Distance V Elevation Landmarks

[aces_up1504]

Distance seems to be one of the main things people target as show of improvement. Wether its 3,10, 20,50 or 100 miles. They are land mark achievements.

I guess Total time for each distance also ranks within this.

But what are Elevation landmarks? and why is not discussed as much interms of landmarks achievements

 

[jdtate101]

Because in this country we don't have really big climbs, more rolling terrain, so doing large climb targets can involve many rides and huge milage. Strava did a climbing challenge a while back, and I really struggled to make the target, it took me doing multiple hill repeat sessions to get anywhere close.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

It would be interesting if people started using something like ''metres climbed per hour'' as their principle target/measure. But you'd need all the elevation data for that particular ride. Distance data is easier - the trip counter doesn't care if it's a flat 50 miles or a hilly 50 miles, it's always going to be 50 miles.

 

[Nebulous]

I'm not hugely bothered by distance, though that probably needs to change as I'm planning some exceptionally long rides next year! It's all about average speed for me.

I had two bad experiences on big climbs, and decided I needed to do more. Actively seeking some of the biggest climbs around helped, but my average speed took a knock!

 

[Nigelnaturist]

My V.A.M. has ranged from 153 to 440 or 504ft to 1452ft per hr. Total climb June, July and Aug it ranged from 17,500ft climb to 17,800 ft, Oct in was 30,623ft and Nov 26,045ft, but it's largely irrelevant in my case as the topography around here is pretty much flat, with some small hills to the west and south, the highest being about 520ft. and as I start at 173ft it's not much really, so basically the more distance I cover the more I climb, When I started in June it was about 32ft per mile Oct Nov 48ft per mile, and unless I just climb a hill go down it climb it again, I don't see a way of improving that climb rate within a reasonable ride, and too me that's not what getting out on the bike is, even though I am interested in my improvements.

 

[raindog]

I always measure myself on climbing ability and never on distance ridden.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

it's also much easier to measure distance, as elevation needs either a gps track or, using something gpsies to calculate elevation, and even then it will only be an avg, but then they all give different elevations, ridewithgps is close to gpsies, but strava usually show about 2/3rd's the height I have done on the garmin and ridewithgps, garmin site some where between the two, and while distance is usually different its usually less than 1%, and thats usually less than my other comp which measure from the wheel.

 

[deanE]

I record metres per mile, from a Garmin 200, as well as mileage, more out of interest than anything. Here in Cornwall it is usually in the 15-18 range without even looking for hills. Will now start to record total elevation, or might just get out more.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

I record metres per mile, from a Garmin 200, as well as mileage, more out of interest than anything. Here in Cornwall it is usually in the 15-18 range without even looking for hills. Will now start to record total elevation, or might just get out more.

Well 15-18m per mile is about 50-60ft p/m, which is more than I can do a ride, without really looking for hills. I was doing rides like that in Oct-Nov, but that really is about as difficult as it gets on a ride, after that I would need to do circuits or as I said before go up then down, when I go out I want to have ride a see things, I love to see the power stations around here and how the light plays on the towers and pollution.

 

[lulubel]

I love to see the power stations around here and how the light plays on the towers and pollution.

I love to see the view from the top of the mountains, so I have no choice but to do a lot of climbing. (That I live near mountains is not a happy accident - it was planned.)

Since I've started mountain biking, my elevation stats interest me as much as my distance stats. Actually, they probably interest me more because riding off road a lot has naturally meant my distances have fallen. My average for all my rides this year (on and off road) is 78ft per mile, and that includes rides where I've deliberately taken the flattest route possible, but I can average over 170ft per mile on a mountain bike ride.

 

[simmi]

My Garmin connect dashboard displays various data including most Elevation in a ride (1013m)
and longest ride (56.8miles)
I love all the data I get, its always nice to beat a personal record whether it be distance, speed or elevation.
Thats why I find Strava good because you can almost always beat at least one segment time even on a poor ride.

 

[oldfatfool]

When you think about it mileage targets are pretty senseless as well, purely because there are too many variables. One persons 100km could be considerably easier than anothers 25km.

Amazingly both the same time taken!!

24km http://www.brytonsport.com/mapTrackView?id=671651
95km http://www.brytonsport.com/mapTrackView?id=841149

I know which I found the easiest

 

[Nigelnaturist]

I love to see the view from the top of the mountains, so I have no choice but to do a lot of climbing. (That I live near mountains is not a happy accident - it was planned.)

Since I've started mountain biking, my elevation stats interest me as much as my distance stats. Actually, they probably interest me more because riding off road a lot has naturally meant my distances have fallen. My average for all my rides this year (on and off road) is 78ft per mile, and that includes rides where I've deliberately taken the flattest route possible, but I can average over 170ft per mile on a mountain bike ride.

Aint no mountains around here, just today, I saw a different view point on Ferrybridge and an idea for a picture, this is what cycling to me is about, I just wanted to be a bit fitter than I am now, by now.

 

[craven2354]

http://app.strava.com/activities/26915270#482337169.

This is a 1100ft+ climb near me it's nice and gradual so not to hard to get up

http://app.strava.com/activities/26915270#482337185

That one in my opinion is twice as hard as it averages 9.6% gradient with spots where it's 15-17% gradient

 

[RWright]

Aint no mountains around here, just today, I saw a different view point on Ferrybridge and an idea for a picture, this is what cycling to me is about, I just wanted to be a bit fitter than I am now, by now.

I would like to be in better shape now as well but I think age has something to do with the time it might take. I think the young whipper snappers get fit quicker, lose weight faster too. I smoke an Ecig. I am sure that isn't helping me, but I am getting in better shape by riding, slow as it may be.