# average time for 10 miles



## chrisitalia (2 Nov 2008)

hi all this is my first post on CC as im just begining cycling. i just wondered if anyone could tell me the average time for a 10 mile cycle just so i can gauge how well, or otherwise i am progressing?? any other distance / times welcome also! thanks all!!


----------



## noadapter (2 Nov 2008)

best time was 36 minutes for 10 miles


----------



## caz (2 Nov 2008)

Hi there and welcome to the forum. You will find lots of helpful people here. No doubt someone else will be along shortly to give you more help!

Regarding average time for time 10miles - it will depend a lot on your own fitness and the type of bike you're riding. When I first started cycling 3 years ago I wasn't very fast at all (or fit) and probably averaged about 10mph on my hybrid. I am now a lot fitter, have a road bike and cycle a lot further without feeling shattered at the end of it. I now average 15mph on a short ride (up to 15-20 miles) and between 12-14mph for longer rides (over 35 miles). I reckon I do 10 miles in about 40 mins. I can do 15 in an hour or just under.

You just need to get out and do what you feel comfortable with, and increase your mileage over the weeks and you will see your fitness improve!


----------



## HLaB (2 Nov 2008)

What sort of riding are you doing, chrisitalia?
On my hilly commute pootling around on average its around 13 mph or 45 mins
The best I've done on the flat on a road bike is around 25mph (24min). On average on the road bike I think it'd be around 16.5 mph for a hilly route (35min), there's not many flat routes around here.


----------



## marinyork (2 Nov 2008)

1hr. Depends on a lot of things of course. There are people that are a lot slower than this (although apparently not on this forum where incredibly high average speeds are routinely posted).


----------



## Neilwoo123 (2 Nov 2008)

Just worked this mornings run on mapmyride.com did 14.83 miles in 57 mins and I am well chuffed! Just to note it was a pretty flat run only 203 feet assent/decent.


----------



## numbnuts (2 Nov 2008)

my average time for a 10 mile is, when I get there, 
what's all this rushing around for anyway


----------



## wlc1 (2 Nov 2008)

25ish mins but like it has been said the only person you should be racing is yourself.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (2 Nov 2008)

Hello and welcome to the group. 1stly an average speed would depend on many variables, such as bike type, tyre type, terrain, weather conditions, etc, etc, etc. At the end of the day IMHO an average speed is not worth bothering measuring. What is important is how YOU feel and what you want to achieve. You don't want to finish a ride needing medical attention but at the same time finishing a 10 miler and looking as though you have walked around your lounge would probably be of no benefit to you either. _Time yourself by all means but do not get hung up on the time. Push yourself but do not hurt yourself._ _* Most importantly, ENJOY!!!!!*_





chrisitalia said:


> hi all this is my first post on CC as im just begining cycling. i just wondered if anyone could tell me the average time for a 10 mile cycle just so i can gauge how well, or otherwise i am progressing?? any other distance / times welcome also! thanks all!!


----------



## yello (2 Nov 2008)

Welcome! There'll be a wide range of answers because there are many types of riders on the forum, riding different sorts of bikes on all manner of different routes etc.

Riding a bike is about you, how you feel etc. What others do doesn't matter a tosh.

It's not worth me going out to do 10 mile because it takes me longer to change into my kit than it does to do the ride


----------



## jimboalee (2 Nov 2008)

+1 on AngelfishSolo.

What bike is it? How tall are you? What is the combined weight of you and the bike?
These three factors should be enough to estimate a reasonable Cd, but 0.95 is about what an average person on an average bike will be.

Using this, and assuming the average cyclist could put out 120 Watts for ten miles, they should be doing 15 miles per hour.

So, 40 minutes will be your initial target.

I must add to this post, doing personal time trials on the open road is not wise, because as you get faster, you will take more risks until one day you will dodge past one car too far and ….prang L


----------



## marinyork (2 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> What bike is it? How tall are you? What is the combined weight of you and the bike?
> These three factors should be enough to estimate a reasonable Cd, but 0.95 is about what an average person on an average bike will be.
> 
> Using this, and assuming the average new cyclist could put out 120 Watts for ten miles, you should be doing 15 miles per hour.
> ...



What are you talking about, what is Cd? Where does this 15mph thing come from, I see it quoted in books but seems very far removed from reality. I don't doubt some people starting off achieve that but you're absolutely mad if you think the average person plucked out of the population could do that on day 1 or 2. The people that can are substantially above average. If you really think the average person can do 15mph on day 1, that means I'm several years off beginner level and have been cycling for a negative number of years!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (2 Nov 2008)

Thanks very much for the +1 but the maths has me confused. 

I take it that _Cd = coefficient of drag_ and you are using _Watts in the context of Watts per Kg_. If this is so the formula (if it can be called that) still is incomplete and in all honesty meaningless. The steepness of one incline along a route would have more impact on an average speed than your proposed calculations.



jimboalee said:


> +1 on AngelfishSolo.
> 
> What bike is it? How tall are you? What is the combined weight of you and the bike?
> These three factors should be enough to estimate a reasonable Cd, but 0.95 is about what an average person on an average bike will be.
> ...


----------



## gbb (2 Nov 2008)

marinyork said:


> What are you talking about, what is Cd? Where does this 15mph thing come from, I see it quoted in books but seems very far removed from reality. I don't doubt some people starting off achieve that but you're absolutely mad if you think the average person plucked out of the population could do that on day 1 or 2. The people that can are substantially above average. If you really think the average person can do 15mph on day 1, that means I'm several years off beginner level and have been cycling for a negative number of years!



Partly true...
Ive always found my average speed never changed much, but the distance i could maintain that speed has increased enormously.
8 years ago, i could probably do 13mph over 10 miles on a road bike, but was cream crackered at the end....
Now (well last year anyway, i havnt done that much this last year)..i can average 16 mph over 40 miles.
Theres an awfu lot of effort and miles got to go into upping the average by a mph or two....an awful lot, but its pleasureable at the same time.

Dont be disheartened OP...dont compare yourself too much with the figures quoted here....it takes time (unless you're young ) and whatever you achieve, you'll be fitter than you were when you started.

Oh, and in answer to the main question...about 38 mins for 10 miles on a good day


----------



## jimboalee (2 Nov 2008)

Ok.

Starley decided on a 52” gear for two reasons.

1/ It represented the most popular size Penny Farthing, and 
2/ The fully clothed, untrained, raw beginner could keep 12.5 mph, at 100 Watts output at 80 cadence for an enjoyable afternoon bicycle ride.

Nowadays, we buy lighter bikes with higher gears than 52”, and wear cycling specific clothes that are much lighter than a tweed suit.

The early responses to the OP’s question were 28 and 36 minutes for ten miles. Tell me how this helps the OP?

I said, “40 minutes will be your initial target.”

I am presuming the OP will be riding a circular route, in which case, wind speed and hills won’t make much difference to riding a flat road in the calm.

The OP asked for our estimations of an ‘average’ time, so I can only presume the OP regards themself of ‘average’ fitness. ????


