# Why is my average speed so low?



## RichardB (9 Jan 2016)

I'm only gradually getting back into cycling, so while I am fitter than I was, I am still a long way from 'fit'. However, I am a bit disappointed with my average speeds. I live in Pembrokeshire and, while it is not the Lake District, it's certainly bumpy and my routes have a lot of gentle to moderate hills in them. My average for a circular run is between 10 and 11 mph usually. I'm happy to accept that this is a pretty miserable performance, but what surprises me is that, on a level bit of road, I can maintain 15-17 mph without much difficulty and I feel I could keep going all day. Do hills affect your average speed as much as this? (I understand that mathematically you can never regain the energy you put in going up a hill because of the need for braking and losses from wind resistance on the way down, but I'm surprised it is as much as this.)


----------



## cyberknight (9 Jan 2016)

Yup hills and stop/start at junctions and lights eat your average speed.


----------



## Globalti (9 Jan 2016)

When we go to the track for a blast around it takes a huge effort or a disciplined group to average even 18mph. And that's a completely flat circuit with no potholes, fast bends and no traffic or wind. Trying very hard indeed on the summer evening hooligan ride we can achieve 17mph on a road circuit with over 900 feet of climb. Solo and not trying too hard I usually manage about 14.5 mph average in hilly Lancashire.


----------



## kiwifruit (9 Jan 2016)

I struggle the same my average speed has plummeted to avg 13.5 compare to 16. See what's going to be like this morning, going for my 1st ride of 2016. Looks damp, cold and wet outside.


----------



## Oldbloke (9 Jan 2016)

It's the hills that make the difference, I usually average 15 to 17 mph here on hills and undulating terrain, mostly climbing around 1,000 ft per hour. A mate of mine from the flatter parts of Wiltshire averages 18 mph there but can't get near that here.

Just keep riding, it gets easier and/or faster!


----------



## screenman (9 Jan 2016)

Have you got any weight you could lose?


----------



## helston90 (9 Jan 2016)

Definitely the hills- we have plenty of gradients here and sometimes your average speed can be determined more by the route you take than the weather you are doing it in. 
Keep an eye on your speedo as you crawl up a hill at 8-9 mph and think how much time you have to spend above 22-23 mph in order to balance this out- it's a lot, especially if you climb a hill in 6 minutes and descend it in 1 minute. 

Also at this time of year your average will always be down a bit as covered by this article in Cycling Weekly


----------



## DWiggy (9 Jan 2016)

I do seem to slow down during the winter but it is dark, wet, cold and windy also the traffic is quite a bit slower/congested (around here anyway)


----------



## Erudin (9 Jan 2016)

Looking at strava flyby after my ride (pictured left) yesterday another rider on a harder 40 mile course averaged 18mph.






*Youtube: Budget Road Bike Review $500 VS $15000*


----------



## Mugshot (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> I'm only gradually getting back into cycling, so while I am fitter than I was, I am still a long way from 'fit'. However, I am a bit disappointed with my average speeds. I live in Pembrokeshire and, while it is not the Lake District, it's certainly bumpy and my routes have a lot of gentle to moderate hills in them. My average for a circular run is between 10 and 11 mph usually. I'm happy to accept that this is a pretty miserable performance, but what surprises me is that, on a level bit of road, I can maintain 15-17 mph without much difficulty and I feel I could keep going all day. Do hills affect your average speed as much as this? (I understand that mathematically you can never regain the energy you put in going up a hill because of the need for braking and losses from wind resistance on the way down, but I'm surprised it is as much as this.)


As has been pointed out already the weather is a massive factor at the moment, the cold and rain and particulalry headwinds can all knock your averages, mine is down by around 4-5mph from what I would expect it to be in the summer.
Also don't underestimate the Pembrokeshire terrain, there are more steep bits than you can shake a stick at if you want them and you don't have to look very hard, but even if you think you've planned a flat one it's very rolling round here, stuff you would never even notice in a car becomes a drag on the bike, and it's pretty relentlessly rolling too, you're either going up or you're going down, I can't think of too many sections where you could ride for even two miles without going up something and that relentlessness very quickly screws your average up. 
If you're out and riding in what we've had recently give yourself a pat on the back, don't beat yourself up over your average,


----------



## Mugshot (9 Jan 2016)

And try not to compare yourself to others, that way madness lies.


----------



## Sharky (9 Jan 2016)

My loops around the North Downs in Kent are surprisingly hilly and I never achieve more than 15mph, even in the summer when conditions are good. At the moment achieving around 13mph. But when it comes to our evening 10's, on a decent time trial course, rarely drop below 20mph. just shows the difference the terrain can make. Have you got your bike computer set to auto pause? I feel it is fair to eliminate any stops from punctures, traffic lights etc. from the calculation.


----------



## Accy cyclist (9 Jan 2016)

I take a mental note of the times i have to stop or slow down for traffic, pot holed roads, muddy roads and slower riders in front of me. Then when i get home i'll look at my computer saying av'13.4(for example) and write down 13.8 in my ride diary, as this is how much it would've been if it wasn't for those obstacles. If it's a nearly obstacle free ride i'll leave it as it is. From my experience i've found that a strong wind can drop your average down to say 12.5 mph after you've been cruising at 13.5 for most of the ride. Your recorded average speed tells you as much about the conditions of the ride as it does about your performance that day.


----------



## Wightdragon (9 Jan 2016)

Nothing wrong with those figures. Traffic wrecks any averages, mine plummet riding through Portsmouth on the way to work, and are 5 mph quicker in the countryside.


----------



## Osprey (9 Jan 2016)

Pembrokeshire is tougher terràin than your'e given it credit for. Plus you always seem to be against the prevailing winds. Your Dawes isn't particularly a machine to rush, so ignore your average speed and enjoy being out there. That's all its about.


----------



## Kajjal (9 Jan 2016)

Hills and wind will really hit your averages as will bike maintenance issues such as under inflated tyres. Riding in the drops with relatively tight fitting clothing makes a significant difference to cruising speed. By this i don't mean in a TT outfit


----------



## phil-b (9 Jan 2016)

I also live in Pembrokeshire are you riding just on the road or do you use any of the shared cycle paths. The cycle paths will also slow down your average speed because of the many gates.
but worrying about average speed is a little futile anyway as you are not comparing like for like. To check if you are getting faster you need to measure your time over a set route and repeat the same route and then compare your times. Also if you are riding alone you average will always be lower than riding with a group.

