# How to get a gradient profile



## mrsbaggins (12 Aug 2010)

have noticed a few people showing gradients of their rides and wondered how you do it? does it need special software and if so is it a shareware type? thanks


----------



## Mystique (12 Aug 2010)

mrsbaggins said:


> have noticed a few people showing gradients of their rides and wondered how you do it? does it need special software and if so is it a shareware type? thanks



I use a website called Bike Hike and you can enter your planned route or even the route you've just done and it calculates the distance, elevation and gradients for you using graphs. It's very good and quick and easy to pick up and play with.


----------



## Ticktockmy (12 Aug 2010)

mrsbaggins said:


> have noticed a few people showing gradients of their rides and wondered how you do it? does it need special software and if so is it a shareware type? thanks



Memory map software here.


----------



## mrsbaggins (12 Aug 2010)

great! thank you I will have a look


----------



## adscrim (12 Aug 2010)

There are a number of sites but for what it's worth, I find bike hike very easy to use. You can't save routes on the site anymore but you can download the data files and save them on your own computer. From here they can be uploaded at a later date.


----------



## tincaman (12 Aug 2010)

Veloroutes 

Give it a try.


----------



## HLaB (12 Aug 2010)

I didn't like Veloroutes, it was slow and cumbersome and dramatically overestimated gradients. For gradient accuracy my favourite is the afforementioned Bike Hike, its just a pity you cant save the route now :-( I have to use Bikely, Mapyride or RidewithGPS to do that.


----------



## magnatom (12 Aug 2010)

I'm another who likes bikehike.

Remember if you want a detailed gradient profile of any hill, remember not to just let the software map the hill for you (i.e. click on the bottom and the top). You don't have control over how far apart the sample points are then. If they are far apart larger gradients are averaged out with surrounding lower gradients.


----------



## jimboalee (12 Aug 2010)

None are 'deadly accurate'.

Bike Hike gets the 10% of Chesterton bank OK because the rise covers more than two contours on the OS map.

Hatton Hill however, has its little length of 10% between contours in a 'S' shaped curve, ie the 10% bit is for less than 5m and comes at the end of a 500m long 5%.

This effect happens numerous times where there might be a NASTY xx% rise that lasts LESS than the contour resolution.
For a strong seasoned cyclist, these pose little problems, but for a newbie, a 14ft tall bit of >20% is like hitting a brick wall, and they stop dead and jump off to walk ( or have a clipless moment  ).

OS doesn't always catch them as they do a measure of the contour and distance after they've surveyed.

Canal bridges are a prime example. Short, sharp and do not appear as gradients on the OS map. So they don't appear on the mapping sites.
There is an area of Leicestershire where this thing proliferates. Novice cyclists are to be seen dismounting and walking their bikes over the canal bridges, or draped on the bridge wall with both feet still in the pedals....


----------



## HLaB (12 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> None are 'deadly accurate'.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Or if the bridge is long enough mapping software records them as a fall to sea level but in fact its an uphill gradient


----------



## ColinJ (12 Aug 2010)

Ticktockmy said:


> Memory map software here.



Memory Map only does _altitude_ profiles. At least, I can't see any way of doing a gradient profile, but if there is, please tell me how to do it!


----------



## HLaB (12 Aug 2010)

ColinJ said:


> Memory Map only does _altitude_ profiles. At least, I can't see any way of doing a gradient profile, but if there is, please tell me how to do it!



I don't think there is; I've occasionally used the distance up by distance across formula but that isn't all that useful or practical for a entire route. To get gradient I've either used the Garmin Training centre for a point gradient or Bikehike. 'RidewithGPS' looks good but I don't think its too accurate.


----------



## jimboalee (12 Aug 2010)

HLaB said:


> Or if the bridge is long enough mapping software records them as a fall to sea level but in fact its an uphill gradient




Or when the road goes through a cutting. The map data follows the hill's terrain because no-one at Navteq can be arsed to do a sensible approximation.  


