whats your top speed of all time?

[Mike Latondresse]

"David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote in
news[email protected]:

> On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 02:03:51 +0000, mo fo wrote:
>
>> Acers! But I was just curious as to what some other people's top
>> speeds are, and how do you feel when you're flying at the seat of
>> your pants at that speed?
>
> I recall several downhills over 50, but don't have a record number
> that I recall. No problems (with current bike, anyway).
>
> One personal craziest I did note was 35mph downhill on a 70" fixed
> gear. Since 100rpm corresponds to 20mph, my feet were moving
> pretty fast.
>
Wow 175, for how long? I can do 135/140 for a while but that is
fantastic. You must be a trackie.

 

[Steve McDonald]

What counts is how fast you can pedal on level ground with no
tailwind. I have a speedometer on only my mountain bike (with large
cargo box---80 lbs. total weight) and yesterday, I got it up to 23 mph,
an all-time high on that tank. If I go for about a mile every day like
that, it'll either make or break me.

Steve McDonald

 

[David L. Johnson]

On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 02:44:50 +0000, Mike Latondresse wrote:

>> One personal craziest I did note was 35mph downhill on a 70" fixed
>> gear. Since 100rpm corresponds to 20mph, my feet were moving
>> pretty fast.
>>
> Wow 175, for how long? I can do 135/140 for a while but that is
> fantastic. You must be a trackie.

Not long, seeing as how it had to have been downhill. The number came up
on my computer, but I was rather busy and not looking at the display.

As far as being a trackie -- has been....

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Enron's slogan: Respect, Communication, Integrity, and
_`\(,_ | Excellence.
(_)/ (_) |

 

[Chris Neary]

> What counts is how fast you can pedal on level ground with no
>tailwind. I have a speedometer on only my mountain bike (with large
>cargo box---80 lbs. total weight) and yesterday, I got it up to 23 mph,
>an all-time high on that tank. If I go for about a mile every day like
>that, it'll either make or break me.

The weight of your "tank" is pretty irrelevant to your speed on level
ground.

You aerodynamic profile on the tank is another matter.



Chris Neary
[email protected]

"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

 

[Rich]

Michael Warner wrote:

> Nah, he's still riding down a 70 degree virtual hill

I think he's doing a 20 degree wheelie on a 90 degree virtual hill.
Very impressive given the lack of traction.

Rich

 

[[email protected]]

mo fo wrote:

> ...But I was just curious as to what some other people's top
> speeds are, and how do you feel when you're flying at the seat of
> your pants at that speed? Any stories to go with it?

I think I hit 60 mph once or twice on the steep
section of Sugarloaf Road outside of Boulder, Colorado.

I tell you one thing for sure, you don't want any
stories to go with your 60 mph.

Robert

 

[Zoot Katz]

8 Aug 2005 22:57:50 -0700,
<[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:

>mo fo wrote:
>
>> ...But I was just curious as to what some other people's top
>> speeds are, and how do you feel when you're flying at the seat of
>> your pants at that speed? Any stories to go with it?
>
>I think I hit 60 mph once or twice on the steep
>section of Sugarloaf Road outside of Boulder, Colorado.
>
>I tell you one thing for sure, you don't want any
>stories to go with your 60 mph.
>
I know I've hit at least 60mph in Rogers Pass drafting highway buses.
No stupid drag inducing hats to slow me down.

I once followed a wood-chip hauler over the center line while he
passed a pick-up truck. I guess we were moving around 55mph.
It took a dump-truck towing a pup to wean me off my drafting habits.

Top speed logged on my puter right now is 51.8 (KmH) but that's just
coming home from the store.
--
zk

 

[Michael Warner]

On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 20:54:19 -0500, AustinMN wrote:

> That's cool, but what's the point with the jet ski???

What's the point of falling out of the sky and trying not
to get killed in general?

