"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - Can I break 5000ft/hr tomorrow?

I say its a definite maybe. Demoralize me :D

tomorrow's hill: 940ft, 2.6mi, 6.8% grade. For 5000ft/hr, I'll have to go 13.8mph for about 11:15, at a p/w ratio of 5.28 (405W)

My previous best was set back in August: 850ft hill, 2.1mi, 7.67% grade. 4708ft/hr, 11.8mph at a p/w ratio of 4.84 (370W)

I just finished base 2, and am starting a rest week. Let's see if this base stuff is paying off!


Place your bets, odds are 3:1 against!

I think its going to be more mental, just fight through the burn and youll be alright

Well, what counts is the tryin'

Good luck, and let us know how it goes!

don't expect to be fast on a 12 minute effort following a base period.

But go out and just kill it. Much luck.

405 watts for 11 minutes? That's a lot of power. But if you really want it, you will make it up that fast. I imagine you'll get demoralized after 6 minutes but if you fight through it you'll power out of it

I just look at the numbers. Your vo2max power is about 120% of your FT. If 405w is 120% of your FT, well, yeah, it is doable. :) That would put your FT at 320w. How long is the climb again? 6 to 10 minutes??? Effort like that would certainly put you in your vo2max power.

^^
There ya go. Just dial it up, Penguin!

Yeesh...>22 km/h for 11 minutes at almost 7 percent?! Yow. I had to vote no, but I'd love to hear you did it.

I just look at the numbers. Your vo2max power is about 120% of your FT. If 405w is 120% of your FT, well, yeah, it is doable. :) That would put your FT at 320w. How long is the climb again? 6 to 10 minutes??? Effort like that would certainly put you in your vo2max power.

Holy wrong numbers Batman.

120% of 320 = 386 watts. FT would need to be 337.5 specifically for 405w to be the top end of Coggan VO2max.

35 watts on top of your previous best will be quite a feat when talking supra-threshold power.

I vote yes because I can't bring myself to voting no.

You Can Do It!
http://www.girl.com.au/img/robschneider_hotchick.jpg

I just checked my PR for our local climb (944ft @2.2mi in 12:15), which came out to 4662 ft/hr. I almost puked. Best of luck. 5000 will be tough, but doable.

FYI, I voted for you to succeed.

I say you go down in flames :) :)

But, prove me wrong, KP. Go kick that hill's butt!!

I vote yes because it's easier (for me at least) to really drill it on hills or into a headwind. I'm not sure why, but if it sucks, I go harder.

Pin it man :D

Demoralize me :D


You'll never do it! You think you can get your fat sack up that hill? No way!!! If God had wanted you at the top of that mountain he would have miracled your ass up there! What is your major malfunction numb-nuts? Didn't Mommy and Daddy give you enough attention when you were a child? I bet you could suck a golfball through a garden hose!


There? Did that work?

(Seriously tho, go for it. Good luck. You'll need it... ;) )

Those free online velocity calculators are worth about what they cost, but are fun to use. According to the ones I use it would take a 168 pound rider an average of 450 watts for 11:15 to go 2.6 miles up a 6.8% grade at an average altitude of 1000 feet and a temperature of 50 degrees.

Whether you make it or not... Since you don't have a power meter (unless I'm mistaken) I guess we won't know how accurate those calculators are. Plus, there are other factors (wind, road conditions, constancy of the grade, etc) that affect speed.

--Steve

You'll never do it! You think you can get your fat sack up that hill? No way!!! If God had wanted you at the top of that mountain he would have miracled your ass up there! What is your major malfunction numb-nuts? Didn't Mommy and Daddy give you enough attention when you were a child? I bet you could suck a golfball through a garden hose!
now that's what I'm talkin about!

time to eat breakfast. Tonight I dine in Valhalla!

Those free online velocity calculators are worth about what they cost, but are fun to use. According to the ones I use it would take a 168 pound rider an average of 450 watts for 11:15 to go 2.6 miles up a 6.8% grade at an average altitude of 1000 feet and a temperature of 50 degrees.

Whether you make it or not... Since you don't have a power meter (unless I'm mistaken) I guess we won't know how accurate those calculators are. Plus, there are other factors (wind, road conditions, constancy of the grade, etc) that affect speed.

--Steve
Heh, yeah, no powermeter. Kreuzotter says I'd need 460ishW to do this thing, but apparantly I can already put out 410 for 10:50.

I used analytic cycling (turning mph into m/s is a little annoying, but i'm convinced its pretty accurate!). I think what might account for the discrepancy is that kreuzotter sets rolling resistance at .006 whereas analytic cycling defaults asphalt at .004.

I say its a definite maybe. Demoralize me :D

tomorrow's hill: 940ft, 2.6mi, 6.8% grade. For 5000ft/hr, I'll have to go 13.8mph for about 11:15, at a p/w ratio of 5.28 (405W)

My previous best was set back in August: 850ft hill, 2.1mi, 7.67% grade. 4708ft/hr, 11.8mph at a p/w ratio of 4.84 (370W)

I just finished base 2, and am starting a rest week. Let's see if this base stuff is paying off!


