Why is my average speed so low?

[Donger]

I wouldn't have thought there is any issue here .... unless you are struggling to keep up with riding companions. It so happens that the stats you give in your original post are almost identical to my own .... after 7 years of riding. Being comfortable doing a steady 15-17mph on the flat all day but always seeming to average 10-12 mph by the end of a long, mixed terrain ride is something I can really identify with. Who knows, it might just mean that you are a natural audaxer. Those stats would get you round most 100km audax events comfortably within the time limits.

 

[Pale Rider]

The OP's 10 or 11mph average sounds OK to me, bearing in mind he's seen a few summers and rides a steel tourer.

The cycling monster that is Steve Abraham rides a similar bike.

He hunts flat routes and tail winds all the time, but still 'only' averages about 14mph.

 

[tallliman]

I think its feasible that your new bike could be slower.

Fatter tyres, different gearing, heavier frame...all possibilities. If it feels slower on the same commute, either it could be or perhaps you are still adjusting to it and yet to find its sweet spot.

If it's none of those and the weather is the same...then I'm afraid it only leaves the engine...which may be in need of an MOT.

I'm definitely still getting used to the bike and yes it could ultimately be slower. However my point was more that the average speed of the newer bike has been slower to date due to the greater amount of climbing per mile that I've done on it. I need a back to back check but I'd not realised this until now

 

[mjr]

And if you are - as you said in your first post - 'disappointed' with your average speed, then that is something which can easily be addressed by improving your fitness. Or keeping to flat routes.

Or changing your mindset. If your fitness is about as good as it gets and your routes necessarily involve hills, that's all that's left.

What blazed seems to ignore is that going faster does not necessarily improve fitness. I could push and go a bit faster but my health is such that that means I won't ride for 2-3 days after and what would be the point of that? It would probably mean a net loss of fitness.

Back to the OP: hills dent your average speeds also as much as urban areas IME. Losing 2mph average is almost certain. Up to 5mph possible.

 

[bpsmith]

@mjray is spot on. Setting yourself targets is great, and I enjoy that myself, but if it's to the detriment of health then that's nuts.

It's all about setting realistic targets, that can change over time, but balancing against keeping yourself riding.

 

[Spoked Wheels]

If everything else fails then I suggest you and your gps device jump in the car for a 10 minutes ride. You'll be amazed of the improvement, no training is required, further more, you don't need to spend on new bikes or tyres....

 

[400bhp]

It's actually pretty simple.

Cycling is a broad activity covering so many disciplines. A chap riding a shopping basket to tesco'stesco to pick up a bottle of merlot, is a cyclist.

The first British winner of the world famous Tour de France, is also a cyclist.

The two, however share nothin in common than the fact that they ride a bike for some reason.

If you treat cycling as a leisure activity, you may find that speed has no interest and that the enjoyment is about travelling.

If you treat it as a sport, you shall most likely wish to show gains, improvements and personal bests.

Nothing wrong with either and neither are a "brigade". You both need to just come to terms with the concept that differnet riders get something different out of the activity and approach it for different reasons.

And this is a good summary of why cycling is such a fantastic way to spend your time doing it.

 

[400bhp]

I was thinking about this thread as I was looking at veloviewer. Since I got my new bike, I've been worried that it's slower than my older bike which was exacerbated by the fact I commuted to work yesterday on my old bike and was quicker by 2mph. However, if I look at the rides from this year with the new bike compared to the old bike, I've done 2,500ft of climbing on the new bike and 500ft on the old one (for a similar distance). So it makes sense that the new bike has been slower due to the terrain!!

Why are you worried? Genuinely I'd ask you to think deeply about this.

 

[Buck]

However, I am a bit disappointed with my average speeds.

The average is just that and doesn't reflect the mix of your ride, the hills, the junctions etc. I would suggest focussing on your performance on the same sections of road to see if you are improving or not - both of which are, in my experience, motivating.

I live in Pembrokeshire and, while it is not the Lake District, it's certainly bumpy and my routes have a lot of gentle to moderate hills in them. My average for a circular run is between 10 and 11 mph usually. I'm happy to accept that this is a pretty miserable performance, but what surprises me is that, on a level bit of road, I can maintain 15-17 mph without much difficulty and I feel I could keep going all day. Do hills affect your average speed as much as this?

I live in Yorkshire and I can relate to the hilly terrain. I just looked at a ride I did yesterday and going up a hill near me (the segment is appropriately called "Steep!" and I averaged 5.0mph - admittedly not my best but that was only 6.7mph) On the same ride yesterday there is a lovely flat section and I hit 27.8mph with my best being 30.5mph!

I know the hills can have a large impact on my ride numbers but that is something that I just accept and try not to focus on the numbers - each ride do your best and enjoy it!