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

 

[AustinMN]

Michael Warner wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 20:54:19 -0500, AustinMN wrote:
>
> > That's cool, but what's the point with the jet ski???
>
> What's the point of falling out of the sky and trying not
> to get killed in general?

I guess I let that one get by me. My general philosophy on skydiving
is that I can't understand why anyone would actually jump out of a
perfectly good airplane.

Austin

 

[[email protected]]

AustinMN wrote:
> Michael Warner wrote:
> > On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 20:54:19 -0500, AustinMN wrote:
> >
> > > That's cool, but what's the point with the jet ski???
> >
> > What's the point of falling out of the sky and trying not
> > to get killed in general?
>
> I guess I let that one get by me. My general philosophy on skydiving
> is that I can't understand why anyone would actually jump out of a
> perfectly good airplane.
>
> Austin

My standard response when I used to jump out of "perfectly good"
airplanes was, A) have you taken a close look at most jump planes?, and
B) any airplane that has a door that can open in flight is not
"perfectly good".

 

[[email protected]]

I hit 93.0 MPH going down the east side of Monitor Pass in the Sierras
last October. Of course, I had to install a second computer magnet to
get my bike to go that fast...

 

[AustinMN]

[email protected] wrote:
> AustinMN wrote:
<snip>
> > I guess I let that one get by me. My general philosophy on skydiving
> > is that I can't understand why anyone would actually jump out of a
> > perfectly good airplane.
> >
> > Austin
>
> My standard response when I used to jump out of "perfectly good"
> airplanes was, A) have you taken a close look at most jump planes?, and
> B) any airplane that has a door that can open in flight is not
> "perfectly good".

My definition of a perfectly good airplane is one where you can
reasonably expect to walk away from the landing, normal or otherwise.


Austin

 

[[email protected]]

AustinMN wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > AustinMN wrote:
> <snip>
> > > I guess I let that one get by me. My general philosophy on skydiving
> > > is that I can't understand why anyone would actually jump out of a
> > > perfectly good airplane.
> > >
> > > Austin
> >
> > My standard response when I used to jump out of "perfectly good"
> > airplanes was, A) have you taken a close look at most jump planes?, and
> > B) any airplane that has a door that can open in flight is not
> > "perfectly good".
>
> My definition of a perfectly good airplane is one where you can
> reasonably expect to walk away from the landing, normal or otherwise.
>
>
> Austin

My point exactly in A) above!

 

[Rick]

Mark Hickey wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> >
> >Gooserider wrote:
> >> I live in Florida, so it's not super hilly. We do have hills, though, and
> >> one of them is 7 miles into my commute. The hill is 200 yards long, then the
> >> road heads downhill for 2 miles through a subdivision. I've hit 50 in the
> >> subdivision, even passing cars. That gets a doubletake from the driver, for
> >> sure. It's a nice subdivision, because it has tons of sidewalks for the
> >> morning walkers, and car traffic is very light.
> >
> >I could almost believe you, until you try to claim a 2 mile long
> >downhill run in Florida. With a high point of 345 ft and a low point
> >of 0, if we connected those on a two mile ramp we would have a 3.4%
> >grade, and I would call that a nominal hill. But I seriously doubt you
> >are claiming that this 2 mile stretch goes from the top of Britton hill
> >to the ocean, so .....
>
> He doesn't say it's a 2 mile hill, but that the "road heads
> downhill"...

Mark,

Read carefully, forget your prejudices. He says: " road heads downhill
for 2 miles through a subdivision" which when taken literally, as
written in English, that it is 2 miles of downhill. If it is not two
miles of downhill, then he needs to learn to write English.

> which could mean a lot of things short of a (substantial)
> 3.4% grade.

It means a grade, not a hill. 3.4% is marginal between being a grade
and a hill - it is by no means substantial. And that is the steepest 2
mile run one can find, by definition, in Florida.

