Old 09-23-21, 05:05 PM
  #31  
indyfabz
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,214
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18397 Post(s)
Liked 15,493 Times in 7,316 Posts
Originally Posted by John N

One last thing to remember is that a lot of these graphs are not always super accurate, especially in mountainous areas. The data may see the REPORTED elevation (usually by a long-time ago USGS map) but that is really different that a road. For instance, the vast majority of graphs will show a climb when you ride through a tunnel because they see the road as always going on the ground, but not necessarily through a tunnel.
A great example of the tunnel thing is mapping the Hiawatha Trail. It has some dozen or so tunnels. It’s a rail-trail, yet the profile on something like RWGPS will show double digit grades because the data is based on the land above the tunnels.

In general, I agree there is way too muck over analyzing going on here. Seems more likely to confuse or scare a newb than help.

My first tour was across the country and then some. The Adventure Cycling Maps only had profiles for the western and eastern mountains, and there was no RWGPS or Komoot back then. We still enjoyed ourselves and the surprise we encountered hill-wise.

No offense, but this thread is sort of like the OP offering packing advice to newbs.

Last edited by indyfabz; 09-23-21 at 05:17 PM.
indyfabz is offline