How are you measuring your average speed are stops included in your time or is the timer paused if you take a break, What average speed are you trying to achieve and how did you arrive at this number. Is it an arbitrary number pulled from space (or cyber space). it is easy to get hooked on the numbers and in essence they are meaningless unless you are working from a datum that is relevant to you. In the first line of your post you said you are fitter. So think what are you trying to achieve if it is fitness then it is already working. If you want to get faster so you can ride with a group don't worry that you are not good enough just find a beginners group ( they will teach a lot and they will be very patent with you as you get up to speed) and then you can work your way up.


----------



## Bobby Mhor (9 Jan 2016)

If you are enjoying your cycling, why worry about speed?


----------



## Brandane (9 Jan 2016)

Erudin said:


> Looking at strava flyby after my ride (pictured left) yesterday another rider on a harder 40 mile course averaged 18mph.
> 
> View attachment 115304
> View attachment 115305
> ...


Don't believe everything you read on Strava. A mate of mine records average speeds of about 23 mph on a local circuit. He is not slow, but even he will admit that 23 mph is BS.. Not sure, but I think the fact he uses his phone rather than a Garmin might have something to do with it. 
From memory, when initially setting up you can set it not to record when speed drops below a certain level. Supposedly so that when walking the bike through pedestrian areas etc. it doesn't affect average speed, but if someone was to set that at say 15 mph......


----------



## Pikey (9 Jan 2016)

Osprey said:


> Pembrokeshire is tougher terràin than your'e given it credit for. Plus you always seem to be against the prevailing winds. Your Dawes isn't particularly a machine to rush, so ignore your average speed and enjoy being out there. That's all its about.



Yeah, I wish strava could work out an average enjoyment measure and display that.


----------



## phil-b (9 Jan 2016)

this guy it talking about running training and seems a little wacky but I think he has a good point here that is also relevant to cycling


----------



## nickyboy (9 Jan 2016)

I ride in a very hilly area, typically 100ft climbing per mile. My "normal" average speed on a reasonably long (say more than 30 mile) ride is about 13.5mph. On a very flat ride in Cheshire, for example, I will average about 18mph

The reason is that the wind resistance is proportionate to the square of the velocity. If you do the maths, maintaining a constant speed results in less wind resistance than some fast riding (downhills) and some slow riding (uphills). That is the reason that hilly riding is slower than flat riding

The effect is marked. In the Peak District even the local professionals struggle to do more than 18mph on a hilly ride. The other speed killer is when the downhills are small, narrow roads where you have to scrub off speed to remain safe. I hate that


----------



## Pikey (9 Jan 2016)

In fact, I think that might be my new years resolution; to ignore my Strava segments and averages etc...
I think I got hung up on them last year and tbh, it really sucked the soul out of my riding and I think I lost sight of why I ride in the first place. I found myself and a mate waiting until the wind was blowing a gale in the right direction to get out on the tt bikes and 'smash' a segment, obsessing after each ride about my averages and why they weren't as high as this time last month etc... FFS.

Now I have the third wheel, I'm just gonna enjoy the rides, if they get longer and faster as a bi product, all the better.

I think the lack of 'kudos' wont make me cry myself to sleep for very long


----------



## 400bhp (9 Jan 2016)

Brandane said:


> Don't believe everything you read on Strava. A mate of mine records average speeds of about 23 mph on a local circuit. He is not slow, but even he will admit that 23 mph is BS.. Not sure, but I think the fact he uses his phone rather than a Garmin might have something to do with it.
> From memory, when initially setting up you can set it not to record when speed drops below a certain level. Supposedly so that when walking the bike through pedestrian areas etc. it doesn't affect average speed, but if someone was to set that at say 15 mph......



It's entirely possible to achieve 23mph with the right rider on the right circuit.


----------



## blazed (9 Jan 2016)

Bobby Mhor said:


> If you are enjoying your cycling, why worry about speed?


Considering he has made a thread about average speed one can assume that he is not just content with cycling about, and wants to make performance increases.

Why do the 'just ride your bike brigade' have such a hard time understanding why people would actually want to go faster/increase fitness?


----------



## 400bhp (9 Jan 2016)

User said:


> It is, and that is fine for those who are up to it and enjoy it. For everyone else though, why do it? Why not just ride your bike and enjoy it?



Not sure I follow that?

If you can physically do 23 then you can enjoy it.

If you can't physically do it then, well, there's nothing to talk about.


----------



## Citius (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> I am still a long way from 'fit'. However, I am a bit disappointed with my average speeds.



You just answered your own question. Average speed will improve with fitness.


----------



## 400bhp (9 Jan 2016)

Ah, understand.

I guess it's a hang-up people have, maybe psycholigically related.

Hang-ups or something more.


----------



## phil-b (9 Jan 2016)

[


Brandane said:


> Don't believe everything you read on Strava. A mate of mine records average speeds of about 23 mph on a local circuit. He is not slow, but even he will admit that 23 mph is BS.. Not sure, but I think the fact he uses his phone rather than a Garmin might have something to do with it.
> From memory, when initially setting up you can set it not to record when speed drops below a certain level. Supposedly so that when walking the bike through pedestrian areas etc. it doesn't affect average speed, but if someone was to set that at say 15 mph......





400bhp said:


> It's entirely possible to achieve 23mph with the right rider on the right circuit.



I think the point was not all GPS readings are always accurate


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (9 Jan 2016)

Don't worry. I don't give a stuff what my average speed is. I'm out and flying, that's all that matters.


----------



## Citius (9 Jan 2016)

phil-b said:


> I think the point was not all GPS readings are not always accurate



GPS will not give you an extra 5mph (it won't even give you an extra 2mph) - regardless of how you set it up.


----------



## Bobby Mhor (9 Jan 2016)

blazed said:


> Considering he has made a thread about average speed one can assume that he is not just content with cycling about, and wants to make performance increases.
> 
> Why do the 'just ride your bike brigade' have such a hard time understanding why people would actually want to go faster/increase fitness?



and seeing as I'm feeling generous, have a like

Have a nice day, friend


----------



## Brandane (9 Jan 2016)

400bhp said:


> It's entirely possible to achieve 23mph with the right rider on the right circuit.


I know that! But the rider I am referring to is someone I know, and believe me; he isn't going to average 23 mph on the circuit in question. Like I said, even HE says it is BS...


----------



## Joffey (9 Jan 2016)

To the OP:

Don't worry about it, keep putting the miles in and gradually your average speed will increase!


----------



## Brandane (9 Jan 2016)

blazed said:


> Considering he has made a thread about average speed one can assume that he is not just content with cycling about, and wants to make performance increases.
> 
> Why do the 'just ride your bike brigade' have such a hard time understanding why people would actually want to go faster/increase fitness?


