Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-08-07, 08:14 AM   #1
Gotte
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Gotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 1,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Gradient question

I can never think in height, and find it pretty difficult thinking in distance (unless I know it). I;m going to be cycling up hill for a day or so. I;ve looked at an elevation map of the route, and it rises 250 meters in about 160 km. What kind of gradient is that (more on a "blimey, you'll have your work cut out," way than actual 3:10 or whatever).

Thanks
Gotte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-07, 08:55 AM   #2
SirScott
Senior Member
 
SirScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Littleton, CO
Bikes:
Posts: 206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
250m in 160km? Are those numbers right? Because that's like 0.1% gradient. Which is nothing.
SirScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-07, 05:34 PM   #3
Gotte
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Gotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 1,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think so. If you click on the link and look below the map, there's a graph. I'm guessing, though it doesn't say, that the figures on the left vertical are meters. We're cycling from Esslingen (about half way on the graph) which looks to be around 400m altitude, to villinger, which is about 650m. So that's about 250m, over 160km. If it is 0.1 grad, then it looks more on the graph.
Or is it deceptive. is the fact that it's an overall, not reflecting the fluctuations along the way?

I don't know. This kind of thing makes my head hurt.

http://www.aufreisen.de/BWRad_WegKarte_0.asp?RIR=260514
Gotte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-07, 06:03 PM   #4
Speedo
Senior Member
 
Speedo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston Area
Bikes: Univega Gran Turismo, Guerciotti, Bridgestone MB2, Bike Friday New World Tourist, Serotta Ti
Posts: 1,998
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
To my eye it looks more like 300 to 700. 400 m over 160 km is nothing. It looks like the route follows a river, so this shouldn't be surprising. Have a blast!

Speedo
Speedo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-07, 06:05 PM   #5
transam
Senior Member
 
transam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sebring, FL
Bikes: Cannondale RT1000; Santana Sovereign; Co Motion Supremo
Posts: 144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If that graph is meters on the vertical scale and kilometers on the horizontal scale then it does not picture the correct grade. The horizontal scale would have to be 1000 times longer with the same vertical scale to show the correct grade. In other words it's basically flat. Enjoy the ride!
transam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-07, 06:58 AM   #6
Gotte
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Gotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 1,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks for that. That's a weight off my mind. It looked somewhat hard going to my untrained eye., but I see now how distorted the view is (obviously for reasons of viewing).

Again, many thanks.
Gotte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-07, 08:03 AM   #7
markf
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Frisco, CO
Bikes: '93 Bridgestone MB-3, '88 Marinoni road bike, '00 Marinoni Piuma, '01 Riv A/R
Posts: 1,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The route does follow a river, and it looks like the OP will be going upstream. The written description calls the route "Nahezu steigungsfrei und stetig bergab" (nearly free of climbing and continously downhill), so it looks like the people who laid out the route intended users to travel down a river valley with a gentle, almost imperceptible grade to make riding easy. Going up the same river valley might be a little more work, but still no serious climbing.
markf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-07, 06:47 PM   #8
bwgride
Slow Rider
 
bwgride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Georgia, USA
Bikes:
Posts: 943
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotte
I can never think in height, and find it pretty difficult thinking in distance (unless I know it). I;m going to be cycling up hill for a day or so. I;ve looked at an elevation map of the route, and it rises 250 meters in about 160 km. What kind of gradient is that (more on a "blimey, you'll have your work cut out," way than actual 3:10 or whatever).

Thanks
Grade of a road can be easy to calculate. If the road increases 1 meter in height for every 10 meters traveled, then the grade is 1/10 multiplied by 100 (to get percent), this would be .1*100 = 10% grade. If height increases 1.5 meters for every 10 meters traveled, the grade is 1.5/10*100 =15%.

In your case, assuming those numbers are correct, the grade would be (as others have pointed out)

250m/160,000m * 100 = 0.15% (less than 1% grade).
bwgride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-07, 04:47 PM   #9
Gotte
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Gotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 1,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks for that. I appreciate the help.

Phil
Gotte is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:34 AM.