Calculating Ascent
- Thread starter User
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
asterix
Comrade Member
- Location
- Limoges or York
Miss out a good hill? You cannot be serious?
Holdsworth
Guru
- Location
- Crewe, Cheshire
Man up and take the hill, even if you have to walk up part of it, you are still rewarded with the descent down the other side, IMO the best bit of any hilly ride
ColinJ
Puzzle game procrastinator!
- Location
- Todmorden - Yorks/Lancs border
I normally choose the hilliest routes I can find. When I decided to ride down to Coventry from Hebden Bridge in 2007, I did a tour of the local hills first, before tackling Holme Moss and Snake Pass and then I went over lots more Peak District hills to get off the main roads.
I would only choose the flat route if the weather had turned awful, or I was ill, or injured. Oh, or my bike was damaged so I couldn't select my low gears. (Actually, if the gears were broken, I'd be tempted to fix it in bottom gear and go by the hills anyway and just freewheel on the descents.)
I would only choose the flat route if the weather had turned awful, or I was ill, or injured. Oh, or my bike was damaged so I couldn't select my low gears. (Actually, if the gears were broken, I'd be tempted to fix it in bottom gear and go by the hills anyway and just freewheel on the descents.)
ColinJ
Puzzle game procrastinator!
- Location
- Todmorden - Yorks/Lancs border
Sorry!
I'm playing with this online bike calculator to try and work it out.
I'm pretty sure that the gradient will affect the result, as will the speed you ride at.
In your example, assume 50% is constant uphill and 50% constant downhill. That is 25 miles at 2.27% and 25 miles at -2.27%.
I think you'd have to make sure the power was constant and play about with the numbers to get your answer.
What is your weight, the weight of your bike and the starting elevation? (The calculator needs those numbers). I think we could assume about 55 degrees for the temperature and stick to 95% efficiency, and riding on the hoods with clincher tyres?
I'm playing with this online bike calculator to try and work it out.
I'm pretty sure that the gradient will affect the result, as will the speed you ride at.
In your example, assume 50% is constant uphill and 50% constant downhill. That is 25 miles at 2.27% and 25 miles at -2.27%.
I think you'd have to make sure the power was constant and play about with the numbers to get your answer.
What is your weight, the weight of your bike and the starting elevation? (The calculator needs those numbers). I think we could assume about 55 degrees for the temperature and stick to 95% efficiency, and riding on the hoods with clincher tyres?
Beardie
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Disneyland's twin town
What you seem to be asking for is a cyclists's version of Naismith's Rule for walkers: 1 hr for every 3mi + 1hr for every 500' of ascent. The thing is, cyclist vary so much more in terms of speed, particularly as they go much faster downhill than on the flat, whereas walkers usually don't. It could be argued that if a slow uphill is followed by a fast downhill, they effectively cancel each other out, but in practice things are rarely that simple and hills have all sorts of other features apart from gradient which govern the speed at which they can be taken.
What slows me down is directness, or the lack thereof. A hilly route which is easy to follow may be very much faster than a flatter one through a maze of lanes where you have to look at the map every quarter-mile or so. The only thing for it is to ride some routes yourself and do the conparisons. But the data will only be valid for you personally.
What slows me down is directness, or the lack thereof. A hilly route which is easy to follow may be very much faster than a flatter one through a maze of lanes where you have to look at the map every quarter-mile or so. The only thing for it is to ride some routes yourself and do the conparisons. But the data will only be valid for you personally.
ColinJ
Puzzle game procrastinator!
- Location
- Todmorden - Yorks/Lancs border
My brain hurts! I'm sure there is something wrong with your numbers but I can't figure out what yet ... 
Ride b) would of course be 'hardest' IF:
1; You went into a headwind
2; Was completed with a higher % of effort
<---- this is me on my 100th munro 
(only up to 150 now, cycling and triathlon keep getting in the way... 
)
I make a variation on this choice for my long commute - the shortest route is down narrow lanes with some horrible road surfaces, so I prefer a longer route on a wider (and busier) road with a bigger hill in it because I reckon the overall experience is more pleasant.
(only up to 150 now, cycling and triathlon keep getting in the way... )I make a variation on this choice for my long commute - the shortest route is down narrow lanes with some horrible road surfaces, so I prefer a longer route on a wider (and busier) road with a bigger hill in it because I reckon the overall experience is more pleasant.
byegad
Legendary Member
- Location
- NE England
Anyone who knows me will tell you I'm no fan of big climbs just for the sake of saying you went up and came down.
BUT If I have the right bottom gear to climb it, however slowly, I'll climb any hill along a otherwise pleasant route. While any climbing slows your average, going down the other side of a big hill is, for me, one of the real pleasures of cycling.
BUT If I have the right bottom gear to climb it, however slowly, I'll climb any hill along a otherwise pleasant route. While any climbing slows your average, going down the other side of a big hill is, for me, one of the real pleasures of cycling.
It was one of the Five Sisters of Kintail - I can't remember and I'm at work so don't have my logs to hand, but I think it was Sgurr Fhuaran. A good one for the 100th, and we had a cracking day for it. (Just patches of snow, not proper winter conditions)