As Adrian beat me to saying - we don't. It's you who doesn't get our POV......


blazed said:


> You should do it to the best of your ability and aim to make constsnt improvement.* I can't understand how so many 'cyclists' have no interest in times, power, speed *etc.


You're so busy trolling on a cycling forum these days - your uber God like cycling performance must be suffering .


----------



## Racing roadkill (9 Jan 2016)

Make the downhills count.


----------



## Stantheman (9 Jan 2016)

Last year I would use distance as a measure to getting fitter not speed, the further I ride the fitter I must be getting.


----------



## gavgav (9 Jan 2016)

I average 11 to 12 mph on most rides, perhaps 12.5 on flat rides, which I know is slow. But with a heavy bike and a pack I know it won't get much faster. To me, cycling isn't about the speed though, it's the enjoyment of being out


----------



## ScotiaLass (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> I'm only gradually getting back into cycling, so while I am fitter than I was, I am still a long way from 'fit'. However, I am a bit disappointed with my average speeds. I live in Pembrokeshire and, while it is not the Lake District, it's certainly bumpy and my routes have a lot of gentle to moderate hills in them. My average for a circular run is between 10 and 11 mph usually. I'm happy to accept that this is a pretty miserable performance, but what surprises me is that, on a level bit of road, I can maintain 15-17 mph without much difficulty and I feel I could keep going all day. Do hills affect your average speed as much as this? (I understand that mathematically you can never regain the energy you put in going up a hill because of the need for braking and losses from wind resistance on the way down, but I'm surprised it is as much as this.)


On the flat, even on the MTB, I can hold around 16mph, easily.
Show me a hill though and that drops to well under 10! I blame my arthritic knees but I think I just have an aversion to hills!


----------



## jonny jeez (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> I'm only gradually getting back into cycling, so while I am fitter than I was, I am still a long way from 'fit'. However, I am a bit disappointed with my average speeds. I live in Pembrokeshire and, while it is not the Lake District, it's certainly bumpy and my routes have a lot of gentle to moderate hills in them. My average for a circular run is between 10 and 11 mph usually. I'm happy to accept that this is a pretty miserable performance, but what surprises me is that, on a level bit of road, I can maintain 15-17 mph without much difficulty and I feel I could keep going all day. Do hills affect your average speed as much as this? (I understand that mathematically you can never regain the energy you put in going up a hill because of the need for braking and losses from wind resistance on the way down, but I'm surprised it is as much as this.)



If it helps, when I'm in really good form, for me to average say over 100 miles a speed of 18-20mph...then I have to be riding on the flat at about 25-27mph, to counter the stops at junctions, hill loss and slower sections of road.

I have only managed that a very few times when I was in pretty good shape, nowadays I'm a stone or two heavier and about 3,000 miles a year lower on my distance.

So, More realistically these days I can ride out on a Saturday and be buzzing along at about 22 mph (seems to be my capability right now) and over about 40 miles that always translates to about 14-15mph average...no matter what the terrain.

Also, Strava nicks about 1-2 mph when it translates my data. My garmin will show an average of 17mph, but when uploaded strava suggests something like 15....always.


----------



## phil-b (9 Jan 2016)

blazed said:


> Considering he has made a thread about average speed one can assume that he is not just content with cycling about, and wants to make performance increases.



but what is it that he is comparing it to. He says his average speed is low but compared to what? his previous performance or just a number pulled from others riding stats that where made under completely different circumstances by riders at different stages in training and skill level

to improve you need to better your own previous performance. it is good to have a goal but that needs to be something tangible and not just a random number


----------



## Smokin Joe (9 Jan 2016)

Stantheman said:


> Last year I would use distance as a measure to getting fitter not speed, the further I ride the fitter I must be getting.



If you read any of the professional riders talking about training they refer to time spent and effort expended, ie two hours hard, six hours steady, etc. I have never heard one mention average speed, presumably because it is a meaningless figure.

If you want to improve concentrate on the effort you put in and the time spent riding, average speed will take care of itself. That nonsense is for Strava junkies.


----------



## stupug (9 Jan 2016)

Does the weight of you might bike a big difference to up your average speed?


----------



## phil-b (9 Jan 2016)

stupug said:


> Does the weight of you might bike a big difference to up your average speed?



Do you mean does the weight of the bike make a big difference? The answer is No. bike weight may make a small difference but it is just on factor out of many. The person on the bike is the engine and this is the biggest factor that will determine how fast a bike can travel. Put the 1 litre eco engine from my corsa in the Ferrari F1 car and the average speed will drop,

If you want to improve get training if you just want a better bike go buy one


----------



## tallliman (9 Jan 2016)

Relative average speed on a circuit is what I use to judge how I'm doing (relative to me) but even then, wind direction can be a pretty large modifier on that for a flat ride.

Apart from that, just adding miles will help improve fitness which should (at least initially) translate to speed.


----------



## phil-b (9 Jan 2016)

tallliman said:


> Relative average speed on a circuit is what I use to judge how I'm doing (relative to me) but even then, wind direction can be a pretty large modifier on that for a flat ride.
> 
> Apart from that, just adding miles will help improve fitness which should (at least initially) translate to speed.



the "(relative to me)" part is the key phase here.


----------



## cyberknight (9 Jan 2016)

stupug said:


> Does the weight of you might bike a big difference to up your average speed?


Not as much as you think , my rigid MTB with slicks can trundle along on the flat at around 18 -19 mph ,over my 10 mile commute im maybe 2 minutes slower than my road bike but its certainly harder work but most of that could be down to a less aero position (?)


----------



## moo (9 Jan 2016)

Aero is king upto around 6% gradient.

The difference between a large rider upright on the hoods and a small slippery rider with a slammed stem in the drops is huge. The large rider may be putting out significantly more power, but the smaller aero rider is going to be faster.


----------



## Sharky (9 Jan 2016)

moo said:


> Aero is king upto around 6% gradient.
> 
> The difference between a large rider upright on the hoods and a small slippery rider with a slammed stem in the drops is huge. The large rider may be putting out significantly more power, but the smaller aero rider is going to be faster.


+1

I find my SS with a 68" freewheel, but with clip on aero bars, is about 1 mph faster than my gears bike without clip on's, over the same hilly loop.


