ridiculously fast???

southdownswolf

Navrig wrote:

Interestingly I would never venture out on my motorbike at anything more than 30mph - to the fuel station and back - without full leathers and here we are discussing riding in Lycra which offers no protection at all.

Crazy but we all do it.

My wife used to work in A+E and has always been against me having a motorbike. She has always said that she would not want to be there when I was brought in on an ambulance held together only by my leathers.

Yet she has no qualms about me riding my road bikes in lycra, doing speeds in excess of 40mph. Strange...

MattC59

I reckon that's probably do-able on the straight dropping down from Beachey Head down to Birling Gap.

I managed 46.9mph on Saturday, descending a 16% hill. I couldn't believe how quickly I was accelerating, I reckon I'd have topped 50mph had I not bottled it and braked. I certainly knew I was going quick and my ar*e hole is definitely two sized smaller now !!!!! (Overtook a Caterham on the way down the hill )
I checked the speed when I got to the bottom and the Garmin showed 46.9mph.

MattC59

Navrig wrote:

Interestingly I would never venture out on my motorbike at anything more than 30mph - to the fuel station and back - without full leathers and here we are discussing riding in Lycra which offers no protection at all.

Crazy but we all do it.

I read somehting by David Millar a while back, he was asked wheat it's like falling off a bike at 40mph, and replied "Imagine jumping out of a car, naked, at 40mph.......... it's the same"

rolf_f

Navrig wrote:

Interestingly I would never venture out on my motorbike at anything more than 30mph - to the fuel station and back - without full leathers and here we are discussing riding in Lycra which offers no protection at all.

Crazy but we all do it.

Yes, but how much of your time on the motorbike is spent above 30mph and how much of your time on a bike is above 30mph? Over about 40mph on a bike and you are likely to be concentrating at 100%. On a motorbike that's still pootling.

russyh

Tail winds are going to be pretty irrelevant if you are travelling faster then the wind! At that point you generate your own apparent wind which will be like when you are descending in normal wind. What a strong tail wind will do is help accelerate you to that speed.

Besides a 50 mph wind is going to be horrible to drive in let alone cycle!

andy46

I was running late for work last week and managed this

rolf_f

Russyh wrote:

Tail winds are going to be pretty irrelevant if you are travelling faster then the wind! !

Errrrrr, no they aren't!

Descending a hill at 35 mph with no wind is entirely different to descending the same hill with a 20 mph tailwind. You should try it sometime. Just because you don't feel a tailwind as a push from behind doesn't mean it isn't having a huge effect on your speed. Basically, you are getting an effective 15mph headwind instead of an effective 35 mph headwind. It makes a difference!

kaptainscoot

I dont even want to picture how fast that is 55 on a road bike scary to me.

russyh

Rolf F wrote:

Russyh wrote:

Tail winds are going to be pretty irrelevant if you are travelling faster then the wind! !

Errrrrr, no they aren't!

Descending a hill at 35 mph with no wind is entirely different to descending the same hill with a 20 mph tailwind. You should try it sometime. Just because you don't feel a tailwind as a push from behind doesn't mean it isn't having a huge effect on your speed. Basically, you are getting an effective 15mph headwind instead of an effective 35 mph headwind. It makes a difference!

Correct, but 20 mph of wind is quite allot and we are talking 55 mph so with a 20 mph tail wind at 55 mph you have a 35 mph apparent headwind which is significant ! And is more relevant then the 20mph tail wind

P_Tucker

Russyh wrote:

Correct, but 20 mph of wind is quite allot and we are talking 55 mph so with a 20 mph tail wind at 55 mph you have a 35 mph apparent headwind which is significant ! And is more relevant then the 20mph tail wind

Just admit that you were wrong FFS

russyh

I would do if i was, perhaps my OP was not worded quite right. But i actually think i am right!

http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/wind.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_w ... le_example

iPete

iPete wrote:

Hit 50.1mph on my wired Cateye once with two panniers and a tent on the back! but it was down the Alps so had over 20km of down to find the right moment!

+



+



= :shock: :evil: :twisted: :!: :!:

Peanutt

Of course there are other factors as well, my bike is no carbon lightweight, at 12.5kg it's like carrying an extra passenger, and I'm no Schleck either at 15 and a quarter stone. I'm guessing I'd reach my maximum velocity a darn site faster than some.

rolf_f

Russyh wrote:

I would do if i was, perhaps my OP was not worded quite right. But i actually think i am right!

http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/wind.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_w ... le_example

If those links support your argument then I'd say your OP was worded completely not right!

And yes - a 35mph apparent headwind is significant but not as significant as the 55 mph apparent headwind you'd have got without the tailwind.

You rarely actually feel a tailwind on a road bike (in as much as the tailwind seems to be pushing you along) as, on the flat you'll be able to keep up with or ride faster than most winds. Therefore most tailwinds are still felt as headwinds. On the other hand, climbing or on an MTB, you are much more likely to be going slowly enough to feel a real push at your back. But on a road descent - probably not.

buzzwold

Superwimp here. Fastest I've got to since getting the bike a month ago is 32.2. On a short country lane, straight down, terrific fun (using the precise meaning of terrific). Speaking of headwinds and tailwinds. Forget the slowing down/speeding up affects. It's the swirling gusts pushing one about that make me back off. Having had a couple of slo-mo offs and the pain and blood from those, I'll stick to being wimpish.