General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Flat Vs. Hilly Rides Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
2007-01-30 1:33 PM

User image

Champion
5345
500010010010025
Carlsbad, California
Subject: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides
OK, this may sound like a stupid question and/or something that should be a poll but I thought I would ask anyway and give folks some added freedom to responsd. (Please be Kind to me)

Do you find that your Elapsed Cycle Times are better over a Hilly Course or a Flat Course. (Races or Training Rides)

There is clearly a school of thought that says you cannot make up the time on the downhills that you lost climbing to the top of the hill and so hilly courses will always be slower.

On the other hand, if you are good at efficiently powering downhill, you can more than make up for the slow uphill by flying down the other side.

Interested in hearing your experiences and opinions


2007-01-30 1:39 PM
in reply to: #672986

User image

Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides

Tim, no matter what I do, all of my training rides seem to end up in the 15-17 average mph range.  It's not the ups and downs, it's the red lights and cars

2007-01-30 1:41 PM
in reply to: #672986

User image

Expert
844
50010010010025
Denver, Colorado
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides
I think a lot depends on how many and how steep the hills are as well as where they are in a course. I can tackle hills at the beginning of a course pretty easily but a killer hill at the end of a course will definatly slow the average down. Overall I think I stay a little faster on the straighter courses in the long run but I love the workout of climbing and the speed of decending.
2007-01-30 1:50 PM
in reply to: #672986

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2007-01-30 1:53 PM
in reply to: #672986

Master
2299
2000100100252525
New York
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides
My average mph and HR are better on flat rides - this weekend I did a 75 or so mile ride on a very hilly stretch of road in Nashville, averaged like 17.5mph. On the flats I'm generally a hair north of 20.
2007-01-30 2:11 PM
in reply to: #672986

Champion
9600
500020002000500100
Fountain Hills, AZ
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides
Flats are usually faster than hills. It is true that downhills don't make up for the uphills.


2007-01-30 2:14 PM
in reply to: #672986

Not a Coach
11473
5000500010001001001001002525
Media, PA
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides
Flats are faster than hills.  Uphill you fight gravity.  Downhill you fight increasing air resistance.  Can't make it up.
2007-01-30 2:25 PM
in reply to: #673049

Elite
2915
2000500100100100100
New City, New York
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides

JohnnyKay - 2007-01-30 3:14 PM Flats are faster than hills. Uphill you fight gravity. Downhill you fight increasing air resistance. Can't make it up.

 

This will be proven at Harriman on May 19thWink:

 

 

 



Edited by rollinbones 2007-01-30 2:28 PM




(Bike%20Course%20Profile.jpg)



Attachments
----------------
Bike%20Course%20Profile.jpg (7KB - 6 downloads)
2007-01-30 2:30 PM
in reply to: #673072

Not a Coach
11473
5000500010001001001001002525
Media, PA
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides
rollinbones - 2007-01-30 2:25 PM

This will be proven at Harriman Wink

I keep thinking that doesn't look SOOOO bad...until I remind myself I have to do that 4x!  Surprised

2007-01-30 2:33 PM
in reply to: #672986

Champion
6786
50001000500100100252525
Two seat rocket plane
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides
Given riders of roughly equal ability, fast descending alone will not make up for slow climbing, at least over the long haul. I regularly ride fairly hilly rides with people who are better climbers than I am. I can keep up with them only because I am willing to hammer the flats and downhills much harder than they are. They catch and pass me on the climbs, but because I try to ride strategically and ride to my own strenghts, I usually finish the ride right with them (unless it's a straight up climbing route)
2007-01-30 3:29 PM
in reply to: #672986

Veteran
109
100
San Mateo, California
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides
I can make up a good amount of time if the downhill is fairly straight and not steep enough that I need to brake to stay in control.  Most downhills I ride, though, have a lot of turns in the road which require braking on the way down.  The turns definitely slow me down especially if there's traffic behind and I need to be sure I don't drift into the center of the lane.


