Getting up hills faster

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

billflat12

Veteran
Location
cheshire
start on longer steady climbs keeping your peddling constant and smooth avoiding short bursts of energy , if your not exhausted when you reach the top go back and do it again in a taller gear until you are , "unless you push yourself you will never improve" , if your ever in the company of slower riders just do a climb again rather than wait at the top, you will be suprised just how quickly your fitness improves by pushing yourself that little harder
 
OP
OP
A

Angelfishsolo

A Velocipedian
Once again thank you all. I will be back in the saddle on Sunday and plan to try out a few suggestions :smile:
 

Rouge Penguin

New Member
Location
East Berkshire
Having spent last summer on the road and this spring mostly on the trails, repeats are really the only way to do it.
The gearing is totally different, but the technique is similar. Spin up the hill in the lowest gear you can manage. Stay seated. Keep going once you've crested the hill, get your breath back on the move to keep your momentum up. Next time round will be easier and within weeks you'll be searching out a bigger challenge.

Mashing up hills only going to ruin you knees in time.
 
OP
OP
A

Angelfishsolo

A Velocipedian
Thank you for the advice. Much appreciated :smile:

Having spent last summer on the road and this spring mostly on the trails, repeats are really the only way to do it.
The gearing is totally different, but the technique is similar. Spin up the hill in the lowest gear you can manage. Stay seated. Keep going once you've crested the hill, get your breath back on the move to keep your momentum up. Next time round will be easier and within weeks you'll be searching out a bigger challenge.

Mashing up hills only going to ruin you knees in time.
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
I think for 99% of people, technique isn't really the problem - it is power-to-weight ratio. You all seem to be concentrating on the power side of the equation.

I'm amazed that nobody has mentioned the obvious - lose some fat! Unless you are already as skinny as you want to go, shed some body fat. Make sure it is fat, not muscle though.
 
OP
OP
A

Angelfishsolo

A Velocipedian
Colin my problem is that I have a defunct Thyroid gland. I gained 6 stones in a little over a month back in 2007. I have managed to get down to 16.5 stone or there about but no matter what I do I can not shift the rest. If my medication is increased I bounce off the walls and I already eat less than the average person. I would to get back to 11 stone with a 30 inch waist and washboard stomach but it seems an impossibility :sad:

I think for 99% of people, technique isn't really the problem - it is power-to-weight ratio. You all seem to be concentrating on the power side of the equation.

I'm amazed that nobody has mentioned the obvious - lose some fat! Unless you are already as skinny as you want to go, shed some body fat. Make sure it is fat, not muscle though.
 

ColinJ

Puzzle game procrastinator!
Colin my problem is that I have a defunct Thyroid gland. I gained 6 stones in a little over a month back in 2007. I have managed to get down to 16.5 stone or there about but no matter what I do I can not shift the rest. If my medication is increased I bounce off the walls and I already eat less than the average person. I would to get back to 11 stone with a 30 inch waist and washboard stomach but it seems an impossibility :sad:
Oh - I'm sorry to hear that! My mum had the opposite problem. She had the gland zapped to cut down its activity but she still couldn't put much weight on.

It's clear where your problem lies. You'd have to generate about 50% more power than the old slim you would have needed to climb at a certain speed, and that 50% isn't easy to find!

Obviously your metabolism must be really slow at rest so that is why you eat need to eat less then the average person to avoid gaining weight.

Having said that, your body can't generate energy from nowhere so if you go for long, slow rides you will burn fat just like anybody else. You just have to make sure you don't eat and drink enough extra to replace all of that loss.


I'm about a stone lighter than you and I burn about 1 pound of fat per 100 miles of cycling. You would burn slightly more, being heavier. You already eat enough to fuel your slow metabolism so you need to make sure that you consume less than 3,500 calories (calories in 1 pound of fat) per 100 miles of cycling and you should lose something. How much less you can get away with without running out of energy on your long rides is another matter.

I'd try 2,000 calories per 100 miles and see how you feel. If you are okay with that, cut it down to 1,500 calories. At some point, you'd start feeling weak on long rides and that's a sign that you'd cut back too far.

It will be harder for you to lose weight, but not impossible.

Good luck!
 
OP
OP
A

Angelfishsolo

A Velocipedian
Thank you very much indeed. I will sit down and work out my calorie intake and thus be able to plan what I need to consume on a ride :smile:

Oh - I'm sorry to hear that! My mum had the opposite problem. She had the gland zapped to cut down its activity but she still couldn't put much weight on.

It's clear where your problem lies. You'd have to generate about 50% more power than the old slim you would have needed to climb at a certain speed, and that 50% isn't easy to find!

Obviously your metabolism must be really slow at rest so that is why you eat need to eat less then the average person to avoid gaining weight.

Having said that, your body can't generate energy from nowhere so if you go for long, slow rides you will burn fat just like anybody else. You just have to make sure you don't eat and drink enough extra to replace all of that loss.


I'm about a stone lighter than you and I burn about 1 pound of fat per 100 miles of cycling. You would burn slightly more, being heavier. You already eat enough to fuel your slow metabolism so you need to make sure that you consume less than 3,500 calories (calories in 1 pound of fat) per 100 miles of cycling and you should lose something. How much less you can get away with without running out of energy on your long rides is another matter.

I'd try 2,000 calories per 100 miles and see how you feel. If you are okay with that, cut it down to 1,500 calories. At some point, you'd start feeling weak on long rides and that's a sign that you'd cut back too far.

It will be harder for you to lose weight, but not impossible.

Good luck!
 
I also agree with Katie about the leg exercises


Who's that then? :hello: ;)
 

deaksie

New Member
Location
Cotswolds
Angelfish, I have a knackered thyroid and some other insulin problems too - I completely understand your frustration! Soul-destroying at times! I have a good one where if I eat too little I put on weight even faster. good egh? WILL NOT let it impact my MTBing
Katie, I'm Deaksie (liz) often to be found mashing up the hills in the cotswolds at any given opportunity x
 
I'm amazed that nobody has mentioned the obvious - lose some fat! Unless you are already as skinny as you want to go, shed some body fat. Make sure it is fat, not muscle though.

I mentioned that at the end of my post, ColinJ. It's on page 1.

What with deaksie getting my name wrong and you not reading my post, I wonder what I'm doing posting here at all!
 
Top Bottom