----------



## Downward (2 Nov 2008)

10 miles - 1 hour maybe ?
It depends if your on a Trainer or a flat 10 mile road.
Certainly around here there are too many hills to average 15mph


----------



## mrfacetious (2 Nov 2008)

i agree with downward on that, I'm surprised not many have mentioned hills. Maybe it's being taken that it was a flat road for 10 miles. I'm not the fastest but my 10 mile run goes over two very large valleys and takes me 50 minutes. But it's murderous. I'd say that a good speed is whatever you feel you've worked hardest to achieve. Sounds a bit cheesy but you'll always get faster. If you want a bit of competitive fun try racing somebody else you know? Just an idea.


----------



## Downward (2 Nov 2008)

I have done Bottom Of Clent (Nimmings Road A456) to bottom of clent going down the A456 towards Hagley (40mph Downhill) Turn off at the Aston Martin Garage up to Lower Clent and then a long slog up the hill to the top of Nimmings Road Car Park.
Then back down the hill to the start - 10 miles ish 1 hour.


----------



## jimboalee (2 Nov 2008)

Hatton through Warwick to Land Rover Gaydon. 12 miles. 40ish minutes on SWorks. 45ish mins on Dawes Giro 500. 50ish minutes on Apollo County & 55ish minutes on BSA 20.

What I'm suggesting is a moderately fit newbie could keep up with me when I'm riding 36 lb of Halfords Apollo County with a Sturmey 3 speed which has a 71 inch top gear.


----------



## marinyork (2 Nov 2008)

Interesting comparison of bikes there. Thanks jimboalee.


----------



## Crackle (2 Nov 2008)

Jimboalee - You keep saying hills make no difference but they do. Yes all things even out and for a trained rider they will be able to carry on as normal once off the hill. For those of us less trained, hills make a treemendous difference. If I've been kicking out 130 for 10 miles and then hit a hill where I have to kick out 250 for 10 minutes, then I've used up a fair percentage of my glycogen reserves which means I might not be able to kick out 130 when I'm back on the flat. It just depends how much cycling conditioning you've been doing?


----------



## marinyork (2 Nov 2008)

I'm inclined to agree with jimboalee. However many hills or flat I seem to average more or less the same speed. On the other hand you could say I've been doing a lot more 1.0 or >1.0 grades when I used to do things like 0.1s so that's an improvement. Who knows.


----------



## Will1985 (2 Nov 2008)

Average - 24 mins (time trialling ). I'll go faster on a good day. On a road bike, I'd say around 28/29 mins.



Downward said:


> I have done Bottom Of Clent (Nimmings Road A456) to bottom of clent going down the A456 towards Hagley (40mph Downhill) Turn off at the Aston Martin Garage up to Lower Clent and then a long slog up the hill to the top of Nimmings Road Car Park.
> Then back down the hill to the start - 10 miles ish 1 hour.



I'm confused - Nimming's road doesn't look like it joins the A456. We sometimes use the A456 on club rides for a 50km/h blast up and down between Hagley Wood Lane and the velodrome roundabout.


----------



## Crackle (2 Nov 2008)

marinyork said:


> I'm inclined to agree with jimboalee. However many hills or flat I seem to average more or less the same speed. On the other hand you could say I've been doing a lot more 1.0 or >1.0 grades when I used to do things like 0.1s so that's an improvement. Who knows.




Depends on the hills:-

20 mile course 4, 12-15 minute 8-10 % hills. Ave 13.7mph
24 mile course rolling short hills but continuous, ave 14.5mph
Flat 20 mile course ave 16.5 mph
Flat 40 mile course ave 16mph


----------



## marinyork (2 Nov 2008)

Crackle said:


> Depends on the hills:-
> 
> 20 mile course 4, 12-15 minute 8-10 % hills. Ave 13.7mph
> 24 mile course rolling short hills but continuous, ave 14.5mph
> ...



Hmmm that kind of confirms what I mean your 20 and 24 mile ones are more or less the same average speed. There is no flat route round here though of that length, heck even 20 miles. I grade my hills. A 1.0 is 1000ft per 10 miles. So if I did 60 miles and climbed 6000ft that'd be a 1.0 if it was 3000ft it'd be a 0.5 and so on. That is pretty normal round here for a 1.0. Hills can be anything upto 20% although are more like 10 or 12% a fair bit of the time. I used to cycle places that were 10 or more times flatter than here.


----------



## Crackle (2 Nov 2008)

Aye, but with no flat route as a comparison you haven't got a true picture. Jimboalee seems to be saying that the overall up/down elevation makes no difference to Ave speed but my experience says it does.

For the same amount of training I can do 20 miles with big climbs or 40 miles flat but not 20 miles climbing and 20 miles flat. Well I could but I would be flagging badly at the end.

Also, 20% climbs are really starting to create a lot of lactic acid and that takes a good few miles, once the climbings over, to get out the system; again for the same given amount of training.


----------



## punkypossum (2 Nov 2008)

On an undulating route on a mountain bike with semi-slicks about 45mins to 50mins...an hour if I'm really taking it slowly ...


----------



## Crackle (2 Nov 2008)

punkypossum said:


> On an undulating route on a mountain bike with semi-slicks about 45mins to 50mins...an hour if I'm really taking it slowly ...



Yeah but it doesn't actually matter what bloody speed you do. You, for instance, have more than proved your credentials with the rides you do, including your 100 which is 30 more than my longest day.


....and besides. You've got that chain to preserve


----------



## marinyork (2 Nov 2008)

punkypossum said:


> On an undulating route on a mountain bike with semi-slicks about 45mins to 50mins...an hour if I'm really taking it slowly ...



Yeah but you're fast.



Crackle said:


> Aye, but with no flat route as a comparison you haven't got a true picture. Jimboalee seems to be saying that the overall up/down elevation makes no difference to Ave speed but my experience says it does.
> 
> For the same amount of training I can do 20 miles with big climbs or 40 miles flat but not 20 miles climbing and 20 miles flat. Well I could but I would be flagging badly at the end.
> 
> Also, 20% climbs are really starting to create a lot of lactic acid and that takes a good few miles, once the climbings over, to get out the system; again for the same given amount of training.



Absolutely I have no comparison just when I was cycling in the vale of York which is upto 50 times flatter than round here. I'd have to go out into Lincolnshire to see really. A few miles to get rid of lactic acid? It isn't flat for long enough!

I found an interesting chart about gearing, gradients and power but I can't find it anymore, made interesting reading.


----------



## punkypossum (3 Nov 2008)

Crackle said:


> Yeah but it doesn't actually matter what bloody speed you do. You, for instance, have more than proved your credentials with the rides you do, including your 100 which is 30 more than my longest day.
> 
> 
> ....and besides. You've got that chain to preserve



Crackle, what would I do without you!?!


----------



## chrisitalia (3 Nov 2008)

thanks for all your replies everyone!! im getting between 36mins and 45 mins depending on the route etc but its great to be a member and read about other members times and tips! thanks again.


----------



## Crackle (3 Nov 2008)

Crackle said:


> Depends on the hills:-
> 
> 20 mile course 4, 12-15 minute 8-10 % hills. Ave 13.7 13.2mph
> 24 mile course rolling short hills but continuous, ave 14.5mph
> ...



Sorry  Got that first figure wrong

And Chrisitalia how rude of me


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

If you go out and ride for 20 muniutes on the flat, then 10 minutes up a hill, turn and then ride another 30 minutes up a less seveve hill ......

