Hills – drive up them hard, or spin until you are fitter?

[jimboalee]

'kin hell! I thought I was a serious cyclist, racing and sportives etc for last 25 years, but dont do any of this stuff, who does?

Each to their own jimbo, but not for me im afraid, its not going to make me any faster

In the nineties, I was working at the Motor Industry Reseach Assocciation. While I was there, Chris Boardman was doing work in the wind tunnel with Mike Burrows. I was not allowed to watch.

The company I was working for had a motorcycle chassis dynamometer which could simulate inertias down to 80kg and as my inertia was 96kg, why not get some lab training on Friday afternoons.

To make the thing simulate effectively, eleven points on a curve are required, and the machine's maths does the rest.

Boardman was doing Cd and streamlining work to measure how much power was required to get him to break the hour record.

Engineers at MIRA were comparing Chris' figures, my figures and prior art from the Uni California Santa Cruz ( Chester Kyle ) for a research project on an electric bike ( which I was asked to test, but declined ).

To say this field of discovery "Won't make me any faster" is a very narrow minded statement.
I'm sure Chris Boardman would agree that 'knowledge is power' and knowing the present situation is inspiration to be better.

You can make up your own mind.

The other benefit of knowing the present situation is that one 'side effect' of this research is kCals requirement.

Whether it be a 1 hour record attempt or a 17 hour Audax, it is worthwhile to know when and how much to eat.

Another 'side effect' is being aware of your own limitations. This helps gear choice for those steep hills on that 300 km Rando.

 

[dodgy]

Jimbo, you do sometimes seem to get lost in the figures! Or at least, you might not get lost, but we do You should change your username to Mr Logic

Seriously though, it is interesting, but I doubt if I'll put any of it into practice.

 

[jimboalee]

In one of those mid-nineties years, a work colleague and I did the LEJOG.
He bought a second hand bike and I rebuilt it.
After some training, I assessed his capabilities and tricked-up the bike as a tourer to suit his level of strength and fitness.

When we were riding up Glen Coe, we were singing 'Bonny, bonny banks of Loch Lomond'. On the last day we were singing 'Its a long way to Tiparrary" to annoy the locals.

Cycling IS fun, if you know what you're doing.

 

[Crankarm]

Here's a little test you might like to try.

1/ Find your MAX heart rate ( that's if you've got a HRM ). Mine is 185, which is OK for a fifty year old.
2/ After warming up, cruise at the speed which is appropriate to 50% MHR. Mine is 14 mph.
3/ Double it.
4/ Look up on your curve ( that's if you are a serious enough cyclist to have evaluated your Cd and roadload velocity/power curve ) to see the power requirement for the ' 2 x cruise' speed.
Mine would be 28 mph at 550 Watts.
5/ Weigh the vehicle ( you and your bike, everything ) in kg.
6/ Calc your W/kg factor. Mine is 5.5W/kg - no where near pro racer's ( but then I'm a fifty year old oncewozza )

You should get out more .

 

[peanut]

Here's a little test you might like to try.

1/ Find your MAX heart rate ( that's if you've got a HRM ). Mine is 185, which is OK for a fifty year old.
2/ After warming up, cruise at the speed which is appropriate to 50% MHR. Mine is 14 mph.
3/ Double it.
4/ Look up on your curve ( that's if you are a serious enough cyclist to have evaluated your Cd and roadload velocity/power curve ) to see the power requirement for the ' 2 x cruise' speed.
Mine would be 28 mph at 550 Watts.
5/ Weigh the vehicle ( you and your bike, everything ) in kg.
6/ Calc your W/kg factor. Mine is 5.5W/kg - no where near pro racer's ( but then I'm a fifty year old oncewozza )

strewth maite get a life

 

[dodgy]

Jim, do you have a proven scientific formula for deciding when you're happy, or for if you're enjoying a good meal with a pint?

Surely you don't just trust your taste buds or the smile on your face?

 

[rich p]

Cycling IS fun, if you know what you're doing.

A bit patronising, isn't it. I have a great time touring, racing, popping to the shops but it doesn't mean I have to do particle physics first.

 

[SimonRoberts0204]

On reading through the post, in fairness, the method he suggests isn't that confusing or difficult to do, - However I do think (by everyone's response) you have to be a very serious cyclist indeed to have a roadload/power curve set up!

But then, Theres plenty of fun to be had from taking things seriously is there not?

 

[peanut]

Absolutely I take my gear ratios very seriously

I have to admit I'm a bit of a techy at heart but ..Cd ? blimey when you are as big as an aircraft hanger the last thing on my mind is getting aerodynamic

 

[jimboalee]

In the nineties, I was working at the Motor Industry Reseach Assocciation. While I was there, Chris Boardman was doing work in the wind tunnel with Mike Burrows. I was not allowed to watch.

The company I was working for had a motorcycle chassis dynamometer which could simulate inertias down to 80kg and as my inertia was 96kg, why not get some lab training on Friday afternoons.

To make the thing simulate effectively, eleven points on a curve are required, and the machine's maths does the rest.

Boardman was doing Cd and streamlining work to measure how much power was required to get him to break the hour record.

Engineers at MIRA were comparing Chris' figures, my figures and prior art from the Uni California Santa Cruz ( Chester Kyle ) for a research project on an electric bike ( which I was asked to test, but declined ).

