whats your top speed of all time?

[Gooserider]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> 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 .....

A) The road heads downhill for two miles. Is it a straight two mile
downhill? NO. But the road is two miles from the top of the hill to the
highway.

> 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.

Are you a fan of gravity? If it's possible to spin up to 30mph on the flats,
why is it so doubtful someone could hit 50 on a downhill? Seems you're just
trying to bust chops. Whatever. Have fun.

> BTW, I have done in the upper 50's (MPH), but that is on real hills (>
> 6% grade - SF Bay area and the Sierra Nevada) with long, straight runs.
> With speeds that high you want good tires, good road surface, and
> nothing in front of you ... and especially no roads/driveways entering
> from the sides.
>
> - rick

Dude, I've hit 45 on a military base and been ticketed for it. I think you
just might need to work on your leg muscles a bit and quit being such a
weenie. 50 isn't even close to impossible.

 

[jj]

On 9 Aug 2005 17:13:19 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>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.

Nowhere did I call anything 'ridiculous'. I only said -you- expect people
to believe you did 30mph uphill on a loaded touring bike, yet -you- doubt
someone could do 130 rpm. I never mentioned anything about believing
Gooserider's speed. I never specified the gearing - getting over 120rpm
even in an easy gear is not a simple matter. In the case of Gooserider, he
did stipulate that he was going downhill. If you say there are no two mile
hills in Florida, that's a separate issue and one which I cannot dispute or
confirm.

>> >> >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.

Nope. You're reading things into my comment that I didn't say. I said I've
never heard of a person with a normal heart who rides frequently having a
heart attack from _riding a bike too hard_. Then I said I've only heard of
a handful of cases where people had heart attacks from exercising. It so
happened the few I've heard about were _runners_ not bikers, and those that
had this happen had questionable medical histories.

>>
>> 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.

I seriously doubt that pros build up their "supporting systems" first and
then put down the foundation of high mileage. I might be wrong, but but
this seems to me that high mileage is the base that you build on. How do
you build up your cardio and your LA recovery without a base of high
mileage? I'm sure there are lots of people reading this thread that would
like to know your magic system.

>
>> >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.

Ah so -you're- the one making assumptions. Get the facts later, eh? ;-)

>
>> >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.

Again, I seriously doubt that you're getting anywhere close to 40mph unless
you're a 25year old professional cyclist. My impression was that you were a
recreational rider. Please clarify if I'm in error on your age and ability.

I NEVER defended Gooserider's claim. If I did please quote that paragraph.
I have a 52x12 and I'm turning 80rpm to get ~32mph - if this differs from
the calculated value, the you'll just have to give me some slack for my
bike computer calibration. If you're getting 40mph then you should check
the road you're riding for flatness and you should have your computer
re-calibrated, because I'm very skeptical of any recreational cyclist being
able to generate that kind of wattage without drafting.

If you are, and you're averaging 30mph on the shortest possible ITT (say
10km) then like I said you need to give Johann a call.

However, even guys like Gary German, who is probably a bit out of your
league is only getting 24mph over 10k. ;-p

jj

>
>- rick

 

[[email protected]]

Gooserider wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >
> > 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 .....
>
> A) The road heads downhill for two miles. Is it a straight two mile
> downhill? NO. But the road is two miles from the top of the hill to the
> highway.
>
> > 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.
>
> Are you a fan of gravity? If it's possible to spin up to 30mph on the flats,
> why is it so doubtful someone could hit 50 on a downhill? Seems you're just
> trying to bust chops. Whatever. Have fun.
>
> > BTW, I have done in the upper 50's (MPH), but that is on real hills (>
> > 6% grade - SF Bay area and the Sierra Nevada) with long, straight runs.
> > With speeds that high you want good tires, good road surface, and
> > nothing in front of you ... and especially no roads/driveways entering
> > from the sides.
> >
> > - rick
>
> Dude, I've hit 45 on a military base and been ticketed for it. I think you
> just might need to work on your leg muscles a bit and quit being such a
> weenie. 50 isn't even close to impossible.

