Am I working out these inclines properly?

Manc33

Using Google Earth, I have the elevation (above sea level) set on meters, then I draw a line up a hill with the ruler, in meters.

I measured Snake Pass (short side, from Glossop) and its an elevation of +332M from that little pub on the left to the "pond" at the top, distance is 5,459M.

So I did 332M ÷ 5459M = 6.1% incline?

Some hills near me I thought were really steep are about 10% lol.

I thought steep hills were about 20% :roll:

I know TdF had a 22% incline on a hill... how strong are their legs OMG!!!

I am so annoyed the hill I was going up I thought was 22% is actually 10.5% :evil:

Unless I am working it out wrong and you double it.

Will TdF go up Snake Pass in 2014? Imagine it.

How ignorant am I lol.

http://blog.veloviewer.com/holme-moss-c ... ge-2-2014/

*rubs hands*



They are going up the "easy" side.

fat_cat

Yep that's how to work it out.

Don't forgot though that it gives you an average gradient, so there will be steeper bits to the climb too. 10 percent average is pretty steep, most of the tour climbs average between 7 and 8 percent.

marcusjb

As above.

If you see a 20% sign on a hill, that will indicate a maximum gradient. The average can be considerably less. Very few climbs (of any length) have a very high average gradient - Hardknott is around 15% average.

Continental climbs are generally much shallower, and will not have even the high maximum gradients (other than around a hairpin) of UK rides. Col du Tourmalet (for example as it is the most used climb in the TdF) has an average gradient of 7.4% and a maximum gradient of only 10%; but it is nearly 20km in distance, so a very different challenge to a UK climb.

The route for the UK stages of the tour next year do not feature Snake Pass I am sorry to tell you. They come up over Holme moss and then over wood head to Sheffield.

StorckSpeed

The Maths is right, but it's too simplistic.
One of the hardest climbs I've ever done is a local coast road. It has an average gradient of just 4%, but the first 500m of the climb is 20%, the last 2Km is just 2-3%. The first 500m take their toll and by the end your just knackered.
I've done Muuuch longer climbs than this that don't seem as tiring as this one.
Get a GPS bike computer, this will show you the exact gradient of any climb. I sometimes become totally transfixed by this and it can distract you from the BURN. Of course you've still got to be focused enough not to wander all over the road.

rolf_f

StorckSpeed wrote:

Get a GPS bike computer, this will show you the exact gradient of any climb.

No it won't. The data isn't that accurate. There are horizontal distance errors and vertical distance errors - and the combination of the two which compunds the errors. It's often not bad but far from exact.

marcusjb

Rolf F wrote:

StorckSpeed wrote:

Get a GPS bike computer, this will show you the exact gradient of any climb.

No it won't. The data isn't that accurate. There are horizontal distance errors and vertical distance errors - and the combination of the two which compunds the errors. It's often not bad but far from exact.

Totally. It's also based on ground you've already covered - so it's really telling you what the gradient was (rather than is).

I'm never sure why you'd need to know the gradient whilst actually climbing a hill - you can see whether it's steep or not!

I once spent part of a very long ride with someone who insisted on reading out the gradients as we were going up hills - with updates every 15 seconds or so. I really didn't need a computer to tell me it was 17% (or whatever) - my legs could tell me how steep or shallow it was at any particular moment.

navrig

This is a real 10% climb with very little variation.

http://www.climbbybike.com/climb.asp?qryMountainID=1945




Nearly killed me.

Manc33

A hill near me is 600M from bottom to top and it elevates 62.5 meters. That makes it roughly a 1 in 10, or 10% average. Well, I can't even get up that in one go in my lowest gear without stopping part way. I am on 700c wheels @ 100 PSI, with a 30T chainring and 32T cassette sprocket, giving me a 1:0.94 gear ratio. I am about 175lbs and the bike is about 25lbs.

So if I physically can't do that without stopping and it is 600M @ 10% just how unfit must I be?

Could nearly everyone here that has cycled a few years just stand up all the way up the 600M on a hill like that in some crazy gear like 39F/18R?

Can anyone actually ride up that standing up in one go and not even break a sweat or be out of breath?

I am 37 and my max heart rate is supposed to be 185... I got it to 189 on that hill. If you heard me breathing up there you'd think I was having a heart attack. I normally average about 12.5 on the flat, its 10.5 going up and down this hill.

