Hill Climbing?

Cletus, Why would you think the Aero would not be on the list? I'm not disputing your list. I'm just
curious about what you base that opinion on because your description of your experience with bents
and climbing parallels mine. bill g *remove the yankees to reply*

Cletus Lee said:

A Ti Aero might be. It was not in my mind for in the list of 'better' climbing 'bents that I gave.
Not to be discounted, I have just not had an opportunity to ride one.

--

Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Cletus, Why would you think the Aero would not be on the list?

And the reason is:

Quoted message said:

Cletus Lee said:

... Not to be discounted, I have just not had an opportunity to ride one.

I won't recommend or criticize a bike that I have not ridden.

--
Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -

Cletus, Oh, ok. Sorry, I got ahead of myself, misread, and thought you'd tested one. bill "reading
comprehension are me" g *replace the yankees with south to reply*

Cletus D. Lee said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Cletus, Why would you think the Aero would not be on the list?

And the reason is:

Quoted message said:

Cletus Lee said:

... Not to be discounted, I have just not had an opportunity to ride one.

I won't recommend or criticize a bike that I have not ridden.

--
Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -

You're right. Here's a sample scenario:

You climb a one-mile hill at an average speed of 4 mph, so the climb takes .25 hours (15 minutes).
You descend the same hill at an average speed of 30 mph. The descent takes .0333 hours (2 minutes).
Your total travel distance is 2 miles. Your total travel time is 0.283 hours, or 17 minutes. Your
average speed is 2 mi / 0.283 hours, or 7.067 mph.

Obviously you could plug in slightly different numbers; but just as obviously, over the same 2-mile
distance, you could easily maintain an average speed more than twice what you got ascending and then
descending the hill.

--
Greg Dunn www.BicycleCommuter.com

"baronn1" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You are oversiimplifying the math. I don't know the exact algorithm, but it's closer to a function
of the length of time spent travelling at any given speed, not a simple average of the high and
low speed...

"Bill Hamilton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ron Levine <[email hidden]> wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 22:08:14 -0500, Cletus D. Lee <[email hidden]> wrote:

>In article

<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>[email hidden] says...
>> I am considering becoming a 'bent' owner BUT I live in the hilly mountainous State of New
>> Hampshire. There are several very looong
hills
>> with 7 degree or more grades on some of my favorite loops. My
question
>> is, would a recumbent be practical for this kind of terrain? Thank You. Danielle
>
>It would depend on what your want out of the bike. If you do no mind being a little slower up
>the hills with an increase in overall performance, then yes.

Again, if you live in very hilly terrain, as I do (and as Cletus does not), then the greater
speed you can get with the bent on the flats and the not-too-curvy descents will NOT make up
for the penalty in climbing. In hilly terrain, climbing speed dominates average speed. Even if
your descending speed were infinite, your average speed could be at most twice your climbing
speed.

Could you explain this? I think you'll turn the entire field of mathmatics on its head if you
can show a sound reasoning for your averaging above. If you manage 4 mph uphill, and 20 mph
downhill, then your average will be (4+20)/2=12 mph, far more than "twice your climbing speed".
In fact, the only way that your average will be twice your climbing speed is if your downhill
speed is three times your climbing speed.

-Bill Hamilton

Cletus, you are a genius. 8-)

--
Greg Dunn

"Cletus Lee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The descents, especially on a 'bent, are lots of fun, but the rush is over quickly.

Quoted message said:

--

Cletus D. Lee Bacchetta Giro Lightning Voyager clee.orgclee.orgOpen ↗
- Bellaire, TX USA -

Greg Dunn said:

Obviously you could plug in slightly different numbers; but just as obviously, over the same 2-mile
distance, you could easily maintain an average speed more than twice what you got ascending and
then descending the hill.

It's not at all obvious what you are trying to say here (because the meaning of "what you got
ascending and descending" is not clear) , but one possible interpretation of what you have written
may seem to contradict a truth that I have previously stated. So let me restate
it.

If the distance ascending is the same as the distance descending and you ascend at a constant speed
and descend at a constant speed, then (no matter what the particular numbers) the average speed for
the total distance is less than twice the ascending speed. The proof of this truth is an exercise in
elementary algebra.

Plug in some typical roadie numbers ... A tight butt roadie will climb the 1 mile hill going 12-16
mph, 0.0833 hours, call it five minutes, They pass me all the time. That same hill takes me fifteen
minutes at 4 mph. He flies down the other side at the same 30 mph, 0.0333, 2 minutes. His total is,
umm, 0.1166 hours, call it 7 minutes, for the same two miles. His average is, umm, 17.1 mph. He's
going a helluva lot faster than I am.

Now, I'm going to have the body skin mounted up on my TE and I'll be pedaling on the downside so
I'll hit 40 easily but only for about
2/3rds of the downhill. That skews my time a bit, call my average 9 mph.

The training hill outside of Boise climbs 4000 feet in 16 miles. The grade varies but that's an
average of 250 feet a mile. I can climb that rascal in just about 2 hours and thirty minutes in the
saddle, not including breaks. I'm averaging 6.4 miles an hour. The record for the Bogus Basin Hill
Climb Race is something like 52 minutes, heck, call it one hour, an average of more than 16 mph.
That's completely insane.

david boise ID

"Greg Dunn" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<Gs%Fa.117231$d51.189028@sccrnsc01>...

Quoted message said:

You're right. Here's a sample scenario:

You climb a one-mile hill at an average speed of 4 mph, so the climb takes .25 hours (15 minutes).
You descend the same hill at an average speed of 30 mph. The descent takes .0333 hours (2
minutes). Your total travel distance is 2 miles. Your total travel time is 0.283 hours, or 17
minutes. Your average speed is 2 mi / 0.283 hours, or 7.067 mph.

Obviously you could plug in slightly different numbers; but just as obviously, over the same
2-mile distance, you could easily maintain an average speed more than twice what you got ascending
and then descending the hill.

--
Greg Dunn www.BicycleCommuter.com