Heavy but not big

[Qjay]

Well, I would measure the volume in cubic inches
But yes, that sounds like a decent guesstimate if it is a square piece of flesh you are talking about. If it is curved (like I suspect yours is, then just do a quick "Cut it in half" and assume 20 x 3 x 1.5 and come up with 90 cubic inches. It sounds like a lot, but if it was water (your body is lighter, btw) that would be about 16.4 * 90 = 1476 gms or under a kilogram. Even if it was a square piece weighing what water weighs, it would only be about a kg and a half or 3 pounds.

I still "blame" those biking muscles, so I think you are in pretty darn good shape.

 

[wishes]

rotfl, oh well , i guess i can go pay to use one of those reading things that sorts out what % is what.

Cycling tends to not build so many muscles and use a lot of cardio and endurance more. Unless of course you go up hills all the time

 

[Qjay]

I'm sure one of the pros can discuss this with more knowledge than I can, but when you "tone" muscles you are building that endurance and making the muscles more dense. When you are bulking up, you are building bigger looking muscles, that might or night not be as thoroughly toned, and therefore as dense as other muscles. Riding that bike of yours for long distances definitely argues for your muscles being very good for endurance, and very toned.

Like I said, I'm no professional, but that is my (very simplistic) understanding of how muscle density can work. It does not necessarily speak for quick and/or slow strength, etc, there is frankly a lot more to muscle structure than that, but it seems to make sense to me in your case..