50 isn't close to impossible IF you have sufficient tailwind or if you
have a sufficient slope. So it might be interesting to tell us where
this military base was, and what the slope and wind were like.

Regarding your two-mile "heading downhill" road in Florida: Why not
say exactly where that is? We can view the contour maps online.
(ISTM the contour interval for Florida maps is usually measured in
inches. ;-)

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Neil Cherry]

On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:53:00 -0400, jj wrote:
> On 9 Aug 2005 11:34:52 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> 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?

A side note:

Last year my typical rpm range was 100 - 110. This year I tried to
move up in the gears and I've typically been riding 85 - 100 (much
harder with the smaller cog set). I will be switching back to the
higher rpms as it suites my legs best.

My highest rpm while still keeping my butt in the seat is 186, going
down hill (larger cogs) while singing follow the yellow brick road
(and sounding like I'm on helium). I could keep singing until around
155. When I'm climbing a hill I can sometimes hit it just right and I
find I climb best at about 120 rpm (standing or seated, weird) which I
seem to able to hold for about 1/4 of a mile (at most). Too high or
too low and I can't climb with any speed and my endurance drops like a
rock. I know when I'm hitting it just right but can't figure out how
to do it all the time. Oh, I can't climb worth jack.

BTW, my fastest speed was 58 (down hill). On the flats I've sprinted
up to 37 mph for several hundred yards (racing traffic, ****** me
off). Though I can't seem to do that this year. My typical speed is
about 18 mph avg. over a Century (solo).

--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry [email protected]
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

 

[jj]

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 12:32:30 -0500, Neil Cherry <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:53:00 -0400, jj wrote:
>> On 9 Aug 2005 11:34:52 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> 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?
>
>A side note:
>
>Last year my typical rpm range was 100 - 110. This year I tried to
>move up in the gears and I've typically been riding 85 - 100 (much
>harder with the smaller cog set). I will be switching back to the
>higher rpms as it suites my legs best.

That's pretty good, Neil. (Uh, side note - I might have misunderstood Rick,
and didn't realize we were slightly talking cross-purpose. I think, now,
that he meant 130rpm in a high gear, such as 53x11. That's probably not
easy to do even down hill if it's a short hill. I was focussing only on the
rpm. Sorry Rick.)

>My highest rpm while still keeping my butt in the seat is 186, going
>down hill (larger cogs) while singing follow the yellow brick road
>(and sounding like I'm on helium). I could keep singing until around
>155.

You're very strange. I like that in a cyclist. ;-p

>When I'm climbing a hill I can sometimes hit it just right and I
>find I climb best at about 120 rpm (standing or seated, weird) which I
>seem to able to hold for about 1/4 of a mile (at most). Too high or
>too low and I can't climb with any speed and my endurance drops like a
>rock. I know when I'm hitting it just right but can't figure out how
>to do it all the time. Oh, I can't climb worth jack.

That's amazing, to me. Even in granny gear I just can't get it above
80-ish. Maybe next year.

>BTW, my fastest speed was 58 (down hill).

Still haven't worked up the courage or trust in the steed to pass 38-ish.
I'm -so- sure a car is going to pull out from some hidden side street. The
speed itself doesn't concern me nearly as much.

>On the flats I've sprinted up to 37 mph for several hundred yards
>(racing traffic, ****** me off).

32.5 is the max I can sustain for about 300 yds so far, then I have to drop
down to about 27-28 for the next quartermile, but I'm still a returning
newbie, only two years in.

>Though I can't seem to do that this year.

Hmm. Think it's due to less riding, or what?

>My typical speed is about 18 mph avg. over a Century (solo).

Heh, I'm about 12mph for a metric Century last time I checked, but that's
with hills and traffic and stuff.

Thanks for the info, good buddy.

