TheRCF

One of the things that always drove me nuts was references to hills being "tough" (or whatever) by someone and I would have ZERO idea what their standard of "tough" was. I got the Delorme Topo USA software to check my hills and get comments. I'm aware it may not be always accurate, but from the things I have been able to check with a friend's altimeter, I think it generally is pretty close.

So, here are some of my hills for you folks to comment on, using the grade, etc, data from the software in this order: Riding Distance, Altitude change, average grade, maximum grade (I'm well aware that this last item would be extremely untrustworthy, especially when it is just a sudden spike). The hills are listed in the order of their average grade (hardest first):

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. DISTANCE-.-. ALT Chg-.-.-.-.Avg Grade-.-.-.- Max grade
Hill 1 (Kilauea):--- 0.20----------133-----------12--------------18
Hill 2 (Poola):-----0.96-----------507-----------11--------------31
Hill 3 (Mariners):--1.49-----------735-----------10--------------28

Hill 4 (Tantalus):--4.84----------1567-----------9---------------40
Hill 5 (Sierra):-----2.45-----------867-----------7---------------21
Hill 6 (Kalaniiki):---0.78-----------315-----------7---------------17

The first, really short hill, I've yet to climb on my double crank, but have several times when riding a triple.

Hill 3 is my toughest, longer hill and the figures presented are a little misleading because it starts with a very minor grade and ends with a short downhill and final short climb. If I take out that beginning and ending stuff, the hill goes 1.02 miles and averages out as a 12 instead of a 10. I've tried it twice and while I made it both times, I also had to stop and rest part way up both times (never tried it on a triple but I'm sure that would be much easier).

So, are these hills no big deal to you folks? They are pretty challenging to me - either they are steep or fairly long - or both. On a lot of them, I may be mostly under 4 mph!

Bob

Bikepacker67

C'mon out to New England.
There's MANY that'll drop me in the -4mph range.

SteveE

" -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. DISTANCE-.-. ALT Chg-.-.-.-.Avg Grade-.-.-.- Max grade"
" Hill 4 (Tantalus):--4.84----------1567-----------9---------------40"

I'm confused - 1567 elevation gain over 4.84 miles is an average grade of 5% not 9%. I find a 40% grade hard to believe..

TheRCF

Hmmm, I don't know. I did the math and came up with a different answer that you or the software: 6.1. I converted the miles to feet and divided the result by the altitude change.

So I checked the linear distance instead of riding distance (4.81 istead of 4.84 miles). That only got the result closer to 6.2, but still off considerably.

I couldn't find anything in their help section to say how they do the calculations so I'm mystified. I could certainly use the distance and altitude data and do my own calculations, but I'd like to know what is going on here. Maybe someone with more experience with the software knows.

As for the maximum, like I said, I wouldn't trust it either. Typically those things are at a specific spot. I figure those are calculated in some way because no way is every foot of every road, trail, etc, actually measured. But if I see a section of road where the numbers go up and stay relatively high compared to the average, the average of those higher numbers are probably fairly close - at least within whatever system of calculation they are using!

xyz

Glad to see you over here. Did the About forum finally die?

SteveE

Oops, my bad. I made a calculation error. The grade is 6.1%. I think only riding distance matters in calculating the grade. 1567 /(4.84 * 5280) = 6.1%

huhenio

40% grade looked a little steep for a road. Probably you will climb it with hands and feet.


Nothing wrong with that though .... think extreme cyclocross hauling the bikes with ropes

TheRCF

Well, it is pretty slow - days without a post. I like it when it is more active - I can keep up with everything!

Bob

TheRCF

I may be wrong, but I think it is linear distance that gives the most accurate result, though the difference is really small.

BlazingPedals

No, you're right. Using the hypotenuse instead of the true horizontal distance, at least at the grades you're likely to see on roads, only induces a small error - on the order of tenths of a percent.

Speaking as a flatlander, I'll say that hills start getting steep at around 8%. Local to me I'd have trouble finding one steeper than 5%; most of the ones I see are closer to 3%. I've seen hills up paved roads that hit 20% grade, but much more than that and cars can't get up them either. Size-wise, 40-60 vertical feet is a hill, 150 vertical feet or more is a big hill. Mountains are not hills, they are mountains; and chances are good that anything over ~400 vertical feet will be a mountain.

TheRCF

Boy, for me it starts well before 8%. I went back and ran the math on all the hills I've done so far, instead of relying on the map program. Some were the same, but a few were well off, like the one first pointed out. I'm not sure, but I think some of this might have to do with hills that have some short, minor, downhills in with what is by far mostly uphill climbs. Not sure if that is somehow handled in special ways, but maybe. I'll need to check some of those hills again to confirm which ones have such downhills.