Although I hear a rumour that their GPS positioning and evevation data is now being collected by chappies driving round in small dark blue vans with a big dome on the roof.

Maybe sometime in the future, Navteq will have position and elevation data down to 1m accuracy.....


----------



## jdrussell (12 Aug 2010)

I find this site a bit better than bike hike, it allows me to export to my Garmin GPS as well


----------



## HJ (12 Aug 2010)

I use bikemap.net which find has lots of user friendly tools.


----------



## jimboalee (12 Aug 2010)

My procedure when I recieve the routesheet for an Audax I have not ridden before is to.. 1/ Translate it onto Mapsource. 2/ Find alternatives, if any. 3/ 'Fly' the route on the OS Pathfinder ( Via Streetmap.co.uk ) to looksie for closely bunched contours, bridges, stairways, cliffedges etc.

I load all the possibilities on my Edge and make the choice of route on the day.


----------



## jimboalee (12 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> My procedure when I recieve the routesheet for an Audax I have not ridden before is to.. 1/ Translate it onto Mapsource. 2/ Find alternatives, if any. 3/ 'Fly' the route on the OS Pathfinder ( Via Streetmap.co.uk ) to looksie for closely bunched contours, bridges, stairways, cliffedges etc.
> 
> I load all the possibilities on my Edge and make the choice of route on the day.




There was a 200 km Audax a few years back where the route took a dual use footbridge over the A38 trunk road at Weeford, Sth Staffs.
The ramps of the bridge were well over 20%. Mapsource ( and every other mapping sofware I could find ) wouldn't use the bridge in an 'auto routing' route.
I had to finish a section at the leadup to the bridge, and start the next section at the ramp down from the bridge.

I enjoyed a can of Coke while walking my bike and Garmin Legend was calculating the next section to INFO_5


----------



## jimboalee (12 Aug 2010)

The moral of my witterings is....

Don't get too reliant on internet routefinders. Check and double-check on a real map.


----------



## ColinJ (12 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The moral of my witterings is....
> 
> Don't get too reliant on internet routefinders. Check and double-check on a real map.


That's why I went for expensive mapping software (Memory Map, one seamless OS 'Landranger' 1:50,000 map for the entire UK) and a cheap GPS (bottom of range Garmin Etrex). 

I take an audax route sheet and translate the instructions to a route in Memory Map, closely following the roads to get accurate data for the route. I then simplify the route, placing waypoints at junctions and enough 'via' points to get a reasonable approximation to the route. If there is any part of the route that I am unclear about, I double-check using Google Maps hybrid view.


----------



## jimboalee (13 Aug 2010)

What was this thread about? Ah, yes, gradient profiling.

The burning question in the minds of cyclists is "Where are the steep hills?" That's why we all go on internet mapping sites and look at what they think the elevation and gradients are for the route we create.

The trouble is, and with OS Landranger 50,000, is that the contours are 10 m resolution.

Take for instance a country lane where two contours are 100m apart. The unwary mapping chappies would ( like anyone else unfamiliar with the area ) assume a constant gradient of 10%.
Ahhh... the first 50m between the contours might be nigh-on level with a miniscule up gradient and then in the next 40 or so meters, the land rides up by 9 meters. That's a sudden 22.5% gradient that is not seen on the map. 
There won't be a chevron.

This might not sound a lot to strong cyclists. They just drop the chainring and honk.
Novice cyclists will probably stop and walk.


The OS Pathfinder with contour resolution of 5m will show this example. 
Pathfinder is available at 'Streetmap.co.uk'


----------



## ColinJ (13 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The burning question in the minds of cyclists is "Where are the steep hills?" That's why we all go on internet mapping sites and look at what they think the elevation and gradients are for the route we create.


The funny thing is - most cyclists seem to think "Bugger that, it's steep, I'll just ride down the A65/AWhatever instead." I do the opposite - "I won't ride down the A65/AWhatever, but that's an interesting looking steep hill. It will be a quiet road with great views so I'll ride up that instead."


