Average Speed

R0B75

Hi all

I got my first proper road bike this week and took it out for its first ride yesterday. I say proper as I previously had a Cyclocross bike which I had been using mainly on the road although it was bought for commuting. I also have a mountain bike.

Anyway, I try where possible to average a minimum of 15mph average on any ride. Generally manageable (just), but gets harder the longer the ride. I know in time I will be able to manage this on longer rides more easily, but does anyone have any tips for reaching or beating that target (preparation/recovery etc) and what kind of average should I hope to aim for in the future. What are your averages on general road rides, not TTs?

Grill

I personally don't believe that average speed is a good indicator of progress (unless comparing the same route). The problem is that there are too many variables such as how many climbs and how steep, weather (rain slows us all), was it with a group or solo, traffic, etc. On my ride yesterday I took a wrong turn and ended up doing 4 miles down a rocky unpaved road- you better believe that killed my average speed.

danowat

Depends on (and not limited too)

What the ride is
What the wind is
What the temperature is
What the terrain is like
What the traffic is like
What the weather is

AKA how long is a piece of string...........

slowbike

Quick reply - first off, everyone will tell you you can't go on average speed and everyone and every ride is different ...

However ... Like you I find I get a very stable average speed and earlier this year it was 15mph - hilly or flat and up to around 50 miles - same average speed ...

I've increased that speed a little (it's now up to ~16mph on solo rides - this is a comfortable avg too) by working on getting up "hills" a bit quicker and intervals (using Strava segments) ... and the other trick - use the big chain ring ...
I don't know why using the big chain ring has helped but I now only drop down for steeper gradients and I'm trying to minimise those ... I guess what it is doing is getting my legs used to putting a bit more power down anyway so the flats become a lot faster in general ..
As a result, my averages have opened up a bit - I can get up to 18 if I push it (on my commute) but I'll also relax a bit and come in at ~16 a lot of the time.
The current aim is to get to 18 being comfortable ...

bahzob

See also

http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40011&t=12871558

R0B75

Thanks for the responses, they make sense. I didn't really consider the variables. I will just keep trying to push myself to maintain/improve the average.

slowbike

R0B75 wrote:

I will just keep trying to push myself to maintain/improve the average.

Best way - no excuses!


Actually, it's probably not the best way .. but it feels good when you do better than you did before ...

Rushmore

Best way to increase average speed in my experiance is to work on your aero.. I barely ever come out of the drops unless I'm climbing..

I currently average 19 - 21 mph depending on condition on solo rides and anywhere between 23-26 when I'm riding with others ( aslong as they are fast and fit enough themselves ) although we get split into ability groups.

I've been riding a road bike now for about 3 and a half months but rode mountain bikes and raced cross country for about a year before that..

Bozman

Personally i'd say that the only way to improve an average speed is to get good on those there hills, it's the hills that'll shaft your average speed due to the drop in speed over a period of time.
Anyone can pedal at 20+ on the flat but as soon as you start adding in a few big hills that can drop like a stone.

nochekmate

Rushmore wrote:

Best way to increase average speed in my experiance is to work on your aero.. I barely ever come out of the drops unless I'm climbing..

I currently average 19 - 21 mph depending on condition on solo rides and anywhere between 23-26 when I'm riding with others ( aslong as they are fast and fit enough themselves ) although we get split into ability groups.

I've been riding a road bike now for about 3 and a half months but rode mountain bikes and raced cross country for about a year before that..

But that's not an answer to the OP's requested 'average speed for general road rides' by any means - post the garmin/strava link for all to see

StillGoing

There really needs to be a sticky for this and other repeated questions. One persons speed cannot be assessed against anyone else's unless they are doing the same course under the same conditions. You might cover 100 miles at 15mph average whereas I might do it at 10mph. But I might be doing a route with significantly more climbing, a good head wind, busy traffic and a good head cold. However, increasing average speed there is a good link on one of the threads asking a similar question that goes into the slow is the new fast theory.

It's also worth noting there are various techniques for climbing. Whilst some advocate grinding out a big gear sticking in the big ring, others will say use the small ring and maintain a high cadence. I went from the former to the latter and find it much easier and less tiring.

slowbike

philthy3 wrote:

It's also worth noting there are various techniques for climbing. Whilst some advocate grinding out a big gear sticking in the big ring, others will say use the small ring and maintain a high cadence. I went from the former to the latter and find it much easier and less tiring.

strange - cos I went from the latter to the former and found that I was faster up the hills if I can stay in the big ring ...
Prob because my legs don't like doing 80 with that load on them - something I'll have to train them to do ... bluddy legs!

