Quality of Workout
 

Hi, I'm new to this board and bike on my own about 15 miles (lots of hills) most days. My ride is much shorter than many others but it takes about 1.15 hours to complete and is strenuous to me. I'm 57 but used to run long distances and I'm in excellent shape. Recently I did some longer biking along route 101 in CA, and it was not very difficult. I'm wondering of the longer distance riders are taking easier courses. I don't see how most people could handle 50 to 150 miles of the stuff I ride every day.

Also any views on the best type of bike for this type riding. I use an older hybrid (Kono) which I really like and service regularly but considering an upgrade.

welcome. if you like your bike, what would you consider an upgrade? for me, longer road riding calls for a drop bar road bike

You'll be surprised to find how spending time in the saddle can increase your endurance. I know that sounds like stating the obvious but generally, you can do on a weekend the number of miles you do across the week. So if you ride 15 miles a day Monday through Friday, you should be able to ride 50 to 75 miles on Saturday or Sunday. Once you do that, increase your weekday mileage a bit, and you can increase your weekend mileage.

There is a section of bike forums for long distance riding. Some people ride 200 to 600 km in a single weekend, some even more. Those courses are not flat.

Each ride, and rider is different.

Most of my longer day rides are relatively flat, but that still doesn't equate riding 15 miles to riding 150 miles. You may get some hills, but the rides are still, at least different. And, it takes a lot of general endurance to do a 150-PLUS mile ride.

Also, what you consider hilly may be killers for some riders, and pretty routine riding for other riders.

I've done a few semi-organized half century rides, and they certainly are not flat. The organized century rides I've done also seem to find good sized hills to go over. Yes, a fair amount of flat riding, but perhaps 15 miles of hill climbing (not counting descents).

Intensity and ascent are not strictly related. My rides with what I consider to be "climbing numbers," that is, +60ft/mi ascent, routinely have lower kJ/mi numbers than flatter rides or rides on undulating terrain.

63.1 miles with 3,800ft of vertical, 36.5kj/mi (17.3mph)
35.4 miles with 770ft of vertical, 35.4kj/mi (20.8mph)
43.6 miles with 1,184ft of vertical, 39.1kj/mi (18.9mph)

Going solo +22mph on flat land is as hare as tackling +6% grades, if not harder. Because there's no downhill on the other side.

...and the wind is always in your face, and sometimes from the sides and rear, too.

Personally, I just find it hard to be on a bike for more than about 50 miles. As much as I like cycling, there is a tipping point where I just don't want to sit on a bike anymore.
It's not so much that I'm just physically spent...I just feel too uncomfortable to care anymore.
To me it's a hobby and a way to keep in shape, and to also socialize with other cyclists. But it comes to a point where "doing something else" overrides my desire to sit on the saddle any longer.
But that's me.

Join Strava, and like me, you'll constantly be amazed at the fitness level of A LOT of people. I'll come back from a 60+ miler with 5,000' of climbing, thinking "I done good", but upload to Strava, and cower in shame at the random people on my FlyBy's that are doing 80+ miles with 8,000' or more of climbing. Usually I'll see at least one 100+ mile rider. And a lot of these are hard efforts, not some soft pedal easy effort. Being in excellent shape doesn't mean you're in excellent cycling shape, or have the same kind of ability as others. I know this first hand!

If you are riding mostly road, and are trying to get better, consider a drop bar road bike. Then you'll get the sickness we all get...upgrade fever! :D

You can look for routes on sites like RideWithGPS and see the length of rides people do, along with how many feet of climbing there are - a good indicator of how hard or easy a ride is but not the only indicator, since doing a flat 100 mile ride under 6 hours is a good workout, too...

I'm 61 and regularly do 60 - 85 mile rides and an occasional 100 miler. If you were to lengthen your typical rides from 15 miles to 25-30 miles, then you would only need to do three of them, with rest stops in between, and you are doing big mileage.

I used a hybrid bike for many years, did upgrade to a road bike with drop bars and a lighter frame/better wheels - the difference is definitely noticeable from either a fatigue/mile or overall mph at equal fitness view.

