Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    one good leg jinws's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF <--> SJ
    Posts
    926
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    climbing around the bay

    Just looking for some input on hills around the bay. I have no idea how steep a hill actually is by normal descriptions. Like 10% grade or 1200 feet of climbing.

    So here's the plan, I'll describe where I've actually ridden and it would be great if someone can tell me what the grade is.

    I've only ridden in and around SF. So first up, going across the GG bridge to Marin, go left and climb to the top of the headlands.

    the little hill coming back to the bridge from Sausalito.

    the short one in Presidio coming out to Arguello in SF

    That's about it.

    thanks

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    My Bikes
    2006 Lemond Etape 105/Tiagra
    Posts
    751
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Unless I'm doing my math wrong...

    Quote Originally Posted by jinws
    So first up, going across the GG bridge to Marin, go left and climb to the top of the headlands.
    Headlands, GG Bridge to the top of Conzelman: ~ 1.8 miles, ~950ft climbing, ~10% avg grade (doesn't seem that steep...what gives?)

    Quote Originally Posted by jinws
    the little hill coming back to the bridge from Sausalito.
    Sausalito lateral, ~1.1 miles, ~360ft climbing, ~6% avg grade.

    Quote Originally Posted by jinws
    the short one in Presidio coming out to Arguello in SF
    Arguello gate, ~0.08 miles ~50ft climbing, ~10% avg grade. (1 block is hardly a climb, unless you do it 10 times ).

    These figures are just gleened from my own training data - I can do some specific laps with my Edge to confirm them, but they should give you a good ballpark estimate.

    If you want to do some real climbing come out to Mt. Tam with me. I'm not a spectacular climber but I do take great joy in the fact that the longer you go up the more you get to go down .

  3. #3
    one good leg jinws's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF <--> SJ
    Posts
    926
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    thanks for the info. but I tell you what, when you have 6 screws and a plate in your foot, then dislocate your knee during rehab, a block of a small hill is a climb.

    mnt. tam, sure, someday. but I wouldnt' want to slow you down or make you wait for me at the top.

  4. #4
    Climbing Fool terrymorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    My Bikes
    Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
    Posts
    3,019
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just keep on climbing, jinws. It will get easier.

    My hip looks like this, but it doesn't slow me down much:

    Managing Director, Undiscovered Country Tours

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    477
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jeffremer
    Headlands, GG Bridge to the top of Conzelman: ~ 1.8 miles, ~950ft climbing, ~10% avg grade (doesn't seem that steep...what gives?)
    The actual peak of Hawk Hill, where the raptor observatory is, is around 920 feet, but you have to go up a trail to get there, and I think that trail is off-limits to bikes. Google Earth puts the "cyclist summit" of Conzelman at 750 ft. Routeslip says 815 ft.

    Also, if you're starting from the bridge, you're already 250 feet above sea level. If you're starting from that road we take beneath the bridge, then it's 0 feet.

    If you're starting from the bridge, the grade is more like 4 - 5%. Stretches of it are probably 10%, though, as the long portion in the middle is almost flat.

    Quote Originally Posted by jeffremer
    Arguello gate, ~0.08 miles ~50ft climbing, ~10% avg grade. (1 block is hardly a climb, unless you do it 10 times ).
    It sounds like the OP is talking about going up Arguello from the other direction, i.e., the main post of the Presidio. If you start from where the Officers Club is, you can take Arguello up to that stop sign that intersects with Washington (Arguello continues to the Arguello Gate). From the Officers Club to the stop sign, which is where the road flattens out, it's about .4 miles and an 8 - 9 % grade.

  6. #6
    one good leg jinws's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF <--> SJ
    Posts
    926
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ConstantRider
    The actual peak of Hawk Hill, where the raptor observatory is, is around 920 feet, but you have to go up a trail to get there, and I think that trail is off-limits to bikes. Google Earth puts the "cyclist summit" of Conzelman at 750 ft. Routeslip says 815 ft.

    Also, if you're starting from the bridge, you're already 250 feet above sea level. If you're starting from that road we take beneath the bridge, then it's 0 feet.

    If you're starting from the bridge, the grade is more like 4 - 5%. Stretches of it are probably 10%, though, as the long portion in the middle is almost flat.



    It sounds like the OP is talking about going up Arguello from the other direction, i.e., the main post of the Presidio. If you start from where the Officers Club is, you can take Arguello up to that stop sign that intersects with Washington (Arguello continues to the Arguello Gate). From the Officers Club to the stop sign, which is where the road flattens out, it's about .4 miles and an 8 - 9 % grade.
    Oh now I get it. he was talking about going into Presidio, that 1 block. I was talking about coming out of Presidio, starting from the Tennis courts.

  7. #7
    one good leg jinws's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF <--> SJ
    Posts
    926
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by terrymorse
    Just keep on climbing, jinws. It will get easier.

    My hip looks like this, but it doesn't slow me down much:

    holy crap! nice hardware.

