Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Magic of recovery? Broken computer? Something else?

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Magic of recovery? Broken computer? Something else?

Old 05-04-16, 05:14 AM
  #1  
kbarch
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
kbarch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 4,286
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1096 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Magic of recovery? Broken computer? Something else?

Weather has been a little gloomy recently, and I've been feeling I've neglected training, so I decided to hop on the rollers for a short, perfunctory spin. Cadence and speed started out slow, as usual (low 70s, 14-16 mph), but after about 15 minutes, I managed to get it up in the 90-100 range, and since it didn't feel like any effort, I put it up on the big ring and started dropping cogs. Well, I managed to spin it up, and was quite surprised to see it registering in the 30s, and at one point sustained a solid 36mph for about half a minute. I was rather incredulous, because normally, on a stationary bike (the only time I really pay attention to these things), I'm lucky to get it to stay in the mid 20s and peak at maybe 30 momentarily. Why can't I do that outside? I wondered dumbly. After catching my breath, I spun it up again, and managed to get it to hold 40-41mph for about half a minute. WTH? Did I break my computer? Seriously - those numbers are completely anomalous; but it's true, I was on 53/12, spinning my legs like crazy.
Sure, lack of wind resistance would make a big difference between what can be done on rollers and what can be done outside, but that doesn't explain why those numbers were so much higher that what I've ever experienced on a stationary bike. Who else has had this experience, and to what would you account such a leap? Proper fit/positioning, maybe?
kbarch is offline  
Old 05-04-16, 05:57 AM
  #2  
datlas 
Should Be More Popular
 
datlas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malvern, PA (20 miles West of Philly)
Posts: 41,621

Bikes: 1986 Alpine (steel road bike), 2009 Ti Habenero, 2013 Specialized Roubaix

Mentioned: 556 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21156 Post(s)
Liked 7,668 Times in 3,605 Posts
Speed info on an indoor bike is not reliable.

Sorry, but that's the truth.

ps in your case it's probably because of lack of air resistance. You could probably go that fast on the moon or in a vacuum. Not IRL.
__________________
Originally Posted by rjones28
Addiction is all about class.
datlas is offline  
Old 05-04-16, 06:13 AM
  #3  
brianmcg123
Senior Member
 
brianmcg123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: TN
Posts: 1,286

Bikes: 2013 Trek Madone; 2008 Surly Long Haul Trucker

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 361 Post(s)
Liked 59 Times in 35 Posts
Lol. What datlas said.
brianmcg123 is offline  
Old 05-04-16, 06:24 AM
  #4  
dr_lha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Central PA
Posts: 4,843

Bikes: 2016 Black Mountain Cycles Monster Cross v5, 2015 Ritchey Road Logic, 1998 Specialized Rockhopper, 2017 Raleigh Grand Prix

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 374 Post(s)
Liked 15 Times in 11 Posts
The resistance of the rollers is likely not the same as the resistance of riding on actual roads as well, as well as the lack of wind resistance, inclines etc.
dr_lha is offline  
Old 05-04-16, 07:57 AM
  #5  
Kopsis
Senior Member
 
Kopsis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 1,258
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
OP description is a little confusing because it compares speed on the rollers to speed on a "stationary bike". Unless "stationary bike" actually means riding the same bike on the same rollers, any comparison is pretty meaningless.

Now, if it is an apples-to-apples comparison, then the improvement may be attributable to the effects of a "taper". Modern approaches to training model stress (acute training load) and fitness (chronic training load) using exponential decay formulas. Training stress balance is the difference between your current stress and fitness. Since stress decays much faster than fitness, extended recovery will increase your training stress balance resulting in a (possibly significant) performance improvement.

Of course without detailed tracking of all your training, all we can do is speculate. But for someone who has a pretty consistent training load week after week (with no periodization), what you observed is pretty typical.
Kopsis is offline  
Old 05-04-16, 11:02 AM
  #6  
kbarch
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
kbarch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 4,286
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1096 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Kopsis
OP description is a little confusing because it compares speed on the rollers to speed on a "stationary bike". Unless "stationary bike" actually means riding the same bike on the same rollers, any comparison is pretty meaningless.
This is where I figured it was going. Since indicated speeds on stationary bike at gym were more consistent with on-the-road (i.e., hard efforts and sprints hovering in the 20s, peaking just over 30 maybe in both cases, it seems the bad fit and position takes away any gains enjoyed by a lack of wind resistance, whereas on well-fitting bike on rollers, nothing takes away from the advantage gained. Still, it's hard to believe fit and position could make the difference between being able to "sprint" inside at 40 vs 30 mph.
kbarch is offline  
Old 05-04-16, 11:17 AM
  #7  
milkbaby
blah blah blah
 
milkbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,520
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
On a stationary bike, by definition you're going 0 mph, just saying...
milkbaby is offline  
Old 05-04-16, 03:31 PM
  #8  
DrIsotope
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 8,553

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn, Lakitu

Mentioned: 119 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4905 Post(s)
Liked 1,730 Times in 957 Posts
I can hold 35mph on the CycleOps trainer for an hour, with the resistance set to 6/10. There's no wind resistance, no rider weight, no bike weight, no irregularities of the road surface, etc. I'm just on the trainer when the weather is awful, and I want to keep my heart rate in a specific zone. The speed and distance numbers are essentially meaningless.
__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Old 05-04-16, 03:59 PM
  #9  
WalksOn2Wheels
Vain, But Lacking Talent
 
WalksOn2Wheels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Denton, TX
Posts: 5,510

Bikes: Trek Domane 5.9 DA 9000, Trek Crockett Pink Frosting w/105 5700

Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1525 Post(s)
Liked 81 Times in 42 Posts
On rollers your resistance is nowhere near what you see on a flat stretch of road unless you a) have a resistance unit fitted to the rollers or b) take your tires down to about 45-50 psi. I noticed when I deflated the tires a bit, speeds were still high, but much more realistic for something like a flat straight for a given HR.
WalksOn2Wheels is offline  
Old 05-04-16, 05:32 PM
  #10  
kbarch
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
kbarch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 4,286
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1096 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by WalksOn2Wheels
On rollers your resistance is nowhere near what you see on a flat stretch of road unless you a) have a resistance unit fitted to the rollers or b) take your tires down to about 45-50 psi. I noticed when I deflated the tires a bit, speeds were still high, but much more realistic for something like a flat straight for a given HR.
Thanks for the insight - it's starting to make sense. This morning it was fully inflated 23mm tires, and come to think of it, a while back, trying it out with soft 25mm tires on the FG was the most difficult. The rollers are 3" drums, don't have a resistance unit, but they are more difficult to start from a dead stop than I would have expected. As for the stationary bike at the gym, I tried to set the resistance high, but when doing strength/intervals on it, I'm not sure it works - it's like there's zero resistance until it's time to put forth the effort. Maybe it's supposed to be like that, but I like to have SOME resistance while I'm resting, and I feel like I do on the rollers. I guess the stationary bike just does a better job at providing/maintaining resistance at higher speeds.
kbarch is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
donski101
Training & Nutrition
6
03-04-18 04:40 PM
kbarch
Road Cycling
12
12-11-17 07:24 AM
Harvieu25
General Cycling Discussion
17
12-18-16 06:48 AM
koger
Training & Nutrition
1
02-11-14 11:13 AM
agarose2000
Road Cycling
22
07-27-10 03:16 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.