You just described me perfectly. About the only time I'll do more than 50 is a special event or if I am riding out west and seeing and exploring new things.

did 48 Tuesday, that took all day, especially with a little sight seeing mixed in
did just under 18 last night & that was a nice cpl of hrs
used to do a regular 30 mile loop & that was good for a solid cpl hrs out of the house
funny last night I felt like I was ready to crush it, but was quickly reminded about all the regular strong riders there are out there. all of which, completely smoked me. not rudely at all, just a solid reminder what a true athlete looks like

That's the thing - if you work at it, you can certainly improve. And what looks impressive or even insurmountable at one point in your life can turn out to be a piece of cake a year or 2 later.
There is a hill near where I live that I saw a guy climbing up - this was about 2 years ago. I was so impressed and wondered how ANYBODY could climb that hill. Today it's just a blip on the road for me.
I happened to run into Bobby Lea (our US Olympic cycling competitor) at a local bike shop. I told him how I marveled at how he could win a 30 mile training race on Thursday, and then hit the velodrome and win races on Friday night. I said that I didn't know how he did it.
His reply to me was, "Yeah, I don't know how I did it, either".
It all comes down to how much you want to train and work to improve, really.

I've now gotten to the point where I do at least one century per weekend, and have averaged 200 + miles for each of the last 3 weekends. I recently rode 168 miles in one day, and I have decided that's max for me because the thought of one more hour on top of that ride was not a happy prospect. The point is, though, that I got to the ability to do this by setting arbitrary goals for myself and not by comparing myself to other riders. I'm 57 years old--if I went on Strava and compared my times and elevations etc. to other riders, I'm sure I could find ones that would make me feel like my performance is inadequate. But I have to remember, if someone had told me 2 years ago I'd be riding these distances, I'd have thought they were nuts.

No one can tell you what is good for you--15 miles on a hilly, windy road is good if you're enjoying it and it makes you feel good. If you think you'll feel better doing another 5 miles, do it! If not, don't.

BTW, with the length of my rides, if I didn't vary them enough so that the longer ones didn't involve some exploring and/or a good meal, I'd go nuts out of boredom.

As to bikes--with distance, it isn't just how fast you can go. I had a '90s hybrid I could ride pretty fast, but after one of my arms swelled up from bad positioning combined with repetitive bumps after a 153 mile ride, I decided I needed either to ride less or get a better bike. I went with the FX 3 which is a fast, comfy flat bar. The day after I rode the 168 miles on it, I rode another 50 and felt fine. One thing I've learned the hard way is the value of proper fit of a bike grows exponentially with distance. Don't go too big or too small. I also think you can't buy a distance bike sight unseen and expect good results. You really need to try it out to see if the geometry lets you get into positions you can tolerate for hours.

Thanks, what's the benefit of a drop bar vs the straight bar on a hybrid?

Thanks and agreed - do you use something to measure distance, speed, incline, etc?

I haven't done long enough rides to know, but I'm guessing I'd feel the same unless the terrain was extraordinary. I usually cross train at the gym most days probably for that same reason, and to give a little balance to my upper body.

Thanks, I also don't think I could take the longer rides without some interesting component to it, like riding along a shoreline or heading across a border. I'll check out the FX 3. I noticed when I rented a quality bike for a week, the ride was much easier, possibly due to much better shifting gears.

Neither do I. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but its not for everyone. There are many ways to cycle and still be in shape.

If centuries and all day marathons in the saddles are your goal and what you enjoy doing then by all means do so. But that's not to say that's the goal of every cyclist, nor is it necessary to get in shape. After all, a sprinter is not a marathon runner but doesn't mean they both can't be the best at what they do.

Thanks, I don't want the speed as much as I want the workout. I always wonder if the people who buy extremely expensively equipment are undermining themselves by making it as easy as possible. Going forward, I planning to run less and bike more to reduce the friction on my joints.

Well, I'm as addicted to numbers as I am to riding the bike, so along with the GPS computer is a crank-based power meter, heart rate monitor, and wheel speed sensor. I don't know why I need to know all of these things, but I do. I pore over them. I spend long periods of time trying make sense out of things like this:

https://i.imgur.com/NsmguDT.png?1

more aerodynamic body position
lighter bike
more hand positions

No, probably not. They are still putting out the same or more effort. They are just getting better speeds, longer distance or better numbers in something. Sometimes the pursuit of those higher numbers is what gives them the encouragement to continue exercising.

No benefits come entirely without some cost. In this case, it would be restricted view and increased neck and back strain.Not necessarily. But you could add lower center-of-gravity for sure.


All the things that are beneficial when racing because it give us something to measure and compare. The effects of the energy expenditure on the body, however, are indistinguishable -- either way.

I don't understand.... I can read this as agreeing or disagreeing with the quoted statement. I'm not sure which.