Another (Older) Newbie : Reasonable Expectations ...

"Mark W" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

So, is this about par for the circumstances ? And, short of replacing
the machine (maybe next year - when distance as opposed to burning
excess baggage is the aim) what would anyone suggest for picking the
pace up ?

A lighter unsuspended bike, with skinnier tyres and more aerodynamic
posture (ie a road bike) might make a big difference. Can you borrow one
to try before you buy?

You sound a bit slower than I'd expect you to be but there are so many
factors affecting speed, the only thing I'd suggest is some experiment.

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

"Mark W" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Recently, 30th July to be precise, got back on a bike (for leisure /
fitness purposes anyhow ... been hacking back and forth to the station,
2m each way, for the last 15 years, but that does next to sod all in
exercise terms) after a 10 year break, and would like to get an idea of
what reasonable performance should be - I'm rather "concerned" with the
average speeds I'm achieving given what I remember from more youthful
times, so some guidance for comparison purposes would be much
appreciated.

Anyhow : basic details.
Me : 38 yo, 5'10, just over 10 stone, no real exercise other than
mentioned above and the daily traipse through the London Underground.
One suspect knee, hence the 10 years - but been reading the threads
about cadence (I killed it tackling a hill in way too high a gear) etc
and seem to be avoiding problems so far.

Bike : trek style bike, ie mudguarded, 21 speed, ally frame, front
suspension - make unknown : says Keswick on the front, Concept on the
frame badge. 700/38 slickish (ie grooved but not knobbly) tyres. All of
£165 so suspect is more of a BSO than anything else. It suits my
purpose and the routes I'm using it on at present - ie to slownly burn
off the belly I've been acquiring, skinny with a gut is NOT a good look
:O)

Routes : normally about 75% road, 25% farm track / bridleway (I know,
being very polite to all and sundry - and I do appreciate the front
springing). Terrain : undulating (south-of-Huntingdon area - so no big
hills but not the Fens either). Started off around 8km in length, now
into the mid 30kms, time permitting.

Anyhow, 8k or 35k, windy or not (boy was it breezy today by the way),
the average speed is coming out consistently between 19 and 22kph, 12
to 14mph). Top whack on the flat (at an estimated cadence of 80ish -
certainly faster than 1 elephant 2 elephant etc - which I aim for most
of the time) in 21st appears to be about 38kph.

So, is this about par for the circumstances ? And, short of replacing
the machine (maybe next year - when distance as opposed to burning
excess baggage is the aim) what would anyone suggest for picking the
pace up ?

Well I don't know how to compare.
At 69 I have a daily schedule where I try and cycle between 20 and 30 miles.
The last 7 days have seen me with 180 miles covered at an averge speed of 10
mph ( 16 kph) I am on the road before 0700 hrs and over the last 4 years I
have been fairly consistant with that average speed.
Even on my annual, long, cycle camping tours I only fall a bit below that
daily average -- and that always includes a lot of slow/walking movement of
my velo which knocks down my average on the day.
However most of my cycling I do is with at least 1/2 touring load and not
intended to be a speed freak -- just an old f*rt on a bike. I find the
regardless of loading ( ie on those days when I cycle free of any load at
all) I still maintain the same rate.
I am in the process of buying a Trice Q NT and I think perhaps my daily
average will, maybr, increase a little -- although that isn't the aim -- but
perhap more expended energy will be put into actual movement as opposed to
keeping me upright. I certainly like the feeling of total freedom of my
upper body when on the trike. A new and quite amazing experience.

So basically my feeling is that you shouldn't worry -- just do your thing
and enjoy it -- if you find yourself not enjoying it then that is when you
should worry!

happy cycling!

--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom.
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

Following on from Mark W's message. . .

* Smoother tyres, but make sure the ones you have are well pumped up
_using a pressure gauge_.

* Toe clips are ever so cheap. Once tried you'll never go back to plain
pedals. (Start with them loose for easy foot downs at junctions etc.)

* Perhaps aim for 13mph average on open road as an 'anybody can do it'
target. Of course you can go faster for longer if you develop (a)
technique (b) strength (c) stamina.

* See the recent cadence thread

Quoted message said:

So, is this about par for the circumstances ? And, short of replacing
the machine (maybe next year - when distance as opposed to burning
excess baggage is the aim) what would anyone suggest for picking the
pace up ?

A buddy or local group for hints and tips, camaraderie and dealing with
lazy tendencies (keeping up with a pace just that fraction faster than
you'd choose for yourself at that point is a good way to achieve the
sort of progress it appears you're looking for.)

--
PETER FOX Not the same since the bookshop idea was shelved
[email hidden]
www.eminent.demon.co.uk - Lots for cyclists

Mark W said:

Bike : trek style bike, ie mudguarded, 21 speed, ally frame, front

As you are hiniting, this is a perfectly reasonable style of bike
for what you are doing, but it will slow you down.

Quoted message said:

So, is this about par for the circumstances ? And, short of replacing
the machine (maybe next year - when distance as opposed to burning
excess baggage is the aim) what would anyone suggest for picking the
pace up ?

After warming up, try doing 1 mile fast, 1 mile steady for 6 miles.
(Or 1km/1km, whatever).

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune

"Mark W" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Recently, 30th July to be precise, got back on a bike (for leisure /
fitness purposes anyhow ... been hacking back and forth to the station,
2m each way, for the last 15 years, but that does next to sod all in
exercise terms) after a 10 year break, and would like to get an idea of
what reasonable performance should be - I'm rather "concerned" with the
average speeds I'm achieving given what I remember from more youthful
times, so some guidance for comparison purposes would be much
appreciated.

