It's not the miles, but the elevation

[amandasmile]

So when people start cycling, they tend to get all excited about the century mark, i was no different but i've realized that i no longer plan my cycling activities around the number of miles i do , but how many feet i climb and what climbs i feel like attacking that day. That and what scenery will turn me on.

Wondering how many of you focus more on altitude versus distance.

 

[gbb]

Climbing only interested me personally as a means to get a more immediate harder workout. But, in a circuit every foot climbed is a foot downhill where the workout isn't as intense. Looking at my former stats, say a 50 miles ride,whether its a flat ride, a hilly one, a windy day or a still one...the averages almost always worked out pretty much the same.

 

[ianrauk]

It also depends on the area of where you live.

Some people like @nickyboy have no choice but to do rides based on elevation rather then distance. Others in the east of the country have very little on the way of climbing. Luckily in the SE we have a nice mix of the two.

Where are you based @amandasmile ?

 

[Drago]

Elevation itself is problematic as an indicator. None of it will all be at the same gradient, and even within a few metres on the same climb the gradient can change. At least you know where you stand with a mile - each one will always be a mile long.

 

[PaulSB]

Living in Lancashire our choice is flat out towards the Fylde and/or Southport and the Mosses. To get the best scenery one needs to head for the hilly Ribble Valley. Though having said that we managed 95 miles to Silverdale with only 3500 feet on Wednesday so it’s possible with careful planning.

Like @gbb when riding solo I use local climbs to train. When riding with friends we chose the scenery and challenges we fancy on the day.

 

[Deleted member 1258]

I do most of my rides in rolling Warwickshire countryside, lots of small hills but very few major climbs, I'd have trouble accumulating a lot of elevation without doing hill reps on one of the bigger hills.

 

[Will Spin]

I ride around the South Downs area so plenty of hills. I prefer a hilly ride for the variety of countryside and I think I get a more intense workout if there are plenty of hills involved. Overall though, it seems to me that 2 hours riding on the flat seems to take more effort than 2 hours riding through hilly country as you never get a rest whilst freewheeling!

 

[Johnno260]

I'm lucky great combo of climbs and flats I can't complain at all.

I really want to attempt my first century in the new year.

 

[welsh dragon]

I don't like hills. My rides consist of just enjoying myself however short or long the distance. People can become obsessed with distance, elevation, speed, how how many calories you burn ETC.

I really can't be bothered with all that. Where i live is very hilly, so i look for flatter routes. Suits me much better.

 

[Threevok]

Living around here, I tend to concentrate on altitude more than distance.

After all, if you were to iron out Wales it would be bigger than Texas

 

[Aravis]

In January, when I switched from a Garmin Edge 200 to a 520, I started doing twice as much climbing. My mileage has stayed the same.

As a somewhat more useful bit of input, I often find the elevation prediction on RwGPS's planning tool extremely useful. I have a chance next week for a ride in a hilly area I don't know, and it's good to know that what I'm planning is likely to be within my capability.

Targeting a particular amount of climbing? I think it could happen, but miles, scenery, and new roads are always going to be higher priorities.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Depends on how fit I am. If I'm fit then it's miles plus a modicum of elevation - although not too much of the latter as I'm never that fit. If I'm not fit then it's miles and elevation avoidance - as best as I can avoid it in the Lake District.

Scenery (especially when the lovely Mrs Spokey is waving me off from the front window of the house) is always lovely here so I don't consciously factor that in.

 

[mjr]

Climbing only interested me personally as a means to get a more immediate harder workout. But, in a circuit every foot climbed is a foot downhill where the workout isn't as intense. Looking at my former stats, say a 50 miles ride,whether its a flat ride, a hilly one, a windy day or a still one...the averages almost always worked out pretty much the same.

If you want to make life harder, try riding more uphill than down and getting a train home, or more into a headwind and getting a train, or aligning most long gentle downhills with the headwind while trying to avoid climbing with tailwinds - I've done most of those accidentally at various times and the last one especially can make a ride as tough as one about twice as long!

 

[Rooster1]

I used to ride more for miles. As i've got gradually better at hills (and then worse again) i've tried to do more climbing in my rides than previous years.
This year I am at 166,000 Feet and I still have two months to go for the year - last year 166,000 feet was my total so I reckon I can do 200,000 by the end of the year - with 5000 miles.

 

[Supersuperleeds]

All about the miles for me, I'm more than happy to avoid a hill and increase the mileage.