Pcad's Definition of a Hilly Road Ride
 

OK, so here it is: my ride today was approx 35.00 miles and 3800 vertical feet of climbing. That's hilly, I have to go out and find hills to climb to get the vertical feet greater than the hundreths of miles. The hilliest ride I've done around here was 8000 vertical in about 80.00 miles.

So if you can match or exceed the hundreths of miles you log with vertical footage, it's generally a pretty hilly ride. That's what I find.

Don't ask me what my average speed is on rides like this either you stupid 41 Fred losers.

You think this will get you banned, but it only fuels your pathetic 41 legend you idiot.

Wait, so .00 is hundredths. I can climb 0 feet while riding 0 miles.

Sounds easy :lol:

Ok, I get it. What's your average speed?

Here on the front range here we are quite near some mountains you may have heard of. Oddly, my rides are not as hilly as one would think. Can't think of the last time I rode 20 miles and climbed 2,000 ft.

You could do that here without much trouble.

Metric or miles? I remember climbing Grandfather Mt. at the end of a century ride, 1000' in less than 2 miles. 6mph maybe...

Same here; I can do more climbing within the city limits than crossing the Cascade Range. The roads in the mountains are graded more smoothly; they top out around 8 %, and the steepest paved road in Seattle is 26 %. But the glaciated mountains are a hell of a lot more fun to ride in.

Needs more revising before submission to Webster's.

Follow Brian Toone on Strava.

Eff Strava.

It's really not so easy in my experience. Easier if there's some 2000+ vertical foot mountain pass near you of course. Harder if you have to accumulate the vertical on hills that gain less than 600 feet or so, which is typical around here, there aren't so many long climbs.

So, you're talking about total ft. gain as climbed minus descended, or by total amount climbed regardless of downhill? I don't even know what is generally accepted, but find that when Strava (eff 'em) or other stat-reporting tools tell me how many feet I descended, I could rather care less.

There is no descent in HTFU.

Is Strava like Twitter?

yep, just gayer because everyone wears lycra.

Yep, I was taught years ago that 100' elevation gain/mile was the definition of a "hilly ride". Anything less than that and you have to defend your assertion with puerile insults and insubstantive blowhardery; anything more than that and you can strut around sans culottes (until your bragging rights expire the next day).

This.

On the east side of Lake Washington you have to go out of your way NOT to climb 2,000 in a 35 mile ride.

I consider any ride hilly if I climb anywhere close to a vertical mile regardless of total mileage.
Then again, I'm from N Texas. Its not totally flat here, but you have to know where the hills are.

When you actually find your Fred self in a dimension where it is possible to do road bike rides that involve climbing and no descending, send us a Postcard from the Edge you 41 Imbecile.

Except nobody cares.

This is what I need to get my post count up. Whackamole in the 41.

http://fishandbicylces.files.wordpre...ack-a-mole.jpg

You should come to Seattle some time. The one that used to be my weekly around-town ride is 2,500+ feet in 35 miles, and that's without seeking the hills out, just trying to get to some place on the other side of them.

ONce you reach 50,000 posts, would you retire? (please).

So you climb 108 feet per mile...what is your VAM?

That's my experience here as well, a ride that doesn't seek out hills might be 2500 vf over 35 miles. The little hills around here really do add up, even flat rides are pretty hilly here.