Running vs biking up hill

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

Quoted message said:

The time trial on the L'Alpe d'Huez got me wondering. Is
it possible for a world-class runner to beat a cyclist's
time on a steep enough slope? Obviously on level ground a
bike is much faster but when the road turns up the cyclist
has the disadvantage of having to lift more weight up the
hill. So if the hill is steep enough can a runner beat a
cyclist and if so how steep does the hill have to be for
the runner to win.

I think there is no chance. FWIW, relatively speaking L'Alpe
d'Huez is not that steep. Its mystique comes largely from
its typical placement at the end of a grueling stage. Of
course any elite distance runner could beat *my* cycling
time over this hill I just called "not that steep."

I am only talking of steep as paved roads go. Dot and the
other trail runners are sure to chime in on the "real" hills
regularly found on their training grounds. ISTR discussion
that walking is more efficient than running on these grades.

Matthew

Quoted message said:

Is it possible for a world-class runner to beat a cyclists
time on a steep

enough slope?

Assuming the slope is NOT so steep as to be unrideable,
and assuming lots of other things such as negligible
headwind, etc., no.

The lightest a cycle can be and still be legal for
competition is 15 lbs. Many people ride better bikes in the
20-25 lb. range. If you use a 20-lb. bike and a 160-lb. man,
this is roughly a 1/8 weight disadvantage you are giving the
cyclist (12-1/2 %). However, the "efficiency" advantage of
the bike is far greater than that 12-1/2%.

For example, the "hour record" for cycling is about 31
miles. In running, it is more or less a half-marathon (WR =
59:17) or about 13.1 miles or so. The 24-hour record for
cycling I think is still 539 miles (for 24-hour running I
think it's about 151 miles?). The cycling advantage would be
FAR greater if not for the fact that air resistance becomes
severe as the velocity goes up. The hour record on a track
bike following a motorized drafting cycle is a huge number
that slips my mind, and just for further example, the max
sustained speed record for a bicycle is 152 mph (drafting a
motor vehicle)!

I used to test your theory (sort of) when I bicycled the
outrageous street hills of Berkeley, California. My bike at
the time had a low gear of 40" (42-28, 27" tires), and I
found a hill of about a half mile (I seem to recall) which
had just an outrageous slope. If you drove it in your car,
you feared flipping over backwards off the hill. I wish I
could recall for sure, but it may have been named Marin
Street or something like that (I'll have to go back). I was
very strong in the legs, fit, in my early 20's, and riding
about a 22 pound bike. This hill was so bad that it was a
challenge to stay up without having to plant my feet, but I
eventually learned to go from bottom to top straight up --
not doing the weave you see so many people use for hills --
Even under these conditions, I was going faster than I could
have walked/run up the hill. I think that the relative
inefficiency of running would have been exacerbated by the
outrageous slope. Interestingly, I do not really think the
inefficiency of the cycling is hurt much by the slope,
assuming a gear low enough to turn the rear wheel. These
days, with triple chainrings and 10-cog rear cassettes,
taking such a hill might even be something you could
accomplish sitting on your saddle!

Steve Gerdemann said:

The time trial on the L'Alpe d'Huez got me wondering. Is
it possible for a world-class runner to beat a cyclists
time on a steep enough slope?

absolutely - assuming not limited to paved roads (but I
don't have a feeling for roads so may be true there also).

Obviously on level ground a bike is much faster but when the

Quoted message said:

road turns up the cyclist has the disadvantage of having
to lift more weight up the hill. So if the hill is steep
enough can a runner beat a cyclist and if so how steep
does the hill have to be for the runner to win.

Not sure about world class, but for local runners and mt
bikers, somewhere around 20%+ on dirt will probably do it
and probably depends on surface condition (mud, snow) and
equivalent skills / training of the two. (biking requires
more skill) [FWIW, I've been calling that particular trail
system 10-20% slope. While perusing a trail guide book the
other night, I stumbled across a section indicating that
short pitches were above 35 *degrees* (which I can believe
for very short pitches). But I'm basing my comment on the
assumption that most of the hills are somewhere near 20%,
maybe a little steeper.]