Place your bets, odds are 3:1 against!

Do it!

that hill just called your momma a hochie. what are you gonna do about it?

If I go to Battenkill, I will crush your skinny soul, so let the demoralizing begin. You are good, but not that good you skinny little tuxedoed punk. When you can step up to my kind of power, maybe, but until then - 2nd place = 1st loser.

Seriously though, good luck. I know that this early in the season, I could NOT do those kinds of numbers.

time to eat breakfast. Tonight I dine in Valhalla!

Just try to avoid having twice-scrambled eggs... (http://anaerobia.com/fable08.html)

I just got spanked. I think my lungs are bleeding.

I confused the false summit for the actual summit and stopped there, so the climb was a bit different than advertised. 1.97mi, 800ft, 7.69% grade...after the false summit it goes downhill for a bit, hence why the whole hill is only 6.8%.

Anyway, up to the false summit, I did it in 12:35. That's a whopping 3825ft/hr :roflmao: I can't really be upset though, since my last all out effort was in mid October, I haven't touched my bike the past 3 days and was feeling sluggish, its 40* out and I'm in winter gear, it was my first time climbing that hill, and I'm getting used to a new bike. And after a couple of minutes, my legs felt perfect again. So I guess base is doing what its supposed to do.


that hill just called your momma a hochie. what are you gonna do about it?
:mad: Why, I'm gonna curl up into a ball, hand it my car keys, and give it my lunch money! That'll show that stupid hill.

Heh, I'll try this again in 4 weeks. Even if I can't then, I'm breaking 5000ft/hr by the end of march, damnit.

You have a profile of the ride?

guitar- here's the routeslip version of the climb: http://www.routeslip.com/routes/18652

the toporoute version puts the climb at 1.92mi and 8.1%gradient, but I'll wager routeslip is the more accurate of the two.

I'm trying 5000ft/hr this weekend, but I have a sophisticated plan, I'm doing it downhill.
..always thinkin', ...always thinkin'...

RouteSlip is doing its' usual crap...says "Loading...Please Wait", but then just sits there....

when it starts doing that, press reload and the page should load fine.

I did...it sucks. Had to log out and log back in again.

Wow, you're in a pretty hilly area of NY....

I had an impromptu race with a friend of mine today and only managed 4,200 ft/hr over the course of 10 min :/

5k must be nutty.

Hmm... I'm gonna have to try this sometime this week if I can work it in. All my climbs are longer than 10 minutes, but best I've done is 3700 ft/hr at 28 min 51 sec. Doing that same climb in 20 minutes would be insane.

Yea, the entire climb took just under an hour and was 3,800 ft gain.

The 4,200 was the best I had for a section of any length.

i'm going to throw this out there, but does anyone actually do 5000 ft in an hour, or do people just do 1/8th of that and discuss how they could theoretically do 5000 ft in an hour?

I don't think anybody has said they could/will do it besides penguin.

I would say though that you actually have to do it for a full hour to have really done 5,000 ft/ hour.

Otherwise, where is the line? Why can't you just attack a small hill for a minute and hit it?

PP hill here I come! 24 mph for .3 miles of 6%(?)grade at 175lbs. How many watts is that ?
I voted no. Will you try again in mid season?

i'm going to throw this out there, but does anyone actually do 5000 ft in an hour, or do people just do 1/8th of that and discuss how they could theoretically do 5000 ft in an hour?

It's like someone saying they can go 35 miles per hour. That doesn't mean they can travel 35 miles in one hour; it just means they can sustain that rate for some period of time.

Even for 1/8 of an hour, sustaining 5000 feet of climb per hour is pretty challenging. I can do it for about 1/64 of an hour :)

I never claimed I'd do it for a full hour. my goal is to do it for about 11 minutes. Its not terribly long, but its not stupid short either.

What about someone who avgs 28mph over a 10mi tt? Did they not avg 28mph because they didn't do it for an hour?

Aside from the naysayers....

I say you can. When is this happening?

Well, it was supposed to happen yesterday, but I couldn't even crack 4000ft/hr then :D

I suppose I'll try again in a month, and then at random times during build. I'm definitely gonna break that barrier by the end of March.

Nice. As soon as the passes clear around here, I'll see what i can pull off.

(I'm no climber)

You suck!

:D

Is this what you do on your rest weeks? :eek:

-mark

I suppose you can relate it to speed in that way, but really who cares who can do 35 mph for 6.5 minutes? There has to be some valid benchmark...40k TT etc.

I suppose you can relate it to speed in that way, but really who cares who can do 35 mph for 6.5 minutes? There has to be some valid benchmark...40k TT etc.

I believe he gave a benchmark: "940ft, 2.6mi, 6.8% grade. For 5000ft/hr, I'll have to go 13.8mph for about 11:15". Why don't you give that a whirl and let us all know how 'valid' that benchmark is.

Edit: would it help anyone with this concept if he had said "83 vertical feet per minute" instead?

I believe he gave a benchmark: "940ft, 2.6mi, 6.8% grade. For 5000ft/hr, I'll have to go 13.8mph for about 11:15". Why don't you give that a whirl and let us all know how 'valid' that benchmark is.

Edit: would it help anyone with this concept if he had said "83 vertical feet per minute" instead?


I said a valid benchmark... aka something I actually COULD repeat. Where am I going to find a hill similar to such exacting specs???

I said a valid benchmark... aka something I actually COULD repeat. Where am I going to find a hill similar to such exacting specs???

Obviously, you cannot, unless you go to that climb.

But, the nice thing about using vertical feet per hour is that it's a pretty good indicator of one's climbing ability, even when the variables change (within reason -- obviously the extremes will always be goofy but that's the case on speed, wattage, and most other measurements of ability).

Edit: Really, you have to qualify any of these measurements. No one (okay, well, maybe *one*) goes around saying they can crank it up to 400W. You have to specify how long. 400W for one second is a lot different than 400W for 30 minutes. But once you know the qualifier, within reason, you can compare abilities pretty well. Same for rate of climb. So, if you wanted to compare to Penguin's climb, find a climb that takes you around 11 minutes to do...just get in the rough area of 11 minutes, doesn't need to be 100% exact to be valid. Discover the elevation change, and divide it by your time and you will see how you stack up.

I think I essentially agree with you.

But how about we start with this-
From Arnie Baker, "standards of excellence" by category (how fast the winners go), 30-minute max. effort on a 6% grade:

Cat 5: 3300 ft/hr
Cat 4: 3800
Cat 3: 4100
Cat 2: 4400
Cat 1: 4700
US Pro: 5000
Euro Pro: 5500

So it seems as if Baker has set the time at 30 minutes. Seeing as he's seemingly gone through the trouble of calculating averages, that is probably the benchmark we should be talking about.

Basically, what I was getting at earlier was-

Say penguin DOES do 5,000 ft/ hr for his 10 minute climb. What would that really prove? Wouldn't it just prove the obvious that higher climbing rates are possible when the time decreases??

Basically he would still be in line with his category, but corresponding to a different (non-existant) chart for 10 minute climbing instead of 30 min.

I don't think anyone was trying to "prove" anything. Penguin wanted to do the climb in a time frame that would end up being roughly 5000 ft/min. If I told you I wanted to do Zentisuboyama in 27 minutes, that means nothing to you. If I tell you I want to do my local hill climb race at 4000 ft/min for a half hour you have a reference point.

The rest of us just hopped on his thread.

I don't think anyone was trying to "prove" anything. Penguin wanted to do the climb in a time frame that would end up being roughly 5000 ft/min. If I told you I wanted to do Zentisuboyama in 27 minutes, that means nothing to you. If I tell you I want to do my local hill climb race at 4000 ft/min for a half hour you have a reference point.

Thank you, someone gets it.

Well I would suggest just going by time then, especially as those online calculators are rough estimates at best.

*edit- Your example makes little sense anyways. Do you hear pro riders talking about their training in ft / min??? They use power or time. Simply knowing the rough idea of the climb is enough to have an idea about how fast it is, or in bikeforums case, isn't.

Well I would suggest just going by time then, especially as those online calculators are rough estimates at best.

*edit- Your example makes little sense anyways. Do you hear pro riders talking about their training in ft / min??? They use power or time. Simply knowing the rough idea of the climb is enough to have an idea about how fast it is, or in bikeforums case, isn't.

Find out your wattage on any given climb:

Watts =(Combined weight rider + bike and in KG X 9.8 to get Newtons X elevation gain in Meters )devide by time in seconds.

Watts per kg = Watts Devided by rider weight.

Find out your wattage on any given climb:

Watts =(Combined weight rider + bike and in KG X 9.8 to get Newtons X elevation gain in Meters )devide by time in seconds.

Watts per kg = Watts Devided by rider weight.

It would be so sweet to ride in a vacuum wouldnt it! :)

It would be so sweet to ride in a vacuum wouldnt it! :)
Except for the whole not breathing thing I agree :D

Unfortunately, there aren't any climbs much longer than 10-15 minutes around here. Even the longest climbs in the catskills are 20 minutes tops. So what I do is find a climb that takes around 10 minutes or a little more and estimate my power for the climb using analyticcycling.

Then I take a look at this chart, see where my 10min p/w ratio measures up to the 5min ratios and assume I'm slightly more powerful at 5min than at 10min.
http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/images/powerprofile_v4.gif

So for example, if I did do that climb at 5000ft/hr, then my roughly 10min p/w ratio would be 5.28w/kg, and if I held that for 5min that'd make me roughly a midpack cat2. Since I would have held that p/w ratio slightly longer than double the 5 min time, it'd be safe to say I'd measure up with good cat2's powerwise.

It's accurate enough for free, and has correlated with what I've found when riding with others. Truly scientific as well ;)