cwelch

I decided to reverse my direction around the block today. I've gotten up to 2 times around without to much problem, about 1 1/2 mile total. A couple of weeks ago 1 time around had me on noodle legs.

I knew that it would be harder since I would have one fairly steep but short hill to start on. What I didn't realize was how much the long gradual slope that I had been pedaling down on the other side of the block was going to kick my butt going up.

The short hill at the start was a piece of cake. I probably couldn't have finished the long slope if it had been 30 feet longer. I was just barely maintaining a walking speed when I reached the top and coasted down to my driveway. Welcome back noodle legs.

I think that I'm going to start working just that slope 2 or 3 times a week. Ride up it's low hill beginning at the driveway, pedal down to the short flat, turn around and go back up and over the top. Turn around in the driveway and do it again and again.

What gets me is that it's only about a 10 to 15 foot total rise while the short steep hill is at least a 20 foot rise over about 30 yards distance. In a few months I know this will seem like nothing but it's frustrating now.

jmccain

Do you have an easier gear you can shift to for the hill?

mprelaw

It'll get easier the more you do it. My approach to long, gradual hills is to stay seated and use the gear that lets me spin a decent cadence. Drop onto your smallest ring if need be. I rarely have to, unless I'm also bucking a stiff headwind. I can get up most long, gradual hills using my 50/21 or 50/23 combo. My granny gear on the rear cassette is a 25, and at 50/25 I'm cross-chained, but half a mile cross-chained isn't going to harm the chain, methinks. A year from now, you'll be doing the same thing.

cwelch

Walking maybe. I was in 1st at the top of the hill, pedaling like crazy. Probably in 4 or 5 ( Nexus 8 speed internal hub ) when I came around the corner leading into it. Downshifting in advance of really needing to. It probably would've been easier if I stood up. I'm a stubborn old fart and was bound and determined to doing it sitting.

Edit- God I'm such a dumb a$$. I decided to do a ninja ride ( I just ordered a light today ) just a few minutes ago on the pesky slope. Backing the bike out of the garage I felt a lot of resistance on the back end.

( I had just put the front and rear wheels back on earlier today ( now yesterday ) after getting them trued at the LBS and immediately went for my ride. See earlier post. )

My first thought was I hadn't reset the back brake correctly. It was fine. But somehow the rear fender was rubbing the tire. Lots of drag there. No wonder I was worn out.

Anyway around the block ninja style in the moonlight. I stopped at the bottom of the slope and up I went, no problem. BTW riding at night sure is a lot of fun and different than in the daytime. It's completely quite and you're just ghosting along.

stapfam

Where I live-I have hills. Up to a mile long and at average of 8% with the steep bits in it getting up to 15%. You knuckle under and get into a rhythm and do them. When out in a group everyone does their own pace up the hills. We also have those short sharp hills that are steep and don't last very long. Depends on the group but if you have sense you put in a bit more effort and take them in comfort but get the legs and lungs working "Just" a bit harder. However these short climbs often turn into a sprint and a lot of pride to be the first one up them

But we have one hill that I hate. Couple of miles long at an average of 3% but with a couple of short 10% sections in it. I hate that hill. No idea why unless there is also a headwind but that "Slope" takes it out of me. Just too long to be interesting and not really a hill and it gets to me. I suppose I should train for that hill but I don't. I try to avoid it as much as possible and only put it into a ride if there is going to be a tailwind.

Hills don't bother me. They are there to be done and on one of my average rides I will take in 3 hills with around 2,400ft of climbing. They are part of my riding and I no longer look on them as difficult-they are there to be done but a few years ago I went to the Alpes and Climbed Ventoux. 13 miles at an average of 7.5%. I did try and train for it but once I settled into the rhythm- it was easy. Well not easy but it was a lot easier than I expected.

Retro Grouch 

I'm often amused by all the threads that say: "I rode X number of miles today with X number feet of climbing." If you start and finish in the same place, climbing always = coasting.

big john

What???

Bikey Mikey

What goes up must come down.

GeorgeBMac

I agree... Or, at least I have experienced the same: I can climb 300 feet easier on a short steep hill than on a long, slow climb -- ESPECIALLY if I can maintain my speed...
... But I also agree with your latter post that drag from fenders (or an unlubricated chain or under inflated tires) can make it even worser...

Where I ride (Rails-to-Trails) we get a lot of that: the railroads would wind their way around the hills rather than climb over them. So we get slopes that are 5 or even 10 miles long and sometimes longer... But, as I ride them more and more, they become easier.

But, also what destroys me is roughness: I frequently ride one 5 mile stretch of trail and the last mile or so is double the steepness of the bottom 4 miles. But I seem to work far more on the bottom, more level section. I think it is the barely perceptible choppiness of that section while the steeper section is smoother...

But also what seems to influence my effort is speed: I do not understand it, but it feels to me that I work a lot harder going up a slope at 6mph than I do going up the same slope at 12mph... That is, it seems that the slower I go, the harder I work. I do not undertand that -- but I do experience it...

revchuck 

This is true in the abstract sense, but it doesn't even out. If, for example, you climb one side of the hill at 8 mph and bomb down the other side at 32 mph, you've spent four times as much time climbing as descending. You also should keep spinning on the way down to keep your legs from tightening up.

