Are You A Reasonably Fit Cyclist?

[axel_knutt]

According to Dan Farrell (Cycle, Apr/May '09, P46):

"Even riding 400 miles in 40 hours is not a cardiovascular struggle for a reasonably fit cyclist"

Perhaps, but how long would you expect a typical middle-aged touring cyclist to cover that distance, 6 days?

[EdinburghFixed]

Without any context it's hard to comment. I mean in theory, if you could stay awake would it be that hard? If the reference is only talking about the capacity of your cardiovascular system, then 45W continuous output isn't all that much?

[Lawrie9]

Its 10mph isn't it which is steady jogging pace so is non aerobic and hardly like to raise ones pulse rate.

[Fabini]

Its 10mph isn't it which is steady jogging pace so is non aerobic and hardly like to raise ones pulse rate.

Except when you start to go uphill: even a one in twenty slope at just 5mph could more than triple your required power output, at which point you could start to puff a bit.

[hamster]

Yes, and an average of 10mph excludes stops for feeding, sleep and other essentials. The longest I've ever done is 38 hours without sleep and I was in a bad way by then.

I think the point he's trying to make is that this is not a superhuman effort and is attainable by most of use with a little preparation. After all it's 31 hours of riding at an average of 13mph. So get up, ride from breakfast, take half an hour for meals, and 6 hours sleep...doesn't seem so bad now, does it?

[Mick F]

I wouldn't WANT to cycle 400 miles in 40 hours! No doubt I could do it, but 40 hours? It would be hard for me to stay awake that long.

I'm an 8 hours a day man, and any sleep I can get at night is a bonus!

[thirdcrank]

I think Edinburgh Fixed is right.

Several years ago an article by DF was published in the CTC mag about the London Edinburgh London. He opened with comments on the line that he started having not had enough sleep and having had too much to drink. (I cannot now remember the exact wording - all double negatives.) There were also references in the article to riding short of sleep - one rider falling off and being put back on his bike and so on.

It was just after the conviction of the Land Rover driver in the Great Heck train disaster and the effects of sleep deprivation on road safety were in the news. I wrote to the the editor suggesting it was wrong for the CTC to appear to endorse that sort of riding. As is almost obligatory with the CTC mag, we were eventually treated to Dan Joyce's opinion. Fair enough - I'm always happy to tell people mine. During Gary Hart's trial the prosecution led a huge amount of evidence about the effects of sleep deprivation on human performance. GH had tried to combat this by playing loud music and driving with the windows open to get more fresh air. The prosecution witnesses demonstrated how shortage of sleep cannot be overcome with fresh air etc. Sleep is the only answer. Naturally, the minute detail of the trial gained even more publicity here in Yorkshire than in the national press. It was particularly disappointing that DJ (who is based not a million miles from Selby) peddled out the line that lack of sleep did not affect cyclists because they were in the fresh air. I was disappointed that my point was misunderstood by some as an attack on Audax riding and endurance riding in general, which it wasn't. There is a huge difference between physical tiredness from hard work, and sleep shortage, although they can obviously sometimes occur together.

I should have thought that the 'cruising speed' of a fit cyclist, particularly in a group of similar people could easily be 20 mph. By cruising speed I mean a speed that could be kept up almost indefinitely. On the other hand, sleep is vital to allow the brain to work properly.

If we think of 40 hours as, say 0400 on the first day, to midnight on the second and then consider proper sleep during the intervening night, the balance is the riding time. Two hundred miles between 0400 and say 2000 is a true average of 12.5 mph. Eight hours break, off at four again and the two hundred miles before midnight is a true average of 10 mph. For somebody in the right frame of mind in a decent group, with some support at feeding points etc, it seems to me that the proposition of 400 miles in 40 hours is eminently reasonable.

IMO it's the proper sleep which is crucial on open roads.

[Manx Cat]

It makes my jaw drop reading this.... Wish i could even dream such an achievement.... Not sure if my body clock is ready for an event doing 400 miles in just 40 hours... (bed factor would be greatly missed I can assure you!) I am in awe of most of you who can do such a thing. And another thing, how do you manage to fit in the training??

Mary

[Phil_Lee]

If I could ride 200 miles between 4 am and 8 pm, I don't think I'd notice any difference between a bed and a bus stop by the end of it.
I might notice when I tried to get going in the morning though.

[eileithyia]

How do you fit in training, by doing what you already doing, Mary, riding almost everywhere; to work, for leisure, to visit friends and family.
It is good daily mileage that gets you ready for these sort of rides with a weekly longer ride at weekends/or weekday depending on what fits in. You build up to these rides over a period of time.