> Remember the OP is in Florida, where the definition of
> "hill" is a little different... ;-)

> >The second part that makes me skeptical is your claim in a followup
> >message that you powered up to 50MPH. Even with a 53x11, it would
> >require a cadence in the high 120's - not impossible buy improbable
> >that a recreational rider could do that. Color me doubting .. and I am
> >not from Missouri.
>
> 120-130 rpm is NOT all that difficult. I have seen "Mount" Dora in
> Florida, and don't doubt for a minute that a serious rider with a
> little wind (and there's always wind in Florida) could hit 50mph on
> that hill.

Not really. I lived in Florida, for periods - Miami and St. Pete area.
No hills, not that much wind, lots of sucky humidity though.

> I've done well over 40mph on the flat along the ocean with
> some of those famous Florida breezes... so I doubt 50mph is
> unthinkable elsewhere in the state (assuming a tailwind and a fit
> rider).

I do not think it is impossible. I am skeptical than a casual rider
can punch 130RPM on a regular basis. There is absolutely no way that
anyone in Florida can get much of a downhill for 2 consecutive miles -
just ain't gonna happen.

- rick

 

[Rick]

Mark Hickey wrote:

> 120-130 rpm is NOT all that difficult. I have seen "Mount" Dora in
> Florida, and don't doubt for a minute that a serious rider with a
> little wind (and there's always wind in Florida) could hit 50mph on
> that hill. I've done well over 40mph on the flat along the ocean with
> some of those famous Florida breezes... so I doubt 50mph is
> unthinkable elsewhere in the state (assuming a tailwind and a fit
> rider).

BTW, I have done 30+ MPH up grade (1-2%) on a loaded touring bike with
the west coast winds so I know about the push of the tailwind. That
said, Gooserider says he powered to 50MPH and the math is the same
whether there is wind or not - he would need to get to almost 130RPM
and hold it. As I said, not impossible but improbable for most riders
to do except for a 1-off, blow the stack and risk a heart-attack. If
you ain't training like a pro, you can't go riding like one as a
regular course.

- rick

 

[Ningi]

C.J.Patten wrote:
> "Ningi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
>>>>How about 135 in an automobile and a little over 450 mph in an airplane
>>>>once, but I'm sure that's slow compared to some on this list.
>>>
>>>Since you mention it... about 600mph as a crew-member onboard a plane
>>>(but I think we have an ex-Navy pilot here so he'll likely give that a
>>>pasting
>>>
>>
>>1350 mph here.
>>
>>On the bike, 49.3 mph freewheeling downhill on my MTB in New Zealand while
>>cycle touring.
>
>
>
> Can you tell us what you did 1350 in or is that one of those "I can tell
> you, but I'd have to kill you" things...
>

I think I had a nice glass of wine and a good steak while flying from
JFK to Heathrow

Not exciting, but very pleasant!

Pete

 

[jj]

On 9 Aug 2005 11:34:52 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Mark Hickey wrote:
>
>> 120-130 rpm is NOT all that difficult. I have seen "Mount" Dora in
>> Florida, and don't doubt for a minute that a serious rider with a
>> little wind (and there's always wind in Florida) could hit 50mph on
>> that hill. I've done well over 40mph on the flat along the ocean with
>> some of those famous Florida breezes... so I doubt 50mph is
>> unthinkable elsewhere in the state (assuming a tailwind and a fit
>> rider).
>
>BTW, I have done 30+ MPH up grade (1-2%) on a loaded touring bike with
>the west coast winds so I know about the push of the tailwind. That
>said, Gooserider says he powered to 50MPH and the math is the same
>whether there is wind or not - he would need to get to almost 130RPM
>and hold it.

Durn, you expect people to believe you did -more- than 30mph uphill on a
loaded touring bike yet you doubt someone could do 130rpm?

>As I said, not impossible but improbable for most riders
>to do except for a 1-off, blow the stack and risk a heart-attack.

