IMHO the 2008 Goatneck was as well organized as ever. The rest stops were well organized and supported with lots of food and volunteers. I didn't even miss having to deal with the numbers, and to make matters even better Mother Nature even cooperated and held off on the heat until the ride was completed. What did everyone else think?

Be sure and email a review to the guy at www.bicycle-stuff.com (http://www.bicycle-stuff.com) for posterity.

Unfortunately, I was slaving away in an air-conditioned office instead.

I don't have much to compare to, since I've only rode one other group ride (Tour de Italia), but I thought it was great! The rest stops were frequent, well supplied and the folks were extremely helpful.

I only did the 27 mile route, but I thought it was pretty good overall. The roads were well staffed and there weren't any significantly damaged roads. They even had folks pointing out the gravel in a couple spots.

The wife and I wanted to do the 42 mile route but time considerations meant we needed to do the 27 instead. It was a really good route with good roads. It would have been nice to see some flat sections! It seemed like we were constantly going up or down--not so much down as I remember...
Great staff and great rest stops. I was a little surprised how close the rest stops were to each other. We hit 3 on the 27 mile route. Everyone was very friendly and the stops were well stocked.
Too bad there isn't some way to identify BF'ers. It would be nice to put some faces with screen names.
This is our third charity ride--we did the Richardson Wild Ride and the Tour de Italia. I would say all three were very nice rides and we have no complaints so far. Maybe we have just been really lucky to hit three very well run rides!

Maybe we can organize a meet-n-great at one of the rides... pick a spot before or after the ride to meet and say howdy.

I did the 69.5 mile route and the rest stops were very frequent. I ended the day with over 3500 ft of climbing. It was a very tough ride overall. :)


The wife and I wanted to do the 42 mile route but time considerations meant we needed to do the 27 instead. It was a really good route with good roads. It would have been nice to see some flat sections! It seemed like we were constantly going up or down--not so much down as I remember...
Great staff and great rest stops. I was a little surprised how close the rest stops were to each other. We hit 3 on the 27 mile route. Everyone was very friendly and the stops were well stocked.
Too bad there isn't some way to identify BF'ers. It would be nice to put some faces with screen names.
This is our third charity ride--we did the Richardson Wild Ride and the Tour de Italia. I would say all three were very nice rides and we have no complaints so far. Maybe we have just been really lucky to hit three very well run rides!

That ride doesn't have 3500 feet of climbing - more like 2800. But it's still one of the tougher 60 milers around. I had a lot of fun and in spite of a couple crappy and speed robbing mechanicals, smoked the course. Finished it in 3h35m including stops. I thought the new pavement in Glen Rose was great, and the enw 'boulder-seal" out of it was pretty bad! But the scenery is always so nice, even after having done the ride several times.

Hey man, I'm just tellin' you what my computer told me. It said 3507 ft.



That ride doesn't have 3500 feet of climbing - more like 2800. But it's still one of the tougher 60 milers around. I had a lot of fun and in spite of a couple crappy and speed robbing mechanicals, smoked the course. Finished it in 3h35m including stops. I thought the new pavement in Glen Rose was great, and the enw 'boulder-seal" out of it was pretty bad! But the scenery is always so nice, even after having done the ride several times.

Either way, it's still a pretty tough ride. Thankfully I was well prepared with the 130 mile 6200 feet I did the Saturday before! *lol*

Either way, it's still a pretty tough ride. Thankfully I was well prepared with the 130 mile 6200 feet I did the Saturday before! *lol*

My computer with altimeter read 3,615 feet of ascension. I have a Sigma MHR 2006 computer. My local routes (40+ miles) are always around 1,600-2,200 feet of climbing depending on distance and exact route. The Goatneck route had substantially more climbing.

FWIW, I've climbed over 60,000 feet in the last 7 weeks. :)

It just doesn't seem like that much. Maybe I'm just becoming a dang-old beast and don't know it!!!

It just doesn't seem like that much. Maybe I'm just becoming a dang-old beast and don't know it!!!

Nah, it doesn't, but undulations in the road, say 5 foot of ascension over 150-200-300 feet distance is hardly noticeable. There is very little flat sections other than the start and ending of that route. It all adds up. Many altimeters, (including a few I've owned) aren't as sensitive to minute changes in barometric air pressure and don't pick up slight undulations in the road so they read lower than actual.

Most of the climbs on the Goatneck route are fairly easy because they are only 5-6% grade or less. What makes a couple of them challenging (only two of them gave me any trouble at all) is that they were fairly long climbs.

True. I had a great ride in California only a month back as well. I climbed up the hollywood hills to mulholland. 5 miles at 4-5%, then several more miles bouncing between 8 and 11 with no letup. That was serious lactic acid!