On the hills on trails that are shallow enough that I can
bike them (that is I stay off the ones that want to throw my
front wheel up - until I've got more skill, maybe forever),
I run and bike the same distance in about the same time if
slightly muddy. And the running was sooo much easier - no LT
needed to crest the hills.

At a 5k about 1.5 yr ago on same system, one of the runners
beat the mt biker (just had one biker leading the pack), and
the mt biker (my GP 😉 was experienced and rides that trail
system a lot. The winning run time was about 17+, iirc.

Some runners doing marathon training on the same course
(gravel road, different from my local course) as a duathlon
a couple years ago were alternately passing mt bikers on
the uphill and being passed on downhill. Most of those were
less than 20%.

And generally, we don't see mt bikes on the long 30%+ hills
so there's no comparison (although may not be legal on the
mtn trails).

Some might suggest that if a runner can't beat a mt biker on
a hill, then it's not a hill 😉

And if talking long distance like Iditarod Trail
Invitational, the runner sometimes wins if conditions are
really cruddy for bikes and skiing. So much depens on the
surface involved.

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

Quoted message said:

Just wondering

If you really want a fun discussion of all points of view,
you may wish to post this same inquiry also to
rec.bicycles.misc. That's a fairly lively crew and a
newsgroup that's even more active than rec.running.

James:

I've been interested in this one, too, having passed many a
mtn biker on uphill grinds.

I posted a query over on r.b.m, as you suggested.

--Dan

"TopCounsel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:20040426171833.15757.00000133@mb-
m29.aol.com...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Just wondering

If you really want a fun discussion of all points of view,
you may wish to

post

Quoted message said:

this same inquiry also to rec.bicycles.misc. That's a
fairly lively crew

and a

Quoted message said:

newsgroup that's even more active than rec.running.

Quoted message said:

At a 5k about 1.5 yr ago on same system, one of the runners
beat the mt biker

Appreciate your comments and insight, Dot. This example
introduces a new variable, however -- maneuverability --
which a staright-up-the-road hypothetical did not include. I
would in many instances expect that it would be more
efficient to travel on foot than on bike if you are on
trails; all the more so if the trails are rough and
meandering, or call for the MTB'ers to dismount and carry
their cycles for stretches.

I myself rode my bike more then anyone and posted it on rec
runner. picking up 10 cent cans to live and eat near 19
month all seasons. and in my own human opinion. Now I am
saying sports human.. I learn that people tend to lie allot.
Lie last week on the new. The gov of texan and like 650 best
of the best bike riders rode from houston to Dallas. or
other way. 120 miles. and the news here shows a start of
race. al nice bike riding attire, and racer bikes. the best.
and this man with white white and all the all said and the
governor came in 11th place of all of them and I (he) all
brag like. was 12 right with him to safe all the
way......These guys look like they came out of a all you can
live for free 2 week vacation.......man I talk to my 19 year
old boy who said before this he did 36 miles once. and for 4
days his legs were sore and hard. I post heed and hurt my
back doing 192 miles in 2 weeks. I jump the 10 % week
increases. and a back pack for cans. am I not race. sure I
was doing over a 100 mile a week and did a 30 miler and was
sora. hurt ba ad sleep 14 hours. and these guys do 10 miles
add look better then when they started the race. hair
looking clean, no strain on face. no sore bodes.... and I
think to my self. I don't evan know who the governor of
Texas is. Is this a lie. who already put near 800 miles in
this year on a bike and every were I look I anno find one
other person who say what they train..... on a bike. no were
I have found. an the new guy look a me from a preview well I
am not the best. this is why I live on 10 cent can. and they
make millions for what they do. I never once got a thank
you. well Bill aid f me me a holystone times.....:>😉lol. and
3 virus whichever shu downy x for9 month. NO Harpy
superwoman throne. and threats and attacks by cousins. sue 3
times one time wasn't true. Footballs for $1,000 times many.
threaten r pleated. audited twice by
I.>> LOST @ GOO JOBS>>>> and lats anyway goody virus thin
a.m. so all and all. sen around local area for none real
jobs. price a door allot. stop 1 or2 times awake by
police, threaten on phone may times. claim barnstorming
alto times. and evan bomb threat many times. tool stolen
many times too. but to date I A Unthinking 1 penne
argumentative too me. runners win. because I don't run...
God speed all rr. Do I think a runner win. I think then it
was I should of not. if I was right it was left, so up was
right, no left was. thenwere? Thehill. No theni was yes.
Why because i waen[t. I know this. it takes me 16 month to
get to a 100 miles a week. but I am not the best. I see
the best. they work I don't, I do 30 miles and die. THey
do 12o miles and have a inerview on t.v. with no tired,
pain an earn another 100 grand. for haveing a say. nd I
get a billed I owe. an I WAKE up. and ride for 10 cent
cans an no get paid. because I am. what do you think is a
lie. Hell them best can jump over the moon. try a common
person an see.

