It sometimes seems that cyclists are bigger liars than fishermen. Usually this refers to boasts of average speeds, or mighty feats of climbing. We all hear these bench racing stories. Usually something like, “Yeah, it was a good ride. We were doing (fill in improbable speed) all the way.” Or, “Oh yeah, we usually average (insert intimidating number) on that ride.”
It helps to remember that time spent at 0.0 mph really lowers the overall average. If a rider travels at 20 mph for one minute, and is completely stopped for one minute, the overall average is 10 mph.
Elevation Gain: This one is probably not used as much as it should be. It’s fairly simple. The “gain” of a given ride is the total amount of climbing on the ride. We don’t count the descending because it doesn’t take an effort to go down. If, for example, a ride was a loop of ten miles, with most of the loop being perfectly flat, and there was only one hill in the loop, then the height of that hill would be the total gain of the ride. Obviously, the rider would not be higher at the end than at the beginning of the ride. But if the hill was 100 feet tall, then the “gain” for the ride would be 100 feet. If the rider did the loop twice, the “gain” would be 200 feet.
Percentage of Grade: This is another area that seems to generate some amusing fish stories. One specific instance I’ll mention. Local cycling folklore often recounts a particularly long and steep hill near Luthersville. I have been repeatedly told about this two mile long climb at a 10% grade. I have to chuckle. Read on to find out why.
Definition: Grade Percentage is defined as rise over run. That means the total height climbed is divided by the total distance it took to do it. So, if a climb gained 100 feet, in a distance of 2,000 feet, the percentage would be 5%.
Put another way, a 10% grade rises one foot for every ten feet of forward travel.
So… If a grade was actually 10%, and was actually two miles long it would have a rise of 0.2 miles. Since a mile is 5,280 feet, that means the hill in question would be 1,056 feet high. Stone Mountain, for purposes of comparison is only 750 feet above the surrounding terrain, and it is visible for many miles around. Since we can not see the towering peak near Luthersville, it stands to reason that either the grade, or the length of the climb are being exaggerated. In fact, both are.
No comments:
Post a Comment