longer/flatter v shorter/pointier

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: longer/flatter v shorter/pointier

Post by beardy »

400 ft less / 10 miles more.


Climbing 400 feet in about a mile and a bit would take around 15 minutes, cycling 10 flat miles would take about half an hour (without headwind).
So I would have to have done a lot of climbing already that day, exhausting my leg muscles, in order to choose that long way round.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56366
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: longer/flatter v shorter/pointier

Post by Mick F »

beardy wrote:Climbing 400 feet in about a mile and a bit would take around 15 minutes, cycling 10 flat miles would take about half an hour (without headwind).
I think you're being a little pessimistic there.

Just looking at the records from my last ride up Gunnislake Hill from the village. I ride up that hill regularly.

After one mile up the hill from 200ft in the centre of the village, to the 630ft mark (ie climb 430ft) I've done the one mile in 9mins 3sec.

At 15mins, I'm at 700ft and done 1.75miles but by then I'm well past the main part of the hill.

I'm no athlete, and I don't honk up there and race. I engage bottom gear and take my time.
Screen Shot 2015-07-08 at 13.50.34.png
Mick F. Cornwall
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: longer/flatter v shorter/pointier

Post by bovlomov »

beardy wrote:Climbing 400 feet in about a mile and a bit would take around 15 minutes, cycling 10 flat miles would take about half an hour (without headwind).
So I would have to have done a lot of climbing already that day, exhausting my leg muscles, in order to choose that long way round.

Maybe I'm some way out with that. But it's not only about time. Once I've cycled those flat 10 miles, I have hardly broken into sweat and I am able to carry on for another 10 miles, and another, and another... ...all day long. I'm not sure I could say the same about climbing 400 feet. Perhaps I need a lower gear.
Tonyf33
Posts: 3926
Joined: 17 Nov 2007, 3:31pm
Location: Letchworth N.Herts

Re: longer/flatter v shorter/pointier

Post by Tonyf33 »

bovlomov wrote:
P.S. Still riding my Raleigh Lady Clubman, Tony! Though daughter No. 1 is getting a bit big for the child seat.

Sweet, I'm glad :D
User avatar
RickH
Posts: 5839
Joined: 5 Mar 2012, 6:39pm
Location: Horwich, Lancs.

Re: longer/flatter v shorter/pointier

Post by RickH »

On LEJOG, an organised trip (& hilly route), the standing joke was that if we were uncertain of the route at any point and one possible way was uphill then that would be the correct choice! :?

On the day out of Waddington (near Clitheroe) 3 of us rebelled and took our own route to Ingleton. The "official" way went via Newton, Slaidburn & High Bentham. We went north to the edge of Settle and then over the valley head to Ingleton. According to Cycle.travel the official route was about 4 miles shorter (~22 v ~26) but had ~300m more climbing (~700m v ~400m). We all set off at the same time but the 3 of us were at Ingleton well ahead of anybody else - a full coffee & cake stop worth before the next person appeared. :)

Rick.
Former member of the Cult of the Polystyrene Head Carbuncle.
User avatar
horizon
Posts: 11275
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: longer/flatter v shorter/pointier

Post by horizon »

I've checked out Google timings again for a couple of local routes that I do regularly. It gives 59 minutes for Looe to Liskeard for example and 49 minutes back which is quite spookily spot on for me (which means I'm a very average cyclist!). This means that it has also taken into account the hills. There are plenty of threads on the topic if you Google "how does google calculate cycling times".

Can you calculate from point to point on the map (as with BikeHike) or do you have to put in known locations?
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Tonyf33
Posts: 3926
Joined: 17 Nov 2007, 3:31pm
Location: Letchworth N.Herts

Re: longer/flatter v shorter/pointier

Post by Tonyf33 »

RickH wrote:On LEJOG, an organised trip (& hilly route), the standing joke was that if we were uncertain of the route at any point and one possible way was uphill then that would be the correct choice! :?

On the day out of Waddington (near Clitheroe) 3 of us rebelled and took our own route to Ingleton. The "official" way went via Newton, Slaidburn & High Bentham. We went north to the edge of Settle and then over the valley head to Ingleton. According to Cycle.travel the official route was about 4 miles shorter (~22 v ~26) but had ~300m more climbing (~700m v ~400m). We all set off at the same time but the 3 of us were at Ingleton well ahead of anybody else - a full coffee & cake stop worth before the next person appeared. :)

Rick.

Probably think the result is skewed, more incentive, stronger riders (deliberately choosing the hillier route), the time extra over such a short distance difference against almost half the climbing doesn't add up.
User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 13780
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: longer/flatter v shorter/pointier

Post by NATURAL ANKLING »

Hi,
If I am reading this right shorter route is an extra 1000 feet of climbing but 4 miles less.
I will take the longer route any day.

22 miles at 105 feet per mile or -
26 miles at 50 feet per mile........no contest.
I'de be ther 10 - 15 minutes earlier. :)
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
Post Reply