TopCounsel said:

Quoted message said:

At a 5k about 1.5 yr ago on same system, one of the
runners beat the mt biker

Appreciate your comments and insight, Dot. This example
introduces a new variable, however -- maneuverability --
which a staright-up-the-road hypothetical did not include.
I would in many instances expect that it would be more
efficient to travel on foot than on bike if you are on
trails; all the more so if the trails are rough and
meandering, or call for the MTB'ers to dismount and carry
their cycles for stretches.

True, most of the tough climbs end up with people carrying
their bikes. The OP didn't specify a distance, type of
start, or surface.

But let's take a straight gravel road (probably true for
paved roads too but I don't have a feeling for necessary
slopes for them) and a stock bike (normal low gearing, not a
special rig). I'm sure it would depend on the distance and
how the start is, but I'm still certain a runner could go
faster than a bike - probably in the 20-30% slope range
although maybe more - at least for hard packed gravel (or
pavement). I agree that on an 11% mentioned on r.b.misc, a
biker would win, but the question was how steep does the
hill have to be before the runner would win. 11% is much
shallower than anything I would have suggested. [You might
try alt.mountain-bike although they'd probably complain
about the smooth surface and no obstacles to jump 😉 ]

To see this, take a slope that is just beyond rideable, then
back it down a notch so it is rideable. At least with me, at
that point just before I stall out, I'm moving so slowly, I
could run at least that fast and probably not be anywhere
near LT. Wind resistance from speed is not an issue. I'm
sure with world class athletes, it would be somewhat
different, esp. for the speeds and slope, but I think the
basic concept would hold true. I think a cyclist will stall
out before a mtn runner.

For what it's worth, mountain runners are still running at
30% slopes and more - although it depends on length of hills
whether they run or include some walking in that. Normal
runners do repeats on 30% slopes and some treadmills go up
to 30% or more slopes. 20% slopes would probably be run the
whole way. Yea, they'd be walked in an ultra for sure, but
in a competitive mtn running race, elite men would be
charging up those slopes (women and jr men didn't have the
strength). One of the papers I posted last year referred to
submaximal efforts by elites running on 45% slopes
(treadmill). Actually, some elites couldn't do this at
submaximal levels.

In a quick search, I wasn't able to find any information on
slopes that bikers ride. I could be wrong in my thought
process, but I'd need to be shown numbers since it's counter-
intuitive to real life.

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

Dot:

I brought this topic over to rec.bicycles.misc, and got some
informed and interesting responses, as TopCounsel suggested.
Check it out...

--Dan

"Dot" <dot.h@#att.net> wrote

Quoted message said:

In a quick search, I wasn't able to find any information
on slopes that bikers ride. I could be wrong in my thought
process, but I'd need to be shown numbers since it's counter-
intuitive to real life.

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

Quoted message said:

Dot:

I brought this topic over to rec.bicycles.misc, and got
some informed and interesting responses, as TopCounsel
suggested. Check it out...

