5 ms·

It depends on where you live and how much you bicycle. 133ft @ 11% is a speed bump to most competitive or avid amateur cyclists. Where I live 1000ft of clim

It depends on where you live and how much you bicycle. 133ft @ 11% is a speed bump to most competitive or avid amateur cyclists. Where I live 1000ft of climbing per hour would be "hilly" but not mountainous. In mountainous regions you can very easily go on rides requiring climbing > 10,000ft over the course of a 3-5 hour ride. It is actually common to have bicycle races at car race tracks, I've done it. But on one of these F1 courses you'd race many many laps of the track and the officials would pull anyone out of the race if they fall behind to avoid anyone getting lapped and causing safety issues. If you ride that 133ft hill on the race track 10-30x in the course of a race then it starts to be annoying as there is going to be someone who attacks up the hill every lap, and if you fall off the back on the hill you'd stand a good chance of not catching up and being pulled from the race. A typical road race would have the lower categories doing around 8 laps of a track like COTA to get to a 25 mile race and the upper classes would be doing 30ish to get to a race closer to 100 miles.

theli0nheart 5y ago
> 133ft @ 11% is a speed bump to most competitive or avid amateur cyclists. I've been a competitive-ish triathlete for five years, and I have to disagree. From "The Climbing Cyclist, Gradients and cycling, an introduction" [1]: * 0%: A flat road * 1-3%: Slightly uphill but not particularly challenging. A bit like riding into the wind. * 4-6%: A manageable gradient that can cause fatigue over long periods. * 7-9%: Starting to become uncomfortable for seasoned riders, and very challenging for new climbers. * 10%-15%: A painful gradient, especially if maintained for any length of time * 16%+: Very challenging for riders of all abilities. Maintaining this sort of incline for any length of time is very painful. [1]: http://theclimbingcyclist.com/gradients-and-cycling-an-introduction/ http://theclimbingcyclist.com/gradients-and-cycling-an-intro... (archive: https://archive.is/Nx8HX https://archive.is/Nx8HX)
- ska 5y ago
  Agreed. GP mentions 1000ft/hour being "hilly" but thats something like 1000ft in 1000000ft at serious cyclist rate, so averaging 1%-ish. Obviously it's unlikely to be uniform, but doesn't really support the argument. If you are on a 10% grade for any length of tim you know it even if you are a pro.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - ben7799 5y ago
    The point was the hill is only 133 feet high, at 11% it's about 1000ft long, less than 1/4 mile. The duration of the climb is very important as well as the grade and in the case of this racetrack hill there's just no duration. It's over in less than a minute for a fit cyclist. You would hit the bottom of the hill at > 20mph and your momentum is going to help you get partway up the hill before they hit the point they even have to climb at a steady speed. It's not even long enough for "climber" type cyclists to be able to start dropping heavier sprinter type cyclists because it's a quick little effort and you're over the top. Even if you're in a race and had to do 10 laps (a short beginner level distance) you would still only climb 1330 feet across a 30 mile race, which would generally be considered a fairly flat race. The Tour De France has a classification system for climbs.. this one would be so short it would not necessarily even get a classification since it's not even 0.5km. A really scary climb would be > 10% for 10km or more. I had mentioned the Mt. Washington Hill climb in NH. That is 7mi/11km at a 13% average grade with essentially no letup the entire climb and some sections exceeding 20%. An excellent time is anything under an hour and twenty minutes and if you can break 1 hour you're putting in a world class performance. A winning time up that mountain would considerably longer than a 10 lap race of COTA, average speed at COTA for an elite group would be around 30mph for 10 laps of COTA in all likelihood. The hill at this race track is not even going to register to most serious cyclists.
    - ska 5y ago
      Agree duration is an important factor, an nobody would suggest this was a "real" climb in the tour-de-france sense. I think we are differing mostly on semantics. I would say for a serious cyclist, it will register but would not be any kind of challenge. Not sure why you are bringing elite cyclists (cf again, TDF) into it, there is an absolutely massive gap between the average serious cyclist and the elites.
- nradov 5y ago
  Gearing matters. If you're riding a dedicated tri bike with typical race gears then an 11% gradient is tough. On a road bike with a compact crankset it's fine.

theli0nheart 5y ago

> 133ft @ 11% is a speed bump to most competitive or avid amateur cyclists. I've been a competitive-ish triathlete for five years, and I have to disagree. From "The Climbing Cyclist, Gradients and cycling, an introduction" [1]: * 0%: A flat road * 1-3%: Slightly uphill but not particularly challenging. A bit like riding into the wind. * 4-6%: A manageable gradient that can cause fatigue over long periods. * 7-9%: Starting to become uncomfortable for seasoned riders, and very challenging for new climbers. * 10%-15%: A painful gradient, especially if maintained for any length of time * 16%+: Very challenging for riders of all abilities. Maintaining this sort of incline for any length of time is very painful. [1]: http://theclimbingcyclist.com/gradients-and-cycling-an-introduction/ http://theclimbingcyclist.com/gradients-and-cycling-an-intro... (archive: https://archive.is/Nx8HX https://archive.is/Nx8HX)

ska 5y ago
Agreed. GP mentions 1000ft/hour being "hilly" but thats something like 1000ft in 1000000ft at serious cyclist rate, so averaging 1%-ish. Obviously it's unlikely to be uniform, but doesn't really support the argument. If you are on a 10% grade for any length of tim you know it even if you are a pro.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ben7799 5y ago
  The point was the hill is only 133 feet high, at 11% it's about 1000ft long, less than 1/4 mile. The duration of the climb is very important as well as the grade and in the case of this racetrack hill there's just no duration. It's over in less than a minute for a fit cyclist. You would hit the bottom of the hill at > 20mph and your momentum is going to help you get partway up the hill before they hit the point they even have to climb at a steady speed. It's not even long enough for "climber" type cyclists to be able to start dropping heavier sprinter type cyclists because it's a quick little effort and you're over the top. Even if you're in a race and had to do 10 laps (a short beginner level distance) you would still only climb 1330 feet across a 30 mile race, which would generally be considered a fairly flat race. The Tour De France has a classification system for climbs.. this one would be so short it would not necessarily even get a classification since it's not even 0.5km. A really scary climb would be > 10% for 10km or more. I had mentioned the Mt. Washington Hill climb in NH. That is 7mi/11km at a 13% average grade with essentially no letup the entire climb and some sections exceeding 20%. An excellent time is anything under an hour and twenty minutes and if you can break 1 hour you're putting in a world class performance. A winning time up that mountain would considerably longer than a 10 lap race of COTA, average speed at COTA for an elite group would be around 30mph for 10 laps of COTA in all likelihood. The hill at this race track is not even going to register to most serious cyclists.
  - ska 5y ago
    Agree duration is an important factor, an nobody would suggest this was a "real" climb in the tour-de-france sense. I think we are differing mostly on semantics. I would say for a serious cyclist, it will register but would not be any kind of challenge. Not sure why you are bringing elite cyclists (cf again, TDF) into it, there is an absolutely massive gap between the average serious cyclist and the elites.
nradov 5y ago
Gearing matters. If you're riding a dedicated tri bike with typical race gears then an 11% gradient is tough. On a road bike with a compact crankset it's fine.