Farther Or Faster
 

Do you like distance (farther) or speed (faster)? Me, of course I like them both but if I had to pick one... I like farther because I see more and take in more I do like faster but I am not the super aggresive type that thrills from fast rides I do like to put in a couple of sprints during my farther rides!

Don't care for either..... I just enjoy the quality of time spent in the saddle.... :)

Farther? Faster? You mean there's a choice?!

Same here. Who cares how far or fast a particular ride is? It's wonderful just to be out on the bike.

Given that life limits our riding time (family, work, etc.), the faster you go, the further you will go.. :D So the Answer is YES..

I need to go very far and get it done fast! However when the ridiculous distances start happening next year I'll slow it down and preserve the energy.

Farther.
I would rather get distance. If you can do 100 miles then it's an accomplishment no matter what speed you keep. 40 miles and hour for a few minutes might be fun, but big whoop.

Perhaps, but my grandma could ride a century with a big group to draft and finish in 9 hours. Ride it solo and finish in 5 hours, now I'm impressed.

One hand washes the other. Getting faster allows me to ride farther. Some days I double the miles. This helps me ride faster on my shorter rides.

It is like riding in a longer gear. It sure makes the shorter one turn faster.

Need both.

Faster.
The thing I found about training is that it is more about having the TIME to do these longer rides.

Too many other things going on during the weekend, which is why I like my nice quick 26-miler daily before I leave for work. Trying to go faster keeps you interested too wen you ride the same route a lot like me.

Who cares if you're impressed?

We're all going to like them both, but I have the need for speed.

I've done centuries and ridden across the state, and it feels great to accomplish things like that. But to me, nothing beats the immediate satisfaction of going really, really fast. It's even better if it's going really, really fast down a steep hill where you don't have to work as hard.

If I were to die on Sunday, I'd rather break 60 MPH down a hill than ride 300 miles on Saturday.

Farther, because I like to get out of town into the rural areas

The purpose of this thread was to state your preference. I stated mine. I don't care whether you like it or not. I'll value your opinion, but don't bash mine. Keep your snarky attitude to yourself.

Distance because I like to explore. Every ride I try to find a new route, or a new route variation. I am amazed at how much stuff I have never seen that is within a 20 mile radius of my home until I went by on my bike. That being said, I always like to look at my computer when I am done and see what kind of speed numbers I have racked up. Its all good....

I don't mean to be snooty or anything.....but I really don't care if I impress you or anyone else.

Farther. I wanna see everthing......and I love ridin' the bike. :D

I vote for faster.

Once you are fast then train for endurance.

RIght now farther. I am working on my first century at the beginning of the year. After that it will be speed...

Drafting is a hollow accomplishment.

Now in a race it's different ....Drafting and everything thing else is fair game. In race situations it doesn't matter who burns the most calories....only who wins.

I don't mind caring, and even being impressed. A five-hour solo century is nothing at which to sneeze. That's both far and fast. My hat is off to that man or woman!

RAAM riders impress me. At the same time, a track rider with a sub-one minute flying kilo is also very impressive. (BTW, remember J. Boyer's RAAM? Impressive in both distance and speed.) Personally, I'll take the 60 mph downhill or 25-30 mph ride. I agree with the sentiment that anybody can ride 100 miles, if given enough time. Far fewer will brave, or can even do, either of the latter. But given it's a choice, that's why we ride our own bikes and with our own goals, eh?


Actually, it's the other way around. That's why successful riders put in base mileage before harder training. (BTW 53-11, do you really ride a bike? Why do I ask? Oh, just wondering....)

Maj. Taylor, I respect your knowledge about cycling....you obviously know more than I do.Yes, I do ride a bike. :lol:

P.S. I am right about the Mig-29 vs. F-16/F-18 (hahahaha....Everybody we started talking about planes in the Carbon Bike thread...it was awesome)

If given a choice between a fast 60 mile ride and a "slower" 100 mile ride, I'd pick the fast one everytime.

Faster. I like to accelerate, brake, and especially turn fast. It just make riding more fun. I just finished a century and I'm not doing that again for a looooong time.

Maj. Taylor beat me to it. Endurance before speed when training. This is my first year where I've given myself to the bike, and I will say firmly that before I can go fast, I have to be in shape. And that for me has come from putting in the miles.

Impressive? It's all about maintaining speed. Anyone can hit 60mph given a big enough hill. Anyone can do century given enough time. Where it matters and where class distinguishes itself, is when a rider can push himself to go faster and longer.

But FWIW, faster is more exciting to me.