Old 09-26-18, 10:58 AM
  #21  
HTupolev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,269
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1979 Post(s)
Liked 1,298 Times in 630 Posts
Originally Posted by Colnago Mixte
So 2.5 seconds per mile per pound times 5 = 15 seconds per mile saved. And since I remember Phil Liggett describing Alpe d'Huez colorfully as "the nine miles drunken road to nowhere", let's assume the climb is nine miles long. 9 x 15 seconds is 235 seconds or 3 minutes and 55 seconds.


If I made a mistake in my math, feel free to correct, it's my absolute worst subject.
2.5*5 is 12.5, not 15.
15*9 is 135, not 235.

12.5*9 is 112.5 seconds, less than half the figure you calculated.

Even 112.5 seconds is a large exaggeration, though. The 2.5 seconds per mile in the article was for a hypothetical recreational rider pedaling 200W, not a top-level professional climber racing for the glory of Alpe d'Huez. It takes much less time for a 300+W engine to move 5lbs uphill than a 200W engine.
HTupolev is online now