Accuracy of max hill gradients using route mapping software?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
"Accurately measures the steepest of hills"... but it only works to about 20%! :whistle:

If you wanted to measure steeper you could recalibrate it by tipping it forward and zeroing the bubble on the negative numbers. That would give you up to 40%
 

Alex321

Veteran
Location
South Wales
Where's that? (And how did you measure it?;) )

This one https://www.strava.com/segments/6770438
Or just the shorter steepest bit https://www.strava.com/segments/11910155

The steepest point according to strava is different between the two - being 33% on the full climb, over 40%, but only for a yard or two on the shorter one.

I saw over 30% on my wahoo before it decided I was going so slowly it paused the ride :smile:

According to veloviewer, the max gradient is 27.9%
https://veloviewer.com/segments/6770438

Note that on Strava and Veloviewer, the line of the segment doesn't actually follow the road, I don't know how much difference that makes
1690381380076.png
 
Last edited:

presta

Guru
"Accurately measures the steepest of hills"... but it only works to about 20%! :whistle:
By the time I get to 20%, I tend to lose my balance if I look at it.

They're quite interesting though, if you've ever wondered why some roads seem strangely easy or difficult for no apparent reason, you might find that you're cycling downhill when you think it's up, or up when you think it's down.
If you wanted to measure steeper you could recalibrate it by tipping it forward and zeroing the bubble on the negative numbers. That would give you up to 40%
You could turn it to any angle you like, but bear in mind that the relationship is between angle and gardient is non-linear (tangent). If you set it to read zero on a gradient of 20%, you'll be on a gradient of 41.7%, not 40%, when it's reading 20%.
 

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
You could turn it to any angle you like, but bear in mind that the relationship is between angle and gardient is non-linear (tangent). If you set it to read zero on a gradient of 20%, you'll be on a gradient of 41.7%, not 40%, when it's reading 20%.
True. I didn't think of that.
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
By the time I get to 20%, I tend to lose my balance if I look at it.
I am certainly not worrying about the actual gradient above 20% because I will either be struggling or walking!

They're quite interesting though, if you've ever wondered why some roads seem strangely easy or difficult for no apparent reason, you might find that you're cycling downhill when you think it's up, or up when you think it's down.
I have ridden a couple of those. One in Wales was incredibly deceptive - it looked like I was going uphill and I felt that I must have had a massive tailwind because I was riding fast and it felt way too easy. It turned out that it was several percent downhill! It was the surrounding terrain that confused me. :wacko:
 

T4tomo

Legendary Member
I have a group social ride coming up later this week - the organiser sent out a GPX file that I imported into Wahoo for use on my GPS unit on the day. It might be a bit beyond me though...
View attachment 700138

i sent my mate the GPX link for ride on Mallorca he was a tad concerned about this section

1690386529815.png

I had to explain the road goes through a tunnel but the GPX track seems to be reading over the peak above the tunnel!!
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
My mapping software doesn't understand bridges - it follows the terrain under the bridge!

For example, the bridge carrying the B6114 over the M62. You can see Guy on the bridge in this photo that I took on Monday, which clearly shows how high above the motorway we were.

Guy on M62 bridge.jpg


The software didn't think so... :whistle:

B6114 over M62.png
 

a.twiddler

Veteran
A handlebar clinometer could be something to add interest to your ride, especially where the road has no indication of the degree of steepness. The problem seems to be calibrating it in the first place. You could ride miles before finding a surface that's completely level, toting your spirit level with you as a reference. It's surprising how non level even the floors in many houses are -though maybe enough for most people. It depends on your degree of QCD -ness.
 

SpokeyDokey

67, & my GP says I will officially be old at 70!
Moderator
It's surprising how non level even the floors in many houses are -though maybe enough for most people. It depends on your degree of QCD -ness.

Very noticable when setting up floorstanding loudspeakers. :cursing:
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
A handlebar clinometer could be something to add interest to your ride, especially where the road has no indication of the degree of steepness. The problem seems to be calibrating it in the first place. You could ride miles before finding a surface that's completely level, toting your spirit level with you as a reference. It's surprising how non level even the floors in many houses are -though maybe enough for most people. It depends on your degree of QCD -ness.
When Guy and I got back from our ride on Monday I pointed out a building which leans back at a crazy angle.

There are lots like that down in the valley bottom - it is what came of building in a flood plain and not using adequate foundations!

A couple that I knew had an upstairs flat in that building. They offered me an apple, which slipped from my grasp, rolled across the table, and carried on across the floor until it came to rest in the corner of the room! :eek:

The floor in my lounge is significantly off-level. Walking across it one way feels uphill, and coming back downhill. Not enough for auto-fruit rolling though! :laugh:
 
My mapping software doesn't understand bridges - it follows the terrain under the bridge!

For example, the bridge carrying the B6114 over the M62. You can see Guy on the bridge in this photo that I took on Monday, which clearly shows how high above the motorway we were.

View attachment 700359

The software didn't think so... :whistle:

View attachment 700360

About 12 years ago I was working in pancake flat Essex and I had a look at strava and there was a 40% Mill Climb and I got excited about an actual hill. It turned out to be a flat bridge over a stream. That probably accounted for some of the error but I doubt the stream was deep enough to reach 40% :laugh:
 
Top Bottom