You will have to parachute to your front driveway.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

First day of LEJOG. Land's End to Wellington, Somerset. 144 miles, 10 hrs 10 minutes. This includes a 0.5 hour stop every 2.5 hours.
So I did the 144 in 8.6 hours 'moving time'. That's an average of 16.75 mph. The first hour or so was slower ( the first hour is the worst ) 'cus I was warming up. Then after Penzance, I started to put the pace up.
There are hills in Cornwall and Devon, but my riding average was a gnat's cock from my average on the Lincolnshire flats.

?????

Which makes me think. A novice might go out for 1 hour… He's still cold! He needs to properly warm up for 1 hour, and then judge his average over the 2nd hour.


----------



## Downward (3 Nov 2008)

Will1985 said:


> Average - 24 mins (time trialling ). I'll go faster on a good day. On a road bike, I'd say around 28/29 mins.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm confused - Nimming's road doesn't look like it joins the A456. We sometimes use the A456 on club rides for a 50km/h blast up and down between Hagley Wood Lane and the velodrome roundabout.




Hi yeah that's it - Halgley Wood Lane not Nimmings Road !

I have only been going up that Lane for 20 years and I still can't remember the Road Name !


----------



## Maizie (3 Nov 2008)

10.3 mile each-way commute.
Done for the first time in June 2008 - having cycled 4 or 5 miles a couple of times a week in the preceding 3-4 weeks. Not a fit person, and not cycled prior to that in years.
Attempted to average twice a week since then, but holidays and illness and stupid late meetings mean that I've probably only averaged once a week.

First commute took me an hour there and an hour ten on the way home. Excluding breaks for a drink (well, really a rest).

Current best is just under 50 minutes, and I can now manage both ways without need to stop.

There are still other cyclists overtaking me. The difference now is that there are a couple that I overtake too!

My ultimate goal is to get it to 40min - whether I manage it next year or the year after, on the bike I have or on an 'upgrade', I don't mind. I'm happy pootling along at 12-12.5mph on average, and now I have a locker at work I am making grand plans for four days cycle commuting a week. Who knows when/if I'll manage it - but that doesn't matter, I'm not on a schedule


----------



## snorri (3 Nov 2008)

chrisitalia said:


> any other distance / times welcome also! thanks all!!



I look at performance in the longer term, 300 miles in a month would be OK in my book.
You could sign up to Cyclogs.co.uk (it's free!). On there you can create targets for speed and distance and compare your current performance with past performance or with other cyclists (who might well be doctoring their input figures).
Otoh, you could throw away your watch and mileage recorder and just enjoy the pleasure of cycling along at a speed you find comfortable.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

+1


snorri said:


> Otoh, you could throw away your watch and mileage recorder and just enjoy the pleasure of cycling along at a speed you find comfortable.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

When I started cycling, my Mom and Dad wouldn't let me go far. After about four years riding round in circles, I would secretly venture out with the other boys who lived in the neighbourhood. We would ride about 5 miles to a river ford. The bike I had was a 20" boys bike from the fifties. I don't remember exactly, but it could have been 42 ring to 18 single freewheel. A 47" gear, 1 inch lower than my Moulton Mini.

On a 47" gear, at 80 cadence, is 11.5 mph. But I was pedalling a lot faster than that to keep up with the older boys on their 'racers'. At 100 cadence, I would be doing 14.5 mph – not bad for a 9 year old!

Now answer me this. If a 9 year old can ride at 14.5 – 15 mph for five miles, can a grown up twentysomething ride at 14.5 – 15 mph for ten miles? 

Be VERY, VERY ashamed if you can't.


----------



## Lazy-Commuter (3 Nov 2008)

snorri said:


> Otoh, you could throw away your watch and mileage recorder and just enjoy the pleasure of cycling along at a speed you find comfortable.





Angelfishsolo said:


> +1



.. depends on what you are trying to do I guess. I started timing myself because I became aware that I was able to get to work in about the same elapsed time as when I started but it was less effort. Given that I was trying to get fitter I thought I should set myself some targets so as to make sure I kept pushing.

But, and there is a big BUT, you need to be a bit careful about where and when you are timing yourself; as Jimboalee said, if you're trying to set a PB though a City centre in rush hour you'll pretty soon come a cropper.

So I allow myself a bit of a warm up to the foot of the "big" (for me!) hill and then time my climb of that 'cos it's basically down to me how quick I can do it: it's up a country lane which is a no through road and it's rare for me to see a car, or anyone else at all come to that; there's also a couple of sections of bridleway which tend to be empty so I time those.

I do time the bits where I interact with traffic, but don't worry about it too much 'cos one red light can blow it for me. I also looked for an improvement over an average week-by-week rather than day-by-day 'cos headwinds and so on can affect it. Plus, some days I just like to dawdle along and admire the scenery.

Anyway, back to the original question .. 10 miles on a flattish run took me 40-45 minutes the other week.


----------



## ACS (3 Nov 2008)

Angelfishsolo said:


> +1



I agree. Since returning to the sport in August I have only completed one timed ride and that was 35 miles in 2h 33 min (13.7 mph) on an undulating (I call them hills) circuit, the rest have been pure saddle time and exploration. My steed is no light weight and neither am I.


----------



## Bodhbh (3 Nov 2008)

Hills surely batter average time, at least to all but v hardcore cyclists?

Maybe more a concentration issue, but I know myself I am slower over varied terrain when I'm mashing gears and can't get into a steady pace. My normal 10mile loop is like this and takes about 40mins (15mph), if I'm on the flat average speed is something like 17-19mph.

Also with wind resistance being non-linear I would have thought a hilly road is less efficient to ride as you loose more energy to wind on the downhills than you save on the climbs?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

However the grown up will undoubtedly have sustained injuries, eaten bad food, indulged in less than healthy practices, etc, etc. Could you play all day in the same way as a 9 year old could? I would be amazed if the answer was yes. 

Also not all people are created equal. Just because you could do something as a child it does mean that your abilities are equitable with others.

_Oh and 10 miles reasonably flat with a 10 Spd 26" wheel MTB Approx 42 mins._




jimboalee said:


> Now answer me this. If a 9 year old can ride at 14.5 – 15 mph for five miles, can a grown up twentysomething ride at 14.5 – 15 mph for ten miles?
> 
> Be VERY, VERY ashamed if you can't.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

For interest.

Through my thirties and forties, I cycle commuted 8 miles to work, physically pushed Jaguars and Range Rovers around an Exhaust Emissions test lab, went jogging 3 kilometers at lunch time with two other colleagues, pushed more cars round during the afternoon, cycled 8 miles home. Had dinner. Took my eldest son to the playing field to play soccer or cricket in the summer evenings, or to the public swimming baths twice a week in the winter; and in the mid nineties, got up at 2 O'Clock in the morning to bottle feed my younger son.

Either I've grossly overestimated the physical capabilities of twenty first century young adults, or I'm living on the wrong planet.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

PS. There were some 100 and 200 Audax rides on occasional Sundays.


----------



## Chris James (3 Nov 2008)

Crackle said:


> Jimboalee - You keep saying hills make no difference but they do.



Obviously hills make a difference to your average speed.

It almost seems pointless doing some maths to demonstrate as it is so self evident.

But in any case, imagine a mile long 1 in 5 hill. You may climb it at a mere 4mph, taking 15 minutes to reach the top. 

You may then descend at 40 mph (in practice you might struggle to go this fast if there are corners and also the slowing effect of wind resistance comes into play at speeds much above this). The descent would then take 1.5 minutes.