I have rode that every night the last three nights and I am going to do it again tonight, one day I will not stop and get up it, then in the next gear and so on...

Doing this seems to beat 20 mile long rides which I estimate is about as taxing as this 600M blast, or would be if I had the physical energy to even get up it in the lowest gear. Standing up isn't an option, I just have to quit sooner then.

I have had kids riding past me on BMX's... up hills. :roll:

When I first got a bike (again, again) around 2010, I did 3 miles down the canal, averaged 8.3 MPH and was unable to do anything for 3 days, so I must be getting fitter now if I am attacking that hill every day.

Mikey23

Lots steeper than 10% round here in cornwall! I'm 62 and I can now do that in 34/28 without too many probs although it has taken time to build up competence and confidence. Sounds like you are doing ok and making good progress... Hills are always painful, you just get to do them quicker

Guanajuato

Manc33 wrote:

I have rode that every night the last three nights and I am going to do it again tonight, one day I will not stop and get up it, then in the next gear and so on...

When I first got a bike (again, again) around 2010, I did 3 miles down the canal, averaged 8.3 MPH and was unable to do anything for 3 days, so I must be getting fitter now if I am attacking that hill every day.

That's the way to do it!
One suggestion though: If you can, do a few miles to warm up a bit before tackling the hill. 10-20 minutes of more gentle riding. I've got a few favourite routes, but the ones that start with a hill straight off are always hard work. A couple of hills defeated me in the past. But its a great feeling when you DO finally beat the buggers! Keep at it, it won't get easier, but you'll get faster.

SFT

Oh, Navrig, I really enjoyed Colle San Carlo - and I was properly amused by the correct to 2 decimal places gradient markers. The only bit I didn't like was the 16% but at the bottom as some weird Italian boy tried to clip me as he overtook then swung into his garage.

navrig

SFT wrote:

Oh, Navrig, I really enjoyed Colle San Carlo - and I was properly amused by the correct to 2 decimal places gradient markers. The only bit I didn't like was the 16% but at the bottom as some weird Italian boy tried to clip me as he overtook then swung into his garage.

Carlos owes me a set of cleats. I have an appointment with him again next September :evil:

pinno

Manc33 wrote:

I am about 175lbs and the bike is about 25lbs.

Can anyone actually ride up that standing up in one go and not even break a sweat or be out of breath?
I normally average about 12.5 on the flat, its 10.5 going up and down this hill.

I have rode that every night the last three nights and I am going to do it again tonight, one day I will not stop and get up it, then in the next gear and so on...

When I first got a bike (again, again) around 2010, I did 3 miles down the canal, averaged 8.3 MPH and was unable to do anything for 3 days, so I must be getting fitter now if I am attacking that hill every day.

Hope for me then. My average is 15.8mph and I weigh 137lbs.

I don't think you are doing yourself any favours by hitting the hill everyday. As a bloke who hates the flat, I was gunked to learn that you don't build any condition on the hills. I was advised to ride 3 days on the flat to 1 day in the hills which transformed my already reasonably good hill climbing. You may build strength and stamina uphill but you won't maintain 'Souplesse' (suppleness) as the French/Belgians call it. I would concentrate on pedaling 'Piano Piano' (softly, softly) at a cadence of 90rpm or thereabouts on the flat - forget road speed. Do this for a few rides and then attempt your nemesis, you will find a huge improvement.
I get around this problem by riding on the rollers as a substitute for (boring) flat days, keeping the suppleness of the muscle, reducing lactic acid build up and trying all the while to maintain a high cadence. I am trying to increase my average road cadence (87) to meet the same average cadence on the rollers (94). You don't need rollers BTW, just flat roads or a flat loop.
Keep at it. Continuity is so important. You need a foundation of 3 years continuous cycling and 5 years to acheive really good stamina: No more than 2 weeks maximum off the bike at any point (which is the tricky bit).

I am 6 months in to a 4 year plan to do the Marmotte with 2 artificial hips to factor in. As a bloke who was in and out of hospital for 11 years, progress is incremental and it is only when you look back over time, you see how far you have come.
Mind you, I crashed into the BR forum and never recovered.

Crankbrother

If you're looking to improve your performance on the climbs, pick a reasonable stretch of road (2km+) with a less severe incline (3-5%) and ride it in a harder gear than you normally would so your cadence/effort feels similar to what you think you could hold over a steeper climb ... simple but effective as your body/legs remember the effort ...