AzTallRider

Obviously. But surely you aren't saying that a flat course is equivalent to a course with a lot of ascending and descending? If so, I need to tell my legs that. I did a century yesterday with 5K of climbing, including a 18% stretch. A flat century would have been dramatically easier, not to mention faster. But hey, if that amuses you, then I'm happy to provide the entertainment!

rdtompki

Incredibly restrained response on your part! Must be a recumbent thing, the ability to run time in reverse on downhills. Ive never experienced that on my DF bike.

Retro Grouch 

You sound exactly like some motorist telling me what it's like to drive a car. Like, since I ride a bike, I must have never driven a car in traffic.

Shimagnolo

My Garmin begs to differ.
It often has me returning to find my home several hundred feet above or below where it was when I left.

Barrettscv 

Climbing is a physics problem. It all comes down to power to weight ratio. Many fit recreational cyclist have a power to weight ratio of 0.75 watts per pound. This will produce the following speed to slope values;

Flat & windless = 18 mph
3% climb & windless = 10 mph
6% climb & windless = 8 mph
9% climb & windless = 5 mph
12% climb & windless = 4 mph
15% climb & windless = 3 mph

This route has multiple climbs that require max effort in the 3 to 4 mph rage. Keeping the front wheel on the ground requires concentration.

https://connect.garmin.com/activity/176310855

Retro Grouch 

That's an interesting chart. 3 mph on a 15% grade - I'm not sure I could keep upright at 3 mph for very long. I'm positive that I work a lot harder riding uphills than on the flat. I'm also sure that I loaf more on the downhills but that's not the kind of thing that you can brag about.

Barrettscv 

Chances are a cyclist will find extra power to keep the bike moving above a certain speed. Not too many roads in the US have sections steeper than 15% for long durations. 15% sections can be found scattered about, but most of these are very short in duration.

Most fit cyclist can double their power output for several minutes. Often that is enough to climb a short but steep hill.

This route has me climbing in the 3 to 4 mph range multiple times, the climbs are about 15% for more than 100 yards. It's steep enough that takes concentration to keep the front wheel on the ground while seated.

https://connect.garmin.com/activity/176310855

rdtompki

You missed the tongue-in-cheek point of my post. I don't begrudge those who live in Florida their discussions about the challenge of ascending bridges or overpasses, nor do I begrudge those who live in Texas their posts about epic wind rides. It's all part of the cycling landscape. Those who live in hillier regions do tend to equate the difficulty of a ride with feet/mile or total feet climbed; it's a reasonable metric. Your post, which did not appear to be tongue-in-cheek, didn't recognize the difficulty of a climbing ride since one get to coast on the downhills.

On mild grades, let's say <6% depending on fitness, you can ride easy in a low gear, coast downhill and not put in much more effort than on a flat ride; you'll still be slow, however. When you're climbing 75-100'/mile you're doing a lot of harder climbing and you'll be much slower of course despite the coasting. Obviously, your know this. Why the original post?

Doug64

cwelch,

Keep up the good work, and it should get easier. Your plan to do "intervals" on the hill is a good idea. Using the right gear is also important. With the low gear on my bike, I can go up a hill at 3.8 mph with a cadence of 80-90 rpm.

However, there have been times when I shifted into my really low gear


+1 Downhills do not even come close to compensating for the effort used in the uphill.. On a recent tour riding fully loaded touring bikes my wife had a total elevation gain over 30,000 feet in almost 3 weeks of riding. It was a loop in Michigan, a relatively flat state compared to where we live. We did not get much below 500' elevation nor much above 1500', But by the end of the day we really felt the effect those "little" rollers had on the legs.

big john

Of course. It's one of the main things we look at to determine the difficulty of a route. Wind and pace also figure in, but the total gain and the steepness of the hills are the things that kick our butts.
Yesterday I was invited to a century with 10 or 12k feet, depending on who you ask. Not ready for that I opted for an easier route but there is a 10k foot century coming up in December thet I will try to get ready for.
I've done centuries with 12k feet and that is a bit much for this Clydesdale.

To the OP, now that we've hijacked your thread, I'd like to say just keep at it, and keep it fun.

digibud

my garmin 500 regularly tells me that I have gained or lost a few hundred feet after going out for a ride and returning home. Somehow my home is either lower or higher than when I start....

digibud

keep at it. my first ride after getting back to biking was also about a mile and a half and it was all I could do. now my favorite ride involves a 9 mile hill in denali park.

gregf83 

Any course is as hard as you make it. Most people find it easier to put out steady power on a hill but there's nothing (other than motivation) from stopping you riding just as hard on a flat course as a hilly one. Flat centuries are usually easier because of drafting and riding with other people. If you were doing it on your own as an individual TT the difference would be much less.

NOS88

I think there are two important things. 1. You're still riding. 2. You know it will improve.

Keep spining those wheels, and allow the frustration to be there and then pass. You doing good.

ericm979

This.

I could barely do 5 flat miles when I started cycling again at age 40. 12 years later I've finished 8 Markleeville Death Rides, 4 Everest Challenges, and countless rides with 10k feet of climbing. Keep at it and you'll get better at it.