To say this field of discovery "Won't make me any faster" is a very narrow minded statement.
I'm sure Chris Boardman would agree that 'knowledge is power' and knowing the present situation is inspiration to be better.

You can make up your own mind.

The other benefit of knowing the present situation is that one 'side effect' of this research is kCals requirement.

Whether it be a 1 hour record attempt or a 17 hour Audax, it is worthwhile to know when and how much to eat.

Another 'side effect' is being aware of your own limitations. This helps gear choice for those steep hills on that 300 km Rando.

As I said, when there is £120,000 worth of testing kit available for personal use, why not make use of it.

The Engineers at the Motor Industry Research Assocciation were keen cyclists and techies, so "When in Rome".

And as for "patronising". The message there was - My colleague at work was going to ride the LEJOG on a race bike with a 42 x 13 lowest. By using some math and physics, suitable gearing was fitted which resulted in an enjoyable trip, not a tortueous slog.

You are probably correct. I don't have a life. Cycling theory takes up so much of my time, I don't have time to socialise.
Then again, every pub around where I live has moving pictures of 22 idiots kicking an inflated pig's bladder around a field. That or two blokes with thin sticks and some coloured balls on a dining table. What's that all about?

 

[rich p]

Cycling IS fun, if you know what you're doing.

I'm not having a pop at your social life or, indeed, the way you approach cycling but the implication that for you cycling IS fun while the rest of us, know-nothings, who just get on the bike and ride, it I'SNT

 

[jimboalee]

As I remember from the mid nineties, MachineHead was writing his stuff. The CTC didn't have much and Audax UK were still basing their calorific theory on the experience of older members and one member who was a Doctor.
Pro teams were doing evaluation work on ergonometers and computing power was just coming on-stream to capture 'real time' logging at 100 hz.
There was in instant boom in lab testing when reports of Chris Boardman were published after his world record triumph.
Everything was measured. One parameter was cadence. It was found pro riders and Chris had quite a high cadence – from revs vs kW curves (Powercurve), so the press jumped on this and told us all this is the way to ride a bike – spin.
Just because the pros had spent years training to pedal fast – because their salary depended upon it, didn't mean all the social and recreational cyclists had to do likewise. Following testing, several Engineers at MIRA and I found our most efficient cadence to be lower than a trained professional. So why change the habit of a lifetime to conform to the 'trendy' spoutings of the cycling press.

This was twelve years ago. I have not re-trained to Spin and have found my Audax distances have appeared to be easier this century than last. On occasion, I have 'spun a 100' and returned to HQ totally wrecked.

What I am saying is – a bit of testing and self evaluation is certainly more beneficial than simply following the crowd down a blind alley. On discovering one's own efficiencies and limitations, gearing and cadence can be chosen to better effect than using what someone else suggests. That 'someone else' is not you.

 

[Cubist]

In the nineties, I was working at the Motor Industry Reseach Assocciation. While I was there, Chris Boardman was doing work in the wind tunnel with Mike Burrows. I was not allowed to watch.



Boardman was doing Cd and streamlining work to measure how much power was required to get him to break the hour record.

Engineers at MIRA were comparing Chris' figures, my figures and prior art from the Uni California Santa Cruz ( Chester Kyle ) for a research project on an electric bike ( which I was asked to test, but declined ).

.
I'm sure Chris Boardman would agree that 'knowledge is power' and knowing the present situation is inspiration to be better.

.

Bloody hell, all that work and he ends up working at Halfords.........

 

[jimboalee]

Bloody hell, all that work and he ends up working at Halfords.........

We've already discussed the monetary rewards of a cycling career ( for CyclingSam's benefit ) and agreed its crap.

I could have junked the motor industry and taken a full time job at a framebuilders, who subsequently went bust.
"Good call" Jimbo.

 

[SimonC]

In the nineties, I was working at the Motor Industry Reseach Assocciation. While I was there, Chris Boardman was doing work in the wind tunnel with Mike Burrows. I was not allowed to watch.

The company I was working for had a motorcycle chassis dynamometer which could simulate inertias down to 80kg and as my inertia was 96kg, why not get some lab training on Friday afternoons.

To make the thing simulate effectively, eleven points on a curve are required, and the machine's maths does the rest.

Boardman was doing Cd and streamlining work to measure how much power was required to get him to break the hour record.

Engineers at MIRA were comparing Chris' figures, my figures and prior art from the Uni California Santa Cruz ( Chester Kyle ) for a research project on an electric bike ( which I was asked to test, but declined ).

To say this field of discovery "Won't make me any faster" is a very narrow minded statement.
I'm sure Chris Boardman would agree that 'knowledge is power' and knowing the present situation is inspiration to be better.

You can make up your own mind.

The other benefit of knowing the present situation is that one 'side effect' of this research is kCals requirement.

Whether it be a 1 hour record attempt or a 17 hour Audax, it is worthwhile to know when and how much to eat.

Another 'side effect' is being aware of your own limitations. This helps gear choice for those steep hills on that 300 km Rando.

I guess if I had access to all this kit, I could improve my position and gain some speed, but to be honest, like I said its not my thing.

Just enjoy my racing and training etc.

On the magic 7W required to get up a 25% hill, and I'm probably opening myself up here to a long and complicated explanation, if I'm putting out less than 7W I'm still gonna get up that hill but just at a slower speed. At these speeds Im guessing wind resistance is not so significant, compared to working against gravity i.e gaining potential energy?

Jeez, who do I sound like??!!