Oh, I just grabbed the bull by the horns and scheduled some rides with a
couple of local Univ. Cycling team members. Just went out and did one of
the routes they do and it kicked my ass. Guess it will be Pain city trying
to keep up with those guys, 25 years old whipper-snappers! ;-D

jj

 

[Rick]

jj wrote:
> On 9 Aug 2005 17:13:19 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >jj wrote:
> >
> >> >>

>
> I seriously doubt that pros build up their "supporting systems" first and
> then put down the foundation of high mileage. I might be wrong, but but
> this seems to me that high mileage is the base that you build on. How do
> you build up your cardio and your LA recovery without a base of high
> mileage? I'm sure there are lots of people reading this thread that would
> like to know your magic system.

Folks may do high mileage, but it does not prepare them to be a pro.
Check out any of the training systems and you will note that they start
with lots of intervals, and then the intervals increase. The idea is
to ramp up the cardio, then the lactic acid threshold and recovery.
Folks who think that high mileage prepares them are those that fail.

> >>
> >> 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.
>
> Ah so -you're- the one making assumptions. Get the facts later, eh? ;-)

It is an assumption, but one that give Gooserider the maximum benefit
of the doubt. It is quite rare for someone other than a pro to ride
something bigger than a 53x11. Even Lance only goes bigger on rare
occasions, like the one stage of the Tour of Georgia where they gave
hima 54x11 so he could do a sprint finish. If I assumed anything less
than a 53x11 it becomes less likely he could power to 50MPH.

> >
> >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.
>
> Again, I seriously doubt that you're getting anywhere close to 40mph unless
> you're a 25year old professional cyclist. My impression was that you were a
> recreational rider. Please clarify if I'm in error on your age and ability.

I am neither young nor pro, but I am strong and have a good cardio
system (resting HR is 53, max is approaching 200).

> I NEVER defended Gooserider's claim. If I did please quote that paragraph.
> I have a 52x12 and I'm turning 80rpm to get ~32mph - if this differs from
> the calculated value, the you'll just have to give me some slack for my
> bike computer calibration. If you're getting 40mph then you should check
> the road you're riding for flatness and you should have your computer
> re-calibrated, because I'm very skeptical of any recreational cyclist being
> able to generate that kind of wattage without drafting.

Forget wattage - you make WAY too many assumptions when you think in
such narrow terms - what I weigh, what the bike weighs, etc. etc. etc.
Think physics. Take the circumference of the wheel (700x25 tire in my
case). Take the gear ratio. Compute how far you go for each rotation.
Run the numbers and you will find that with a 52x12 that 40MPH is
about 118 RPM +/- 1. It is not so difficult to run up to 118RPM.
AGain, you doubt that I can do that, and you still defend Gooserider's
claim of powering to 50MPH which would require something in the
neighborhood of 130 RPM with a 53x11 and a 700x25 tire - more RPMs if
he uses skinnier tires. I marvel at this inconsistency.

BTW, with a 52x12 and 700x25 tires you will be doing a tad over 27MPH
at 80RPMs. You will need to be turning somewhere in the high 90's (98
or 99) to get 32MPH with that rig.

My bike computer is recalibrated often, and verified against a GPSR
that I ride with much of the time. Spot on is the word.

- rick

 

[[email protected]]

My top reliably RECORDED bicycle speed was 60.7 MPH going downhill
(and pedaling) on West Road into the Miami/Ohio River Valley in Western
Hamilton County outside of Harrison, Ohio, but I'm sure I've beaten
that several times on some long mountain descents.

 

[Neil Cherry]

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 14:08:13 -0400, jj wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 12:32:30 -0500, Neil Cherry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:53:00 -0400, jj wrote:
>>> On 9 Aug 2005 11:34:52 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> 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?
>>
>>A side note:
>>
>>Last year my typical rpm range was 100 - 110. This year I tried to
>>move up in the gears and I've typically been riding 85 - 100 (much
>>harder with the smaller cog set). I will be switching back to the
>>higher rpms as it suites my legs best.
>
> That's pretty good, Neil. (Uh, side note - I might have misunderstood Rick,
> and didn't realize we were slightly talking cross-purpose. I think, now,
> that he meant 130rpm in a high gear, such as 53x11. That's probably not
> easy to do even down hill if it's a short hill. I was focussing only on the
> rpm. Sorry Rick.)

