Max speed!

Melter

Donkeywings wrote:

At the risk of being flamed because of being new to the forum...but... are people seriously claiming to have ridden an actual 60+mph on their road bike??? Or are you just all taking the wee-wee out of the OP?
I'm not saying I don't believe you (which, by the way I don't) but seriously... why not just send your broken Aldi bike-computer back for a refund? Or take the second magnet off your spokes so that one rotation only counts once. Or calibrate your wheel circumference to something bigger than a chopper front wheel. Or just learn the difference between the KPH and MPH readout?

You are right to feel like this, personally I scare the crap out of myself at about 35 mph downhill, all that wind noise and the thought that my front wheel is about collapse. However, proof is indeed not just in the above linked vid but in every tour on TV when they're in the mountains. A pro time trialist reaches my down hill flat out speeds on the flat . There are 2 worlds, them and us.

Donkeywings

Well, my post was meant to be a bit facetious anyway, but I wasn't disputing that Elite riders riding down a mountain that had been cleared for a race couldn't do it. Was kinda thinking about the people posting on this forum ... UK based.... not many mountains around ... not very good roads ... other traffic on the roads... etc.

I'd be genuinely interested to see some strava segments of one of these huge, clear, UK downhills with an amateur 60+mph ride plotted on it. And with cadence included, so it isn't another of the "obviously did it in a car/on a motorbike" ones.

Bustacapp

Donkeywings wrote:

Well, my post was meant to be a bit facetious anyway, but I wasn't disputing that Elite riders riding down a mountain that had been cleared for a race couldn't do it. Was kinda thinking about the people posting on this forum ... UK based.... not many mountains around ... not very good roads ... other traffic on the roads... etc.

I'd be genuinely interested to see some strava segments of one of these huge, clear, UK downhills with an amateur 60+mph ride plotted on it. And with cadence included, so it isn't another of the "obviously did it in a car/on a motorbike" ones.

A mate I follow rides with a lad who is just an amateur like him (and me). I noticed he hit 56mph down Shalew Brow the other day...
http://app.strava.com/rides/20964226

Gabbo

A little over 30mph. Not sure if there is something wrong with the bike or the rider but I wasn't a bad 100/200m track sprinter so not sure why I'm unable to transfer that power into cycling. Maybe I've lost power, and of course fitness.

marz

Donkeywings wrote:

I'd be genuinely interested to see some strava segments of one of these huge, clear, UK downhills with an amateur 60+mph ride plotted on it. And with cadence included, so it isn't another of the "obviously did it in a car/on a motorbike" ones.

Cadence won't help as folks may be tucked and just letting gravity do the work for them.

marz

Donkeywings wrote:

I'd be genuinely interested to see some strava segments of one of these huge, clear, UK downhills with an amateur 60+mph ride plotted on it. And with cadence included, so it isn't another of the "obviously did it in a car/on a motorbike" ones.

Cadence won't help as folks may be tucked and just letting gravity do the work for them.

Donkeywings

marz wrote:

Cadence won't help as folks may be tucked and just letting gravity do the work for them.

eh? Cadence is the pedal rotation. Freewheeling down a hill, or driving your car long with the cycle computer inside it will return a zero cadence = "I wasn't pedaling at all" = in the case of someone actually cycling "I was descending just due to gravity"

Aerodynamic resistance increases *exponentially* with speed. Which means 30-40mph is much easier to achieve than 40-50mph, which in itself is much easier than 50-60mph. No-one in the UK is going to be free-wheeling down a hill at 60mph, because the hills are simply not that steep or long enough to reach that speed, let alone taking into account other traffic or shitty conditions.

As a beginner, who has according to Cateye computer AND Garmin 800 Satellite tracking, managed around 40mph, it would be ridiculous for me to claim that other experienced riders couldn't do *much* better. 50mph must be easily in reach of a decent rider. But I'm calling shenanigans on anyone claiming 60mph+ as a non-race conditions amateur rider.

marz

Donkeywings wrote:

marz wrote:

Cadence won't help as folks may be tucked and just letting gravity do the work for them.

eh? Cadence is the pedal rotation. Freewheeling down a hill, or driving your car long with the cycle computer inside it will return a zero cadence = "I wasn't pedaling at all" = in the case of someone actually cycling "I was descending just due to gravity"

Aerodynamic resistance increases *exponentially* with speed. Which means 30-40mph is much easier to achieve than 40-50mph, which in itself is much easier than 50-60mph. No-one in the UK is going to be free-wheeling down a hill at 60mph, because the hills are simply not that steep or long enough to reach that speed, let alone taking into account other traffic or sh!tty conditions.

As a beginner, who has according to Cateye computer AND Garmin 800 Satellite tracking, managed around 40mph, it would be ridiculous for me to claim that other experienced riders couldn't do *much* better. 50mph must be easily in reach of a decent rider. But I'm calling shenanigans on anyone claiming 60mph+ as a non-race conditions amateur rider.

I know what cadence is and I also know most folks hitting +50 or even 60 are not doing so because they're pedaling like crazy. They're doing so because they're coasting in a tucked position.

Plus there are plenty of hills in the UK to get up to 50mph on and few to edge past 60mph, if you've the nerve, the bike and the weather and traffic conditions.

dw300

Donkeywings wrote:

At the risk of being flamed because of being new to the forum...but... are people seriously claiming to have ridden an actual 60+mph on their road bike??? Or are you just all taking the wee-wee out of the OP?
I'm not saying I don't believe you (which, by the way I don't) but seriously... why not just send your broken Aldi bike-computer back for a refund? Or take the second magnet off your spokes so that one rotation only counts once. Or calibrate your wheel circumference to something bigger than a chopper front wheel. Or just learn the difference between the KPH and MPH readout?

Best time on the steepest hill near me (not by me though!) .. 62.6mph on a stretch of 14-15%. Garmin Edge 200.

http://app.strava.com/rides/18726468#339376076

fsd61b

Where on the handlebars do you hold on to when going (too ) fast? I've started going to a hill where I can achieve 41.6 mph but when on the drops it seems to be a bit out of control, as opposed to on the hoods. I noticed the TDF riders are off the front of the seat in a tuck which seems very unstable.I keep wanting to hang off the back as much as possible.

Bustacapp

fsd61b wrote:

Where on the handlebars do you hold on to when going (too ) fast? I've started going to a hill where I can achieve 41.6 mph but when on the drops it seems to be a bit out of control, as opposed to on the hoods. I noticed the TDF riders are off the front of the seat in a tuck which seems very unstable.I keep wanting to hang off the back as much as possible.

Strangely I feel more in control when on the drops doing high speed. I got 40mph today and it felt like any crosswinds were less obvious in the drop position.

SPOC

I'm rubbish going downhill, 44mph is my quickest and that felt just too fast for my confidence of going down the slopes.

These 50-60mph speeds talked about, whether that be on the hoods, in the drops, wouldn't matter to me, I'd be soiling myself rotten.

Joeblack

theescapedslave wrote:

60mph...It is possible - not by me though...my balls would be far too small for this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kZSzB4kEE8

That is nuts, one guy takes one hand of the handlebars to touch the other guys butt!!!!! That's ballsy, a bit homo, but ballsy!!!!!

oldhairylegs

There is a road near Buxton that 60mph can be reached on, but it takes some very large cahunas indeed as its bumpy and narrow and the bend at the bottom is a sharp one, so your brakes have to be in full working order!

It runs from the A5004 into the Goyt Valley:

http://app.strava.com/segments/1317111

Managed 55mph down there last year - cahunas not of sufficient size for 60mph, but the Strava segment record holder clearly owns a very large set.... :shock:

The climb out the other side is an absolute bastard!

esmr

My Garmin has me doing 89.9mph down the col de madeleine, on the tarmac, not plummiting over the edge I hasten to add. I knew i was going fast but that seems a tad optimistic!!!

Bustacapp

oldhairylegs wrote:

There is a road near Buxton that 60mph can be reached on, but it takes some very large cahunas indeed as its bumpy and narrow and the bend at the bottom is a sharp one, so your brakes have to be in full working order!

It runs from the A5004 into the Goyt Valley:

http://app.strava.com/segments/1317111

Managed 55mph down there last year - cahunas not of sufficient size for 60mph, but the Strava segment record holder clearly owns a very large set.... :shock:

The climb out the other side is an absolute bastard!

How can you see max speeds on segments? It usually only shows average speed.

theescapedslave

I am hazarding a guess here but as garmins are a somewhat inaccurate gps (at least compared to high end gps).

