Forum home Road cycling forum Road general

Increasing distance

feistyfeisty Posts: 154
edited January 2017 in Road general
My regular schedule is 2 days commuting by bike a week (a total of 60k over the 4 journeys) plus a 65km ride at the weekend, albeit the latter includes around 1000m of climbing and a few 20% gradients. In the summer my weekend ride is sometimes 90km to 110km (roughly 1300m of climbing) and then I might do the occasional sportive too in the region of 100km to 120km.

I realise that is pretty low mileage by many people's standards.

I am planning on cycling from London to Leicester to see my in laws (180km and around 1300m climbing on the route I have found). I think I need to work up slowly (increase my 65km rides to 90km, 110km, 120km 140km etc)

However, I was wondering if I could make the jump quicker on the basis that the total climbing over 180km is no different to my 100km rides. i.e. does the climbing I do on weekend rides, mean I could jump from say a 100km hilly weekend ride straight to a 180km ride that was flatter on average (provided I took it slower)?

Guessing not?
«1345

Posts

  • webboowebboo Posts: 3,284
    Wait for a nice strong southerly.
  • If you can do 100km with the same amount of climbing I'd wager you could do the 180km now if you knocked a couple of mph off your average. You'd be tired at the end, but then you would be.
  • stevie63stevie63 Posts: 481
    feisty wrote:

    However, I was wondering if I could make the jump quicker on the basis that the total climbing over 180km is no different to my 100km rides. i.e. does the climbing I do on weekend rides, mean I could jump from say a 100km hilly weekend ride straight to a 180km ride that was flatter on average (provided I took it slower)?

    Guessing not?
    If you can ride 100km then you can ride 180 at a slower pace. You just need to be prepared for it to take longer than you anticipate.
  • mrb123mrb123 Posts: 2,968
    If you can build up to doing 180km over the course of a week's worth of rides then you should be able to do it all in one go.

    Just take it steady, eat plenty and have a few short stops. You might suffer a bit but you'll get there in the end if you're determined enough.
  • You could probably do it now if you were sensible, took breaks and ate and drank a lot. The main thing is pacing to make sure you don't blow up with 40km to go.

    Are your weekend rides non-stop? Easy way to increase work-load is remove any breaks and double up some of the climbs (up, descend, up and over).
  • LukeTCLukeTC Posts: 211
    Like others have said, steady riding is key. Start at a pace that you find relatively easy, you'll feel slow but be glad for it later, it's about using your energy efficiently, if you start off too fast you'll likely try to maintain it and eventually it'll sap you.

    A ride of that length is as much a mind game as it is physical in my opinion, sometimes your mind can convince you that you're stuffed when you're not. I found on my rides of similar lengths that planning and knowing your route is key, I tend to make sure I have food or gels on me but it's always good to know where the shops are, or a friendly pub so you can refill your water (I've found that some more rural petrol stations are usually happy to do this too).
  • fenixfenix Posts: 5,437
    I went from a longest ride of 80m to 140m as a kid.

    As they say - pace it and keep eating and drinking. Its not that hard.
  • Increase power not distance.
  • Garry HGarry H Posts: 6,639
    Increase power not distance.

    Why?
  • Increase power not distance.

    How's that going to help in getting to Leicester?
  • cougiecougie Posts: 22,512
    Pretty sure Hoy has powerrrrrrr enough for us all. But he's not the best over long distance.
  • keef66keef66 Posts: 13,123
    Increase power not distance.

    Cracking advice for a first post!
  • Garry H wrote:
    Increase power not distance.

    Why?
    Because power is a true measure of work. If you can only do 200w for an hour, you will struggle with long distance if you want to get to your destination in good time especially considering the annoyingly lumpy terrain of England
  • LukeTCLukeTC Posts: 211
    Garry H wrote:
    Increase power not distance.

    Why?
    Because power is a true measure of work. If you can only do 200w for an hour, you will struggle with long distance if you want to get to your destination in good time especially considering the annoyingly lumpy terrain of England
    What if they don't own a powermeter? Should they not bother at all? I don't own a powermeter but I somehow managed to drag myself through multiple 160km+ rides alright :? perhaps I'm just a freak of nature, or perhaps you're placing too much emphasis on power. I wonder how anyone managed to train for long rides before they were able to measure power :roll:

    If it's their first ride of that length I suspect that the time it takes them bears no significance, merely the act of doing it would be enough.
  • fat daddyfat daddy Posts: 2,605
    LukeTC wrote:
    I don't own a powermeter but I somehow managed to drag myself through multiple 160km+ rides .

    errr .... its your legs that produce the power .. not the power meter. You can still produce 200w even if you don't have a power meter :P :wink:

    but being less pedantic ... I agree .... power is not the be all and end all of long distance .... how hard your censored and knees are ! .. A Bum meter would be more beneficial
  • Technically you don't need to measure power to increase it. Suggesting increasing power on its own is silly, it's power-to-weight that matters to most cyclists unless they are track sprinters (then it's a combination with aerodynamics). You can increase power by just putting weight on, but it's not going to help much when the distance goes up.