A reasonably fit cyclist can do this sort of mileage but it is getting used to the hours in the saddle and the general stamina required to do it that is the problem, but it is just like putting together all those short rides, this is why Audax has plenty of control stops where you can refuel.
Mental stamina is a big part of it. You do not necessarily think of the whole ride, but of getting from one control to the next, then to next. Though admittedly you can never get away from the fact the overall ride is in the back of your mind.
When I rode LEL, on the 2nd day there was a cyclist leaving the control at the same time as myself who had already decided he would not finish the event and would only go to Edinburgh then finish when he got back Thorne (some of us started at Thorne), he was giving out so many megative vibes I did not want to be anywhere near him in the event.


The point about lack of sleep is obviously relevant. However, a stray cyclist falling asleep is not likely to cause a large number of other deaths, they are most likely to fall off their bike where they are, yes they may well be run over by a following car, but the risk is predominantly to themsleves. Obviously this emphasis changes if they then jump in a car to drive home at the end of the event.

[Mick F]

I've never ridden further that 106 miles. I've done that distance twice, once Helmsdale to JOG and back without luggage, and Cheddar to home pulling a heavy trailer.

The JOG trip has some big hills north of Helmsdale, but the Cheddar trip was fairly flat and easy-going. Either way, it was my greatest distance.

This thread has got me thinking .....
I always like an aim when I go for a ride, just going round in circles is mindless, so I reckon I'm going to have a crack at LE and Back. 180 miles ish in the one day. If I start off nice and early, and take the Southern A390 route there, I'll come back on the Northern Route - A39. Should be a good day out.

If I fail and can't manage it, Mrs Mick F can come and collect me!

[patricktaylor]

... just going round in circles is mindless ...

You don't mean that

I've never cycled 100 miles. I might have try this year. I'm 61 and easily fit enough in the cardiovascular sense, strength, stamina, etc. From middle-age onwards it's often the mechanical bits that are the limiting factor: knees, back, feet, etc (and bum).

[axel_knutt]

None of which answers the question. How old are the people posting here? If you are middle aged, (say 50) and touring rather than audaxing how long would you expect to take to cycle 400 miles?

I'm 50, I cycle 3000 to 5000+ miles per year. I don't consider 20mph an easy cruising speed, 14mph is busting a gut. I can do 100m at 12mph, but only as a one off. Riding daily on tour, it takes me 10-12 days to cover 400m, my speed being about 8.5mph excluding stops, or 6mph including stops. If I tried to do 400m in 6 days I'd get chest pain.

My doctor describes me as "extremely fit" and clearly thinks that my expectations are ridiculous if I aspire to do 400m in 6 days. If I suggest to him that most other cyclists can tour at around 1.5 to 2 times the speed I do, he tries to persuade me I'm mistaken with patronising arguments that presume I can't see whether other cyclists are younger, or that distance is further if the road meanders, or that I'm too stupid to stop and eat.

They bunged me on the treadmill at the hospital the other day. I did up to 170bpm in a 13minute session no problems. When I said that I'd had chest pain two days earlier but not until the 50th mile of a 65 miler, they just gave each other a we've got a right one here look. The guy who was shuffling his feet with cerebral palsy then said "I cycled 7 miles once, and that made me tired". I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take from that. Am I supposed to feel guilty for being able bodied, or stupid for cycling 65 miles at the age of 50?

[Michael R]

I consider myself reasonably fit at nearly 63 . Yesterday I went for a mountain walk 14 miles and 3100ft of climbing near Kirkby Stephen

When cycling I expect to average over 10mph on a hilly ride of 40-60 miles and faster on the flat (I live near Lancaster) I pedal up all hills sitting in the saddle at a sedate pace.

As for speed I do 13-15 along the flat

Last summer I did a couple of TDF passes in the Auvergne including the Pas de Peyrol and tackle any hills in the Lakes , Dales or Bowland

As a young man of 45 I did 95 miles , which was tiring as that included ascending the Gt St Bernand from Martigny a climb of over 6000 ft.

I last did 100 in 2004 but reckon I could still.

I dont go on tours so 400 miles doesnt enter my head

As for my bike it is a 2003 Dawes 601 with over 15,000 on the clock , butterfly bars , Brooks and 44-32-22x 11-32. I rarely use bottom gear and keep it for the Wrynose pass

[kwackers]

<snip>

I'm 48, my 27 mile round trip to work averages just under 20mph (I'm trying to get it over) on a fairly flat (but windy) route. I'm not sure I can do 400m in 2 days without suitable reward but reckon 3 days would be doable.
Most of my fitness comes from running rather than cycling, I'm certainly working harder - running over a half marathon my average heart rate is around 175, cycling usually nearer 160.
The biggest problem I'd have doing any distance is just not being used to it rather than any fitness issues. I'd expect sore knees, arms, bottom etc.

Last year I had a number of tests for a pain in my chest but after all the faffing it turned out to be a hiatus hernia.

As long as you're up to it I wouldn't worry about age. I do loads of races (running) and can show a clean pair of heels to lots of people half my age - as one person at the club put it "for a guy with your build and grey hair you're bloody fast!" (or as I interpreted it, "for an old fat guy you're not bad").