Forum home Road cycling forum Road general

What's a good avg speed for a first time ride?

BlondBlond Posts: 36
edited April 2017 in Road general
Hi guys

So I've bought a road bike but I've been going gym and so I'm quite fit (also have a HR monitor so know my limits).

Here's the elevation: http://m.imgur.com/3vgPM9K. How hilly is it?

I'm found a 13 mi route and plan on riding it. What's a respectable pace for such distance? Could I do it at 21-25 mph? Is that respectable?

Thanks

Posts

  • bendertherobotbendertherobot Posts: 11,630
    Do it, and report back. That's the best measure as to what's doable
    My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
    https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
    Facebook? No. Just say no.
  • BlondBlond Posts: 36
    Do it, and report back. That's the best measure as to what's doable
    Ok thanks could you comment on the elevation?
  • bendertherobotbendertherobot Posts: 11,630
    Not really, no.
    My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
    https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
    Facebook? No. Just say no.
  • First.AspectFirst.Aspect Posts: 3,388
    Not really, no.
    Oh come on. Its quite phallic for starters.
  • meanredspidermeanredspider Posts: 12,550
    The elevation looks fine - your suggested speed looks quite "ambitious" for a new rider but, as BTR says, just ride it and find out. Unless it's a commute and you need an estimate of time, just head out there and find out.
    ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH
  • DebeliDebeli Posts: 637
    For many of us oldies who have done many sports over the decades, this seems an unusual question.

    For a first ride, there is really no such thing as a good speed or a good time.

    The trick is to sort of get into the feel of the machine and the topography and the road surface and then learn about how hard you can push yourself, how soon and where and when to back off a little.

    Even when you are super-diddly fit, time can be a big, fat liar because of traffic, wind speed, a wet surface and many other variables.

    Whatever time you do on your first run (whatever time) is a good time for you. After that, just try to improve on it in similar conditions.
  • imposter2.0imposter2.0 Posts: 10,835
    This is another of Boswell & Percy's accounts I think.
  • cooldadcooldad Posts: 32,904
    I don't do smileys.

    There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda

    London Calling on Facebook

    Parktools
  • chris_basschris_bass Posts: 4,913
    Imposter wrote:
    This is another of Boswell & Percy's accounts I think.

    yeah, that's what i was going to say
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • MiddleRingerMiddleRinger Posts: 678
    edited April 2017
    Ride it. If you don't average 25mph, buy a faster bike.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 11,038
    Just in case someone reads this who is genuinely curious then...According to Strava the worldwide average speed of all rides is 15mph. But that only includes Strava users. Probably a lot lower in reality.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • imafatmanimafatman Posts: 351
    The author of this post is a very sad individual.
  • Garry HGarry H Posts: 6,614
    Seven
  • DavidJBDavidJB Posts: 2,019
    25MPH + or you're a total failure.
  • Thick MikeThick Mike Posts: 357
    (a/10)+(2b/768)-((c*d)/60)

    a=FTP
    b=cost of bike in GBP
    c=average gradient of route
    d=mass of bike in kg
  • Thick Mike wrote:
    (a/10)+(2b/768)-((c*d)/60)

    a=FTP
    b=cost of bike in GBP
    c=average gradient of route
    d=mass of bike in kg


    So I plugged in some numbers for me (seriously) and got 25.1mph! :twisted:
  • Thick MikeThick Mike Posts: 357
    Thick Mike wrote:
    (a/10)+(2b/768)-((c*d)/60)

    a=FTP
    b=cost of bike in GBP
    c=average gradient of route
    d=mass of bike in kg


    So I plugged in some numbers for me (seriously) and got 25.1mph! :twisted:

    I don't just throw these things together you know :wink:

    Not sure if the result is in mph or kmph though :D
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 11,038
    Thick Mike wrote:
    (a/10)+(2b/768)-((c*d)/60)

    a=FTP
    b=cost of bike in GBP
    c=average gradient of route
    d=mass of bike in kg
    Being pedantic.
    Is the average gradient of a circular route not 0% so mass is negligable?
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • singletonsingleton Posts: 1,536
    Hi Blond

    Great, well done, should be useful.

    Nice graph.

    Enjoy the ride. Anything from 10-25mph. Not sure, yes it's fine.

    Thanks.
  • fat daddyfat daddy Posts: 2,632
    Thick Mike wrote:

    Not sure if the result is in mph or kmph though :D


    it would make more sense if it was in kph .... that way it would be an average of 15mph ... which backups stave data showing the average is 15mph :D
  • Thick MikeThick Mike Posts: 357
    pblakeney wrote:
    Thick Mike wrote:
    (a/10)+(2b/768)-((c*d)/60)

    a=FTP
    b=cost of bike in GBP
    c=average gradient of route
    d=mass of bike in kg
    Being pedantic.
    Is the average gradient of a circular route not 0% so mass is negligable?

    Exactly, so going all weight weeny on a circular route has no effect ascent/descent is swings and roundabouts. The only way to improve your average on a circular route is to spend more on your bike (or improve you FTP I suppose :roll: ). Spending more on your bike is the obvious solution.
  • Thick MikeThick Mike Posts: 357
    fat daddy wrote:
    Thick Mike wrote:

    Not sure if the result is in mph or kmph though :D


    it would make more sense if it was in kph .... that way it would be an average of 15mph ... which backups stave data showing the average is 15mph :D

    That's disappointing...you're not spending enough on your gear.
  • pblakeneypblakeney Posts: 11,038
    Thick Mike wrote:
    pblakeney wrote:
    Thick Mike wrote:
    (a/10)+(2b/768)-((c*d)/60)

    a=FTP
    b=cost of bike in GBP
    c=average gradient of route
    d=mass of bike in kg
    Being pedantic.
    Is the average gradient of a circular route not 0% so mass is negligable?

    Exactly, so going all weight weeny on a circular route has no effect ascent/descent is swings and roundabouts. The only way to improve your average on a circular route is to spend more on your bike (or improve you FTP I suppose :roll: ). Spending more on your bike is the obvious solution.
    Surely by spending more time on the bike, and more money on the bike then your FTP will rise by default. Worked for Team Sky. Allegedly.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • chris_basschris_bass Posts: 4,913
    pblakeney wrote:
    Thick Mike wrote:
    pblakeney wrote:
    Thick Mike wrote:
    (a/10)+(2b/768)-((c*d)/60)

    a=FTP
    b=cost of bike in GBP
    c=average gradient of route
    d=mass of bike in kg
    Being pedantic.
    Is the average gradient of a circular route not 0% so mass is negligable?

    Exactly, so going all weight weeny on a circular route has no effect ascent/descent is swings and roundabouts. The only way to improve your average on a circular route is to spend more on your bike (or improve you FTP I suppose :roll: ). Spending more on your bike is the obvious solution.
    Surely by spending more time on the bike, and more money on the bike then your FTP will rise by default. Worked for Team Sky. Allegedly.

    i think that is correct but the f stands for fictional in this case
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
Sign In or Register to comment.