While it's possible, my legs aren't hitting those rpms without a big
hill!

>>My highest rpm while still keeping my butt in the seat is 186, going
>>down hill (larger cogs) while singing follow the yellow brick road
>>(and sounding like I'm on helium). I could keep singing until around
>>155.
>
> You're very strange. I like that in a cyclist. ;-p

My friend was riding next to me (aero-tuck and not pedaling) and
nearly fell off the bike at the site of me spinning like mad and
sounding like a munchkin.

>>When I'm climbing a hill I can sometimes hit it just right and I
>>find I climb best at about 120 rpm (standing or seated, weird) which I
>>seem to able to hold for about 1/4 of a mile (at most). Too high or
>>too low and I can't climb with any speed and my endurance drops like a
>>rock. I know when I'm hitting it just right but can't figure out how
>>to do it all the time. Oh, I can't climb worth jack.
>
> That's amazing, to me. Even in granny gear I just can't get it above
> 80-ish. Maybe next year.

I found it odd also, once I hit that sweet spot my climbing improves
stremendously and I can climb better than most of the folks I ride
with. Afterwards I'm a bit winded but I recover in about 5 minutes.

>>BTW, my fastest speed was 58 (down hill).
>
> Still haven't worked up the courage or trust in the steed to pass 38-ish.
> I'm -so- sure a car is going to pull out from some hidden side street. The
> speed itself doesn't concern me nearly as much.

When it comes to downhill I have no fear (or is that common sense). We
have this one great scenic route by Sandy Hook with twists and turns I
can get up to about 40 mph. Lots of fun as long as there is no car in
front of me (they can't go as fast and drafting is not a good idea as
they have to brake a lot). So we no longer let them pass when we get
past a certain point (it's hard to when we take the lane and we're
going faster than the 25 mph speed limit .

>>On the flats I've sprinted up to 37 mph for several hundred yards
>>(racing traffic, ****** me off).
>
> 32.5 is the max I can sustain for about 300 yds so far, then I have to drop
> down to about 27-28 for the next quartermile, but I'm still a returning
> newbie, only two years in.
>
>>Though I can't seem to do that this year.
>
> Hmm. Think it's due to less riding, or what?

Pushing a bigger gear since January, I've been riding 52/38 & 11x21
lately (I live in the flat lands). I pop'd on a 12x25 for use with my
trailer and found that my spin currently suffered from pushing a
bigger gear. It's much harder to spin when your in a big gear and my
legs are not used to spinning as much. I can still break 100 easily
but can't maintain that spin all day.

>>My typical speed is about 18 mph avg. over a Century (solo).
>
> Heh, I'm about 12mph for a metric Century last time I checked, but that's
> with hills and traffic and stuff.

I live in NJ, we have lot of traffic and I can't blow through lights
or stop signs like my friend can. No hills where I do most of my
riding though last week we did a hilly ride around Round Valley
resevoir (16.9 mph over 65 miles).

> Thanks for the info, good buddy.

Thanks for letting me brag a bit.

> Oh, I just grabbed the bull by the horns and scheduled some rides with a
> couple of local Univ. Cycling team members. Just went out and did one of
> the routes they do and it kicked my ass. Guess it will be Pain city trying
> to keep up with those guys, 25 years old whipper-snappers! ;-D

Do enough of that and you'll be able to keep up with them. Figure out
their tactics and then you can take advantage of them.