  8. #8
    dismembered member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Davis, CA
    My Bikes
    Trek 1500, Trek 4300
    Posts
    168
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    A good way to figure this out (without GPS) is with Google Earth. You can measure the distance along the road by tracing it with the path tool, and find out the elevation gain or loss by mousing over the start and endpoints. Grade is simply rise over run expressed as a percent. I think Google Earth calculates distance as surface distance instead of distance parallel to the Earth's surface (needed for true rise over run), but this will get you pretty close.

    Actually, if you care to use the Pythagorean Theorem (a^2 + b^2 = c^2), the difference between the starting and ending elevation is a, and the distance Google Earth gives you is c (the hypotenuse). So, if I'm thinking about this correctly, you can then calculate b (the actual horizontal distance), which can then be used to calculate the true grade. I believe this works even if the grade is curvy - if you think about the cross section, all you're doing is taking a triangle and folding it. It doesn't change the parameters.

    The difference between the grade calculated this way and the way I described before would be small for lesser grades and increase to be quite different for steep grades.
    Last edited by dmitrivich; 05-02-07 at 02:48 PM.

  9. #9
    Radfahrer Rincewind8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    653
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Or you could just try this:

    http://www.heywhatsthat.com/profiler.html
    TH 1.81 (133kg*62)

  10. #10
    dismembered member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Davis, CA
    My Bikes
    Trek 1500, Trek 4300
    Posts
    168
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rincewind8
    Or you could just try this:

    http://www.heywhatsthat.com/profiler.html
    That's pretty good. Still not sure it's more useful than Google Earth though, because you can't just mouse over and find where a particular hill starts, so it's more clicking around where you think it is and estimating the elevations from the graph. EDIT: ah, I see that you can turn profiles on. Also, you have to estimate distances with the graph whereas Google Earth gives them to you in hundredths of a mile.

    If the route finder feature worked that would be awesome.

  11. #11
    Spinning like a gerbel spingineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    My Bikes
    Seven
    Posts
    7,947
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jinws
    holy crap! nice hardware.
    and I bet he'll still outclimb most of us.
    I'm in it to finish it.

    My Cycling Blog

  12. #12
    Senior Member 8Lives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    My Bikes
    Lemond Zurich
    Posts
    461
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by terrymorse
    Just keep on climbing, jinws. It will get easier.

    My hip looks like this, but it doesn't slow me down much:

    I'm jealous - I don't have cool pix of the rods and screws holding my back together! Need to find that last x-ray and scan it.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    My Bikes
    2006 Lemond Etape 105/Tiagra
    Posts
    751
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by terrymorse
    Just keep on climbing, jinws. It will get easier.

    My hip looks like this, but it doesn't slow me down much:

    Maybe I need to get one of those - today was one of my "off/recovery days" where I just do a 15RT ride to school and back, but I couldn't resist hammering up some of the steeper hills, my hip starting flaring up a little.

  14. #14
    Climbing Fool terrymorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    My Bikes
    Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
    Posts
    3,019
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by 8Lives
    I'm jealous - I don't have cool pix of the rods and screws holding my back together! Need to find that last x-ray and scan it.
    To be honest, that's not my x-ray. My film was so dark that it didn't show up very well in a scan. That's somebody else's, but my device is identical.
    Managing Director, Undiscovered Country Tours

  15. #15
    Senior Member ken cummings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    northern California
    My Bikes
    Bruce Gordon BLT, Cannondale parts bike, Ecodyne recumbent trike, Counterpoint Opus 2, miyata 1000
    Posts
    5,605
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you would like to see a whole lot of hill profiles go to www.srcc.com , then over to the sidebar and click on ride elevations. You go from gentle strolls to most of the horrors featured on the Terrible Two ride.
    This space open

  16. #16
    Senior Member SaiKaiTai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,984
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dmitrivich
    A good way to figure this out (without GPS) is with Google Earth. You can measure the distance along the road by tracing it with the path tool, and find out the elevation gain or loss by mousing over the start and endpoints. Grade is simply rise over run expressed as a percent. I think Google Earth calculates distance as surface distance instead of distance parallel to the Earth's surface (needed for true rise over run), but this will get you pretty close.

    Actually, if you care to use the Pythagorean Theorem (a^2 + b^2 = c^2), the difference between the starting and ending elevation is a, and the distance Google Earth gives you is c (the hypotenuse). So, if I'm thinking about this correctly, you can then calculate b (the actual horizontal distance), which can then be used to calculate the true grade. I believe this works even if the grade is curvy - if you think about the cross section, all you're doing is taking a triangle and folding it. It doesn't change the parameters.

    The difference between the grade calculated this way and the way I described before would be small for lesser grades and increase to be quite different for steep grades.
    I found myself doing this so much -still do- that I wrote a stupid little PERL script to calculate it out for me.
    '13 Felt Z3 - '08 Jamis Aurora Elite - ('07 Giant OCR C2)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •