Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Riding mountains vs flat lands

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Riding mountains vs flat lands

Old 12-27-12, 02:09 PM
  #26  
Portland Fred
 
banerjek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,548

Bikes: Custom Winter, Challenge Seiran SL, Fuji Team Pro, Cattrike Road/Velokit, РOS hybrid

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked 53 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by TrojanHorse
If you don't routinely ride hills/mountains, you really owe it to yourself to drive out to one of the big climbs on that ride and try it out. If you don't already have a compact crank, get one of those first.

The mental part of climbing might be the toughest... if you don't know how much farther you have to go it can really mess with your head. If you've already ridden the climb even once you will know what's going on and what to expect and that makes a huge difference.
Not knowing where the top is will mess you up and even driving a route is better than having it be a total mystery that reveals itself as you go. If you have an altimeter, know where the climbs start and stop so you can plan your effort. If you don't have an altimeter, know which elevations correspond with which odometer readings -- for big rides, I write this on my arm or tape it to my TT depending on temps on the climbs.

When you've been out all day, you'll get really depressed if you can't tell if you have hundreds or thousands of feet to go to the top and if you can get more water in 2 miles or 8.

Gearing is helpful. You can do anything on anything if you're willing to suffer enough. But suffering sucks.
banerjek is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 02:22 PM
  #27  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 2,240
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cplager
Going from 20 to 15 mph suggests that you're going up a small hill, not a mountain.
I'm talking about averages. You might go 10-12 up and 25-30 down.
hamster is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 02:36 PM
  #28  
Portland Fred
 
banerjek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,548

Bikes: Custom Winter, Challenge Seiran SL, Fuji Team Pro, Cattrike Road/Velokit, РOS hybrid

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked 53 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by hamster
I'm talking about averages. You might go 10-12 up and 25-30 down.
This still sounds gentle. A lot of mountain rides can requite grinding up at 7mph or less and even on bad surfaces, descents can be quite fast.
banerjek is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 03:05 PM
  #29  
Pedalphile
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The physics of climbing vs. flat riding vs. riding indoors are different. It feels different because it is different (sometimes it's not your imagination). And that's why performance in one doesn't transfer fully to another.
The_Cretin is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 03:14 PM
  #30  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 2,240
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by banerjek
This still sounds gentle. A lot of mountain rides can requite grinding up at 7mph or less and even on bad surfaces, descents can be quite fast.
Right. In any case, my own short mountain rides with lots of 6-8% grades consistently average 12-13 mph. In my last mountain century (9800 feet of climbing) I averaged 10 mph. That was considered slow. Most people averaged 11-12. My flat rides come out around 16 mph (I could go faster but, around here, flat rides inevitably have lots of stoplights).
hamster is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 03:18 PM
  #31  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
There are differences for sure, weight being the biggest factor (big heavy dudes wil have a harder time climbing against stick figures) but in terms of your own personal performance, your success will almost entirely depend on your ability to generate the required power over the time of the ride. If you could train at that similar power on flat lands, you will be equally prepared. It's not like you suddenly lose 10+% of your power because you suddenly start climbing.

I'm a believer of being able to train flats to ride big climbs. I have a local loop with 6000 feet of climbing in 50 miles right out my front door, and I'm plenty well prepared for them by just doing aggresive trainer rides of adequate length. The main thing is to make sure you're doing enough time on the flats - since you might be going 8mph up a long climb, you'll have to adjust for that duration on a flat effort so you don't get rudely awakened when you realize that a 50 mile hilly ride can take an hour longer than a flat one.

Another consideration for beginners or weaker riders is of course, if the % grade of the hill is too steep for them to generate enough power to keep cadence reasonable, which often happens over 12+% grades even on a triple. Even then though, you'll be just a good hammering it on a flat road or trainer at similar wattage of the climb, rather than dismounting and walking the hill if you're trying to ride it repeatedly without being ready for it.
hhnngg1 is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 03:34 PM
  #32  
Pedalphile
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Oh, if it were only that simple...
The_Cretin is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 04:03 PM
  #33  
Senior Member
 
Drew Eckhardt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Mountain View, CA USA and Golden, CO USA
Posts: 6,341

Bikes: 97 Litespeed, 50-39-30x13-26 10 cogs, Campagnolo Ultrashift, retroreflective rims on SON28/PowerTap hubs

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 550 Post(s)
Liked 325 Times in 226 Posts
Originally Posted by mike12
Just for a little background, I'm new to road cycling (riding about 2 months) and have been using this forum as a resource.

We live where there are small hills but no real mountains - we are about 2 hours away from the NC mountains. There's a century ride in the mountains in June that has roughly 9,000 ft of cumulative climbing elevation. There's also a half century that has about 4,000 ft climbing elevation. I want to participate in one of these rides this summer. Is there any general rule of thumb where "x" number of flat miles equate to "x" number of mountainous miles???
No. An hour uphill is about the same as an hour on flat ground until you run out of gears although obviously the same distance takes longer.

Civil engineers usually route roads up valleys and use switch backs when necessary so most paved roads have grades under 6%. You can choose gearing for such a grade that will keep you pedaling at a comfortable cadence and all-day endurance pace; although the specifics will vary (a 140 pound climber can do it with 39x26; although the same guy with 50 pounds of middle aged spread would need 39x34/34x29/30x26).

150W (an all-day pace) can have a 145 pound rider atop 20 pound bike traveling at 19.5 MPH on flat ground or 6.9 MPH up a 6% grade so a given distance up the mountain would be like 2.8X the distance on flat ground.

Things are rather different once you run out of gears and start standing at a low cadence. You recruit muscles differently, can fatigue much faster, and it's decidedly different.

Last edited by Drew Eckhardt; 12-27-12 at 04:15 PM.
Drew Eckhardt is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 04:49 PM
  #34  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by The_Cretin
Oh, if it were only that simple...
It is. Get a powermeter, train so you can crank out like 250 watts steadily for 2 hours on flats, and you'll be able to crank them out on hills so long as they're not insanely steep requiring like 300 watts just to stay up. For longer distances, you'll have to hold that wattage longer.
hhnngg1 is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 05:04 PM
  #35  
Pedalphile
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Lulz.
The_Cretin is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 05:11 PM
  #36  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks for all the info guys. I'll certainly ride the mountains a couple times before the event - just not regularly due the travel time. I think I'll give the century a try. I'm not in great shape, but certainly not in bad shape either. I weigh about 150lbs and may drop another 10lbs just to improve the summer riding season. My bike has a 50/34 compact so I'm betting that I'll be OK on gearing.

I certainly agree with those of you who say a lot of it is mental. I think that is true with a lot of things in life. If you think you're going to fail, well....
mike12 is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 05:19 PM
  #37  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times in 177 Posts
Originally Posted by hhnngg1
It is. Get a powermeter, train so you can crank out like 250 watts steadily for 2 hours on flats, and you'll be able to crank them out on hills so long as they're not insanely steep requiring like 300 watts just to stay up. For longer distances, you'll have to hold that wattage longer.
I agree. I train mostly on flatish roads with hills no longer than 5 min. However, I have flat loops I can ride continuously without stopping at tempo-threshold power levels. When I do ride the local climbs the power I put out for the 40-60 minutes required for the climbs is no different than what I'm capable on the flats. If anything, I find I can put out a little more power on the hills.

I would like to be closer to a hill as I find it mentally easier to grind out a 40 min interval on a hill than on the flats but at the end of the day power is power and if you can put out x watts on the flats for an hour, you shouldn't have any problem putting out x watts on the hill.

With all the on line calculators and GPS mapping tools available it's not difficult to figure out what kind of gearing you need for a particular hill. I think most guys are too macho and end up over gearing for hills.
gregf83 is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 05:32 PM
  #38  
Senior Member
 
Looigi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,951
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times in 12 Posts
I'm 60, live and ride at sea level, flew to CO one day and did a century the next day with 12,500' of climbing topping out at 9000' above sea level. My avg speed was 14 mph. I'm not blowing my horn and am not anything special when it come to riding. I just post this to illustrate that I think some are making a much bigger deal out of it than it deserves. They way you accomplish stuff like this is by going and trying, not by sitting in front of a computer endlessly hashing over inconsequential minutia. And if at first you don't succeed, try again. Sheesh...
Looigi is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 06:04 PM
  #39  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,277
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Only 9000 feet? The fun doesn't begin until around treeline. : p
DataJunkie is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 06:18 PM
  #40  
Senior Member
 
Brian Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Near Portland, OR
Posts: 10,123

Bikes: Three road bikes. Two track bikes.

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by The_Cretin
The physics of climbing vs. flat riding vs. riding indoors are different. It feels different because it is different (sometimes it's not your imagination). And that's why performance in one doesn't transfer fully to another.
This is BS. The physics of riding a bike are not dependent on the terrain. Power is power is power. What differs is procedure. You choose different gears for different speeds and you really need to know what to expect out of your body for a given effort at a given time. This is why it is important to train in the terrain you are going to ride at least once in a while, but at the same time, you can do the bulk of your training on the flats for your climbs.

Fitness wise, the advice to work up to a century is good. The advice to once in a while travel to the mountains to train is good; bring some buddies and make a day of it. On the fitness front, finding some long country roads (doesn't matter the terrain) and keeping a pace where you are breathing heavily and can't talk for 20 minutes at a time is good training.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter

Last edited by Brian Ratliff; 12-27-12 at 06:21 PM.
Brian Ratliff is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 07:02 PM
  #41  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,771
Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1454 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by hhnngg1
It is. Get a powermeter, train so you can crank out like 250 watts steadily for 2 hours on flats, and you'll be able to crank them out on hills so long as they're not insanely steep requiring like 300 watts just to stay up. For longer distances, you'll have to hold that wattage longer.
I know the powermeter is an easy, almost glib, answer these days, but some people can't afford, don't want or don't need a powermeter, especially when their aspirations do not include racing.
Rowan is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 07:25 PM
  #42  
Pedalphile
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
As usual, this place never fails to entertain.
The_Cretin is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 07:43 PM
  #43  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Rowan
I know the powermeter is an easy, almost glib, answer these days, but some people can't afford, don't want or don't need a powermeter, especially when their aspirations do not include racing.
I only use the powermeter as an example of why you don't need hills to train for a hilly century or road ride. I'm not saying the OP needs to rely on a powermeter to train for hills.

Heck, while I do most of my training with virtualpower on a trainer (since all my weekday rides are indoors), I still rely on good ol' HR and average speed on known segments for my outdoor pacing both for training and racing. HR alone should get you close for keeping your intensity on flats enough for a similar HR effort on hills.
hhnngg1 is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 08:03 PM
  #44  
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
is riding a bike similar to the riding a motorbike?
Connie Imaging is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 08:04 PM
  #45  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,213

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 554 Times in 443 Posts
I can always tell when the people commenting have never ridden for hours at a time in the mountains. The big difference is that the power requirement to keep moving forward is unrelenting. On flatter terrain, you might put out the same wattage, most of the time, but it's common to relax once in awhile. That relaxation period often goes unnoticed. Try that on a big climb and you'll be going backwards.

There really is a big difference between training in the mountains, compared to training on the flats. You need to train in the mountains to be proficient at climbing.

Body weight can be a huge issue. Heavy riders can ride well on the flats, where wind resistance is the major obstacle. Put those guys on a hill or mountain and a 20 mph average guy will ride at 8-9 mph.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 08:34 PM
  #46  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,771
Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1454 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by hhnngg1
i'm not saying the op needs to rely on a powermeter to train for hills.
ok.
Rowan is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 10:30 PM
  #47  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times in 177 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS
I can always tell when the people commenting have never ridden for hours at a time in the mountains. The big difference is that the power requirement to keep moving forward is unrelenting. On flatter terrain, you might put out the same wattage, most of the time, but it's common to relax once in awhile. That relaxation period often goes unnoticed. Try that on a big climb and you'll be going backwards.

There really is a big difference between training in the mountains, compared to training on the flats. You need to train in the mountains to be proficient at climbing.
Nonsense. Do you think that a rider with 5+W/kg threshold power who lives in the flatlands isn't a proficient climber? Or do you think that the only way to reach a high power to weight ratio is by training in the mountains?
gregf83 is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 10:44 PM
  #48  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS
I can always tell when the people commenting have never ridden for hours at a time in the mountains. The big difference is that the power requirement to keep moving forward is unrelenting. On flatter terrain, you might put out the same wattage, most of the time, but it's common to relax once in awhile. That relaxation period often goes unnoticed. Try that on a big climb and you'll be going backwards.

There really is a big difference between training in the mountains, compared to training on the flats. You need to train in the mountains to be proficient at climbing.

Body weight can be a huge issue. Heavy riders can ride well on the flats, where wind resistance is the major obstacle. Put those guys on a hill or mountain and a 20 mph average guy will ride at 8-9 mph.

Actually, the more accurate situation is that riders who ride the way you describe, who take it easier on the flats than the hills, need to learn to ride harder on the flats. Hills just force the issue of putting up more intensity, but if you can control the intensity without the hills, you really don't need them.

A HRM is an inexpensive but very useful tool for steady state nondraft training rides to maintain similar efforts on flats compared to hills. If you're maintaining the same HR on your flat sections as you do on the climbs, you'll be close enough in power that you'll get similar training effect from both. Slap on a powermeter, and it'll be even more precise.

I don't disagree with you that most riders will take it easier on the flats than the climbs, but that's more a reflection on the rider's habits than the reality that if you're putting up similar power for climbs or flats, you'll be getting very similar training effects and will be similar prepared for race day.
hhnngg1 is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 10:54 PM
  #49  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,771
Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1454 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times in 40 Posts
The theory is perfect, but the reality is often different and controlled by the rider's mind.

That comes about from the realisation that a 10-mile climb at 5mph is going to take two hours, instead of the half-hour that the 10-mile flat ride took a short while back at 20mph... at the same intensity.

There are a ton of tricks that the mind can play over that two hours...
Rowan is offline  
Old 12-27-12, 11:26 PM
  #50  
Senior Member
 
Drew Eckhardt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Mountain View, CA USA and Golden, CO USA
Posts: 6,341

Bikes: 97 Litespeed, 50-39-30x13-26 10 cogs, Campagnolo Ultrashift, retroreflective rims on SON28/PowerTap hubs

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 550 Post(s)
Liked 325 Times in 226 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS
I can always tell when the people commenting have never ridden for hours at a time in the mountains. The big difference is that the power requirement to keep moving forward is unrelenting. On flatter terrain, you might put out the same wattage, most of the time, but it's common to relax once in awhile. That relaxation period often goes unnoticed. Try that on a big climb and you'll be going backwards.

There really is a big difference between training in the mountains, compared to training on the flats. You need to train in the mountains to be proficient at climbing.
I lived in Boulder, CO for fifteen years. Ride the Rockies from Golden to Grand Junction, Flagstaff Mountain, Lee Hill Road, the Mike Horgan Memorial Hill Climb, etc.

Apart from the pscychology (lots of people find it harder to push themselves on flat ground than in hills and many fail to pace themselves on hills) it's pretty much the same as riding on flat ground until you run out of gears and a little planning can usually prevent that.
Drew Eckhardt is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.