How fast should I aim to be?

Calder

I'm fairly new to cycling but getting increasingly keen. I like to push myself but have nothing to gauge myself against. So... I'm after some targets for when I'm out on the bike.

What sort of times or average speeds are respectable/good for for rides of say 10m, 30m and 50m? The routes I take at the moment are generally pretty flat.

Cheers.

G.

Anonymous

I think if you can hold 18mph over rolling roads for about 2 hours you will be doing well. Just something one of the race guys at my club said to me years ago and it always stuck.

danowat

Calder wrote:

I'm fairly new to cycling but getting increasingly keen. I like to push myself but have nothing to gauge myself against. So... I'm after some targets for when I'm out on the bike.

What sort of times or average speeds are respectable/good for for rides of say 10m, 30m and 50m? The routes I take at the moment are generally pretty flat.

Cheers.

G.

Speed is relative, it is affected by so many factors that what might be a good speed for one day/course, might be terrible for another.

That said, for TT'ing, an avg of 25mph is a pretty decent avg, 24min 10mile, 1hr 25mile, 2hr 50mile etc etc

Bobbinogs

It is hard to say because we all have different capabilities and fitness levels but I figure a starter for ten would be something like:

Be able to complete 25 fairly flat miles comfortably (don't worry about time at all), then be able to do a hilly circuit, ensuring you can complete that.
Repeat the above but make it 50 miles, again adding in hills/more hills when it gets too easy.
Complete a flat 10 miles within 30 minutes.
Complete a flat 50 miles in 3 hours.
Complete a hilly 50 miles in 3 hours, etc.

Go from there. If you want some minor targets along the way then pick the hill that you currently fear...and keep doing it until you can crack it. Then, pick another hill that looks even worse...

I would thoroughly recommend joining a club as they will help you along the way. Most have groups of different standards and will let you hop between the groups depending on your progress, objective, motivation and how you feel on the day.

Calder

That's rocking, cheers. I've got some work to do but they seem achievable, so I'll see how I get on...

Ezy Rider

wind, traffic, roundabouts, trafficlights all can have a major effect on speed. i can do a 50 mile jaunt at 18.5 - 19 mph on a good day ,but throw in some of those factors and my av speed can drop considerably.

just go out and have fun mate.

markos1963

Why the need for an average speed? It's pretty irrelevant unless you are racing or TTing. The important thing is to be able to complete the distances you need to ride. If your aim is to ride 100 miles in a day then work at increasing your distance and how comfortable you feel doing it. Speed will come with experience and a good base of distance work.
When I go out on casual rides or base training I never bother recording av speed, only during interval/TT training would I bother to look at it.

amaferanga

markos1963 wrote:

Why the need for an average speed?

So he can come on beginner forums in a few months time and willy wave?

anto164

If you're doing 25mph over 100 miles then you'll be doing well :P

Calder

"Why the need for an average speed?"

It's called ambition. I like to improve - ie. go further and faster. And if you never set yourself targets how on earth can you improve?!

This applies for cycling, rock climbing, more academic skills, etc and so on...

markos1963

Calder wrote:

"Why the need for an average speed?"

It's called ambition. I like to improve - ie. go further and faster. And if you never set yourself targets how on earth can you improve?!

This applies for cycling, rock climbing, more academic skills, etc and so on...

Problem is average speed is such a variable thing and difficult to use as a target. Over here in Norfolk our 'slow' club run can average 18-19mph some weeks because of the terrain and conditions yet those riders would struggle to average 12mph over in Derbyshire.
We can't gauge your ability according to average speed because we don't know all the variables, only you can do that. By all means ask for tips on how to get faster/stronger/better on hills/better down hills etc and then you can apply it to your needs/targets.

Calder

Yeah, I appreciate your point - I simply plan to log my training and I'll note whether the route was particularly hilly or windy or if I only had two weetabix for breakfast or whatever. I've also found and read some tips on to climb better or go faster so I'll be experimenting with that too.

Just needed some rough targets is all, and you've provided me with that so appreciate the help.

Cheers.

G.

MountainMonster

Unless you are riding exactly the same route every time, then the average speed won't matter too much.

Pumpkin Positive

I totally understand where the OP is coming from. I’ve been riding on roads for less than 6 months now having switched from MTBing. Watching your averages creep higher over the same route is incredibly motivating. Buy a cycle computer and record route conditions in a notebook or spreadsheet, you'll soon get a pretty accurate idea

I tend to ride the same four or five routes route and although every ride is different I definitely noticed that my average speeds are improving. Where I live in Devon it’s hard to find a flat route so I mostly ride hills and I consider 16 - 17mph to be a good average (15mph if I go to Dartmoor) but when I go to my inlaws in the Norfolk Fens I can easily achieve 19 or 20mph over a longish distance .

It’s pretty pointless trying to compare your averages to someone else’s because there are so many factors that corrupt your average. I have average speed on my cycle computer but you could weep watching it fall as you wait for lights to change!

meanredspider

I have sympathy for the OP's aim. I did my fastest ever ride in on my commute today - it felt great. I think the important thing is just to go faster. A good idicator of the prevailing conditions for me is my max speed (typically down a specific hill). All things being equal, 40mph is a good day - above that I have a following wind and much below that and headwind (slower still, pissing rain). Besides, you aren't looking for individual data points but trends over time. It's great to see, for instance that I'm typically x miles an hour faster than last year.

Of course it gets harder and harder and that's maybe why the experienced cyclists are disenchanted with average speeds - as your progress flattens (which it inevitably will), the "noise" (weather, traffic, temp etc) overtakes everything. For the newbies, there's still some excitement in it. No need to piss on their parade.

