly having to propel and support their body weight with no mechanical assistance; which is conversly a more intense activity to cycling...

Take a look at marathon runners...and not just when they are running their races...They look completely ravished, almost frail to the point that you could break them in half...in short, not very healty looking...



[QUOTE]The key to retaining muscle lies in proper nutrition. As long as your nutrition is in check and you haven't dropped calories too much, the type of cardio you do matters very little with regard to muscle loss.[/QUOTE]

I don't agree, and I believe most people on the board concur. There ARE better forms of cardio in regards to sparing muscle, and more specifically a recommended limit to your cardio activity per day...

[QUOTE]
HIIT is the best cardio routine but, moderate extended cardio works very well also (bodybuilders have been doing it for years). The choice is up to you, just keep in mind HIIT takes a toll on your joints after a while. Which is why I rarely do HIIT anymore. I've had excellent results from moderate extended cardio (heart rate @ 150-160 bpm for 45 min.)[/QUOTE]


I agree, what works for some does not work for all -- just wanted to respond to your opinion :)

Figure your calorie needs with this equation:
66 + (6.3 x body weight in lbs.) + (12.9 x height in inches) - (6.8 x age in years)

This gives you your Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR). Multiply it by 1.2. This is now the minimum amount of calories to eat. IF your heart monitor is correct (ignore the fat burned %), then that is your calorie deficit. If that is more than 500 - 750 calories, eat the difference. For instance, if you burned 1,000 calories in exercise, you will want to eat 250 - 500 calories more.

IF you are not losing 1 - 2 pounds per week and that is your goal then decrease your minimum number of calories by 250 - 500 per day. (Your goal shouldn't be higher but if you are trying to build muscle it could be lower.) Never go below 1,500 calories. Make sure your cardio is intense (no magazine reading - don't cheat in spin class) and lift heavy.

I've lost almost 60 pounds this way.

[QUOTE=TexasLift]"Lean" is an understatement. I believe there is a big difference in what most people on this board consider "lean", and what marathon runners look like... Most world class maraton runners look like citizens of 3rd world counties -- thin and ravished in their overall appearance.

When you demand extended periods of high aerobic activity, the body's natural responce is to reduce the size of muscles necessary to carry out the activity, thus improving efficiency due to the reduced weight....

This reduction in size yields higher efficiency in regards to these prolonged periods of intense exertion. Lance Armstrong is an interesting case study, (I brought it up in case anyone has read into his unique makeup) in that his heart has actually increased in size due to his cycling which is much closer to HIIT (various cycling terrain requiring high AND low amoungs of exertion) than marathon runners who are constantly having to propel and support their body weight with no mechanical assistance; which is conversly a more intense activity to cycling...

Take a look at marathon runners...and not just when they are running their races...They look completely ravished, almost frail to the point that you could break them in half...in short, not very healty looking...





I don't agree, and I believe most people on the board concur. There ARE better forms of cardio in regards to sparing muscle, and more specifically a recommended limit to your cardio activity per day...




I agree, what works for some does not work for all -- just wanted to respond to your opinion :)[/QUOTE]

Big difference b/w moderate extended cardio @ 75% HR max for 45 min 5 times a week and marathon/long distance cycling training. In fact it is not uncommon to see competitive bodybuilders doing 2 - 45 min. cardio sessions daily a few weeks prior to competing - now that's a LOT of cardio. Whether you agree with the nutrition or not, the reality is that nutrition accounts for a lot, IMO I think it boils down to 70% nutrition 30% training. Take a look at marathon competitors nutrition programs, you'll find that they are carb heavy and protein sparse - this is the biggest variable which explains why they have no muscle. Nutrition also explains why there are those in the gym that lift their butts off month after month, yet see minimal results b/c they are eating crap.
And we can both agree that HIIT is the best form of cardio. But I'd rather do a cardio which damages your joints less especially when your eating enough calories to sustain muscle. No point trying to build/keep muscle if you can't do squats b/c your knees are all f***ed up.