So you have covered 2 miles in 16.5 minutes = average speed of just over 7mph.

But for the same effort you might knock out 15 - 20mph on the flat.

If I go for a 30 - 40 mile ride on my own around Huddersfield (hilly) I average about 13mph. Down to about 12mph if the route is much longer.

In rolling Northumberland I average about 14 mph for 60 milers and for flattish Cheshire I average about 16mph for the same distance on my own.

I am faster in groups.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

+1 Another voice of sanity, Thank You 


Chris James said:


> Obviously hills make a difference to your average speed.
> 
> It almost seems pointless doing some maths to demonstrate as it is so self evident.
> 
> ...


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

Hmmm… The Stratford road between Shirley, Solihull; and the ice cream shop in Henly in Arden is ten miles. Shirley is at 460 ft elev, and Henley is at 250 ft. The hill is called Liverage Hill and accounts for 150 ft in ¼ mile. The rest is an undulating A road.
To the ice cream takes 33 minutes, that's 18 mph. Back takes 50 mins, that's 12 mph. The round trip is at average 15 mph! How strange.

By sheer coincidence, the calorific expenditure for the trip is equal to a twin cone with a flake.


----------



## Crackle (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> For interest.
> 
> Through my thirties and forties, I cycle commuted 8 miles to work, physically pushed Jaguars and Range Rovers around an Exhaust Emissions test lab, went jogging 3 kilometers at lunch time with two other colleagues, pushed more cars round during the afternoon, cycled 8 miles home. Had dinner. Took my eldest son to the playing field to play soccer or cricket in the summer evenings, or to the public swimming baths twice a week in the winter; and in the mid nineties, got up at 2 O'Clock in the morning to bottle feed my younger son.
> 
> Either I've grossly overestimated the physical capabilities of twenty first century young adults, or I'm living on the wrong planet.



 Yep, different planet. I'd consider you to be a very fit individual who has stayed fit. Not everyone is the same or has done the same, certainly I'm not and I can't currently keep up with a 9 and 11 year old on sheer energy, though luckily I can still outlast them on bigger activities but the day is coming when I won't


----------



## Chris James (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> Hmmm… The Stratford road between Shirley, Solihull; and the ice cream shop in Henly in Arden is ten miles. Shirley is at 460 ft elev, and Henley is at 250 ft. The hill is called Liverage Hill and accounts for 150 ft in ¼ mile. The rest is an undulating A road.
> To the ice cream takes 33 minutes, that's 18 mph. Back takes 50 mins, that's 12 mph. *The round trip is at average 15 mph! How strange*.
> 
> By sheer coincidence, the calorific expenditure for the trip is equal to a twin cone with a flake.



Why is that strange? From what I can gather, you go slower uphill than downhill, which is perfectly normal.

How fast do you go on the dead flat?

To a degree it depends on how hilly we are talking about. If it is slightly rolling then the average speeds are probably not hugely affected. Wind probably makes as much as a difference.

For comparison I put into Bikely the 25 miler I did yesterday afternoon. There was 2590 feet height gain in that 25 miles and that is a pretty normal route around here.


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

Chris James said:


> Why is that strange? From what I can gather, you go slower uphill than downhill, which is perfectly normal.
> 
> How fast do you go on the dead flat?
> 
> ...



+1. Putting that route into something that calculates altitude that's more or less completely flat. It doesn't even rate a 0.2 in one direction and going the other way about a 0.4. Looking at the A-road it doesn't look like there are too many traffic lights about and it's probably a quality bit of tarmac. The 23 miler I did on Saturday I can't remember but I think it might have been 2600ft. 



> Now answer me this. If a 9 year old can ride at 14.5 – 15 mph for five miles, can a grown up twentysomething ride at 14.5 – 15 mph for ten miles?
> 
> Be VERY, VERY ashamed if you can't.



Cheers for that. I am that twentysomething. Over a course length you've quoted I've averaged 18mph, once. It's never been repeated (it just isn't the flatness and there is too much urban sprawl and microlumping on the roads). My day to day average is nothing like 15mph. I know there are people that easily can. The other thing I would say is I know a lot of people here use computers and some of them don't measure crude average speed.

The story about your physical activity I'd put you in the top 5% of the population. You're vastly overestimating the fitness of the population. I've always walked a lot, used to do running and I'd put myself just above average at perhaps top 40% of the population. I realise that makes me a very crap cyclist and done some things wrong which I have now learnt from but the idea that any beginner could get straight on a bike on day 1 and do 15mph (crude average speed) for a 10 miler is insane.


----------



## caz (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> Hmmm… The Stratford road between Shirley, Solihull; and the ice cream shop in Henly in Arden is ten miles. Shirley is at 460 ft elev, and Henley is at 250 ft. The hill is called Liverage Hill and accounts for 150 ft in ¼ mile. The rest is an undulating A road.
> To the ice cream takes 33 minutes, that's 18 mph. Back takes 50 mins, that's 12 mph. The round trip is at average 15 mph! How strange.
> 
> By sheer coincidence, the calorific expenditure for the trip is equal to a twin cone with a flake.




When I pluck up the courage to go on the A34 from Shirley to Henley, I will have to see how long it takes me. Just don't fancy Liveridge Hill both ways! I've done it once from Henley on a Sunday but I was cream crackered by the time I got up to the top of the hill - that was a long drag,and I was in the granny ring managing about 7mph! Turned off soon after that onto the quieter country roads.


----------



## Crackle (3 Nov 2008)

Marinyork, what's this 0.1, 0.4 stuff. Is this something you've created because I've never seen it before?

And I think Jimboalee has already established his own personal fitness, which is, I would agree, in the higher echelons of fitness and I speak as a cyclist/runner/mountaineer, albeit a fairly average one


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

Crackle said:


> Marinyork, what's this 0.1, 0.4 stuff. Is this something you've created because I've never seen it before?
> 
> And I think Jimboalee has already established his own personal fitness, which is, I would agree, in the higher echelons of fitness and I speak as a cyclist/runner/mountaineer, albeit a fairly average one



It is something I've created Crackle. I grade hills routes now to try and get as much hills in as possible so as to survive some of the longer routes I've been doing a bit better (40 miles + which I have always struggled with). 1.0 means 100ft per mile or 1000ft per 10 miles. Like Chris James, whatever route I take it is more or less this, which is why I call it a 1.0. A 0.2 would be 200ft per 10 miles and so on. When I lived in York it was about 0.05 or even 0.02. When I cycle home from town with traffic holding me up, red lights galore and a 500ft hill it can be a 1.2. Do you really live in the Wirral Crackle, thought you lived in Scotland?


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

Since my last post on the thread regarding Puncture Fairies, I have been to check my own tyres.
I will have to notify the OP of that thread that it is Imps who puncture tyres and wicked Goblins who break spokes. The little bastards from Beta Leonis Minoris.

Anyway, while I was over by the bike sheds, I popped into Medical and had a go on their electric blood pressure kit. After 10 mins relaxing, I was 135 over 85 and a resting HR of 56.

So, I sincerely apologise to all the Earthlings who can't keep 15 mph for 40 minutes.


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

My HRR is lower than that (surprised by that and I thought mine was high).


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

Must be those Yorkshire Hills.

Cycling DOES pay.


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

Pay?