----------



## Doyleyburger (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> Do hills affect your average speed


Er yeah 

I also live in your area and am well aware how hilly it is.
Don't get hung about about average speed, it doesn't mean sod all at the moment as there are way too many variables this time of year what with the wind and rain and dodgy road surfaces etc. These days I never look at the speed on my garmin, I just focus on my efforts and keep those pedal revolutions turning as high as I can.
My advice to you is just to keep hitting the hills and the speed will eventually look after itself come spring/summer. We live in a hilly area so get as good as you can on the hills.....simples
Keep going and enjoy


----------



## Justinslow (9 Jan 2016)

Not blowing my own trumpet but, I managed 100 miles on Tuesday @17mph, solo, not ridiculously hilly though (3314 ft according to strava). Another guy on the clubs strava page did 100 @20 in a group of 4.
I think it depends how you ride, where you ride and your ability, I'm just not happy bumbling along!


----------



## RichardB (9 Jan 2016)

screenman said:


> Have you got any weight you could lose?



Oh yes! Three stone down, two to go.



helston90 said:


> Keep an eye on your speedo as you crawl up a hill at 8-9 mph and think how much time you have to spend above 22-23 mph in order to balance this out- it's a lot, especially if you climb a hill in 6 minutes and descend it in 1 minute.



Absolutely. And if the downhills are narrow, wet and strewn with leaves you can't even do that 



Mugshot said:


> Also don't underestimate the Pembrokeshire terrain, there are more steep bits than you can shake a stick at if you want them and you don't have to look very hard, but even if you think you've planned a flat one it's very rolling round here, stuff you would never even notice in a car becomes a drag on the bike, and it's pretty relentlessly rolling too, you're either going up or you're going down, I can't think of too many sections where you could ride for even two miles without going up something and that relentlessness very quickly screws your average up.
> If you're out and riding in what we've had recently give yourself a pat on the back, don't beat yourself up over your average,



I try to take opportunities and dodge the showers. Get wet whatever! If you know the area, my rides are generally round the Hayscastle/Roch/Mathry areas and while it's not the Alps, you are right in saying you are either going up or down, and rarely level.



Mugshot said:


> And try not to compare yourself to others, that way madness lies.



Agreed. I wasn't really comparing myself (although it's useful to know a benchmark), just curious as to how other people found hills affected averages.



Sharky said:


> Have you got your bike computer set to auto pause? I feel it is fair to eliminate any stops from punctures, traffic lights etc. from the calculation.



Yes I have, but I don't really stop anyway, unless it's a short breather at the top of a hill. There is little traffic here, and no lights or busy crossings that I can blame!



Osprey said:


> Pembrokeshire is tougher terràin than your'e given it credit for. Plus you always seem to be against the prevailing winds. Your Dawes isn't particularly a machine to rush, so ignore your average speed and enjoy being out there. That's all its about.



I thought that posting the average from a circular ride would more or less eliminate the effect of a head or tail wind, but maybe not. The Dawes is no racer, that's for sure, but it's a nice comfy ride. I always enjoy the ride and while I am not aiming to break any records I like to push myself and do the best I can. Hence the question.


----------



## Julia9054 (9 Jan 2016)

moo said:


> Aero is king upto around 6% gradient.
> 
> The difference between a large rider upright on the hoods and a small slippery rider with a slammed stem in the drops is huge. The large rider may be putting out significantly more power, but the smaller aero rider is going to be faster.


I assume this explains why I catch my fella up on downhills. I thought that his greater mass (2 stone heavier than me) should make him faster downhill but being a lot smaller, I must be more aerodynamic!


----------



## RichardB (9 Jan 2016)

phil-b said:


> I also live in Pembrokeshire are you riding just on the road or do you use any of the shared cycle paths. The cycle paths will also slow down your average speed because of the many gates.
> but worrying about average speed is a little futile anyway as you are not comparing like for like. To check if you are getting faster you need to measure your time over a set route and repeat the same route and then compare your times. Also if you are riding alone you average will always be lower than riding with a group.
> 
> How are you measuring your average speed are stops included in your time or is the timer paused if you take a break, What average speed are you trying to achieve and how did you arrive at this number. Is it an arbitrary number pulled from space (or cyber space). it is easy to get hooked on the numbers and in essence they are meaningless unless you are working from a datum that is relevant to you. In the first line of your post you said you are fitter. So think what are you trying to achieve if it is fitness then it is already working. If you want to get faster so you can ride with a group don't worry that you are not good enough just find a beginners group ( they will teach a lot and they will be very patent with you as you get up to speed) and then you can work your way up.



Road only. I have used some of the cycle paths for leisure rides with family, but my (semi-) serious riding is on the road, always. And I am a bit of a loner, with no particular interest in riding in a group or racing anyone but myself 

My post wasn't really about how to improve my average speed. I'd like to get faster and go further (wouldn't we all?) but that is in hand, mentally. My post was really to enquire how much hills affected averages, as I was surprised to find my average just over 10 mph when on a given day (and bike) I was bowling along the flat at 16-17 mph without too much effort.



Bobby Mhor said:


> If you are enjoying your cycling, why worry about speed?



I am, and I don't worry about it. Just curious, as above.



nickyboy said:


> The reason is that the wind resistance is proportionate to the square of the velocity. If you do the maths, maintaining a constant speed results in less wind resistance than some fast riding (downhills) and some slow riding (uphills). That is the reason that hilly riding is slower than flat riding
> 
> The effect is marked. In the Peak District even the local professionals struggle to do more than 18mph on a hilly ride. The other speed killer is when the downhills are small, narrow roads where you have to scrub off speed to remain safe. I hate that



Sound reasoning. And your last point is spot-on. The rides I am talking about are on narrow lanes, with twisty downhills, blind junctions, leaves, gravel and the like. Barrelling down them at 35 is not an option - apart from a section of the coast road I use, where 35 is easily achieved, although not for long!



blazed said:


> Considering he has made a thread about average speed one can assume that he is not just content with cycling about, and wants to make performance increases.
> 
> Why do the 'just ride your bike brigade' have such a hard time understanding why people would actually want to go faster/increase fitness?





Citius said:


> You just answered your own question. Average speed will improve with fitness.



The post wasn't concerned with fitness, but with asking for other people's experience regarding the effect of hills on average speed. Perhaps I could have worded the title better. I ride for the sake of riding, and I would also like to be fitter (of course), so that places me half-way between the 'just ride your bike' and performance camps, and no arguments will be entered into 

Thanks for all the responses. Very interesting and informative.


----------



## screenman (9 Jan 2016)

My local rides in Lincolnshire will return around 17mph average, when I ride over in Shropshire and put the hills in it will drop to 14 for the same distance.


----------



## Smokin Joe (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> I try to take opportunities and dodge the showers. Get wet whatever! If you know the area, my rides are generally round the Hayscastle/Roch/Mathry areas and while it's not the Alps, you are right in saying you are either going up or down, and rarely level.



I sometimes ride round that area and as Pembrokeshire goes it isn't too hilly but there are some hefty lumps along the way especially if you take the coast roads. That climb from the A487 up to Mathry is a real leg killer, though thankfully fairly short. I nearly rode into the back of a parked car while grinding up there once and looking about a yard in front of my wheel. I only avoided it because I was going so slow the bike stopped as soon as I stopped pedalling.


----------



## Citius (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> *The post wasn't concerned with fitness*, but with asking for other people's experience regarding the effect of hills on average speed



It is concerned with fitness, because that is precisely why you are disappointed with your average speeds. Average speed is exactly what it says - an average of all the speeds you ride at while you are on the road. That is what an average is. Riding below your average speed will reduce your average. Riding above your average speed will increase your average. But either way, what you end up with is the average of all the speeds you have ridden at. Want a higher average? Improve your fitness and ride faster.


----------



## raleighnut (9 Jan 2016)

Julia9054 said:


> I assume this explains why I catch my fella up on downhills. I thought that his greater mass (2 stone heavier than me) should make him faster downhill but being a lot smaller, I must be more aerodynamic!


It might also be down to the bike/wheels, my Carlton always 'rolled' faster than just about any of my friends bikes. It isn't anything special* (other than being a Carlton) it has Maillard wideflange hubs though, again nothing out of the ordinary, but every time we all went out and were just rolling down a slight slope (having a break and a natter, all freewheeling) it used to gradually pull out/catch up on the others so I'd either have to brake a bit or they'd have to pedal a bit to maintain speed. I let a couple of them have a brief ride on it (at the time it wasn't mine as it belonged to my cousin, still does really) and it still did that 'rolling faster' thing, dunno why.

* The bike is a 68 or so Carlton Clubman which as @Spokesmann will confirm isn't really anything special. probably the 'bottom' of their range at the time.


----------



## jonny jeez (9 Jan 2016)

blazed said:


> Considering he has made a thread about average speed one can assume that he is not just content with cycling about, and wants to make performance increases.
> 
> Why do the 'just ride your bike brigade' have such a hard time understanding why people would actually want to go faster/increase fitness?


It's actually pretty simple.

Cycling is a broad activity covering so many disciplines. A chap riding a shopping basket to tesco'stesco to pick up a bottle of merlot, is a cyclist.

The first British winner of the world famous Tour de France, is also a cyclist.

The two, however share nothin in common than the fact that they ride a bike for some reason.

If you treat cycling as a leisure activity, you may find that speed has no interest and that the enjoyment is about travelling.

If you treat it as a sport, you shall most likely wish to show gains, improvements and personal bests.

Nothing wrong with either and neither are a "brigade". You both need to just come to terms with the concept that differnet riders get something different out of the activity and approach it for different reasons.


----------



## Ihatehills (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> I thought that posting the average from a circular ride would more or less eliminate the effect of a head or tail wind, but maybe not.



Definitely not as far as I'm concerned, I haven't been out without at least a 16 mph wind blowing for weeks, and my average has gone from around 14.5mph to around 13 when the wind is blowing from the south West, a couple of rides have been with a northerly wind and I'm back around 14 mph, it is a circular route but the south west wind really hits me on a three mile stretch of flatish road ( the strava segment is called " it all depends on the wind") on a good day I cruise at between 18 to 22 mph on this section, into a headwind I'm down to at most 12 sometimes below 10 depending on the wind strength and I just never make it back up. 

Im fairly sure I'll speed up again in the summer, I don't think That winter is the time to be comparing speeds, I'm fairly pleased That I'm still making the effort to get out as motivation is hard to find in sh1tty weather


----------



## tallliman (9 Jan 2016)

I was thinking about this thread as I was looking at veloviewer. Since I got my new bike, I've been worried that it's slower than my older bike which was exacerbated by the fact I commuted to work yesterday on my old bike and was quicker by 2mph. However, if I look at the rides from this year with the new bike compared to the old bike, I've done 2,500ft of climbing on the new bike and 500ft on the old one (for a similar distance). So it makes sense that the new bike has been slower due to the terrain!!


----------



## Citius (9 Jan 2016)

tallliman said:


> So it makes sense that the new bike has been slower due to the terrain!!



You mean *you've* been slower. It's not the bike's fault.


----------



## tallliman (9 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> You mean *you've* been slower. It's not the bike's fault.



Yeah, I do! I should've said that it makes sense that the rides I've done on the new bike have been slower.


----------



## screenman (9 Jan 2016)

I have worked it out with the help of Mr Smirnoff, you are not pedalling hard enough.


----------



## Joshua Plumtree (9 Jan 2016)

...or fast enough.


----------



## screenman (9 Jan 2016)

Joshua Plumtree said:


> ...or fast enough.



Did he help you as well?


----------



## Justinslow (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> I was surprised to find my average just over 10 mph when on a given day (and bike) I was bowling along the flat at 16-17 mph without too much effort.


Arrrr, but you want to be bowling along the flat at 22 mph not 16-17! And effort is good, you need effort!


----------



## RichardB (9 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> It is concerned with fitness,


Not really. Not even the maths, which I understand. It was asking for other people's experiences of the effect of terrain on average speed, and wondering if my own was typical. I only mentioned my fitness (or relative lack of it) in the original post to try to avoid people focusing on that aspect. Obviously, I didn't do that very well.


----------



## RichardB (9 Jan 2016)

Justinslow said:


> Arrrr, but you want to be bowling along the flat at 22 mph not 16-17! And effort is good, you need effort!


I was resting from all the bastard hills. Cut me some slack!


----------



## Citius (9 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> Not really. Not even the maths, which I understand. It was asking for other people's experiences of the effect of terrain on average speed, and wondering if my own was typical. I only mentioned my fitness (or relative lack of it) in the original post to try to avoid people focusing on that aspect. Obviously, I didn't do that very well.



I don't really understand what your issue is. Assuming you understand what makes an average speed, then scientifically, it follows that everyone else's experience will be exactly the same as yours. Because everyone else is subject to the same laws of physics that you are.

And if you are - as you said in your first post - 'disappointed' with your average speed, then that is something which can easily be addressed by improving your fitness. Or keeping to flat routes.


----------



## Justinslow (9 Jan 2016)

If your riding involves loads of hills, then yes your average speed will be lower than that on more flatter terrain, just looking at some of my strava rides and I'm getting up some of the hills around 12 mph.........


----------



## Justinslow (9 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> can easily be addressed by improving your fitness


True but not "easy" it's chuffing hard work


----------



## Citius (9 Jan 2016)

Justinslow said:


> True but not "easy" it's chuffing hard work



well, yeah..


----------



## Smurfy (9 Jan 2016)

I don't average more than about 13mph on a hilly ride, although I do have the excuse of being on fixed wheel. I could probably go a bit faster, but it would take away the enjoyment, so I happily pootle along, gawping at the view as I go.


----------



## jonny jeez (9 Jan 2016)

tallliman said:


> I was thinking about this thread as I was looking at veloviewer. Since I got my new bike, I've been worried that it's slower than my older bike which was exacerbated by the fact I commuted to work yesterday on my old bike and was quicker by 2mph. However, if I look at the rides from this year with the new bike compared to the old bike, I've done 2,500ft of climbing on the new bike and 500ft on the old one (for a similar distance). So it makes sense that the new bike has been slower due to the terrain!!


I think its feasible that your new bike could be slower.

Fatter tyres, different gearing, heavier frame...all possibilities. If it feels slower on the same commute, either it could be or perhaps you are still adjusting to it and yet to find its sweet spot.

If it's none of those and the weather is the same...then I'm afraid it only leaves the engine...which may be in need of an MOT.


----------



## Donger (9 Jan 2016)

I wouldn't have thought there is any issue here .... unless you are struggling to keep up with riding companions. It so happens that the stats you give in your original post are almost identical to my own .... after 7 years of riding. Being comfortable doing a steady 15-17mph on the flat all day but always seeming to average 10-12 mph by the end of a long, mixed terrain ride is something I can really identify with. Who knows, it might just mean that you are a natural audaxer. Those stats would get you round most 100km audax events comfortably within the time limits.


----------



## Pale Rider (9 Jan 2016)

The OP's 10 or 11mph average sounds OK to me, bearing in mind he's seen a few summers and rides a steel tourer.

The cycling monster that is Steve Abraham rides a similar bike.

He hunts flat routes and tail winds all the time, but still 'only' averages about 14mph.


----------



## tallliman (9 Jan 2016)

jonny jeez said:


> I think its feasible that your new bike could be slower.
> 
> Fatter tyres, different gearing, heavier frame...all possibilities. If it feels slower on the same commute, either it could be or perhaps you are still adjusting to it and yet to find its sweet spot.
> 
> If it's none of those and the weather is the same...then I'm afraid it only leaves the engine...which may be in need of an MOT.



I'm definitely still getting used to the bike and yes it could ultimately be slower. However my point was more that the average speed of the newer bike has been slower to date due to the greater amount of climbing per mile that I've done on it. I need a back to back check but I'd not realised this until now


----------



## mjr (10 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> And if you are - as you said in your first post - 'disappointed' with your average speed, then that is something which can easily be addressed by improving your fitness. Or keeping to flat routes.


Or changing your mindset. If your fitness is about as good as it gets and your routes necessarily involve hills, that's all that's left.

What blazed seems to ignore is that going faster does not necessarily improve fitness. I could push and go a bit faster but my health is such that that means I won't ride for 2-3 days after and what would be the point of that? It would probably mean a net loss of fitness.

Back to the OP: hills dent your average speeds also as much as urban areas IME. Losing 2mph average is almost certain. Up to 5mph possible.


----------



## bpsmith (10 Jan 2016)

@mjray is spot on. Setting yourself targets is great, and I enjoy that myself, but if it's to the detriment of health then that's nuts.

It's all about setting realistic targets, that can change over time, but balancing against keeping yourself riding.


----------



## Spoked Wheels (10 Jan 2016)

If everything else fails then I suggest you and your gps device jump in the car for a 10 minutes ride. You'll be amazed of the improvement, no training is required, further more, you don't need to spend on new bikes or tyres....


----------



## 400bhp (10 Jan 2016)

jonny jeez said:


> It's actually pretty simple.
> 
> Cycling is a broad activity covering so many disciplines. A chap riding a shopping basket to tesco'stesco to pick up a bottle of merlot, is a cyclist.
> 
> ...



And this is a good summary of why cycling is such a fantastic way to spend your time doing it.


----------



## 400bhp (10 Jan 2016)

tallliman said:


> I was thinking about this thread as I was looking at veloviewer. Since I got my new bike, *I've been worried* that it's slower than my older bike which was exacerbated by the fact I commuted to work yesterday on my old bike and was quicker by 2mph. However, if I look at the rides from this year with the new bike compared to the old bike, I've done 2,500ft of climbing on the new bike and 500ft on the old one (for a similar distance). So it makes sense that the new bike has been slower due to the terrain!!



Why are you worried? Genuinely I'd ask you to think deeply about this.


----------



## Buck (10 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> However, I am a bit disappointed with my average speeds.



The average is just that and doesn't reflect the mix of your ride, the hills, the junctions etc. I would suggest focussing on your performance on the same sections of road to see if you are improving or not - both of which are, in my experience, motivating.



RichardB said:


> I live in Pembrokeshire and, while it is not the Lake District, it's certainly bumpy and my routes have a lot of gentle to moderate hills in them. My average for a circular run is between 10 and 11 mph usually. I'm happy to accept that this is a pretty miserable performance, but what surprises me is that, on a level bit of road, I can maintain 15-17 mph without much difficulty and I feel I could keep going all day. Do hills affect your average speed as much as this?



I live in Yorkshire and I can relate to the hilly terrain. I just looked at a ride I did yesterday and going up a hill near me (the segment is appropriately called "Steep!" and I averaged 5.0mph - admittedly not my best but that was only 6.7mph) On the same ride yesterday there is a lovely flat section and I hit 27.8mph with my best being 30.5mph!

I know the hills can have a large impact on my ride numbers but that is something that I just accept and try not to focus on the numbers - each ride do your best and enjoy it!

Until I read this thread, I hadn't even looked at the averages and tend to focus on a whole ride time or individual segment times as my comparison to myself.


----------



## SpokeyDokey (10 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> I'm only gradually getting back into cycling, so while I am fitter than I was, I am still a long way from 'fit'. However, I am a bit disappointed with my average speeds. I live in Pembrokeshire and, while it is not the Lake District, it's certainly bumpy and my routes have a lot of gentle to moderate hills in them. My average for a circular run is between 10 and 11 mph usually. I'm happy to accept that this is a pretty miserable performance, but what surprises me is that, on a level bit of road, I can maintain 15-17 mph without much difficulty and I feel I could keep going all day. Do hills affect your average speed as much as this? (I understand that mathematically you can never regain the energy you put in going up a hill because of the need for braking and losses from wind resistance on the way down, but I'm surprised it is as much as this.)



@RichardB

Hills affect me massively.

As already mentioned in the thread, down's do not always compensate for the ups. I can slog up a hill at 4-6 mph in some cases and then go down a twisty, slithery thing, running with water and filled with blind bends at not a lot more tbh. Both the up's and the down's affect my overall average speed (14.2 for 2015) quite dramatically. On flattish roads I usually run at around 18-20 mph occasionally flipping up to around 22/23 mph. So hills, overall, knock out very roughly 4-6 mph across the year - notwithstanding the effects of wind, feeling like crap or just being plain demotivated.

I averaged 78'/mile over 2200 miles last year in the Lake District - and I steer well clear of the really hilly bits tbh.

Pembrokeshire is far from flat as you know and has similar lanes to here plus you probably take more hammer from the wind too - where I live (eastern side of the main mountains) I am screened by the big hills to some extent.
Sounds like you are doing ok to me - keep at it!


----------



## Smokin Joe (10 Jan 2016)

SpokeyDokey said:


> @RichardB
> 
> Pembrokeshire is far from flat as you know and has similar lanes to here plus you probably take more hammer from the wind too - where I live (eastern side of the main mountains) I am screened by the big hills to some extent.



Wind isn't that much of a problem here, high hedgerows are the norm and they afford a lot of protection. When I lived in Essex the wind could be a nightmare as the hedgerows had largely disappeared and you were at the mercy of every little gust. I have memories of riding a time trial in north Essex and having to drop to the small ring on a dead flat section, the headwind was so strong.


----------



## RichardB (10 Jan 2016)

Thanks for the helpful responses. To reiterate; this isn't a question about how I can improve my average speeds, but to ask if other people find their averages knocked back by hills as much as I do. The answer seems to be pretty much in the affirmative, so thank you all for confirming and reassuring. I thought losing perhaps 6 mph to the terrain was unusual, but obviously not. And I know the times will come down and the speeds go up as I get fitter - I just need to put the hours in.



Donger said:


> Those stats would get you round most 100km audax events comfortably within the time limits.



Now THAT is encouragement! I'm booked in for an 80km ride in April, and I hope to finish before the last checkpoint locks up and goes home, so that's good news.



Pale Rider said:


> The OP's 10 or 11mph average sounds OK to me, bearing in mind he's seen a few summers and rides a steel tourer.



That's an extremely kind way of describing me. I appreciate it


----------



## Mugshot (12 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> I try to take opportunities and dodge the showers. Get wet whatever! If you know the area, my rides are generally round the Hayscastle/Roch/Mathry areas and while it's not the Alps, you are right in saying you are either going up or down, and rarely level.


I know the area well and ride it quite often, as @Smokin Joe has said dependant on your route it doesn't have to be the hilliest but there are plenty of lumps and drags (mind you if your route includes New Gale to Penycwm ) long and short of it as loads have already said is yes, hills can destroy your average.


----------



## Dogtrousers (12 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> Thanks for the helpful responses. To reiterate; this isn't a question about how I can improve my average speeds, but to ask if other people find their averages knocked back by hills as much as I do. The answer seems to be pretty much in the affirmative, so thank you all for confirming and reassuring. I thought losing perhaps 6 mph to the terrain was unusual, but obviously not. And I know the times will come down and the speeds go up as I get fitter - I just need to put the hours in.


I'm about as slow as you. If I choose my hillier 100k routes (about 1600m climb) it can take me around 6 hours, so about 10mph (start-to-finish including stops: none of your ego-flattering moving averages). But a flatter 100k (say 1000m) I can get through in 5 hours. 

Don't underestimate the psychological effect too. If you spend a lot of time slogging slowly up hills you get stuck in slow-slog mode (or at least, I do) and find yourself slogging slowly along on the flat. A cold wet day, and a slow start with a few hills can almost guarantee a slow rest of the ride for me.


----------



## totallyfixed (12 Jan 2016)

No one, unless I missed it somewhere, has pointed out that averages also include the warm up period at the start of the ride, the only way round that is to get on the turbo / roller prior to setting out. I typically take 11 miles to get properly warmed up so average speed up until then is fairly academic, particularly as leaving home is far from flat. Average speed would comfortably be 1 - 2 mph higher if the warm up period was excluded. In the colder months average speed will also be less, but then in winter long and steady is an old maxim that still holds true.


----------



## Dogtrousers (12 Jan 2016)

Also, you could reappraise what the point is of measuring average speed. You could divide your cycling by time (today I cycled for X hours) or distance (today I did Y miles or km). Personally, I'm more concerned with distance. Average speed is only an issue for me personally if I can't fit the distance I want to ride into the time available. When that happens, I just have to allot more time and get up earlier, or not ride as far, or choose a flatter route, or some combination of these. The only other reason (for me) to worry about average speed is the cut-off times of events that I may want to enter. Audaxes tend to be quite generous in this respect, and more welcoming to the dallying rider. Sportives, less so (which is why we had problems when Velothon Wales upped the published minimum speed requirements last year).


----------



## Ajax Bay (12 Jan 2016)

The high levels of activity on this thread are impressive: well done the OP, even if many focused on your weight, weight of your Dawes, the philosphy of cycling, your fitness (or path thereto), the hilliness of Pembrokeshire. The OP has reiterated:



RichardB said:


> To reiterate; this isn't a question about how I can improve my average speeds, but to ask if other people find their averages knocked back by hills as much as I do. The answer seems to be pretty much in the affirmative, so thank you all for confirming and reassuring. I thought losing perhaps 6 mph to the terrain was unusual, but obviously not.



This is a derivative of the OP's enquiry. Taking a lateral step, for tour planning then, what allowance is it sensible to make for the amount of climbing/descent on a day's ride? I have wanted to do this to inform where to end each day on a mult-day tour.

For example if a LEJOG route is 1600km and the height gain/loss is circa 16000m and you want to break it into 'equal days. Doing it in 10 days divided purely on distance gives you 160km a day. But Day 1 has 2000m of climb. Stripping out the many other aspects (eg road type, quality of surface, conurbation concentration, expected prevailing wind) Is 150km + 2000m of climb going to be 'harder' than 180km and 1000m (eg Day 4)?

Or more simply, when deciding whether to go over or round a group of hills or spur, what is 100m of climb worth, in terms of the length of detour required? Walking has Naismith's Rule but I have been unable to find a persuasive equivalent for cycling planning. @Globalti asked something similar 30 months ago with no decent answer: https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/sort-of-equivalent-to-naismiths-rule-for-bikes.137044/
In another thread at: http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/hills-how-bad.62439/ @hubbike suggested a x8 rule but @andym doubted that (and I think it's too low too).

