I started cycling about 8 months ago and just did my first race last weekend at the Mrytle Beach Marathon Metric Century Ride. I finished the complete route at 3:29:29. I thought I was doing well until I saw the final results which had the first place time at 1:16:52. Thats an average of 49 mph...is that possible? The problem with this ride is that the route overlaps a number of times with no timing check points throughout so its possible for riders to decide to end early but still cross the finish line and have thier time recorded. Being my first ride I was hoping to see where I stood amongst other cyclists. The ride is completely flat for the duration although there was a considerable coastal wind to make life more hellish. What's "good" for 63 miles and what should I expect from myself especially if I plan on doing a few full centuries in Colorado this summer?
Road Cycling · Public discussion
First Race Questions
Thread navigation
Jump through the discussion
Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.
Thread details
What we know about this thread
- Original section
- Road Cycling
- Published
- 21 February 2007
- Last activity
- 3 March 2007
- Original author
- Hirotmc
- Posts
- 8
- Discussion status
- Public discussion
- Total views
- 1,185
- Views / 30 days
- 0
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
-
-
49 mph? that sounds highly unlikely....
My husband and I can do a bit over 20 mph (ride time only - not counting rest/lunch) on a century with moderate climbs, working together - though I am not too much of a draft 🙄
-
Hirotmc said:
....I thought I was doing well until I saw the final results which had the first place time at 1:16:52. ....
That's either a time for a shorter course or just an error. Not even Armstrong, Lemond and Indurain working together (seems unlikely) as a team could average 49 mph for 60 miles unless it was downhill 🙂Your 3 and a half hour time is great for a first metric century. If you're motivated you can get faster and shave some time off of that, but it's a very good time for your first one. Nice job!
-Dave
-
+1 ... 49 mph must be well over 60 kph.
That is an error or some of the people were riding motorcycles.
-
Powerful Pete said:
+1 ... 49 mph must be well over 60 kph.
That is an error or some of the people were riding motorcycles.
Unless it was 49Km/h?
Which would be an elite TT time, but not completely impossible. Also I guess a bunch or team of strong guys could also pull that off.
-
Powerful Pete said:
+1 ... 49 mph must be well over 60 kph.
That is an error or some of the people were riding motorcycles.
78.4 kph
-
mikesbytes said:
78.4 kph
If its a metric century, then that must be 100k. A time of 1:16:52. is a lot faster than 49kph as 49kph would be a tad over 2hours.
-
mikesbytes said:
If its a metric century, then that must be 100k. A time of 1:16:52. is a lot faster than 49kph as 49kph would be a tad over 2hours.
Very good point. It would indeed appear then that they were riding a moped / motorcycle.
Good effort by those publishing the results not to realise how unrealistic that time and speed is. Unless of course it was 100km descent. 🙄
Active in the last 60 minutes
Active in this thread
0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total
No signed-in users are active right now.
No known search crawlers active right now.