Question
"I've read info on some exercise equipment. I would like to know why some "riders" vary from $150 to $500. Are the lower priced ones shabbily made or are the higher priced ones overpriced? I keep putting off buying one for lack of consumer information. Please advise because I need to get going! Thanks."

Esther Yanez
Sacramento, CA

Answer
The price of any consumer product is based on a number of factors—cost to produce, demand for the product and competition. The original rider, the HealthRider, established a price of about $500. Since they have sold a million of the things, it obviously was a price that was appropriate for their market. Other competitors tried to capture a different share of the market—the "economy" buyers. The lowered cost of these riders is due to different materials, different features and perhaps a willingness to accept a lower profit margin. The HealthRider offers a strong guarantee and has established itself as the "premium" product. Other riders use less expensive materials. This doesn't necessarily mean that they are unusable. Even the HealthRider offers a less expensive model that does not carry the same warranty as the original.

Having said that, I'm not sure it makes any difference, because I have a low opinion of riders in general. I think the basic design is flawed and that they are an inferior mode of exercise. I do not recommed them to anyone as a primary form of exercise.

Most of the claims of benefits by manufacturers of the riders are marketing hype and do not stand up to closer scrutiny. Let's look at the claims. The first is that of a "total body workout." There is no evidence that a total body workout is inherently superior to one in which legs only are used. When claiming one exercise is "better" than another, that decision is a very subjective one based on what criteria you use, and on the individual preferences of the user. Performing exercise consistently and at the right intensity are more important than what type of exercise is performed.

Another claim is that riders are "designed to burn fat." Any aerobic exercise will "burn fat"—that is, lead to a reduction of body fat stores—if performed consistently and if combined with appropriate eating habits. No piece of exercise equipment can somehow magically burn up body fat better than any other.

Here's another touted benefit—achieve "results in less time than other types of exercise". Once again, this claim is groundless. Fitness benefits occur as a result of the intensity, frequency and duration of exercise. As long as these three elements are at the proper levels, improved fitness will occur. No exercise machine can achieve fitness results more quickly than another, if intensity, frequency and duration are the same.

Riders claim that they "stretch and tone all major muscle groups at the same time" while you are also receiving aerobic benefits. Sounds good, but that is not how the body works. To improve muscle flexibility, you need to perform a static stretch—that means putting the body in a posture that elongates the target muscle group with no bouncing—and hold it for 20-30 seconds. The riders use bouncing movements that are repeated hundreds of times. To increase muscle strength, you need to work the target muscle group with a resistance that fatigues the muscle in 8-12 repetitions. Once again, with the riders you are performing rhythmic movements hundreds of time in succession. The resistance just isn't enough to build muscle.

So most of the supposed "benefits" of riders are just hype. How do riders stack up as a type of aerobic fitness machine? Not very well. The most recent unbiased study showed that among moderately fit females, riders burned an average of 25% fewer calories than walking on a treadmill. The design of the machine is such that, once you have reached a moderate level of fitness, you simply can't work hard enough on a rider to continue improvement.

So, is a rider any good at all? Why do so many people think so highly of them? It may be possible for a beginning exerciser to improve aerobic fitness levels using a rider, at least initially. They are quiet. At first, riders give the impression of being very intense because you become fatigued quickly. That is because the movement is different and the body has to work harder at first because it is uncoordinated. They also emphasize upper body muscles, which in most people are underdeveloped. Therefore, it seems like you are doing more work than you actually are. Also, many people are always looking for a new exercise "gimmick"—something that provides results without effort. Unfortunately, there are no shortcuts for results.

So, while riders are not complete frauds, they are very limited in their usefulness, and that inferior quality comes at a premium price. I recommend that you stay away from them altogether. For $500, you can get a Schwinn Airdyne, Nordic Track Cross Country Skier, Trek recumbent stationary cycle, and for $725, a Concept II rower. All would be better choices than a rider.

Good luck.

Rick Gerwin

Ask a question of your own

Back to Equipment Questions