Looking at some of these, I would say that I find even 2.5-3% to be an issue, but then, the hill I have in mind has a couple fairly steep sections and the rest is much more mild. I'm guessing that a fairly steady 3% grade wouldn't bother me much, but having some easier than that and some much harder is the problem. Hmmm, maybe the map program is taking this approach - while a hill may average out to "x" percent, it has harder sections which hurt you more than the easy parts help you. Sort of like how you lose more time climbing a hill than you gain from going back down it.

Using your standards, I have one in your 40-60 "hill range", another two inbetween the hill and big hill range. All the rest are more than your big hill range and I think 7 count as mountains.

BlazingPedals

Not surprising you'd have some mountainous terrain since you live on the upper part of the tallest volcano in the world.

huhenio

Ok ... pittsburgh, pennsylvania has the most difficult hills of any city on earth.

some streets are over 50% ... insanity!

And of course, there is a bicycle race there on thanksgiving saturday.

SteveE

Could you please define how you calculate a 50% hill? Are you talking about a hill that rises 1 foot for every 2 feet of distance? I've never heard of such a thing.

Thanks.

TheRCF

Had to think about that for a moment - good one!

huhenio

Yes ... google pittsburg, dirty dozen, race, thanksgiving weekend

some streets are forbidden to be even driven downhill .... and off course totally closed to vehicular traffic in winter.

I ran it on my software .. .read the articles ... and my quads where burning while sitting on my chair.

Some people use those mega steep streets to test their offroad vehicles. The article mentioned that the streets used to be cobblestone, but now they are mostly paved.

I cannot wait to go to Pittsburgh in the spring and give it a wirl ... on a 42x20 fixed gear!

TheRCF

I think I've figured out how the Delorme Topo USA calculates the grades.

I looked at the example someone else pointed out (Tantalus) and found a stat that gave "climbing distance" as well as totall climb in feet.

In other words, while the hill is almost a constant climb, there are some very short exceptions where you can even go very slightly downhill. To get the correct figure, you have to subtract these distances, but it also means to get to the highest point, you have to makeup for any downhills. If you have a 1000 ft elevation at the top, starting off at sea level, but at some point you drop 100 feet during the climb, it means you are actually climbing 1100 feet.

huhenio

You are correct! Ding ding ding ding!! we have a winner!!

Is the TOTAL climbing altitude that one must do, not the altitude of the hill over sea level.

That means if you have two 10,000 feet mountains, and you climb both, your total climbing for the distance is 20,000 feet.

All uphill slope altitude gains are calculated, and probably it might sum a higher number of feet than the elevation over sea level of the destination.

TheRCF

Okay, so anyone looking at my original chart can see the actual riding distance, but also know that the grade is sometimes higher than expected because of the need to adjust for short flats or downhill sections.

Hmmm, now that I think about it, I wanted to get some idea of how my hills would be viewed by experienced riders. I don't think I've gotten much feedback on that!

SteveE

Admittedly those hills are pretty darned steep! But I went to the website and saw that they singled out a 37% hill as the steepest one. There's a big difference between 37% and 50%, IMO.

bennyk

There are steeper hills in the area.

bk

huhenio

Run a topo map software in measure yourself. Average of 37% that peaks up to 50% in some humps.

bikebugmenot

I did the Tantalus/Roundtop Drive when I was in Oahu; a lot of weaving up/down Mount Tantalus. I thought the top part goes up a bit over 2,000 feet in elevation? Of course I was there months ago, so don't quite remember. I was with the wife, so was doing a very leisure pace, so can't really find out how challenging it really is. I did see a group of three cyclists on very nice bikes going back and forth on that path for like three times. Maybe I would have a better idea if I had ridden with them instead of the wife...

TheRCF

Boy, it never seemed leisurely to me, even going slow! But then, I only have a double crank so my low gears aren't all that low. The road elevation is what I listed in my original post. You can go higher, but have to take hiking trails to do it.

Bob

bikebugmenot

I'm used to riding the hills of San Francisco. Wife, OTOH, is not. She was complaining to me all the way up... She kept telling me why I didn't rented a scooter or car instead of a couple of bikes. Come to think about it, I think it might have been cheaper to rent a scooter/car than two bikes... Roundtop Drive actually offers a very nice view of Honolulu, but I guess most of the tourists don't know about it-->we saw very few cars there. I think if I ever bike that path again, I'm going to bring a backpack to pick up all those ripe mangos planted/dropped all along the path...can make some nice mango pudding dessert after the ride.