Out of saddle hill climbing is.....

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

fossyant

Ride It Like You Stole It!
Location
South Manchester
I commute on a fixed, so out of the saddle is the only way sometimes. It's good to mix both types of climbing
 

sreten

Well-Known Member
Location
Brighton, UK
Hi,

In terms of keeping fit there is nothing wrong with it, and it uses muscles differently.
FWIW though going up hills seated is the thing that uses your stomach muscles
AFAICT, so I get out of the saddle if in the wrong gear at the bottom of a hill,
then change down, and use it to power over the top of hills because I can.

I wouldn't reccomend it as a general approach to hills, some are long
and seated climbing technique is more efficient than standing.

Of course with some hills and gearing, you have no choice.

rgds, sreten.
 

Fab Foodie

hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
Location
Kirton, Devon.
I don't really care about what's most 'efficient', I care about what feels best when I'm out riding. I tend to climb out of the saddle more than most ... it works for me.
There are many mantra's about how to ride Spinning/grinding, seated/standing whatever. In general I think what ever feels best probably is ....
 

Drago

Legendary Member
I'm confused.

Someone says its less efficient.

Someone says its not less efficient, and because they said NOT in capital letters, presumably in case we can't read, it looks jolly convincing.

What's a simple cycling bloke.to believe?
 

HovR

Über Member
Location
Plymouth
Being that I only have a single ring up front, I tend to have to do most of my climbing out of the saddle, at least on any real hills. I definitely feel more exhausted than when riding on a bike with a triple, but it's a good challenge!

May be good for your buttocks but not good for your goolies when the chain snaps mid climb as I can testify!
(Half way up Birdlip Hill on the outskirts of Gloucester).

Ouch! At least it wasn't on Portway, though!
 

sreten

Well-Known Member
Location
Brighton, UK
I'm confused.

Someone says its less efficient.

Someone says its not less efficient, and because they said NOT in capital letters, presumably in case we can't read, it looks jolly convincing.

What's a simple cycling bloke.to believe?

Hi,

The capital letters mean nothing. If you can get up a hill in the saddle comfortably it IS the most efficient.
If you can't in the saddle, then any other method that works is fine, including walking, which for FWIW is
by far the most efficient but generally obviously very slow, and not what you want if your racing.

rgds, sreten.
 

fossyant

Ride It Like You Stole It!
Location
South Manchester
In or out the saddle just uses different muscle groups.

The tricky stuff starts with gradient increase and rider fitness.

It's that simple. Steep stuff requires much more effort. You can get up a 25% hill spinning a little gear in the saddle without getting exhausted over 10 minutes, or you could get up it in a bigger gear in half the time but sweating like a pig.

The second option is better for building fitness though. It's called less efficient as you have to ride a bit harder. Basically bollox...

Ride hard ride fast. Ride slow, still be slow....
 

sreten

Well-Known Member
Location
Brighton, UK
You can get up a 25% hill spinning a little gear in the saddle without getting exhausted
over 10 minutes, or you could get up it in a bigger gear in half the time but sweating like a pig.

The second option is better for building fitness though. It's called less efficient as you have to ride a bit harder. Basically bollox...

Ride hard ride fast. Ride slow, still be slow....

Hi,

The bollox is clearly if you could get up the hill in half the time riding
a bit harder that is clearly the more efficient option. Except reality
doesn't work like that and your talking bollox. You have to ride
more than twice as hard to get up a hill in half the time, always.
Out of the saddle even more than if you can do it in the saddle.

I know my routes and take it easy so I have something
in my (small) tank for the hills I know are coming up.

And such an approach is faster, for overall energy / time,

I walk up 25% hills, at my age they are just stupid.
(And much less than 25%, with a 40" bottom gear.)

rgds, sreten.
 
Last edited:
The key thing is the word "efficient". Just because a rider might be able to do a climb faster out of a saddle than seated, as there's no such thing as a free lunch, that must come at a cost of burning more energy. And that's before you take into account the small extra aerodynamic drag through standing up.
 

cyberknight

As long as I breathe, I attack.
In or out the saddle just uses different muscle groups.

The tricky stuff starts with gradient increase and rider fitness.

It's that simple. Steep stuff requires much more effort. You can get up a 25% hill spinning a little gear in the saddle without getting exhausted over 10 minutes, or you could get up it in a bigger gear in half the time but sweating like a pig.

The second option is better for building fitness though. It's called less efficient as you have to ride a bit harder. Basically bollox...

Ride hard ride fast. Ride slow, still be slow....
Indeed, use whatever method suits you .
I prefer to stand but i do not neglect sitting and spinning as i like to mix it up .For me standing is faster .
 

NorvernRob

Senior Member
Location
Sheffield
On steep hills I get out of the saddle to lower my cadence, have a break and keep my heart rate and breathing under control. On short hills I get out to blast up. I went up Winnats Pass two weeks ago, 90% was out of the saddle but I actually went too easily and wasn't particularly tired at the top.

I was kicking myself as I didn't realise I was near the top and could have gone much quicker if I'd emptied the tank. I'd have found it really difficult to stay seated the whole climb with that gradient though.
 
Top Bottom