    It's also a silly suggestion even if you are talking about power-to-weight, because for someone doing relatively low milage and likely fairly untrained any increase in work load is likely to increase power-to-weight, including upping milage.
  • BrakelessBrakeless Posts: 865
    Garry H wrote:
    Increase power not distance.

    Why?
    Because power is a true measure of work. If you can only do 200w for an hour, you will struggle with long distance if you want to get to your destination in good time especially considering the annoyingly lumpy terrain of England


    Yeah right. I've cycled dozens and dozens of 200k, 300k Audaxes many 600s plus a few of a 1000+

    I couldn't begin to tell you anything about my power output, I wouldn't know if it was 200w or 20,000,000 watts!

    I could tell you quite a lot about distance cycling though

    I can also tell you that I know what I can ride because I've ridden lots and built my distances up to enable me to do big back to back days.

    You don't 'need' to know anything about power to ride distances you just need to go out and ride lots.
  • imposter2.0imposter2.0 Posts: 11,202
    Garry H wrote:
    Increase power not distance.

    Why?
    Because power is a true measure of work. If you can only do 200w for an hour, you will struggle with long distance if you want to get to your destination in good time especially considering the annoyingly lumpy terrain of England

    If you can only do 200w for an hour, then being able to do 250w for an hour is still not going to get him much closer to Leics, as has already been pointed out. Holding his power output for longer is possibly what you meant to say. But that is obviously not 'increasing' power, it is increasing his tolerance of that power for longer.
  • CiBCiB Posts: 6,098
    Why this obsession with km? Last time I looked all the road signs in the UK were in miles, and Leicester is about 110 miles from London according to my car's speedo. :)

    Anyway. It's a ride of about 110 miles, with some climbing. These subjects often come up on here and the answer is pace yourself, keep well fed and hydrated, and pace yourself. And whilst you're at it pace yourself. It'll take about 8 hours + a few stops, and if you can land on a route that has most of the climbs up front and ends with a lot of flat or downhill so much the better, but you'll be lucky as Leicestershire has quite a few hills esp coming in from the south.

    You'll be knackered by the end, but f you can raise your weekend rides to about 65-70 miles the extra bit to do this will be well within reach. The last 30 is mostly in your head, provided you've eaten well and have drunk enough fluids - milk is v good towards the end when you're flagging and have had enough of energy gels & energy drinks. Just get used to rides of 65-70 miles in the months running up to it.
  • CiB wrote:
    Why this obsession with km? Last time I looked all the road signs in the UK were in miles, and Leicester is about 110 miles from London according to my car's speedo. :)

    The fact you think a speedometer can measure distance probably invalidates your opinion on which units should be used. :P
  • :lol::lol: Very very good point
    Advocate of disc brakes.
  • CiBCiB Posts: 6,098
    CiB wrote:
    Why this obsession with km? Last time I looked all the road signs in the UK were in miles, and Leicester is about 110 miles from London according to my car's speedo. :)

    The fact you think a speedometer can measure distance probably invalidates your opinion on which units should be used. :P
    Mine has a row of digits in it which tells me how far I've gone, so I'm quite relaxed about using the speedo to get an indication of distance.

    Do you price stuff in Euros in the UK?
  • That's the odometer pal.
    Advocate of disc brakes.
  • Oh and whilst on the subject, do not go to google with the intent of providing images for a speedo or you'll get pictures of a fat chinaman in green trunks!
    Advocate of disc brakes.
  • CiBCiB Posts: 6,098
    That's the odometer pal.
    Yes I know, but in a passing comment prior to answering the main question, I used the common casual term of reference. If you're a bit of a [email protected] that's your problem mate.

    See You Next Tuesday.
  • LukeTCLukeTC Posts: 211
    CiB wrote:
    That's the odometer pal.
    Yes I know, but in a passing comment prior to answering the main question, I used the common casual term of reference. If you're a bit of a [email protected] that's your problem mate.

    See You Next Tuesday.
    tenor.gif
  • CiB wrote:
    CiB wrote:
    Why this obsession with km? Last time I looked all the road signs in the UK were in miles, and Leicester is about 110 miles from London according to my car's speedo. :)

    The fact you think a speedometer can measure distance probably invalidates your opinion on which units should be used. :P
    Mine has a row of digits in it which tells me how far I've gone, so I'm quite relaxed about using the speedo to get an indication of distance.

    Do you price stuff in Euros in the UK?

    As others have pointed out, that's not the speedometer.

    I'll leave the strawman to blow in the wind.
  • CiB wrote:
    Why this obsession with km?

    This, is a cycling website.

    THAT is why.
  • CiBCiB Posts: 6,098
    CiB wrote:
    Why this obsession with km?

    This, is a cycling website.

    THAT is why.
    :) CAPITALS too. Awesome. Like I said, do you price in Euros here as well?
  • CiBCiB Posts: 6,098
    As others have pointed out, that's not the speedometer.

    I'll leave the strawman to blow in the wind.
    Sigh. #2
    Yes I know, but in a passing comment prior to answering the main question, I used the common casual term of reference.

    Is it that difficult for you? You know, the word that people routinely use when the exact terminology really doesn't matter? It looks like it is. Never mind.

    Bless.
Sign In or Register to comment.