----------



## Crackle (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> Since my last post on the thread regarding Puncture Fairies, I have been to check my own tyres.
> I will have to notify the OP of that thread that it is Imps who puncture tyres and wicked Goblins who break spokes. The little bastards from Beta Leonis Minoris.
> 
> Anyway, while I was over by the bike sheds, I popped into Medical and had a go on their electric blood pressure kit. After 10 mins relaxing, I was 135 over 85 and a resting HR of 56.
> ...



Yeah but your blood is Green: Green blood is well known for inexhaustible supplies of Glycogen and absolutely no lactic acid build up


----------



## Downward (3 Nov 2008)

Good thread for encouraging beginners


----------



## Crackle (3 Nov 2008)

marinyork said:


> It is something I've created Crackle. I grade hills routes now to try and get as much hills in as possible so as to survive some of the longer routes I've been doing a bit better (40 miles + which I have always struggled with). 1.0 means 100ft per mile or 1000ft per 10 miles. Like Chris James, whatever route I take it is more or less this, which is why I call it a 1.0. A 0.2 would be 200ft per 10 miles and so on. When I lived in York it was about 0.05 or even 0.02. When I cycle home from town with traffic holding me up, red lights galore and a 500ft hill it can be a 1.2. Do you really live in the Wirral Crackle, thought you lived in Scotland?



Ahh I see. Makes sense. Yes I live on the Wirral, moved from Scotland this summer. So my hilly rides are my Scotland rides and the flat 20 miles is a Wirral ride. So far not done much since I got here. Various things have kept me away from the bike and probably will until after the New Year. Will probably go back to running soon (with the dog) and wknd mtn biking.


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

Ah you lucky thing. I'm sure they'll be plenty of wirral cycling time in the spring. I know someone that moved to Willaston (sp)? or somewhere round there and was thinking of cycle visiting but never got round to it.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

Ref Grading hills.

Audax UK has a recognised system of grading hills. It is in their Audax Altitude Award section.
I thought MarinYork was refering to AAA points, but the sums didn't compute.


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

I don't do Audax's but I have considered them. You got a direct link?


----------



## snorri (3 Nov 2008)

After reading this thread, my mind is going to be full of statistics and new abbreviations. No longer will cycling be an opportunity to commune with nature and call out friendly greetings to fellow travellers between home and paper-shop, whilst taking some gentle exercise. No cycle trip will be complete without altimeter, stopwatch and pocket calculator.
Maybe I will just take the car and save myself a lot of stress.


----------



## Neilwoo123 (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> Hmmm… The Stratford road between Shirley, Solihull; and the ice cream shop in Henly in Arden is ten miles. Shirley is at 460 ft elev, and Henley is at 250 ft. The hill is called Liverage Hill and accounts for 150 ft in ¼ mile. The rest is an undulating A road.
> To the ice cream takes 33 minutes, that's 18 mph. Back takes 50 mins, that's 12 mph. The round trip is at average 15 mph! How strange.
> 
> Yes, but how long would it take to get back if there was ice cream at both ends????????


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

He'd fly if he was in a hurry. Or if he had a bit more time he'd pull along the car behind the bike with his teeth.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

I am starting work on a dashboard for my handlebars to accommodate all of the information gathering equipment I didn't know I needed. 


snorri said:


> After reading this thread, my mind is going to be full of statistics and new abbreviations. No longer will cycling be an opportunity to commune with nature and call out friendly greetings to fellow travellers between home and paper-shop, whilst taking some gentle exercise. No cycle trip will be complete without altimeter, stopwatch and pocket calculator.
> Maybe I will just take the car and save myself a lot of stress.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

I thought he'd push it with his breath 


marinyork said:


> He'd fly if he was in a hurry. Or if he had a bit more time he'd pull along the car behind the bike with his teeth.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

BTW.
I ride with Solihull CC. I go on the 'D' ride. About 50 miles at a 15 mph average.

The 'C' ride is longer and a tad faster. Only for me in the summer.

The 'B' run go 70ish miles and try to average 16 mph. No chance.

The 'A' run go at an average 18 mph and can cover 80ish miles. Only for the Cat 1 and 2s.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

Indeed. Thank God not everyone prescribes to the "_Intimate Knowledge of Maths, Physics and Human physiology is essential_" school of cycling


Downward said:


> Good thread for encouraging beginners


----------



## Moose (3 Nov 2008)

I asked a friend of mine what a good time for a 10 should be and he says the benchmark is 20 minutes 

Pissed on my fireworks it did, I currently average 35 minutes for 10.75 miles


----------



## srw (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> Now answer me this. If a 9 year old can ride at 14.5 – 15 mph for five miles, can a grown up twentysomething ride at 14.5 – 15 mph for ten miles?
> 
> Be VERY, VERY ashamed if you can't.



Like you I am an arrogant git. I look down on people who only earn £100k - after all if I can manage something more, why can't they? I also encourage feelings of shame in people who got a mediocre 2:1 degree. Only an utter thicko would have failed to get a first. And as for people who can't speak five languages like a native and play the bassoon to professional standard - what have you been doing with your life?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

30 mph for 10 miles. Sure he wasn't talking about a 10K or maybe thinking you were on a moped?


Moose said:


> I asked a friend of mine what a good time for a 10 should be and he says the benchmark is 20 minutes
> 
> Pissed on my fireworks it did, I currently average 35 minutes for 10.75 miles


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

20 mins. I think they were pulling your leg Moose.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

Don't forget to belittle those who can't snap their fingers and get doors opened for them; make ladies swoon with a single syllable and be able to fly a jet fighter a helicopter and drive a F1 car. All this if course is by the age of 21.



srw said:


> Like you I am an arrogant git. I look down on people who only earn £100k - after all if I can manage something more, why can't they? I also encourage feelings of shame in people who got a mediocre 2:1 degree. Only an utter thicko would have failed to get a first. And as for people who can't speak five languages like a native and play the bassoon to professional standard - what have you been doing with your life?


----------



## Crackle (3 Nov 2008)

Moose said:


> I asked a friend of mine what a good time for a 10 should be and he says the benchmark is 20 minutes
> 
> Pissed on my fireworks it did, I currently average 35 minutes for 10.75 miles



Is that a commute or are you going for it. You ain't too far off a respectable 20mph ave. Which benchmark was your friend talking about, pro team time benchmark


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

Travelling the universe.


----------



## Muddyboy (3 Nov 2008)

I’m with Jimboalee. 

The short Audax rides are 100km. They are called Populaires. In French it means Everybody.
You have to do them faster than 9 mph, so you have to keep up a decent speed like 15 mph for feed stops and if you puncture.

The Audax Club Parisien reckon any cyclist should be able to ride a 100km faster than 9 mph average. 10 miles is well before the first control.

I do MTB. I'd go on a Audax 100 if I had a road bike.


----------



## Crackle (3 Nov 2008)

Muddyboy said:


> I’m with Jimboalee.
> 
> The short Audax rides are 100km. They are called Populaires. In French it means Everybody.
> You have to do them faster than 9 mph, so you have to keep up a decent speed like 15 mph for feed stops and if you puncture.
> ...



Are you sure you're not Jimboalee


----------



## Moose (3 Nov 2008)

Crackle said:


> Is that a commute or are you going for it. You ain't too far off a respectable 20mph ave. Which benchmark was your friend talking about, pro team time benchmark



My time is a pretty fast commute - best is just under 33 minutes, average speed of 19.2mph (ish). On the way back, my best time is 36 minutes.

