Speed over 30 miles?
Comments
-
Valy wrote:Yeah, but in a way you just confirmed how wattage can produce different results - just like time saved will vary with conditions if you quote "x" number of seconds off with "x" item. Not being a smart ass, just pedantic.
But your wrong. Because the wattage saving is specified as the number of watts less you need to go a particular speed. So the different results are removed.Jibbering Sports Stuff: http://jibbering.com/sports/0 -
Well as far as watts are concerned, I've not done much over the past 5-7 weeks, but before that, I was regular training and my FTP was at around 300W, now I weighed in at around 77kg then. And there was talk about times and wattages, and I noticed, some people were getting alot better times than me and needing even less wattage
, if I remember some of em, they were heavier than me too. 0 -
i thinkk that me be down to positioning on the bike, and we are all diff shapes and sizes0
-
freehub wrote:Well as far as watts are concerned, I've not done much over the past 5-7 weeks, but before that, I was regular training and my FTP was at around 300W, now I weighed in at around 77kg then. And there was talk about times and wattages, and I noticed, some people were getting alot better times than me and needing even less wattage, if I remember some of em, they were heavier than me too.
If the photo you posted is your TT position, it is not surprising that you fail to translate power and fast training rides into better TT times. You don't have a TT bike, and you don't ride on the drops, let alone in a low position on them. Just get some basic clip-on aerobars and you'll be pleasantly surprised.0 -
jibberjim wrote:Valy wrote:Yeah, but in a way you just confirmed how wattage can produce different results - just like time saved will vary with conditions if you quote "x" number of seconds off with "x" item. Not being a smart ass, just pedantic.
But your wrong. Because the wattage saving is specified as the number of watts less you need to go a particular speed. So the different results are removed.
But would not that particular speed have various power requirements in different conditions?
If you mean in the same conditions, then it goes the same for time. Are watts mentioned at some benchmark conditions?0 -
That's true. Air temperature (and thus density) and wind strength/direction play a bigger role in this than you'd think as well. As does the amount of clothing you wear.neeb wrote:One funny thing occurred to me last summer. I usually see my average speeds on particular routes getting better towards the middle of the summer and then tailing off slightly towards late autumn. I've always attributed this to increased fitness due to training much more from the spring onwards, and I'm sure this is a large part of it. However, I also have a tendency to go out as late as possible while it is still light on weekdays. This means that in the spring/early summer I might go out for a 40 miler between 6pm and 8pm, while at the beginning of July, when it's light in Helsinki until about midnight, I might actually go out for the same ride between 10pm and midnight. It suddenly occurred to me that the later it is, the less traffic there is in the suburban stretches before I get out into the countrside, and the more likely it is I can just fly through the 3 or 4 traffic lights / crossings in these bits (they actually switch the traffic lights off after about 10pm).
There's no doubt that even 2 or 3 brief stops at lights can knock quite a bit off your average speed even on a 40 mile route.
My quickest rides are in summer too, but I usually put out a little bit more power (and go a lot slower) when it's colder.Jeff Jones
Product manager, Sports0 -
Valy wrote:If you mean in the same conditions, then it goes the same for time. Are watts mentioned at some benchmark conditions?
Yes the conditions are normalized. But that doesn't mean time is usable the same because you've added another variable - that of distance.
Watts vs speed are good and you can just talk about the change in watts to go the speed (in the fixed conditions)
Watts speed distance since the distance travelled will also change in the time you're considering. So gains are not additive in the same way because the minutes you save depend on how fast you were going anyway.Jibbering Sports Stuff: http://jibbering.com/sports/0 -
Jeff Jones wrote:
That's true. Air temperature (and thus density) and wind strength/direction play a bigger role in this than you'd think as well. As does the amount of clothing you wear.neeb wrote:One funny thing occurred to me last summer. I usually see my average speeds on particular routes getting better towards the middle of the summer and then tailing off slightly towards late autumn. I've always attributed this to increased fitness due to training much more from the spring onwards, and I'm sure this is a large part of it. However, I also have a tendency to go out as late as possible while it is still light on weekdays. This means that in the spring/early summer I might go out for a 40 miler between 6pm and 8pm, while at the beginning of July, when it's light in Helsinki until about midnight, I might actually go out for the same ride between 10pm and midnight. It suddenly occurred to me that the later it is, the less traffic there is in the suburban stretches before I get out into the countrside, and the more likely it is I can just fly through the 3 or 4 traffic lights / crossings in these bits (they actually switch the traffic lights off after about 10pm).
There's no doubt that even 2 or 3 brief stops at lights can knock quite a bit off your average speed even on a 40 mile route.
My quickest rides are in summer too, but I usually put out a little bit more power (and go a lot slower) when it's colder.
If that's true then surely I should be quite abit faster today when I go out? It's about as windy as the last time I went out, wet like last time, but it's about 8-9 degrees warmer and I will be wearing less clothing.0 -
In principle yes, all other things being equal.freehub wrote:Jeff Jones wrote:That's true. Air temperature (and thus density) and wind strength/direction play a bigger role in this than you'd think as well. As does the amount of clothing you wear.