DavidJB

Lower cadence at a harder gear is the best way....for me

nickellis

Plenty of miles with rolling road, and a few bigger hills. You'll know when its getting better, as you'll find your cruise speed increasing.

When I started I could barely hold 15mph on flat ground. 18 months later and I cruise along at 22-26mph on the same stretch of tarmac.

DavidJB

nickellis wrote:

Plenty of miles with rolling road, and a few bigger hills. You'll know when its getting better, as you'll find your cruise speed increasing.

When I started I could barely hold 15mph on flat ground. 18 months later and I cruise along at 22-26mph on the same stretch of tarmac.

Must be a pro 'cruising along' at 26MPH...

nochekmate

DavidJB wrote:

nickellis wrote:

Plenty of miles with rolling road, and a few bigger hills. You'll know when its getting better, as you'll find your cruise speed increasing.

When I started I could barely hold 15mph on flat ground. 18 months later and I cruise along at 22-26mph on the same stretch of tarmac.

Must be a pro 'cruising along' at 26MPH...

It's always the case when questions of averages are asked - people come on 'cruising at 22-26mph' or are riding at 25mph+ - hence my earlier request for the Garmin/Strava evidence. Many people can ride at such speeds on given terrain and for given periods of time but the number of people that can 'cruise' at such speeds is certainly only the minority.

I've been out on a couple of club rides this week, one on Sunday lasting just short of 60 miles where the average was 20.4mph and one of nearly 40 miles today where the average was 20.2mph - believe me, although I'm no Pro, these are a good tempo ride over a variety of roads/undulations and I had certainly knew that I had had a good workout after each of the rides.

'Cruising' at 22-26mph is all well and good but for how long? Wind direction? Elevation? Those sort of speeds maintained for an hour or more are more like race speeds and people asking questions of averages on beginners' forums should not be led to believe otherwise!

ianbar

i am very slow but recently i have started averaging 14+ on most rides under say 35miles depending on hills.i have done 15mph in an hour with a cat4 in the middle which i am chuffed with.still trying to lose more weight though.but there are a variety of challenges rather than just general speed, like how fast or even how many times you can get up certain climbs or even a local 1 mile flat section on strava etc.

nickellis

nochekmate wrote:

DavidJB wrote:

nickellis wrote:

Plenty of miles with rolling road, and a few bigger hills. You'll know when its getting better, as you'll find your cruise speed increasing.

When I started I could barely hold 15mph on flat ground. 18 months later and I cruise along at 22-26mph on the same stretch of tarmac.

Must be a pro 'cruising along' at 26MPH...

It's always the case when questions of averages are asked - people come on 'cruising at 22-26mph' or are riding at 25mph+ - hence my earlier request for the Garmin/Strava evidence. Many people can ride at such speeds on given terrain and for given periods of time but the number of people that can 'cruise' at such speeds is certainly only the minority.

I've been out on a couple of club rides this week, one on Sunday lasting just short of 60 miles where the average was 20.4mph and one of nearly 40 miles today where the average was 20.2mph - believe me, although I'm no Pro, these are a good tempo ride over a variety of roads/undulations and I had certainly knew that I had had a good workout after each of the rides.

'Cruising' at 22-26mph is all well and good but for how long? Wind direction? Elevation? Those sort of speeds maintained for an hour or more are more like race speeds and people asking questions of averages on beginners' forums should not be led to believe otherwise!

Apologies, probably not the best terminology used in my first post. Cruising along was not meant to make a statement about whether I am pro or not or how good I think I am (because I'm not), or how easy cycling is to me. I have to put in effort to sustain 22-26mph, and can only do this on flat roads with decent surfaces and not necessarily a tail wind. Throw in a hill and I'm puffing like a 20 a day smoker on the account of my 95kg weight and my asthma.

I was just trying to point out that with enough mileage and by challenging yourself that you can make big improvements in a relatively short period. Which make cycling even more enjoyable.

Mikey23

There are so many of these average speed threads and I don't think they are that helpful. Perhaps a sticky?
I am getting up to 14mph average now. Am pretty fit from road running, recent cyclist aged 60 and living in Cornwall with roughly 60ft of climb per mile. Not too hung up on it as long as I am enjoying

Corporate Camper

Like others have said; average speed is only useful when you are comparing the same route. My commute to work is just over 15 miles each way and the average speed I get from Endomondo can be really encouraging. When I started riding to work (I don't do it that often at the moment) I was over 20 stone and averaging 11.5-12 mph, now I'm a couple of stone lighter and have just started to achieve >15 mph average.

