Wot on earth are an audax?

davek said:

I already posted this to the AUK yahoogroups list, but shall repost it
here in case anyone is interested - a letter in today's Guardian, part
of an ongoing discussion of metrication:

Audax UK, the national long- distance cycling club, runs its trials
thus: "100 miles to be completed at an average of between 11 and 18
kilometres an hour".
Rob Parrish
Teignmouth, Devon

Also here:
<url:http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,1719405,00.html>

I may be mistaken, but surely AUK has never run a ride under those
conditions?

10-25 kph for a BP, 15-30 for a BR IIRC; does he mean mph?
(there are a few 160km rides, my first ever AUK ride was Battle and
Back which was that distance or 200 at the time)

MartinM said:

10-25 kph for a BP, 15-30 for a BR IIRC; does he mean mph?
(there are a few 160km rides, my first ever AUK ride was Battle and
Back which was that distance or 200 at the time)

Yes, there are several 160km rides - I believe Battle & Back is
available as both a 160 and a 200 this year. And some of Dave Hudson's
rides also include a 160 option. There is also the "double century" in
this year's calendar - billed as 322km. But the point is the distances
are advertised in km, not miles. And as far as I know, AUK has always
used metric consistently from day one.

As for the speeds, I also thought he might mean mph, but it doesn't
quite add up - 18mph is near enough 30km/h to be plausible, but 11mph
is too fast (as a minimum average speed) for an AUK ride, being around
18km/h.

d.

davek said:

Audax UK, the national long- distance cycling club, runs its trials
thus: "100 miles to be completed at an average of between 11 and 18
kilometres an hour".
Rob Parrish
Teignmouth, Devon

I may be mistaken, but surely AUK has never run a ride under those
conditions?

The time limits aren't far off 11-18 *miles* per hour mind. The 100
mile bit is just confused of course.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune

Arthur Clune said:

The time limits aren't far off 11-18 *miles* per hour mind. The 100
mile bit is just confused of course.

11mph is far enough out to be unlikely - 15km/h is more like 9mph,
isn't it? May not sound much difference, but on a 600km ride it's the
difference between finishing inside 42 hours and finishing inside 34
hours.

And on LEL the difference would be 18 hours.

d.

davek said:

this year's calendar - billed as 322km. But the point is the distances
are advertised in km, not miles. And as far as I know, AUK has always
used metric consistently from day one.

There's the Wigginton "Hilly Imperial", which as the name suggests is
100 miles. In gerneral though it looks like the person just didn't
know what they are talking about.

--
Arthur Clune

MartinM said:

10-25 kph for a BP, 15-30 for a BR IIRC; does he mean mph?
(there are a few 160km rides, my first ever AUK ride was Battle and
Back which was that distance or 200 at the time)

AFAIK there are no strict rules for time limits set on Brevet
Populaires. (I set 13.33 to 26.66 on Across Rhondda) . The standard
speed for BR events is 15-30km as you stated. Very hilly events such
as Ride 'Round Rhondda are allowed an easing of the time restrictions
eg 14.3 - 24km. A further restriction applies to BRM events (PBP
qualifiers) . These events are over standard distances but if an
Audax is over distance you are still only allowed the standard time.
You would only be given 13 hours 20 minutes to complete a 200k even if
it is 220k long (An 8am start BR finish by 10:40pm BRM finish by
9:20pm).

davek said:

I already posted this to the AUK yahoogroups list, but shall repost it
here in case anyone is interested - a letter in today's Guardian, part
of an ongoing discussion of metrication:

Audax UK, the national long- distance cycling club, runs its trials
thus: "100 miles to be completed at an average of between 11 and 18
kilometres an hour".
Rob Parrish
Teignmouth, Devon

Also here:
<url:http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,1719405,00.html>

I may be mistaken, but surely AUK has never run a ride under those
conditions?

For non-Guardian readers, I should point
out that this is part of a recurring
run of letters concerning amusing
MIXING of units.

compare yesterdays's letter:

Twenty years ago I needed four yards of chicken netting (Letters, February 25). The
man in the shop said: "We only sell it in metres." I said I'd take four metres.

He then asked me what size mesh.

"Fifty millimetres, please," I said, thinking fast.

"We've got one inch or two inch," came the reply.

BugBear

bugbear said:

"Fifty millimetres, please," I said, thinking fast.