My friend is indeed a Time Trialist but not a pro, just pretty fast.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

Really short Audax rides, and there are some 50k events, have a min speed of 10kmh, which is 6.25 mph.

AUK appreciate that there are some cyclists who will have difficulty getting to the first control at 15 mph, the speed at which experienced riders can achieve.

But having said this, the OP asked for an 'average' time for a 10 miler.
Hence my calcs giving 40 mins.
There have been times suggested that I would classify as 'well above average'. The guy who suggested 20 minutes - I don’t know what he was thinking. Maybe a mountain highway he’s ridden down.

Below average, and I’m NOT trying to sound arrogant, because that’s what raw newbies will be, might be 50 mins to an hour. This is about what my untrained 12 year old son can do on his hardtail MTB. He rides 8 miles in 40 to 45 minutes; and he would be able to ride the extra 2 miles comfortably.

Sorry for sounding arrogant. It was my interpretation of ‘Average’ which led to the 40 minute suggestion.


Here is the OP’s opening post:-

“hi all this is my first post on CC as im just begining cycling. i just wondered if anyone could tell me the average time for a 10 mile cycle just so i can gauge how well, or otherwise i am progressing?? any other distance / times welcome also! thanks all!!”

The way I read that question was “In what time does the average cyclist ride 10 miles. I am new and I want to judge myself against it”


----------



## snorri (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> The way I read that question was “In what time does the average cyclist ride 10 miles. I am new and I want to judge myself against it”[/FONT][/COLOR]



I would respectfully suggest you have quoted figures for the time taken by the average sporting cyclist which will be considerably less than the time taken by the average cyclist.


Hey, this could run longer than a helmet thread.


----------



## Moose (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> .......There have been times suggested that I would classify as 'well above average'. The guy who suggested 20 minutes - I don’t know what he was thinking. Maybe a mountain highway he’s ridden down......



If you re-read what I said, I didn't suggest that it was an average time, in fact I was making a point that what would be a 'benchmark' time for one person could be completely different for another. Therefore an 'average' time would also be subjective.

Again, using my commute as an example, my average time on the way is about 35 minutes whereas on the way back is more like 38 minutes that's a 3 minute difference for the same distance, by the same person, on the same bike. The differences may be slight, but enough to notice (prevailing head wind and slight overall ascent on the way back).

Surely the route will dictate what a good average time for 10 miles would be?


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

It probably will run longer than a helmet thread, because as I've described on an earlier post, The 'D', yes *D *ride, and that's what the BCF consider AVERAGE, rides at a 15 mph average speed.

Above average - CAT 1, 2 and 3 ---- 17 - 18 mph

Below average - Casual non club members - 10 - 12 mph, as in the 'Solihull Spinners' ride for Nervous and Novice cyclists.

If the Original Poster had asked for a BELOW AVERAGE speed, I would have said 10 - 12 mph.

Quite finished?


----------



## ACS (3 Nov 2008)

Average cyclist? What is an average cyclist?' Sorry I may have missed something or just being thick. When I was 26, training twice a day, with sub 1 hour, 25 and 50 at 2h 4 mins I was considered 'average' by fellow clubmen. I am now 50 years of age and I can just about make 50 miles without having to stop for tea and cake and I consider myself to be an average cyclist.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

It sounds as though to be classed as average you must at least belong to a club.  The OP is new to cycling and thus one could possibly assume is not a club member and therefore would define average in a different way. Maybe average was a bad choice of words but everyone else has replied with sensible answers. I get the feeling that jimboalee is being a pedant. To what end I have no idea other than to make others here feel less than adequate.



satans budgie said:


> Average cyclist? What is an average cyclist?' Sorry I may have missed something or just being thick. When I was 26, training twice a day, with sub 1 hour, 25 and 50 at 2h 4 mins I was considered 'average' by fellow clubmen. I am now 50 years of age and I can just about make 50 miles without having to stop for tea and cake and I consider myself to be an average cyclist.


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

Angelfishsolo said:


> It sounds as though to be classed as average you must at least belong to a club.  The OP is new to cycling and thus one could possibly assume is not a club member and therefore would define average in a different way. Maybe average was a bad choice of words but everyone else has replied with sensible answers. I get the feeling that jimboalee is being a pedant. To what end I have no idea other than to make others here feel less than adequate.



I think the idea of the average being a club cyclist is silly, if they are quick from the start they may become one quickly if that's what they want out of cycling. Anyway average or beginner, whichever way you want to phrase it they aren't going to be at their best from the start and slowly along the process of improvement, from whatever level. So I don't know why jimboalee and some of the others seem unable to count below 15mph and then on the other hand start talking about audaxes and 9 and 6mph.


----------



## ACS (3 Nov 2008)

Angelfishsolo said:


> It sounds as though to be classed as average you must at least belong to a club.  The OP is new to cycling and thus one could possibly assume is not a club member and therefore would define average in a different way. Maybe average was a bad choice of words but everyone else has replied with sensible answers. I get the feeling that jimboalee is being a pedant. To what end I have no idea other than to make others here feel less than adequate.



Not being very eloquent I was trying in my limited way to say that average is subjective opinion and dependent on a vast amount of variables. Therefore it is impossible to state what an average time for an average cyclist is.

A benchmark could be 10 miles in 30 minutes but a fit clubman may sneer at this as being slow.

Not very good at this and I am standing by to be shot down in flames.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

I can see we all have different perceptions of what 'average' is. I think the only logical conclusion to this situation is to agree to disagree.


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> I can see we all have different perceptions of what 'average' is. I think the only logical conclusion to this situation is to agree to disagree.



Not really. If you'd said very clearly that you thought to the OP that the average cyclist after training reasonably hard for several years would be doing 15mph on a regular basis I could pretty much agree with that (although I doubt I'll ever achieve that). You seemed to be saying something along the lines of someone starting off straight away should do that and that's where the disagreement lies. Sure some people could but it'd be a small number. The idea of a club being average seemed equally ridiculous. I'm not a fast cyclist but you go into the city centres and see people cycling and they are going slower than I do quite a few of them. That suggests there are a lot of people doing 10mph or less. Cycling in York was even slower. I think some of it is perceptions and snobbery as I went cycling with someone who used to do TTs and was in a club and he said I was the slowest cyclist he'd ever met (rather bizarre thing to say with the speeds in York) but on the other hand I actually got back from one of the rides first.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

Not only mine, but some of the other suggestions have been equally ridiculous.
We’ve all told our situation, and each poster’s situation is different.

The only way to settle this is to lay down some hard and fast parameters.
What terrain and what bike.

If you were to ride 10 miles round an empty velodrome on ( for argument sake ) a Trek 1000 road bike, what time would you expect to achieve. That is the only situation where one cyclist can be compared with another.

I think you would be pleasantly surprised to see you could finish the 10 miles in 40 minutes.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (3 Nov 2008)

+1


satans budgie said:


> Not being very eloquent I was trying in my limited way to say that average is subjective opinion and dependent on a vast amount of variables. Therefore it is impossible to state what an average time for an average cyclist is


----------



## Neilwoo123 (3 Nov 2008)

Just to put the cat amongst the pidgons, 

I am a returning cyclist after a 10 year break. I’m 32 years old purchased a Bianchi Via Nirone 7 on the 27/10/08.

