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

Blond

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

bendertherobot

Do it, and report back. That's the best measure as to what's doable

Blond

bendertherobot wrote:

Do it, and report back. That's the best measure as to what's doable

Ok thanks could you comment on the elevation?

bendertherobot

Not really, no.

First.Aspect

bendertherobot wrote:

Not really, no.

Oh come on. Its quite phallic for starters.

meanredspider

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.

debeli

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.

imposter2.0

This is another of Boswell & Percy's accounts I think.

cooldad

How stupid can a person be? First ride?

At least start another sock puppet.

viewtopic.php?f=40013&t=13074976&p=20044749#p20044749

viewtopic.php?f=40013&t=13074970

viewtopic.php?f=40013&t=13074323&p=20033276#p20033276

chris_bass

Imposter wrote:

This is another of Boswell & Percy's accounts I think.

yeah, that's what i was going to say

MiddleRinger

Ride it. If you don't average 25mph, buy a faster bike.

pblakeney

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.

imafatman

The author of this post is a very sad individual.

Garry H

Seven

DavidJB

25MPH + or you're a total failure.

Thick Mike

(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

MiddleRinger

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 Mike

MiddleRinger 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

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

I don't just throw these things together you know

Not sure if the result is in mph or kmph though

pblakeney

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?

singleton

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 daddy

Thick Mike wrote:

Not sure if the result is in mph or kmph though

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

Thick Mike

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 Mike

fat daddy wrote:

Thick Mike wrote:

Not sure if the result is in mph or kmph though

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

That's disappointing...you're not spending enough on your gear.

pblakeney

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.

chris_bass

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