The max speed I assume would be calculated by a time/distance equation between two coordinates as logged by the garmin...if one is out one way and one is the other way...then this could give a falsely high max speed.

The same apllies for min speed...average would be v. good though due to it being precisely that - an average.

I think this would also explain why you see gps routes get different gradients through the same section...but an overall consistent gradient.

oldhairylegs

Bustacapp wrote:

How can you see max speeds on segments? It usually only shows average speed.

If you click on the date of the ride in the Strava link, it takes you to the segment details, then click on the performance tab and it shows the speed over that segment.

The record holder for that segment recorded 98.6km/h on the 12th August :shock:

mallorcajeff

my garmin has a highest spped recorded of 511mph but then I turned it on, on the plane flying back to the uk, it was great fun to zoom into street level and see the speed roads were passing at 500mph i had it on for half hour cant remember the calories it thought i was burning but it was a lot!

dw300

theescapedslave wrote:

I am hazarding a guess here but as garmins are a somewhat inaccurate gps (at least compared to high end gps).

The max speed I assume would be calculated by a time/distance equation between two coordinates as logged by the garmin...if one is out one way and one is the other way...then this could give a falsely high max speed.

The same apllies for min speed...average would be v. good though due to it being precisely that - an average.

I think this would also explain why you see gps routes get different gradients through the same section...but an overall consistent gradient.

Not all Garmins are relying on GPS to calculate speed. If you have a speed sensor, and set your unit to auto it will calculate the circumference of your wheel.

Also, I have looked at rides i've done and the GPS is accurate enough to show what side of the road i was riding on, and when zig-zagging a 20% section showed me going from verge to verge. GPS is plenty accurate unless you're near buildings or under heavy tree cover.

I geocache sometimes, and you can get within a foot or two of a location via GPS.

TheCornishMong

Fastest I've managed was just a shade under 50, but i ran out of hill at that point. this practice was soon put to a stop when, on the same hill, a caravan decided to pull out on me. Locking up the rear and going sideways at 45 was an 'entertaining' expirience to say the least...

mark s

i did 60.9 mph on the leek to buxton road today.had to dab the brakes slightly as a car 100 yds in front looked like he might turn to the roaches.i reckon i could do 63 0r 64 on a clear run.

mark s

Donkeywings wrote:

marz wrote:

Cadence won't help as folks may be tucked and just letting gravity do the work for them.

eh? Cadence is the pedal rotation. Freewheeling down a hill, or driving your car long with the cycle computer inside it will return a zero cadence = "I wasn't pedaling at all" = in the case of someone actually cycling "I was descending just due to gravity"

Aerodynamic resistance increases *exponentially* with speed. Which means 30-40mph is much easier to achieve than 40-50mph, which in itself is much easier than 50-60mph. No-one in the UK is going to be free-wheeling down a hill at 60mph, because the hills are simply not that steep or long enough to reach that speed, let alone taking into account other traffic or sh!tty conditions.

As a beginner, who has according to Cateye computer AND Garmin 800 Satellite tracking, managed around 40mph, it would be ridiculous for me to claim that other experienced riders couldn't do *much* better. 50mph must be easily in reach of a decent rider. But I'm calling shenanigans on anyone claiming 60mph+ as a non-race conditions amateur rider.

i did it down cat tor in staffordshire today,im sure alot on here will back me up that 60 is more than possible down here,im 95kg which must help.roads were dry and not too much cross wind

rolf_f

theescapedslave wrote:

I am hazarding a guess here but as garmins are a somewhat inaccurate gps (at least compared to high end gps).

The max speed I assume would be calculated by a time/distance equation between two coordinates as logged by the garmin...if one is out one way and one is the other way...then this could give a falsely high max speed.

The same apllies for min speed...average would be v. good though due to it being precisely that - an average.

Probably not much - it's generally fairly obvious if a GPS is misreading but I don't think I've ever had a false high speed off my Bryton (at least not that I've noticed whilst on the bike). Actually, you are more likely to get a slight under-reading to a maximum and a slight over-reading to a minimum.

theescapedslave wrote:

I think this would also explain why you see gps routes get different gradients through the same section...but an overall consistent gradient.

Elevation is calculated on barometric pressure so the unit mislocating itself won't lead in itself to an error in elevation.