Have done 47.38 miles on it since then at an average speed on 14.78 miles an hour!! Mapmyride!!

Now I’m relatively fit but smoked 25 a day until 2 weeks ago. I think a lot of you guys are doing yourselves an injustice.

Spend some time working it out you may well be surprised!!

Neil


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

You don’t have to get any cats excited and you don’t have to frighten any pigeons.  I’ll put this one to bed right now.

May I draw you attention to a paper written by Albert C Gross, Chester R Kyle and Douglas J Malewicki entitled “The Aerodynamics of Human Powered Land Vehicles”.

A print was photocopied and handed to me by the manager of the Motor Industry Research Association climatic wind tunnel where Chris Boardman tested his bike (because he was a good friend and knew I was a cyclist).

Within the document, please study a graph which illustrates “Effective front area (square feet).
You will notice that ‘straight arm touring’ has been measured at approx 4.3 sq ft.
The curve which represents 0.1 HP, corresponds to 13 mph. The curve which represents 0.2 HP corresponds to 17 mph.
Therefore, an additional curve which represents 0.15 HP (112 Watts output) corresponds to 15 mph.

The research work for this publication was conducted at the University Chester Kyle was employed, and consisted of student ‘volunteers’ riding an assortment of bicycles. They initially rode an ergonometer in the lab and their VO2 uptake was measured. Then they went out onto a campus road on a real bike and their VO2 uptake was recorded via a long hose to a pick up truck holding the analysers.
Care was taken to negate the weight and drag of the hose by suspending a short length from a long boom. The truck was following the cyclist.
An ‘average’ figure was calculated (see above) for each type of bicycle ridden by untrained and under fit university students.

Many text books have figures of 260 Watts for walking at 3 mph. This includes Basal metabolic rate of 120 Watts and reaction to windchill at 20 Watts. So subtracting BMR and windchill, walking at 3 mph requires 120 Watts.

Gross, Kyle and Malewicki will go down as three of cycling’s highest deities.


----------



## Downward (3 Nov 2008)

Maybe us Newbies should find a nice flat 10 mile Circuit and pedal our knackers off so we can come back to this thread to show how big our balls are !


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> Not only mine, but some of the other suggestions have been equally ridiculous.
> We’ve all told our situation, and each poster’s situation is different.
> 
> The only way to settle this is to lay down some hard and fast parameters.
> ...



Well to be sporting I've just had a bit of a harder go at my 10 mile loop  (10.3 miles) and did it in 49 minutes which is fast for me. If I'd had a couple of less reds and no wind I can perhaps imagine it being 45 mins but that's starting to get into what if territory and we can all do that. So 40 minutes, probably not but hey .


----------



## jimboalee (3 Nov 2008)

Thank you for being sporting.
While you were out on your test circuit, I was scrambling around in a freezing cold attic searching for the Gospel according to Chester R Kyle, the most influential individual ( slightly above Mike Burrows ) in cycling since the great J K Starley.


----------



## Neilwoo123 (3 Nov 2008)

Jimboalee,

In english if you will good sir.


----------



## marinyork (3 Nov 2008)

I understand the physics of it, it just doesn't seem to work out like that in real life, for me anyway. Next time I'm cycling somewhere flat like Leeds, Doncaster or Lincolnshire I'll find a 10 mile stretch and see if it makes much of a difference. It's been that long since I've been somewhere flat I'm quite interested myself to see how much I've improved.


----------



## epicurus. (3 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> It probably will run longer than a helmet thread, because as I've described on an earlier post, The 'D', yes *D *ride, and that's what the BCF consider AVERAGE, rides at a 15 mph average speed.
> 
> Above average - CAT 1, 2 and 3 ---- 17 - 18 mph
> 
> ...



The effort required to ride 15mph average in a group on a club ride would achive much less (12mph?) on a solo ride. Aerodynamics. You don't have to be one of "cycling's highest deities" to understand that.


----------



## jimboalee (4 Nov 2008)

Chapter II, 'The real world'

Now we have established a benchmark speed for an untrained cyclist, this can be used as a basis to apply correction for the real world.

1/ Stop junctions. If you have a commute route planned, ride a 'dry run' and count how many junctions, traffic signals, pedestrian crossings, level crossings etc there are. Add on 1% for each stop junction.
If our 10 miler has ten 'stop junctions', add on 10% giving 44 minutes.

2/Wind. For every 1 mph of 'dead in the face' wind against you, add on another 1% to the total.
With a 10 mph headwind, our 10 miler now will be 48 minutes.

3/Hills. Find the lowest point on the route and the highest point on the route. Calculate the average gradient between the two over the length of the route in percentage terms and increase the time accordingly.
If this average gradient for the route is 1%, the total time is now 48.5 minutes. (I told you it wasn't much).

Chrisitalia, as your question was so open-ended, I hope this provides a guide to assessing your performance.

A steep learning-curve maybe, but you asked the question.


A below average cyclist who can cruise at 15mph, riding the typical route I described will have a net average of 12 mph.

An *average* cyclist who can cruise at 19 mph, riding the same route will have a net average of *15 mph*.

I have only once ventured into the realms of 'above average' cycling. That was after training for my seven day LEJOG.


----------



## jimboalee (4 Nov 2008)

epicurus. There are only six of us on the D ride, and we take turns at the front ( two abreast ) for 45 minute stints. By the time we're half way home, we break up and go our seperate ways, keeping up the group average.


----------



## Chris James (4 Nov 2008)

Jimbolee, you want to get out more

By the way, your correction factor for hills ignores the road actually going up and down, rather than simply up. Using your method of just looking at the lowest and highest points my 25 mile route described before would involve a total ascent of about 400m rather than 800m. And if I rode a 50 miler, for example the highest and lowest points of the ride would probably be the same as the 25 miler and yet I could comfortably create a route with 2000m of climbing in that distance if I wanted.

A 1% average hill as pretty much dead flat.

I have a degree in Mechanical Engineering and have a copy of Bicycle Science which covers much the same ground that you are on about. But I don't need either of these to know that riding hilly routes decreases your average speed.

Likewise, the point about group cycling is well made. You can add at least 2-3mph to your average speed, with less effort, if you wheelsuck.


----------



## jimboalee (4 Nov 2008)

Chris. I appreciate your comments.

I topographically mapped the entire first section of my LEJOG; 144 miles through Cornwall and Devon to assess the effect of hills. I have a curve of 'speed vs gradient', which is applicable to myself through years of climbing many hills. I also have a curve of 'speed vs descent' which is derived from a 'roll-down' test on a known gradient. Very sad I know but 144 on the first day of seven over those hills was mmmmm, pushing it.

After hours of entering contour elevations on a spreadsheet, and measuring the OS map (in the days before Garmin), it was depressing to see the result was not so far away from a flat road. I abandoned that labourious method to adopt the simpler method. My own view on this is after struggling up a hill, I will freewheel down.
There is an old cycling saying "Never pedal downhill, let gravity do the work". Some of those Cornish hills wouldn't allow pedalling anyway, they're that fast.

The time at which I achieved that section was very close to my prediction, and I reached my lodgings with time to shower and change for Dinner. One happy bunny.