--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry [email protected]
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)
http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog

 

[jj]

On 10 Aug 2005 11:29:32 -0700, "Rick" <[email protected]> wrote:

>AGain, you doubt that I can do that, and you still defend Gooserider's
>claim of powering to 50MPH which would require something in the
>neighborhood of 130 RPM with a 53x11 and a 700x25 tire - more RPMs if
>he uses skinnier tires. I marvel at this inconsistency.
>
>BTW, with a 52x12 and 700x25 tires you will be doing a tad over 27MPH
>at 80RPMs. You will need to be turning somewhere in the high 90's (98
>or 99) to get 32MPH with that rig.

I'll recheck the cadence next time I ride. I usually take a quick glance at
the speed and when I hit 30 I don't always see the cadence, because I'm
starting to accelerate, but it feels like about 85ish.

>My bike computer is recalibrated often, and verified against a GPSR
>that I ride with much of the time. Spot on is the word.
>
>- rick

I've since read your message about getting 8000 miles per year and that's
impressive. Bear in mind that the Cat A pros usually get 41-44km/hr
(24-27mph), and the winner of a 16km ITT will get 48km/hr anyone who is
riding these speeds ought to consider entering A level races if they ITT at
30mph. If you're in your late 30s to early 40s you would be a sensation.

Thanks for the kind reply.

jj

 

[jj]

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 14:38:03 -0500, Neil Cherry <[email protected]> wrote:

>Thanks for letting me brag a bit.

No problem. I think most people here view any bragging not as
self-aggrandizement, but as postive self-talk. Heck I got pretty revved up
just reading your message and ended up riding my normal hilly route twice,
and adding a couple serious hills and sprints. I was cooked when I got back
but recovered rapidly. Six months ago, riding at that level would resulted
in nap time when I got back. Reading and ranting at Rick got me stoked
yesterday and I went out and rode my flat route twice and it felt easy.

>> Oh, I just grabbed the bull by the horns and scheduled some rides with a
>> couple of local Univ. Cycling team members. Just went out and did one of
>> the routes they do and it kicked my ass. Guess it will be Pain city trying
>> to keep up with those guys, 25 years old whipper-snappers! ;-D
>
>Do enough of that and you'll be able to keep up with them. Figure out
>their tactics and then you can take advantage of them.

Yeah I'm pretty sure they will phear me, lol. <sarcasm>. I dunno, though I
still have about 20lbs to lose and then who knows?

Right now my emphasis is on getting more and more a clean diet and being
sure I get a shot of liquid carbs and some protein after each ride - a
little tip I'd been neglecting until recently.

Take 'er easy!

jj

 

[Chris Zacho The Wheelman]

Well, like the original poster, and I'm sure meny others, my record is
downhill, steep downhill, with a 20 mph tailwind to boot.

How else do you expect to get a touring bike up to 63 mph?

- -

"May you have the winds at your back,
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

 

[Chris Zacho The Wheelman]

[email protected] (C.J.Patten) wrote:

>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...

Well, considering the copy paste of the post referring to navy pilots, I
would assume a fighter jet.

1350 is around mach 2, easily reachable by many jet fighters in the
navy's arsenal.

- -

"May you have the winds at your back,
And a really low gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

 

[di]

"Chris Zacho "The Wheelman"" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] (C.J.Patten) wrote:
>
>>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...
>
> Well, considering the copy paste of the post referring to navy pilots, I
> would assume a fighter jet.
>
> 1350 is around mach 2, easily reachable by many jet fighters in the
> navy's arsenal.
>



Concorde?

 

[Blair P. Houghton]

Rick <[email protected]> wrote:
>Folks who think that high mileage prepares them are those that fail.

It prepares their ass and their mind.

--Blair
"Which may be closer together
than some people realize."

 

[Robert Uhl]

"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> 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.

Nice! What do you get in the other direction, though?

Fastest I've gotten was a little over 40 mph on a hill on the way home
from work, with the wind at my back (I go to work another way, which is
flatter). Still, I was speeding, which is always a great feeling on a
bike

--
Robert Uhl <http://public.xdi.org/=ruhl>
Remember, you're dealing with developers. If they knew what they
were doing, they wouldn't be doing it.