My quickest rides are in summer too, but I usually put out a little bit more power (and go a lot slower) when it's colder.
If that's true then surely I should be quite abit faster today when I go out? It's about as windy as the last time I went out, wet like last time, but it's about 8-9 degrees warmer and I will be wearing less clothing.
I on the other hand expect to be slower than when I last went out, 'cos I've just returned from 3wks in the sun in Australia. Oh well at least it's not -5 again.Jeff Jones
Product manager, Sports0 -
jibberjim wrote:Valy wrote:If you mean in the same conditions, then it goes the same for time. Are watts mentioned at some benchmark conditions?
Yes the conditions are normalized. But that doesn't mean time is usable the same because you've added another variable - that of distance.
Watts vs speed are good and you can just talk about the change in watts to go the speed (in the fixed conditions)
Watts speed distance since the distance travelled will also change in the time you're considering. So gains are not additive in the same way because the minutes you save depend on how fast you were going anyway.
I see what you are saying, but i see what I'm saying too.
Watts saved is amount of energy saved per unit time. Same applied to time is time saved per unit time.0 -
Anyone who manages 20 mph this weekend in this bloody wind is on a diff level. :twisted:
Just did 76 miles at 17 mph taking in climbs like monsal head.
Bloody bike was being blown sideways at times.0 -
63miles at 20.2mph, ave HR 131
But it was a nice day in Luxembourg 8)0 -
After reading all this talk of speed etc i think im going to give up cycling, well stick to mtb racing!
Last year i did the Fred Whitton, 112 miles, few hills and a ave of just over 14 mph.....hr through the roof i expect!!
I'll get my coat!
Been interesting reading though and entertaining.
I find Freehubs 180 mile ride at an ave of 19mph amazing and confusing, as over that distance with junctions, lights, pee stops and to ave 19 you must be riding a hell of alot faster to keep it up, but can't crack 24 mph on a 10? Surely you must be motoring to hit 19 to 23 mph averages?
Anyway keep up the good work, i'm going back in my lurking cubby hole!
0 -
320DMsport wrote:I find Freehubs 180 mile ride at an ave of 19mph amazing and confusing, as over that distance with junctions, lights, pee stops and to ave 19 you must be riding a hell of alot faster to keep it up, but can't crack 24 mph on a 10? Surely you must be motoring to hit 19 to 23 mph averages?
I believe the 19mph average ride was a group ride. Still impressive riding, but the group gives a you an mph or two for free.More problems but still living....0 -
10mph into the headwind
30mph with a tailwind 
There were some shocked drivers when I was keeping up in a 30 zone!! LOLCycling never gets any easier, you just go faster - Greg LeMond0 -
hi all just signed up after lurking for a while.
short version- motorbike accident couldnt walk for 9 months =stick thin legs.
took up cycling-love it. now been about 5 months training(not strong enough to do everyday yet) so maybe in a better position to encourage someone whos new? im gradually increasing distance and speed. best is av 14.6mph for 30 miles. obviously ive got a long way to go but in my short experience:
- have short and long term goals , lots of short term goals = lots of success=motivation/improvement. however you want to measure it go for it. most of all if your a noob just get out and ride.Death or Glory- Just another Story0 -
Well as a beginner to the road scene, I've now read through some of this thread and still none of the wiser to how I'm doing
Well not strictly true, as it's a big surprise how fast some of you guys can go.
But just looking at my own data... I can see the issue with comparing rides....
The 'average moving speed' vs the 'average speed' is pretty interesting. Off-road this is pretty easy... as the difference will caused (mainly) by either resting or bio-breaks (unless something went wrong with the bike).
On the road... traffic lights and getting stuck in traffic have a bigger impact. In one respect it feels like the average moving speed is the better figure to use in terms of effort (if being stuck in traffic is the main cause of the differences) to 'normalise' the data, but in other respects... even though it's not necessary your fault for stopping, you still are resting (so needs to be taken into account).
Other issues I can see are the terrain. Looking at the 'elevation gain' gain data is useful to get an idea of how much climbing was involved... but if the hills are undulating (rather than peaky)... then it seems easier to keep your speed up. I don't really have any data to support this... so it's a bit of a guess from riding.
I guess the best way to compare how you are doing... is to compare yourself over the same route and similar conditions.
It seems to me that it would be useful to have 'benchmark routes' around the country... which people can try and compare their times.Simon0 -
springtide9 wrote:It seems to me that it would be useful to have 'benchmark routes' around the country... which people can try and compare their times.
Yes, if only someone would come along and invent the discipline of 'Time Trialling', then such routes would be established and you could either ride them as part of an event, or in your own time.
Until that happens, we're stuffed 0 -
Any Bristolians here?
What about a TT ride from Bristol -> Bath -> Bristol ( A4 | A46 | B4465 ) ?
Pick a spot as you leave and enter Bristol (so that we avoid the traffic's impact on our time). Think that would give a decent route with a nice climb on the A46 Simon0