"We've got one inch or two inch," came the reply.

I knew an engineer, would you believe, who walked into a stationer's
shop and asked if they had a 6" metric rule.

--
Dave...

bugbear said:

For non-Guardian readers, I should point
out that this is part of a recurring
run of letters concerning amusing
MIXING of units.

While the letter writer manages to get all the details
wrong, he does have a point. I've done plenty of 200km
Audaxes where the route sheets give distances in miles

--
Arthur Clune

Arthur Clune said:

bugbear said:

For non-Guardian readers, I should point
out that this is part of a recurring
run of letters concerning amusing
MIXING of units.

While the letter writer manages to get all the details
wrong, he does have a point. I've done plenty of 200km
Audaxes where the route sheets give distances in miles

Me too -- very annoying.

Simon Bennett said:

Quoted message said:

While the letter writer manages to get all the details
wrong, he does have a point. I've done plenty of 200km
Audaxes where the route sheets give distances in miles

Me too -- very annoying.

I saw one that was in percentages, luckily it was a 100k :-)

dkahn400 said:

bugbear said:

"Fifty millimetres, please," I said, thinking fast.

"We've got one inch or two inch," came the reply.

I knew an engineer, would you believe, who walked into a stationer's
shop and asked if they had a 6" metric rule.

you may laugh but my brother went into a electrician's shop and asked
for a 6' Flourescent tube; they said "sorry, don't sell them any more,
you'll have to have a 1813mm one" (and that is exactly what it said in
the catalogue)

I also own a 6" metric rule (although TBF it's also in inches)

Going back to averages; there is a lower limit of 10kph on BP's but it
can be higher, if I raised mine to 12.5 I could go home (counts on
fingers) minutes earlier, but would lose the charming old couple from
the village who do it every year (being the only ride to start from
there) as they would not get back on time.

dkahn400 said:

I knew an engineer, would you believe, who walked into a stationer's
shop and asked if they had a 6" metric rule.

Car tyres are always sold in mixed units (barring brief experiments with
metric wheel sizes in the 1970s). Mine are 185mm wide and fit on a 14"
wheel.

Simon Bennett said:

Arthur Clune wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

While the letter writer manages to get all the details
wrong, he does have a point. I've done plenty of 200km
Audaxes where the route sheets give distances in miles

Me too -- very annoying.

Oh I don't know. I'm not changing my computer to steenkin' French units
for anyone. The Dunwich Dynamo route guide helpfully gives both units
although it's sold as a 200km ride (I clocked it at just over 112 miles
on a meticulously calibrated computer [1], and that was with a half mile
off-piste excursion).

[1] average of 3 loaded rollout tests for circumference using a paint
line on the tyre followed by riding the club "10" course to check it; it
read 9.99 miles at the end.

Simon Bennett said:

Quoted message said:

wrong, he does have a point. I've done plenty of 200km
Audaxes where the route sheets give distances in miles

Me too -- very annoying.

Since my computer is still in miles, I prefer it I'm afraid.

--
Arthur Clune

Arthur Clune said:

Simon Bennett said:

Quoted message said:

wrong, he does have a point. I've done plenty of 200km
Audaxes where the route sheets give distances in miles

Me too -- very annoying.

Since my computer is still in miles, I prefer it I'm afraid.

I switched to km for the audaxing.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Since my computer is still in miles, I prefer it I'm afraid.

I switched to km for the audaxing.

Yep, converting avaerage/max/total etc speeds back to miles gives you
something to think about on those long, boring straights.

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Since my computer is still in miles, I prefer it I'm afraid.

I switched to km for the audaxing.

Yep, converting avaerage/max/total etc speeds back to miles gives you
something to think about on those long, boring straights.

I don't bother converting. I don't think in mph when I'm cycling. I fill the
long hours by burbling quietly to myself.

Simon Bennett said:

Arthur Clune said:

bugbear said:

For non-Guardian readers, I should point
out that this is part of a recurring
run of letters concerning amusing
MIXING of units.

While the letter writer manages to get all the details
wrong, he does have a point. I've done plenty of 200km
Audaxes where the route sheets give distances in miles

Me too -- very annoying.

Never done a 200k in miles, the Invicta is miles, the Elenith 300 has
two sheets; one in miles, on in killer-metres (sic)