Huh? What is a 1-off? I seriously doubt that a person with a normal heart
who rides frequently could have a heart attack from riding a bike too hard
- in fact I've never heard of such a thing.

>If you ain't training like a pro, you can't go riding like one as a
>regular course.

What is 'training like a pro'? Lots of recreational riders can ride pretty
good speeds and hit a relatively high cadence. I turn over 120 every day in
some parts of my route - I just don't do it for more than about a minute at
a time. I've also hit 32mph on the flats with a slight run up, but I don't
do it for more than a minute at a time, so far. ;-)

jj

>
>- rick

 

[Rick]

jj wrote:
> On 9 Aug 2005 11:34:52 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >Mark Hickey wrote:
> >
> >> 120-130 rpm is NOT all that difficult. I have seen "Mount" Dora in
> >> Florida, and don't doubt for a minute that a serious rider with a
> >> little wind (and there's always wind in Florida) could hit 50mph on
> >> that hill. I've done well over 40mph on the flat along the ocean with
> >> some of those famous Florida breezes... so I doubt 50mph is
> >> unthinkable elsewhere in the state (assuming a tailwind and a fit
> >> rider).
> >
> >BTW, I have done 30+ MPH up grade (1-2%) on a loaded touring bike with
> >the west coast winds so I know about the push of the tailwind. That
> >said, Gooserider says he powered to 50MPH and the math is the same
> >whether there is wind or not - he would need to get to almost 130RPM
> >and hold it.
>
> Durn, you expect people to believe you did -more- than 30mph uphill on a
> loaded touring bike yet you doubt someone could do 130rpm?

Man, you need to learn some math, then you can understand all this. Do
the calcs, and you will find that on a 50x12 (high gear on my touring
bike) that 30MPH is just 90RPM - not unreasonable at all. And when you
are getting pushed by a 40+ MPH tailwind, with lots of surface area
(panniers) to act as sails, it is not hard to keep that pace even on
upturned grades. Learn some math, it might help in these discussions.

> >As I said, not impossible but improbable for most riders
> >to do except for a 1-off, blow the stack and risk a heart-attack.
>
> Huh? What is a 1-off? I seriously doubt that a person with a normal heart
> who rides frequently could have a heart attack from riding a bike too hard
> - in fact I've never heard of such a thing.

Better start reading the papers. We have a few of them a year around
here. Folks just lying dead on the side of the road. Happens, not
uncommon. More common where there are actual hills so folks have to
work, though.

> >If you ain't training like a pro, you can't go riding like one as a
> >regular course.
>
> What is 'training like a pro'? Lots of recreational riders can ride pretty
> good speeds and hit a relatively high cadence. I turn over 120 every day in
> some parts of my route - I just don't do it for more than about a minute at
> a time. I've also hit 32mph on the flats with a slight run up, but I don't
> do it for more than a minute at a time, so far. ;-)

Training like a pro means just what it says - lots of reps, intervals,
sprints, time trials - all while keeping heart rate, lactic acid
buildup, and other things in check. 120RPM is one thing, pushing 130
in a 53x11 is a notch up. Easy to redline to HR max in trying to do
so. Hitting 32MPH on the flats is no big deal, either. We were time
trialing on Sunday, on rolling terrain, and averaging over 30MPH. I've
easily done 40MPH on the flats, no wind. But that is far from 50, and
the stress on the body increases non-linearly.