I've started only taking my gps every now and again as I found that a disappointing average speed would ruin my morning!

StillGoing

Here's the link to the "slow is fast" theory.

http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/articl ... sts-28838/

R0B75

philthy3 wrote:

Here's the link to the "slow is fast" theory.

http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/articl ... sts-28838/

Mind = blown.

Ringo 68

Do hills adversely affect your average speed?

I ask because for every up there is usually a down. If my average speed is usually around 16mph and I can go up hills at 12mph (4mph less than my average) but ride at 25mph on the downhill bits, won't a hilly ride improve my average rather than hurt it?

Sorry if this is a stupid question.

slowbike

Ringo 68 wrote:

Do hills adversely affect your average speed?

I ask because for every up there is usually a down. If my average speed is usually around 16mph and I can go up hills at 12mph (4mph less than my average) but ride at 25mph on the downhill bits, won't a hilly ride improve my average rather than hurt it?

Sorry if this is a stupid question.

Yer - but how many hills (gradient?!) can you go up at 12mph - how long can you sustain that effort for?
I can blast up a (short) hill at 18mph (I'm not the fastest by any stretch!) - but if I do that my speed drops for the next section until I recover - it's actually faster overall for me to pootle up that hill at 12mph.

If you consider a 1 mile hill (or any hill for that matter) that you'll go up at 12mph and return at 25mph you'll do the round trip at 16.2 mph - which according to your statement is just above your average speed - but close enough for it not to be statistically different. Actually, if you return at 24mph it'll give you an average of 16mph ... which is because the speed is twice the difference and 1/2 the time.


This is why average speed is meaningless when comparing disparate courses ...

I look at my average speed overall - averaging out times from my commutes as well as longer rides - I also have to consider that some rides will be with slower riders and others may be (if lucky) with faster riders where I can draft quite a bit... but too much of one will skew the results ...

RandG

philthy3 wrote:

Here's the link to the "slow is fast" theory.

http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/articl ... sts-28838/

I have been reading various stuff recently about HRM's etc, and have read a couple other subsequently since reading that link, and I am more convinced now than ever, that a HRM is the way forward. I have been told this numerous times by my very knowledgeable partner, but never really knew what I was doing with mine tbh, but from now on, this is the way forward. Although I do think 6 zones is a bit over the top.

I suggest others do the same.

simon_masterson

nochekmate wrote:

hence my earlier request for the Garmin/Strava evidence.

nochekmate wrote:

'Cruising' at 22-26mph is all well and good but for how long? Wind direction? Elevation? Those sort of speeds maintained for an hour or more are more like race speeds and people asking questions of averages on beginners' forums should not be led to believe otherwise!

I agree with the second quotation; really. I often cycle at the above speeds, but I also do so on very flat Hertfordshire roads for about 10 miles. Could I do that for 100 miles on my current fitness? Absolutely not.

However, please don't feel too singled-out, but the attitude exhibited in the top quotation is something I see too much, and I'm not keen on it...

What for those of us that don't care to race against invisible strangers/flaunt our online cycling penis/etc, and don't feel the need to prove ourselves to strangers on the internet? I know that Strava (and Mapmyride, etc) is used very positively by many riders, and that's excellent, but I don't feel the need to use it. Until I attach a number to my bike, my race is personal and against myself. For me a standard wired cycle computer is perfectly sufficient. I'm also sceptical (until proof to the contrary is proffered) of the accuracy of GPS. My wife's TomTom for example doesn't judge speed all that well at all; what hope for my phone?

But why is it that anybody's cycling isn't legitimate unless they can 'prove' it? It saddens me (to say the least!) that some people will immediately call foul as soon as anybody claims to have achieved something that they couldn't (which is pathetic), and it also saddens me that some people are so convinced that enough of the reports that they read are embellished or fabricated that no-one can claim to have achieved anything without proffering 'evidence'. Should I ever pass comment on some cycling that I have done and anybody question the accuracy of my numbers, the problem will be theirs and not mine.

Rant over.

StillGoing

Probably because plenty of riders make claims they can't substantiate and hence others become sceptical over claims. There's an article somewhere that most amateurs don't get much better than 16-18mph average with those few exceptionals filling the gap to pro levels.

simon_masterson

But why should they substantiate them? If you want to be Mark Cavendish on the internet, be my guest. It just makes you a juvenile idiot. I'm happy to let idiots be idiots.

The exchange that is A: 'I can ride at ... speed for ... time' B: 'No you can't!' makes all participants involved look like armchair cyclists; any onlooker would think that all are fat old men who are past it and bitter. To date I've seen no evidence of high level cyclists spending their time on cycling forums to denigrate people for their claimed average speeds and achievements on Strava. I wonder why that could be...

karlth

Ringo 68 wrote:

Do hills adversely affect your average speed?

I ask because for every up there is usually a down. If my average speed is usually around 16mph and I can go up hills at 12mph (4mph less than my average) but ride at 25mph on the downhill bits, won't a hilly ride improve my average rather than hurt it?

Sorry if this is a stupid question.

Imagine a hypothetical hill that is a half mile long. It reduces your speed from 20mph along the flat to 10mph. Plenty of hills like that. How fast would you have to go down the other side (it's a symmetrical hill) so that your average speed was still 20mph?

Answer - infinite.

Thing is, I don't think that a hill that reduces you from 16mph to 12mph (that'd be pretty gentle) would give you 25mph for the same effort (i.e. an extra 9mph) on the down side. It never does. And as illustrated above, to keep the average the same, you need a much greater speed-boosting effect of the downhill than speed reducing effect on the uphill. Take another example.

Suppose our hill's a bit gentler, and reduces us from 20mph on the flat to 15mph on the up half mile. What speed would we have to manage coming down to maintain a 20mph average?

Well, 20mph means a mile in three minutes. Going up the first half mile at 15mph will take two minutes. That leaves one minute to do the descending half mile - requiring an average speed of 30mph on that section. Since you're accelerating from 15mph at the start, you're probably going to be needing to be around 40 by the bottom to get that average speed on the descent. I don't think a hill that only dropped my speed by 5mph would give me a 10mph boost in descent. In fact I know it doesn't, because I know of a similar slope I do in both directions.

As the hills get gentler, the scenario you posit becomes a bit more plausible. Simple maths tells you that there comes a point (i.e. where the gradient halves your speed) where it becomes impossible, no matter how fast you go downhill. And there are plenty of hills in my neck of the woods that will take you even below that - 6-7mph is quite a regular ascent speed for me, and as I say, I can do 20mph av. on the flat.

So hilly rides are indeed slower.

springtide9

nochekmate wrote:

DavidJB wrote:

nickellis wrote:

Plenty of miles with rolling road, and a few bigger hills. You'll know when its getting better, as you'll find your cruise speed increasing.

When I started I could barely hold 15mph on flat ground. 18 months later and I cruise along at 22-26mph on the same stretch of tarmac.

Must be a pro 'cruising along' at 26MPH...

It's always the case when questions of averages are asked - people come on 'cruising at 22-26mph' or are riding at 25mph+ - hence my earlier request for the Garmin/Strava evidence. Many people can ride at such speeds on given terrain and for given periods of time but the number of people that can 'cruise' at such speeds is certainly only the minority.

I've been out on a couple of club rides this week, one on Sunday lasting just short of 60 miles where the average was 20.4mph and one of nearly 40 miles today where the average was 20.2mph - believe me, although I'm no Pro, these are a good tempo ride over a variety of roads/undulations and I had certainly knew that I had had a good workout after each of the rides.

'Cruising' at 22-26mph is all well and good but for how long? Wind direction? Elevation? Those sort of speeds maintained for an hour or more are more like race speeds and people asking questions of averages on beginners' forums should not be led to believe otherwise!

Not wanting to jump back either side, but if you want to average 20mph over the entire ride you do need to have stints on the flat at around the 24mph mark. Now whether this is considered 'cruising' is another matter.

And a 20mph solo 'Strava Average' (as there are multiple ways of defining 'average speed') is achievable... maybe not for total beginners, but definitely if you have been riding fairly regularly for maybe 2-3 years (and building on your fitness during that time). The terrain also doesn't need to be that flat.. what seems more important is that the traffic is light and the roads are good enough to keep a decent pace (as in you don't have to brake for corners all of the time)

There is also the definition of a "beginner" that the title is probably held by riders longer than they should. As in, someone starts off as a beginner... rides for a year, another year etc. For me, there were always faster riders, so the term beginner stays with me. It's only when someone I respected comments on my ability did it suddenly click that I am no longer a beginner. We actually I am a beginner... as I attempted a few Cat 4 races this year, and as we know, Cat 4 is the beginners category.

slowbike

karlth wrote:

Imagine a hypothetical hill that is a half mile long. It reduces your speed from 20mph along the flat to 10mph. Plenty of hills like that. How fast would you have to go down the other side (it's a symmetrical hill) so that your average speed was still 20mph?

Answer - infinite.

Er - no ... the answer is 40mph ... ignoring the fact that you don't go from 10mph to 40mph in an instant .. but then the hill is hypothetical anyway ..