 

[mo fo]

Update since last week: I reached 43.6 MPH on that same hill as
last week. It's a pretty short hill, much less than half a mile.
Very steep, though. I was proudly able to climb it without
stopping for the first time today, too!

There is an INSANE hill nearby. The street is called Hanley Road.
It's about 1 mile straight down, emptying out onto Interstate 71.
I'm not brave enough or crazy enough to ride down this one yet,
but I might do it someday as a personal challenge. I don't know
how to measure or estimate what percent grade it is, all I know
is it's STRAIGHT down for a mile. Very steep. I can see exceeding
70 coasting on a good aero bike easily. I'm afraid the bearings
in my wheels will overheat if i tried this hill, siezing up the
front wheel and launching me into orbit and into a coma! Any nut
jobs near the Mansfield Ohio area, look up Hanley Road if you
have a need for speed and a death wish!

~Rob


"mo fo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
: Hi, I'm new to the group, so I don't know if this topic has
come
: up too much yet. I just got back into riding after a 3 year
: hiatus. Moved to a new state and took a while to get settled
and
: to get used to the maniac drivers around here. Finally got a
new
: bike. Trek FX 7200. Hybrid. Not too fancy, but fits great and
I'm
: happy with it so far. Got it up to 39.2 MPH today, and it was a
: total rush! It was down hill, I admit. A short hill, at that.
And
: in traffic. Probably considered slow by most of you guy's
: standards, with the ultra light, ultra fast Campies and Dura
: 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? Any stories to go with it? Also, how
: fast do you think is the fastest speed a bicycle can handle,
with
: wheel balancing issues and all that?
: ~Rob
:
:

 

[Chris Neary]

>Any nut jobs near the Mansfield Ohio area, look up Hanley Road if you
>have a need for speed and a death wish!

A topo of this road can be seen at: http://tinyurl.com/e3met

The summits East and West of the I-71 are approximately 1400 feet.

The hill bottoms out at I-71 at approximately 1250 feet.

The length of the road west of I-71 appears to be approximately 0.3 miles,
yielding an average grade of about 9.4%.

The road east of I-71 appears to be somewhat longer, say 0.4 miles, yielding
an average grade of 7%

Must be a hoot trying to bleed speed before the freeway intersection!

The west section is a healthy hill, though nothing spectacular. For example,
compare it to the Oakville Grade, near Napa, CA. A topo of this road can be
seen here: http://tinyurl.com/byff8

This road drops over 500' in less than 0.8 miles, yielding a grade of nearly
12%.

The only thing preventing one from pushing through 50 MPH is one's sanity.
60 MPH is entirely possible, especially on a tandem.


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

 

[mo fo]

Wow! Thanks for that scientific geographical research! It seems
longer than 0.3 miles when you're on your way down (in a car).
Now if they put a ramp at the bottom, you could do some serious
Evel Kinevel stuff on a bike...

~Rob

"Chris Neary" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
: >Any nut jobs near the Mansfield Ohio area, look up Hanley Road
if you
: >have a need for speed and a death wish!
:
: A topo of this road can be seen at: http://tinyurl.com/e3met
:
: The summits East and West of the I-71 are approximately 1400
feet.
:
: The hill bottoms out at I-71 at approximately 1250 feet.
:
: The length of the road west of I-71 appears to be approximately
0.3 miles,
: yielding an average grade of about 9.4%.
:
: The road east of I-71 appears to be somewhat longer, say 0.4
miles, yielding
: an average grade of 7%
:
: Must be a hoot trying to bleed speed before the freeway
intersection!
:
: The west section is a healthy hill, though nothing spectacular.
For example,
: compare it to the Oakville Grade, near Napa, CA. A topo of this
road can be
: seen here: http://tinyurl.com/byff8
:
: This road drops over 500' in less than 0.8 miles, yielding a
grade of nearly
: 12%.
:
: The only thing preventing one from pushing through 50 MPH is
one's sanity.
: 60 MPH is entirely possible, especially on a tandem.
:
:
: 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