- rick

 

[jj]

On 9 Aug 2005 13:12:59 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>jj wrote:
>> On 9 Aug 2005 11:34:52 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Mark Hickey wrote:
>> >
>> >> 120-130 rpm is NOT all that difficult. I have seen "Mount" Dora in
>> >> Florida, and don't doubt for a minute that a serious rider with a
>> >> little wind (and there's always wind in Florida) could hit 50mph on
>> >> that hill. I've done well over 40mph on the flat along the ocean with
>> >> some of those famous Florida breezes... so I doubt 50mph is
>> >> unthinkable elsewhere in the state (assuming a tailwind and a fit
>> >> rider).
>> >
>> >BTW, I have done 30+ MPH up grade (1-2%) on a loaded touring bike with
>> >the west coast winds so I know about the push of the tailwind. That
>> >said, Gooserider says he powered to 50MPH and the math is the same
>> >whether there is wind or not - he would need to get to almost 130RPM
>> >and hold it.
>>
>> Durn, you expect people to believe you did -more- than 30mph uphill on a
>> loaded touring bike yet you doubt someone could do 130rpm?
>
>Man, you need to learn some math, then you can understand all this. Do
>the calcs, and you will find that on a 50x12 (high gear on my touring
>bike) that 30MPH is just 90RPM - not unreasonable at all. And when you
>are getting pushed by a 40+ MPH tailwind, with lots of surface area
>(panniers) to act as sails, it is not hard to keep that pace even on
>upturned grades. Learn some math, it might help in these discussions.

Oh, -now-, you add you had a 40mph tailwind. I see no reason for a
contentious reply simply because I asked a question. This is not a question
of math. You seem to be using that as a way to get an easy put down. If
not, I don't see how you could have expected me to do "math" when you
omitted the gearing and the windspeed.

>> >As I said, not impossible but improbable for most riders
>> >to do except for a 1-off, blow the stack and risk a heart-attack.
>>
>> Huh? What is a 1-off? I seriously doubt that a person with a normal heart
>> who rides frequently could have a heart attack from riding a bike too hard
>> - in fact I've never heard of such a thing.
>
>Better start reading the papers. We have a few of them a year around
>here. Folks just lying dead on the side of the road. Happens, not
>uncommon. More common where there are actual hills so folks have to
>work, though.

Utter BS. C'mon Rick. It's not necessary to conflate to make your point.
The times we've heard of clear-cut cases of people having heart attacks
while exercising are -so- rare that they make the headlines. I can think of
only a handful of cases and many of those were people with questionable
medical histories.

>> >If you ain't training like a pro, you can't go riding like one as a
>> >regular course.
>>
>> What is 'training like a pro'? Lots of recreational riders can ride pretty
>> good speeds and hit a relatively high cadence. I turn over 120 every day in
>> some parts of my route - I just don't do it for more than about a minute at
>> a time. I've also hit 32mph on the flats with a slight run up, but I don't
>> do it for more than a minute at a time, so far. ;-)
>
>Training like a pro means just what it says - lots of reps, intervals,
>sprints, time trials - all while keeping heart rate, lactic acid
>buildup, and other things in check.

Keeping things in check? What does that mean? Do you have -any- idea what
training like a pro means? I thought it was high mileage first and
foremost.

>120RPM is one thing, pushing 130 in a 53x11 is a notch up.

OK, in the previous paragraph you have 50x12 gearing. Now you have 53x11
gearing?

>Easy to redline to HR max in trying to do
>so. Hitting 32MPH on the flats is no big deal, either. We were time
>trialing on Sunday, on rolling terrain, and averaging over 30MPH.

You averaged over 30mph? You need to give Johann a call, buddy, lol.

>I've easily done 40MPH on the flats, no wind. But that is far from 50, and
>the stress on the body increases non-linearly.

That's utter BS. No way you did 40mph on the flats without drafting. You'd
have to be cranking well over 1500 watts, and yes I did the math. At a
cadence of 130, and a bike weight of 20lbs, it's about 1675 watts. Your
replies are usually very balanced and level-headed. I'm surprised at this
change. ;-/

jj

>
>- rick

 

[Rick]

jj wrote:

