Stupid Question
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Nags Head NC
Posts: 359
Bikes: Cannondale Synapse
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Stupid Question
What does it mean exactly when a ride notes a certain amount of elevation? Is this the net of climbing and descents? Sorry, but I'm usually a pure bred flat-lander!
#2
Seat Sniffer
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 5,630
Bikes: Serotta Legend Ti; 2006 Schwinn Fastback Pro and 1996 Colnago Decor Super C96; 2003 Univega Alpina 700; 2000 Schwinn Super Sport
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 945 Post(s)
Liked 1,985 Times
in
569 Posts
Add up all the climbing you do uphill and disregard the downhills.
So, if you were to start at sea level, go consistently uphill to an elevation +1000 feet, the consistently downhill to an elevation of 500 feet, then consistently uphill back to the elevation of +1000 feet, then finally, a consistent downhill back to sea level, your total climb would be 1500 feet.
So, if you were to start at sea level, go consistently uphill to an elevation +1000 feet, the consistently downhill to an elevation of 500 feet, then consistently uphill back to the elevation of +1000 feet, then finally, a consistent downhill back to sea level, your total climb would be 1500 feet.
__________________
Proud parent of a happy inner child ...
Proud parent of a happy inner child ...
#3
Banned.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brighton UK
Posts: 1,662
Bikes: 20" Folder, Road Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
All circular rides would be zero. As said you add up the ascents and ignore descents.
A real roller of a course, hardly flat, just up and down all the time with no big hills might
appear to be much worse than it actually is, compared to the simple example above.
rgds, sreten.
Last edited by sreten; 08-19-13 at 05:21 PM.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Westchester County, NY
Posts: 1,299
Bikes: Giant TCR SL3 and Trek 1.5
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
To add a bit here, in addition to total elevation, you'll also commonly see tougher climbs on a ride broken out with the elevation for them segregated from the total amount in many cases. A lot of more serious riders like to test their performance on particular climbs and are interested in tracking both the elevation gains and the gradient increase percentages for those. This is especially true for those who perform well on the flats, but are a bit "allergic" to hills
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Medina, OH
Posts: 5,804
Bikes: confidential infromation that I don't even share with my wife
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
When I look at a new route or upcoming race I always figure the climbing at feet per mile. For instance a 40 mile ride with 1,500' of ascent would equal 37.5 feet of climbing per mile which would not be significant. However a ride that is 40 miles with 4,500' of ascent would equal 112.5 feet of climbing per mile and that would be a very hard effort for me.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bigdaddy10028
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
48
08-03-10 10:37 PM