Ezy Rider

MountainMonster wrote:

Unless you are riding exactly the same route every time, then the average speed won't matter too much.

thats bang on the money

my quickest ever half century on a route with flats and climbs to mix it all up was at an average of 19.4mph , to say i could do that on all half centuries is dreamland for me. you can use a well used route as a yardstick as to how you are doing, but dont let it be all you are focussing on and be proud in the knowledge you are doing something to keep yourself in great shape and having a blast at the same time.

Calder

Some logical thoughts in there folks. Thanks.

amaferanga

meanredspider wrote:

Of course it gets harder and harder and that's maybe why the experienced cyclists are disenchanted with average speeds.....

Or they realise that chasing an improving average speed is a pretty ineffective way to actually improve as a cyclist.....

briantrumpet

amaferanga wrote:

Or they realise that chasing an improving average speed is a pretty ineffective way to actually improve as a cyclist.....

So, out of interest, how is that different from TTers using their times to measure progress? Or are you saying that looking to improve TT times is an ineffective way to improve as a cyclist?

P_Tucker

briantrumpet wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Or they realise that chasing an improving average speed is a pretty ineffective way to actually improve as a cyclist.....

So, out of interest, how is that different from TTers using their times to measure progress? Or are you saying that looking to improve TT times is an ineffective way to improve as a cyclist?

On the same course, it makes sense. Otherwise, it doesn't.

briantrumpet

P_Tucker wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Or they realise that chasing an improving average speed is a pretty ineffective way to actually improve as a cyclist.....

So, out of interest, how is that different from TTers using their times to measure progress? Or are you saying that looking to improve TT times is an ineffective way to improve as a cyclist?

On the same course, it makes sense. Otherwise, it doesn't.

And with identical weather conditions too, I assume. It would also suggest that comparing TT times for different courses is ineffective.

I know what you're saying, but I do get a little tired of TTers saying that average speed is useless, when, used intelligently by individuals setting themselves targets (on their own terms), it can be a strong motivator, in the same way that TT times are.

danowat

In TT'ing, its not JUST the overal time, its also about your position in the final standings, and how you stack up to your "nemisis's" or "on par" people that you tend to race with, week in, week out.

briantrumpet

danowat wrote:

In TT'ing, its not JUST the overal time, its also about your position in the final standings, and how you stack up to your "nemisis's" or "on par" people that you tend to race with, week in, week out.

Ah, now that I can understand - though it's not my idea of how to get the most enjoyment out of riding a bike.

But it just amuses me that whenever TTers quote TT times, all they are doing is giving an average speed, in effect, whilst saying that average speed doesn't matter.

P_Tucker

Indeed, TT times are pointless as an objective measure. Idiot testers drive all over the country looking for a fast course on a float day so they can get a long 19 (or whatever), when they've got no hope of getting anywhere near that on their local course. Mental.

meanredspider

P_Tucker wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Or they realise that chasing an improving average speed is a pretty ineffective way to actually improve as a cyclist.....

So, out of interest, how is that different from TTers using their times to measure progress? Or are you saying that looking to improve TT times is an ineffective way to improve as a cyclist?

On the same course, it makes sense. Otherwise, it doesn't.

Which is just like a commute - horribly identical. I've done the same route a couple of hundred times. Since my aim is get faster over exactly that route, I'm struggling to see why getting faster over that route is a poor measure - I can't think of a better one!

That's not to say I just try to ride faster & faster (as my "pretty ineffective way" of improving) - I try different routes with far more hills, I try intervals, hill repeats & all sorts. But it still just comes down to one thing - am I faster over THAT route.

And I'm totally with Brian on the TT thing. I'm just doing a TT against all the other Mes that have done the ride before.

danowat

briantrumpet wrote:

]But it just amuses me that whenever TTers quote TT times, all they are doing is giving an average speed, in effect, whilst saying that average speed doesn't matter.

But you are all riding the same course, at around the same time, in generally the same conditions as everyone else is, you can't get a truer test of individual speed than that, IMO.

Many people do drive long distances for fast courses, because they like going fast, I am lucky enough to have plenty of fast courses on my doorstep.

briantrumpet

danowat wrote:

But you are all riding the same course, at around the same time, in generally the same conditions as everyone else is, you can't get a truer test of individual speed than that, IMO.

As you say - on that course, at that time. But if you start comparing TT times on the same course on different days, it's no different from me comparing my average speeds on one of my regular loops on different days. Granted, I don't get any 'ranking' to compare myself meaningfully with other riders, but until TTers stop quoting and using TT times, I think I'll carry on using average speed as one of my measuring tools and motivators, and will have a chuckle each time I'm told that average speeds are 'useless'. As all TTers will know, if you're riding a course of a fixed length, speed and time are directly proportional, so are merely different ways of measuring exactly the same thing.

dboden

I would suggest joing a local club.. start off in the slow group or on their slower ride days (assuming they have one) most decent sized clubs do. Explain to them at what level you are... You will be doing 17s straight away, sat at the back. You will enjoy it more, along with learning valuable skills. Its amazing how you get pulled along in a group, and as your fitness improves, you may start to have your turn on the front, and get stronger. But beware, it gets expensive!

rolf_f

The same route argument is a bit overblown. You do need to compare like with like but I can judge my performance on different routes - I know that I can expect to cover a certain distance in a certain amount of time on a certain type of terrain given a certain personal physical condition. Not that scientific but not valueless either. I'd say weather conditions on a repeated route probably give greater variance than you'd get riding two routes over similar sorts of terrain.