Until I read this thread, I hadn't even looked at the averages and tend to focus on a whole ride time or individual segment times as my comparison to myself.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

I'm only gradually getting back into cycling, so while I am fitter than I was, I am still a long way from 'fit'. However, I am a bit disappointed with my average speeds. I live in Pembrokeshire and, while it is not the Lake District, it's certainly bumpy and my routes have a lot of gentle to moderate hills in them. My average for a circular run is between 10 and 11 mph usually. I'm happy to accept that this is a pretty miserable performance, but what surprises me is that, on a level bit of road, I can maintain 15-17 mph without much difficulty and I feel I could keep going all day. Do hills affect your average speed as much as this? (I understand that mathematically you can never regain the energy you put in going up a hill because of the need for braking and losses from wind resistance on the way down, but I'm surprised it is as much as this.)

@RichardB

Hills affect me massively.

As already mentioned in the thread, down's do not always compensate for the ups. I can slog up a hill at 4-6 mph in some cases and then go down a twisty, slithery thing, running with water and filled with blind bends at not a lot more tbh. Both the up's and the down's affect my overall average speed (14.2 for 2015) quite dramatically. On flattish roads I usually run at around 18-20 mph occasionally flipping up to around 22/23 mph. So hills, overall, knock out very roughly 4-6 mph across the year - notwithstanding the effects of wind, feeling like crap or just being plain demotivated.

I averaged 78'/mile over 2200 miles last year in the Lake District - and I steer well clear of the really hilly bits tbh.

Pembrokeshire is far from flat as you know and has similar lanes to here plus you probably take more hammer from the wind too - where I live (eastern side of the main mountains) I am screened by the big hills to some extent.
Sounds like you are doing ok to me - keep at it!

 

[Smokin Joe]

@RichardB

Pembrokeshire is far from flat as you know and has similar lanes to here plus you probably take more hammer from the wind too - where I live (eastern side of the main mountains) I am screened by the big hills to some extent.

Wind isn't that much of a problem here, high hedgerows are the norm and they afford a lot of protection. When I lived in Essex the wind could be a nightmare as the hedgerows had largely disappeared and you were at the mercy of every little gust. I have memories of riding a time trial in north Essex and having to drop to the small ring on a dead flat section, the headwind was so strong.

 

[RichardB]

Thanks for the helpful responses. To reiterate; this isn't a question about how I can improve my average speeds, but to ask if other people find their averages knocked back by hills as much as I do. The answer seems to be pretty much in the affirmative, so thank you all for confirming and reassuring. I thought losing perhaps 6 mph to the terrain was unusual, but obviously not. And I know the times will come down and the speeds go up as I get fitter - I just need to put the hours in.

Those stats would get you round most 100km audax events comfortably within the time limits.

Now THAT is encouragement! I'm booked in for an 80km ride in April, and I hope to finish before the last checkpoint locks up and goes home, so that's good news.

The OP's 10 or 11mph average sounds OK to me, bearing in mind he's seen a few summers and rides a steel tourer.

That's an extremely kind way of describing me. I appreciate it

 

[Mugshot]

I try to take opportunities and dodge the showers. Get wet whatever! If you know the area, my rides are generally round the Hayscastle/Roch/Mathry areas and while it's not the Alps, you are right in saying you are either going up or down, and rarely level.

I know the area well and ride it quite often, as @Smokin Joe has said dependant on your route it doesn't have to be the hilliest but there are plenty of lumps and drags (mind you if your route includes New Gale to Penycwm ) long and short of it as loads have already said is yes, hills can destroy your average.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Thanks for the helpful responses. To reiterate; this isn't a question about how I can improve my average speeds, but to ask if other people find their averages knocked back by hills as much as I do. The answer seems to be pretty much in the affirmative, so thank you all for confirming and reassuring. I thought losing perhaps 6 mph to the terrain was unusual, but obviously not. And I know the times will come down and the speeds go up as I get fitter - I just need to put the hours in.

I'm about as slow as you. If I choose my hillier 100k routes (about 1600m climb) it can take me around 6 hours, so about 10mph (start-to-finish including stops: none of your ego-flattering moving averages). But a flatter 100k (say 1000m) I can get through in 5 hours.

Don't underestimate the psychological effect too. If you spend a lot of time slogging slowly up hills you get stuck in slow-slog mode (or at least, I do) and find yourself slogging slowly along on the flat. A cold wet day, and a slow start with a few hills can almost guarantee a slow rest of the ride for me.

 

[totallyfixed]

No one, unless I missed it somewhere, has pointed out that averages also include the warm up period at the start of the ride, the only way round that is to get on the turbo / roller prior to setting out. I typically take 11 miles to get properly warmed up so average speed up until then is fairly academic, particularly as leaving home is far from flat. Average speed would comfortably be 1 - 2 mph higher if the warm up period was excluded. In the colder months average speed will also be less, but then in winter long and steady is an old maxim that still holds true.