As a guestimate I have used a x25 rule before: for me 7.5km with 100m climb will take about the same time as 10km on the flat ((5km@30kph + 2.5km@15kph) v (10km@30kph)). But does this weight hills/climbing/descending too much? The fitter, faster and/or 'supported' cyclist will be less affected by the 'hilliness' of a ride and the laden tourer, but what is the range (of climb multiplyer) for planning purposes?


----------



## totallyfixed (12 Jan 2016)

When planning a tour our daily distances are nearly always of a similar length, I allow for anything up to 8hrs of riding, this would include hilly /getting lost / puncture, headwinds etc. It is really just common sense and subjective according to your capabilities, hills slow some more than others as you have intimated. Looking back at our diaries for similar distances over flat v hilly [in this case 80 miles], it took us about the same time, the reason for this is we just pushed a bit harder knowing the terrain that lay ahead.
I think [like a lot of cyclists do] you can over complicate things, the way to plan is to think of all the worst things that could happen in a days ride, throw in a few hills and a head wind then work out how far you could ride in those conditions, everything else is then a bonus.
Why does the text have a line through it?

*Mod edit*: lines through text removed for you.


----------



## Dogtrousers (12 Jan 2016)

Ajax Bay said:


> As a guestimate I have used a x25 rule before: for me 7.5km with 100m climb will take about the same time as 10km on the flat ((5km@30kph + 2.5km@15kph) v (10km@30kph)). But does this weight hills/climbing/descending too much? The fitter, faster and/or 'supported' cyclist will be less affected by the 'hilliness' of a ride and the laden tourer, but what is the range (of climb multiplyer) for planning purposes?



I once tried to do something like this using my own ride data. I gave up. The external factors were too great and the effect of hills was just one factor in amongst a load of other noise.


----------



## RichardB (12 Jan 2016)

totallyfixed said:


> Why does the text have a line through it?


Have you put a lower-case 's' in square brackets anywhere? That would activate strikethrough in HTML.


----------



## RichardB (12 Jan 2016)

Mugshot said:


> there are plenty of lumps and drags (mind you if your route includes New Gale to Penycwm )



To be blunt, I haven't tried Penycwm on a bicycle, ever. I used to love it on the motorbike, better going up than down.



Dogtrousers said:


> Also, you could reappraise what the point is of measuring average speed.



That's a good point. Partly I am a bit of a maths geek, and while away long car journeys calculating mpg, ETA etc in my head, and averages interest me, especially if they move. So the average speed function on the little computer interests me more than the max speed, for example. Partly I am using average speed as a measure of general fitness, and now I think about it, it's not really appropriate. My average hasn't changed much in six months, but the length of time and distance I can ride at that speed have increased, and the level of knackeration less at the end of it. It's not a 'fitness programme', though - just riding more and getting better at it.


----------



## Smokin Joe (12 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> To be blunt, I haven't tried Penycwm on a bicycle, ever. I used to love it on the motorbike, better going up than down.



If you want a real leg breaker try the climb from Llanychaer up to the A487 just north of Fishguard. 25% with a couple of hairpins to make it interesting. Going up is tough, descending is terrifying as you approach the corners with the brakes full on and the bike refusing to slow.


----------



## Citius (12 Jan 2016)

Smokin Joe said:


> If you want a real leg breaker try the climb from Llanychaer up to the A487 just north of Fishguard. 25% with a couple of hairpins to make it interesting. Going up is tough, descending is terrifying as you approach the corners with the brakes full on and the bike refusing to slow.



Is that the Bessie's climb, Joe?


----------



## RichardB (13 Jan 2016)

Smokin Joe said:


> If you want a real leg breaker try the climb from Llanychaer up to the A487 just north of Fishguard. 25% with a couple of hairpins to make it interesting. Going up is tough, descending is terrifying as you approach the corners with the brakes full on and the bike refusing to slow.


Llanychaer to Lower Fishguard isn't too bad. But the climb out of Fishguard on the A487 is bad enough in a car - a really tough hill and one I will leave until I am very much fitter. Mind you, there is a little layby at the top where someone was serving fabulous ice-cream a couple of years ago.


----------



## Smokin Joe (13 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> Is that the Bessie's climb, Joe?


No, that runs off the Gwuan Valley. I've been along the Gwuan many a time but never plucked up the nerve to try that one.


----------



## RichardB (14 Jan 2016)

Smokin Joe said:


> No, that runs off the Gwuan Valley. I've been along the Gwuan many a time but never plucked up the nerve to try that one.


Post the grid ref, and I'll go and check it out.

In the car.


----------



## Citius (14 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> Post the grid ref, and I'll go and check it out.



Look for Pontfaen and Cwm Gwaun off the B4313 - the climb is up Ffordd Bedd Morris - on the map just look for a road with two zig-zag hairpins at the bottom...


----------



## RichardB (14 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> Look for Pontfaen and Cwm Gwaun off the B4313 - the climb is up Ffordd Bedd Morris - on the map just look for a road with two zig-zag hairpins at the bottom...


That's a serious bit of road. I've walked a lot round there, but ...


----------



## Citius (14 Jan 2016)

RichardB said:


> That's a serious bit of road. I've walked a lot round there, but ...



I've been up the hill once, or maybe twice - it's not pleasant. Nice views at the top though...


----------



## RichardB (14 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> I've been up the hill once, or maybe twice - it's not pleasant. Nice views at the top though...


It's a lovely area, very lonely and wild. One of my proudest moments was walking on Carn Ingli one November when the fog came down, a real pea-souper. I navigated back to the car (parked close to the Bedd Morris stone) by compass and dead reckoning, and when I reached the road the car was 20 ft away.


----------



## huwsparky (15 Jan 2016)

Citius said:


> I've been up the hill once, or maybe twice - it's not pleasant. Nice views at the top though...


I've come down that road and always thought that it would be a good one to do coming the other way, It's a really nice climb coming up from Newport as well, doesn't look as brutal though. Some really nice climbs in north Pembs but it would be nice if there were some longer ones.


----------



## Smokin Joe (15 Jan 2016)

huwsparky said:


> I've come down that road and always thought that it would be a good one to do coming the other way, It's a really nice climb coming up from Newport as well, doesn't look as brutal though. Some really nice climbs in north Pembs but it would be nice if there were some longer ones.


Be a bloody sight nicer if there were far less of the buggers. Wait till you get to your sixties.


----------



## huwsparky (15 Jan 2016)

Smokin Joe said:


> Be a bloody sight nicer if there were far less of the buggers. Wait till you get to your sixties.


Haha. Fair play to you. You must be as fit as a fiddle riding them roads regular. Always love having the time to go for a ride down to Pembrokeshire. We are fortunate enough to have a few hills around us also which is nice.


----------