> >>
> >> Durn, you expect people to believe you did -more- than 30mph uphill on a
> >> loaded touring bike yet you doubt someone could do 130rpm?
> >
> >Man, you need to learn some math, then you can understand all this. Do
> >the calcs, and you will find that on a 50x12 (high gear on my touring
> >bike) that 30MPH is just 90RPM - not unreasonable at all. And when you
> >are getting pushed by a 40+ MPH tailwind, with lots of surface area
> >(panniers) to act as sails, it is not hard to keep that pace even on
> >upturned grades. Learn some math, it might help in these discussions.
>
> Oh, -now-, you add you had a 40mph tailwind. I see no reason for a
> contentious reply simply because I asked a question. This is not a question
> of math. You seem to be using that as a way to get an easy put down. If
> not, I don't see how you could have expected me to do "math" when you
> omitted the gearing and the windspeed.

Even without me adding the gearing and tailwind speed, it is trivial
math to compute the cadence to get to 30MPH. Do the math before you
start calling things ridiculous. Speaking sans information is
buffooning .. and you are mastering it in this thread.


> >> >As I said, not impossible but improbable for most riders
> >> >to do except for a 1-off, blow the stack and risk a heart-attack.
> >>
> >> Huh? What is a 1-off? I seriously doubt that a person with a normal heart
> >> who rides frequently could have a heart attack from riding a bike too hard
> >> - in fact I've never heard of such a thing.
> >
> >Better start reading the papers. We have a few of them a year around
> >here. Folks just lying dead on the side of the road. Happens, not
> >uncommon. More common where there are actual hills so folks have to
> >work, though.
>
> Utter BS. C'mon Rick. It's not necessary to conflate to make your point.
> The times we've heard of clear-cut cases of people having heart attacks
> while exercising are -so- rare that they make the headlines. I can think of
> only a handful of cases and many of those were people with questionable
> medical histories.

It happens around here several times per year. Now you go from "I've
never heard of such a thing" to "I can think of only a handful of
cases", i.e., you change your story to fit how you want to slant the
argument. Tsk tsk.
>
> Keeping things in check? What does that mean? Do you have -any- idea what
> training like a pro means? I thought it was high mileage first and
> foremost.

Not at all; high mileage comes *after* you work up the supporting
systems. You do the intervals first and foremost, build up the cardio
system, build up the lactic acid recovery, build up VO2 max, and then
you ratchet up the mileage. Anyone can do high mileage, but to have
that translate into pro level performance requires a lot beforehand.

> >120RPM is one thing, pushing 130 in a 53x11 is a notch up.
>
> OK, in the previous paragraph you have 50x12 gearing. Now you have 53x11
> gearing?

I had 50x12 gearing. The 53x11 is the max I can assume Gooserider was
running in Florida ... and with that he would have to be pumping almost
130RPM to hit his 50. If one were running 50x12 they would have to
have a much higher cadence.

> >Easy to redline to HR max in trying to do
> >so. Hitting 32MPH on the flats is no big deal, either. We were time
> >trialing on Sunday, on rolling terrain, and averaging over 30MPH.
>
> You averaged over 30mph? You need to give Johann a call, buddy, lol.
>
> >I've easily done 40MPH on the flats, no wind. But that is far from 50, and
> >the stress on the body increases non-linearly.
>
> That's utter BS. No way you did 40mph on the flats without drafting. You'd
> have to be cranking well over 1500 watts, and yes I did the math. At a
> cadence of 130, and a bike weight of 20lbs, it's about 1675 watts. Your
> replies are usually very balanced and level-headed. I'm surprised at this
> change. ;-/

Boy, the only thing you are consistent at in this thread is
inconsistency. Here you say there is no way I can pump 40 on the
flats, right after you defend Gooserider's claim that he was pumping 50
on the flats (again, there are no long hills in Florida, so his claim
of a 2 mile long hill is BS). Get some consistency, man. It is much
more likely that I can pump 40 on the flat than Gooserider can pump 50,
yet you defend him and flog me. My fast bike has a big gear of 52x12;
with that 40MPH is only about 118 RPM. Cripes, get a grip and learn
the math.

- rick