----------



## HLaB (13 Aug 2010)

ColinJ said:


> The funny thing is - most cyclists seem to think "Bugger that, it's steep, I'll just ride down the A65/AWhatever instead." I do the opposite - "I won't ride down the A65/AWhatever, but that's an interesting looking steep hill. It will be a quiet road with great views so I'll ride up that instead."



Yip most of the time I just pick a fairly direct route from A-B but via back roads; it just so happens they turn out hilly.

Completely OT did you see Britain By Bike the other night ? it was in the Hebden Bridge area.


----------



## jimboalee (13 Aug 2010)

ColinJ said:


> The funny thing is - most cyclists seem to think "Bugger that, it's steep, I'll just ride down the A65/AWhatever instead." I do the opposite - "I won't ride down the A65/AWhatever, but that's an interesting looking steep hill. It will be a quiet road with great views so I'll ride up that instead."




When I was younger, much younger, I thought just like you. I saw "Rubery Hill" on the map. "Let's go and see how steep that is". 

When I got there, it was a *psychiatric hospital.

*Two big blokes in white jackets came running down the driveway toward me, so I turned quick and rode away at speed.


----------



## fossyant (13 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The moral of my witterings is....
> 
> Don't get too reliant on internet routefinders. Check and double-check on a real map.



Quite.......nearly took CC'ers down a 'farm track' on fixed bikes.............. alternative route was up some big hills.......oops.....


----------



## soulful dog (15 Aug 2010)

I could be doing with borrowing some of your legs for the wee hills I struggle up. I look at my routes in bikemap and am embarrased that they appear so flat   



jimboalee said:


> When I was younger, much younger, I thought just like you. I saw "Rubery Hill" on the map. "Let's go and see how steep that is".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Am I the only person who wonders if you really did cycle away or did they catch you and you are in fact posting from Rubery Hill?


----------



## pepecat (15 Aug 2010)

I use mapmyride which seems to be quite good - plus, as someone else has said, you can save routes for future reference.


----------



## Garz (17 Aug 2010)

HLaB said:


> Completely OT did you see Britain By Bike the other night ? it was in the Hebden Bridge area.



Oooh, big C might have a growth in his pants?


----------



## ColinJ (17 Aug 2010)

HLaB said:


> Completely OT did you see Britain By Bike the other night ? it was in the Hebden Bridge area.


I've just watched it on iPlayer. It gives people a bit of a taste of what it is like round here, though they did play around with the cycle route somewhat for artistic effect. 

I liked the bit about getting off and pushing on the steep hills - ha, not if I can help it!

I knew quite a lot of the local history but hadn't heard of the secret henpecked husbands society before - ho ho!

It's a great place to live, walk and cycle.


----------



## Adrian_K (18 Aug 2010)

I'd be interested in your opinions of this site. I don't know how it works it out or how accurate it is but is seems to have the granularity to find the _really_ steep bits. The trouble with it is that produces many segments of 0.0 - 0.2 miles and sometimes rediculous figures (40-45%).



jimboalee said:


> What was this thread about? Ah, yes, gradient profiling.
> 
> The burning question in the minds of cyclists is "Where are the steep hills?" That's why we all go on internet mapping sites and look at what they think the elevation and gradients are for the route we create.
> 
> ...


----------



## HLaB (18 Aug 2010)

Adrian_K said:


> I'd be interested in your opinions of this site. I don't know how it works it out or how accurate it is but is seems to have the granularity to find the _really_ steep bits. The trouble with it is that produces many segments of 0.0 - 0.2 miles and sometimes rediculous figures (40-45%).



I tried couple of hill I knew with that site too and I too was getting ridiculous figures on the back road which only maxes as 13-14% it was giving me 33.1%.

And on Gloom Hill which is a constant gradient all the way except for a few steep bits but in the middle of a constant rise it was giving me 0%, 0%, 38.7% and 32.3%. The hill most certainly doesn't have a flat bit in the middle and doesn't peak at 38.7%; 26% max iirc with an average gradient of 14% .

Based on this limited test I'd say the figures it gives are next to useless or worse


----------