--Dan

The OP also posted to RBR (rec.bicycles.racing) if you are
interested.

Matthew

El Paisano said:

"Dan Stumpus" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message -"]news:[email hidden]-
rthlink.net...

Quoted message said:

Dot:

I brought this topic over to rec.bicycles.misc, and got
some informed and interesting responses, as TopCounsel
suggested. Check it out...

THanks. I did follow it then posted back here since I wasn't
seeing too much (also don't like posting in a ng unless I've
lurked a couple weeks)
- other than the Shimano comment (low gear design is where
it's more efficient to run than bike), which made sense.
But this older thread that was referred to in r.b.r seems
to have more discussion (read other parts of the thread,
but I didn't read it all). I suspect it's a recurring
theme in that ng, much like some of our threads.
tinyurl.com34jmlOpen ↗

Even the cyclists seem to think it's faster to run than bike
on a steep enough hill, which may be somewhere between 12%
(Mt. Washington data) and 3x%. But it depends on the
distance. This is why people dismount and run sometimes.

Quoted message said:

The OP also posted to RBR (rec.bicycles.racing) if you are
interested.

Thanks. This thread had some interesting discussion with
links to some good information - including an old
discussion on r.b.m.

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

TopCounsel said:

Quoted message said:

But let's take a straight gravel road (probably true for
paved roads too but I don't have a feeling for necessary
slopes for them) and a stock bike (normal low gearing, not
a special rig). I'm sure it would depend on the distance
and how the start is, but I'm still certain a runner could
go faster than a bike - probably in the 20-30% slope range
although maybe more - at least for hard packed gravel (or
pavement).

I was all set to agree with you until you added those last
two words: "or pavement." In fact, but for those two words
I had said as much in my earlier post -- that on dirt or
trails, it is absolutely the case that running is faster
under a number of different conditions.

I think what's happening is 3 questions are being addressed,
but not clearly separated. (this includes my reply to other
post since I'm too tired to do 2 posts - too much rest-of-
life at moment).

1. The original OP asked

Quoted message said:

So if the hill is steep enough can a runner beat a cyclist
and if so how steep does the hill have to be for the
runner to win.

There were no stated conditions of pavement or max slope
that I saw - and no distance specified. So I replied that,
yea, around 20+% on dirt (not sure how much above 20%), a
runner could beat a cyclist since most people (admittedly
not world class) stall out somewhere in there. With world
class athletes it will probably happen on a steeper slope,
but I know that elite mtn runners can run on at least 40-45%
slopes. And people seem to agree on this.

2. I could be wrong but I have a feeling you may have
interpreted the question in terms of paved roads and the
max slopes that exist there.

Yes, I would agree that a cyclist would probably beat a
runner - at least on the paved roads I've seen since they
tend to be less than 20% and traction is less of an issue.
And I think everybody agrees on this.

3. In my attempt to explain my viewpoint, I introduced the
concept of pavement that might be steeper than existing
roads (and why I thought I had phrased it hypothetically
with regard to the pavement, since I don't really know) -
say 40% or more - and suggested that the same idea as in
#1 existed. Namely it gets too steep to maintain forward
#motion on a
bike. My gut feeling is that even on pavement, the cyclist
is going to be bailing before the runner, but I could be
wrong. The slopes will be more similar for pavement than for
dirt, for sure. Both will bail before it's 90 deg (200%,
vertical wall) - unless one is Spiderman 😉 Actually, based
on some of my field experiences with measured slopes, I
would expect it to happen before 80-100%. Whoever can
maintain forward motion after the other has bailed can
obviously go faster and wins the race of unspecified
distance. If it's a race of a couple miles or more, then I
don't know.

The reason I used gravel or hard-packed dirt is they
eliminate a lot of the issues of regular dirt trails, but
may actually exist in steep enough slopes where a runner
would be faster than a biker. Our hard-packed gravel isn't
that different from our pavement if that says something
about our pavement 😉 I'm not sure that existing paved roads
are steep enough for the runner to be faster than cyclist.

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope