Cycling equivelant to marathon

[crossy]

I've come from a running back ground the big thing in that world is the marathon 26.2 miles is there a cycling equivelant i.e distance in miles as don't do kilometers if I can help it.

 

[WychwoodTrev]

I believe it would be the 100 mile sportive,

 

[mcshroom]

I think it would have to be longer than that.

A 300km Audax would be my best approximation, although what that would make the 1200km Paris-Brest-Paris or the 1400k London-Edinburgh-London I don't know.

 

[albion]

The nature of cycling means it would have to be a time trial.I rate the Styrkeprøven at 520KM as quite a marathon.

 

[mcshroom]

That's a thought, there are some 24hr TTs around as well

 

[ianrauk]

I believe it would be the 100 mile sportive,

to short.
I would say 250 miles at least.

 

[oldfatfool]

I would say you can easily walk a marathon in 7 hours, so I would guess the equivalent on a bike would be how far you can cycle, say 150 miles without any major climbs?

 

[xxmimixx]

I asked a similar question in this thread

 

[WychwoodTrev]

to short.
I would say 250 miles at least.

Thats longer than most tour stages

a 100 miler would take a decent cyclist 4 hrs a av cyclist 5 hrs

how long to run a marathon ? 3 or 4hrs

Not many 250 mile events in this country

now over in france they have 24hr cycle races on tracks like Le mans that would be cool

 

[mcshroom]

Thats longer than most tour stages

a 100 miler would take a decent cyclist 4 hrs a av cyclist 5 hrs

how long to run a marathon ? 3 or 4hrs

Not many 250 mile events in this country

now over in france they have 24hr cycle races on tracks like Le mans that would be cool

If you look in the Audax calendar there's quite a few 400km rides (248.6mi) They do have a 30km/h maximum speed though so they are not quite the same.

These distances are longer than tour stages, but tour riders do stages day after day. It's very unlikely a professional marathon runner could run back to back marathons. They are very different sports so it's hard to equate the two really

 

[sean8997]

Thats longer than most tour stages

a 100 miler would take a decent cyclist 4 hrs a av cyclist 5 hrs

how long to run a marathon ? 3 or 4hrs

Not many 250 mile events in this country

now over in france they have 24hr cycle races on tracks like Le mans that would be cool

I did my 1st 100 miler in 6hr 32 min so must make me a below average cyclist!!!! bad times!!!

 

[DrSquirrel]

That's rubbish, 5hours is 20mph for the 100miles, and 4hours is significantly more. From knowing the record of the 100 course here, that is tosh... utter tosh.

 

[martint235]

That's rubbish, 5hours is 20mph for the 100miles, and 4hours is significantly more. From knowing the record of the 100 course here, that is tosh... utter tosh.

You got there first. I was going to say I think that for a normal (ie one of us) cyclist, 6 hours for 100 miles over varying terrain is either good going or average. I know I can do it so I'd tend to put it towards average as I know people quicker than me.

 

[Rob3rt]

I dont know of any 100 mile pure cycling races, so the closest thing I can compare is the Ironman bike leg at 112 mile, the male elites get around on time trial bikes in full aero attire in about 4:10 to 4:30 (course dependant). Thats ELITE level althletes! In fact at the recent challenge Roth event, the winner, did the 112 miles in 4:11.

So to concludes, 4 hours for 100 miles is well above "decent" and 5 hours is well above "average".


Time for a reality check.

 

[captainhastings]

I don't see how you can draw a comparison really. For my self when I do a 15 miler on the bike caning up hills I like to think its roughly like a 5 mile run.
They don't feel any thing alike though. The run I hardly break a sweat or get out of breath at my pace and I am used to it but there is no let up on the muscles. The cycle on the hills by the time I hit the top I will be gasping for air but I get a recover going back down. So it is all swings and round abouts