I would not suggest a newbie meticulously chart a 10 mile commute, my advice was 'Ball park'. If the 10 miler is really hilly or the downward sections are interrupted by junctions, maybe 4 – 5% extra time could be allowed ?? It is up to the individual to gauge their capability.
I no longer plot hills and gradients, for all the AUK 200s I ride, including the Castleton Classic up to Speedwell Cavern. The effect of the long slow incline on the A53 out of Leek is countered by downhill stretches later in the route.
Incidentally, the Castleton Classic is 128 miles and I am by no means the first rider home. Average cruising on the road is 17 – 18 mph. Average speed after road junction etc considerations is 14.5 – 15 mph, and after some tea and cake stops, I like to average 12.5 mph for the whole ride. The fastest allowable speed is 18 mph, and some try to do this. The lowest limit speed is 9.5 mph, so I finish below average.

This is me. You will be different and if I suggested a newbie should attemp that Rando, lock me away.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (4 Nov 2008)

I'm beginning to think that I am not advanced enough for this *BEGINNERS* group. Maybe an Admin could create a '_*special needs*'_ group where people such as myself can fit in.


----------



## ACS (4 Nov 2008)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I'm beginning to think that I am not advanced enough for this *BEGINNERS* group. Maybe an Admin could create a '_*special needs*'_ group where people such as myself can fit in.



+1


----------



## yello (4 Nov 2008)

This thread is getting increasingly silly. Keep it up!


----------



## jimboalee (4 Nov 2008)

Following an apparently simple question, which doesn't have a simple answer, this thread has indeed progressed into something worthy of a category entitled "Cycling Principles, Mechanics and Theories". There is a "Know How" category, but not a "Reference Information" category.

Administrator. Can you create such a category and migrate this thread to there.

All others – Sorry.


----------



## 4F (4 Nov 2008)

jimboalee said:


> Following an apparently simple question, which doesn't have a simple answer, this thread has indeed progressed into something worthy of a category entitled "Cycling Principles, Mechanics and Theories". There is a "Know How" category, but not a "Reference Information" category.
> 
> Administrator. Can you create such a category and migrate this thread to there.
> 
> All others – Sorry.



Surely just a catagory entitled "Jimboalee" should do it. There you could post the gaggle of formula's you have stashed away for everyone's enjoyment. Still loving the one about the tin of paint as a guide for measuring chain wear.


----------



## nigelb (6 Nov 2008)

I must admit, having read some of the posts here, as a beginner I was starting to wonder if I was "worthy" enough to be allowed a bike at all!

My fault, should have known that where there's a forum, there are always people who will tell you what you can do, what you can't do, and how inadequate you are.

Decided to say sod it, and go for a ride.

(and promised myself to use the forum strictly for finding answers to questions in future)

Nige
(now, how do I add someone to my ignore list ...)


----------



## Angelfishsolo (6 Nov 2008)

Welcome Nigelb. Most of us here are not as you describe. To add a person to the ignore list enter Control Panels, click on edit ignore list and enter the user name. Happy cycling.




nigelb said:


> I must admit, having read some of the posts here, as a beginner I was starting to wonder if I was "worthy" enough to be allowed a bike at all!
> 
> My fault, should have known that where there's a forum, there are always people who will tell you what you can do, what you can't do, and how inadequate you are.
> 
> ...


----------



## jimbob (6 Nov 2008)

Hi Chrisitalia, welcome aboard. I am a newbie [about three weeks ago] aged 61 and I have noticed that I am getting fitter with [I'm sure] every ride. Its like a bug that gets under the skin, I cannot wait to get on the bike. I only do short runs at the moment with my longest a cicular six miles but improving all the time. Dont worry about times and speeds as they will come I am sure


----------



## Angelfishsolo (6 Nov 2008)

+1


jimbob said:


> Hi Chrisitalia, welcome aboard. I am a newbie [about three weeks ago] aged 61 and I have noticed that I am getting fitter with [I'm sure] every ride. Its like a bug that gets under the skin, I cannot wait to get on the bike. I only do short runs at the moment with my longest a cicular six miles but improving all the time. Dont worry about times and speeds as they will come I am sure


----------



## zsadiq1 (6 Nov 2008)

Takes me 50 minutes to do 10 miles (was 1 hour when I started) but it's a hilly route and I ride a mountain bike. My target is 40 minutes.


----------



## nigelb (6 Nov 2008)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Welcome Nigelb. Most of us here are not as you describe.



Hi

Yes, I've found almost all very welcoming and friendly, and do appreciate the assistance and guidance.

Found a local route that's 4.5 miles, took me 21 mins today, if I ever get as far as 10 miles I'll let you know how long it took!

Finding the road surfaces round here a challenge, not many big potholes, but just generally very rough, causing loads of vibration (glad the saddle is now angled better, much more comfy!).

I guess if I can keep going for say an hour, then its time to find a local group and go for a ride with them - I'm keenly aware there's so much I don't know about cycling, and bikes, I'm bound to be doing loads wrong.

Nige


----------



## thomas (6 Nov 2008)

I usually cycle faster in a group. I went out on a nightride last week and the motivation of going faster to keep warm and the fact you're in a group meant we did an average of about 16mph over about 20 miles. I did feel that I could of gone a bit faster, but as I'm using my mountain bike at the moment that slows you down a bit.

By myself it depends. I don't actually have a speedo on this bike so I couldn't say for sure. Earlier I went out and I couldn't really be bothered so probably didn't average more than 12mph; if that.

When I was cycling to my old job, I did 15 miles in about 50 minutes to an hour and 10 minutes (I got fitter through the time of working; and weather/hang overs/etc dictated the rest of the speed). That was quite a hilly journy too (could hit 40mph+ going down hills there and back!). So 15/16mph average.


----------



## ontheroadtofrance (6 Nov 2008)

*It depends on you!!*

It all depends on you and your ability. Also it depends on what type of ride flat, hilly. What type of bike do you have? 
I do 20 FLAT miles in an hour hills average about 1 hour 10 minutes!

I cycle into work doing 6.5 miles and average between 15 and 16 mph depending on weather and wind!


----------



## Downward (6 Nov 2008)

nigelb said:


> I must admit, having read some of the posts here, as a beginner I was starting to wonder if I was "worthy" enough to be allowed a bike at all!
> 
> My fault, should have known that where there's a forum, there are always people who will tell you what you can do, what you can't do, and how inadequate you are.
> 
> ...



Hi Yeah maybe this thread or some parts should be moved from Beginners to the Roads,Rides bit.

Goes a bit against what a "beginner" is.


----------



## soulful dog (7 Nov 2008)

This thread makes me feel really, really slow! Took me an hour to do 11 miles today, and my regular 5 mile trip takes me 20-25 mins, which used to take me 30 when I first started doing it.


----------



## snorri (7 Nov 2008)

l-mac said:


> This thread makes me feel really, really slow! Took me an hour to do 11 miles today, and my regular 5 mile trip takes me 20-25 mins, which used to take me 30 when I first started doing it.



Don't worry I-mac, you are doing ok 
I like to think some people apply a correction factor to all quoted speeds times and distances in order to make their data appear more impressive to other posters.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (7 Nov 2008)

Or do you apply a correction factor to your thinking  BTW I agree with you 


snorri said:


> Don't worry I-mac, you are doing ok
> I like to think some people apply a correction factor to all quoted speeds times and distances in order to make their data appear more impressive to other posters.


----------