2007-01-30 3:55 PM
in reply to: #672986

Pro
4578
20002000500252525
Vancouver, BC
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides

I've tried to test it out, but there were too many variables to make my test results worthwhile.

Sorry.

2007-01-30 5:02 PM
in reply to: #672986

Master
1603
1000500100
Connecticut
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides

Flatter rides. A true hilly ride definitely slows my average mph.

On the other hand, if you are good at efficiently powering downhill, you can more than make up for the slow uphill by flying down the other side.

This can sometimes be true on rolling terrain, but has a limit when the terrain moves from nice rollers to serious climbs.

It's easiest to see at the extreme. Take the Mt. Washington climb. Last year's winner, Tyler Hamilton, took just over 52 minutes to ascend the 7.6 miles. Now, if he could hypothetically go back down at say, light speed, he'd still only average about 17.5mph for the total 15.2 mile trip. Of course, he isn't allowed to go down anyway, light speed or not, but the point is - there is no making up the speed past a certain point.



Edited by dredwards 2007-01-30 5:03 PM
2007-01-30 6:23 PM
in reply to: #672986

Master
2379
2000100100100252525
Alpharetta, GA
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides

Flat definitely wins...fair amount of rolling to hilly rides here in Alpharetta, GA and surrounding areas and I typically average 16-18 MPH over 32-53 mile route; did a 65 mile ride on Jan 1, 2006 with the Gainesville, FL cycling club and we were just under 20 for the first 50 and +22 for most of the last 15...yes, flat is definitely faster overall.

2007-01-30 9:18 PM
in reply to: #672986

Member
43
25
Auckland , New Zealand
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides

I would think the steeper the hills the slower your average time.

If you had a flat road of 30 kms and you averaged 30 kph it would take you one hour.

If you had a 30 km ride and the first half was a hill that you could only climb at 15kph it would take you one hour to climb to the top so even at the speed of light you would have a higher average.

The over the same distance if you climbed at 25 kph you would have to complete the rest of the ride at a speed greater than 37.5 which would be possible.

I see the same in training, flat ride around 30 - 28.5 kph on a good day. Same course with a couple of small hills about the same speed.

A nasty, hilly course that I ride where the downhill are longer than the up hills average 23.5 - 24.7 

 

 



Edited by mike9521 2007-01-30 9:19 PM
2007-01-30 11:00 PM
in reply to: #672986

Champion
19812
50005000500020002000500100100100
MA
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides

Hills make me slower...but there is this one tri that is hills first half of the loop and gently downhill for probably 55-60% of the loop and I do great there as the uphills are steeper but shorter, but the downhills give back for a long time....so you can sort of accelerate with the varying degree of downhill.

The other part of the question is how you stack up against others say in a hilly tri vs. a flat tri. I tend to place better on rolling type course..around here not to many flat course.

I did a metric century that was very steep hills...flew on the descents hit 45 mph+ but no way made up for the 3-4 mph I did going up the hills in parts.

I think clearly on your strengths and weaknesses some people do better on certain courses than others.  This one women I competed against in my two Int'l races last year..she beat me on the bike by about 8 minutes first race (very hilly) and in the second race I beat her by about 8 minutes...pretty big swing in times only 2.5 months apart.

The guy that won IMLP in '05 thinks that course is easier (very hilly) than IMFL course (much flatter). Is it a surprise that he is maybe 5'6" or 5'7" and slight built...so hills aren't as hard as bigger guy. His comment was at IMFL you get no break as there are no hills.



Edited by KathyG 2007-01-30 11:03 PM


2007-01-31 3:59 AM
in reply to: #672986

Extreme Veteran
579
500252525
Subject: RE: Flat Vs. Hilly Rides
This falls into the "duh" category. As you increase speed, wind resistance increases dramatically. Sum it up another way....gravity sucks.
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Flat Vs. Hilly Rides Rss Feed