Anyhow : basic details.
Me : 38 yo, 5'10, just over 10 stone, no real exercise other than
mentioned above and the daily traipse through the London Underground.
One suspect knee, hence the 10 years - but been reading the threads
about cadence (I killed it tackling a hill in way too high a gear) etc
and seem to be avoiding problems so far.

Bike : trek style bike, ie mudguarded, 21 speed, ally frame, front
suspension - make unknown : says Keswick on the front, Concept on the
frame badge. 700/38 slickish (ie grooved but not knobbly) tyres. All of
£165 so suspect is more of a BSO than anything else. It suits my
purpose and the routes I'm using it on at present - ie to slownly burn
off the belly I've been acquiring, skinny with a gut is NOT a good look
:O)

-
It would be worth getting a heart rate monitor, you can train at different
zones then, such as :-
Fat burning, Improve CV level & speed improvement. Do a google for
"hrmzones.xls".
Brian Day

"Mark W" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Recently, 30th July to be precise, got back on a bike (for leisure /
fitness purposes anyhow ... been hacking back and forth to the station,
2m each way, for the last 15 years, but that does next to sod all in
exercise terms) after a 10 year break, and would like to get an idea of
what reasonable performance should be - I'm rather "concerned" with the
average speeds I'm achieving given what I remember from more youthful
times, so some guidance for comparison purposes would be much
appreciated.

It sounds like we're in a similar position remembering our halcyon days
although at 10st one of my thighs is probably bigger than you ;-)

It's whatever you feel comfortable with.
If you're doing 12-14 mph and getting a good workout then fine.
Set yourself some targets.
If you don't have one already get yourself a cycle computer and decide
that your average speed won't drop below 14mph then build from there.
If you get a new bike, different tyres etc then you may be quicker, but
not get as good a workout.
I've been riding the 5 miles to work for years and with traffic I'm lucky
to average 15 or 16mph.
A while ago I donated my CB Milano to a friend as I'd bought myself a
Giant OCR and now I've persuded him to actually come out for a ride its
given me extra impetus to get off the sofa.
Now it's 2-3 evenings a week I do a 21 mile sprint. I started a few weeks
ago trying not to let my speed drop below 20 mph. As of next week I'm
increasing to 24mph. The friend with whom I ride is new to cycling, but
goes to the gym regularly, I'm between 5 and 10 mins quicker than him but
he still gets a good workout.
On a weekends I do a longer ride, so far 60 miles.
Good luck and keep going.

Dave

Mark W said:

Recently, 30th July to be precise, got back on a bike (for leisure /
fitness purposes anyhow ... been hacking back and forth to the station,
2m each way, for the last 15 years, but that does next to sod all in
exercise terms) after a 10 year break, and would like to get an idea of
what reasonable performance should be - I'm rather "concerned" with the
average speeds I'm achieving given what I remember from more youthful
times, so some guidance for comparison purposes would be much
appreciated.

Anyhow : basic details.
Me : 38 yo, 5'10, just over 10 stone, no real exercise other than
mentioned above and the daily traipse through the London Underground.
One suspect knee, hence the 10 years - but been reading the threads
about cadence (I killed it tackling a hill in way too high a gear) etc
and seem to be avoiding problems so far.

Bike : trek style bike, ie mudguarded, 21 speed, ally frame, front
suspension - make unknown : says Keswick on the front, Concept on the
frame badge. 700/38 slickish (ie grooved but not knobbly) tyres. All of
£165 so suspect is more of a BSO than anything else. It suits my
purpose and the routes I'm using it on at present - ie to slownly burn
off the belly I've been acquiring, skinny with a gut is NOT a good look
:O)

Routes : normally about 75% road, 25% farm track / bridleway (I know,
being very polite to all and sundry - and I do appreciate the front
springing). Terrain : undulating (south-of-Huntingdon area - so no big
hills but not the Fens either). Started off around 8km in length, now
into the mid 30kms, time permitting.

Anyhow, 8k or 35k, windy or not (boy was it breezy today by the way),
the average speed is coming out consistently between 19 and 22kph, 12
to 14mph). Top whack on the flat (at an estimated cadence of 80ish -
certainly faster than 1 elephant 2 elephant etc - which I aim for most
of the time) in 21st appears to be about 38kph.

So, is this about par for the circumstances ? And, short of replacing
the machine (maybe next year - when distance as opposed to burning
excess baggage is the aim) what would anyone suggest for picking the
pace up ?

At 59 years and 14 and a bit stone, my average speed over all rides sits
firmly at 21 kph. On my fairly skinny tyred road bike I average around
23 kph and on my heavier and fatter tyred touring bike it drops to about
18. I can obviously ride at faster speeds for fairly short,
thigh-straining runs, but I rarely bother.

FWIW, my average speed increased noticeably a few years ago when I began
to use SPD type pedals and shoes.

If this is any use for comparison, you're welcome.

--
Brian G

Mark W said:

Anyhow : basic details.
Me : 38 yo, 5'10, just over 10 stone, no real exercise other than
mentioned above and the daily traipse through the London Underground.
One suspect knee, hence the 10 years - but been reading the threads
about cadence (I killed it tackling a hill in way too high a gear) etc
and seem to be avoiding problems so far.

Quoted message said:

Bike : trek style bike, ie mudguarded, 21 speed, ally frame, front
suspension - make unknown : says Keswick on the front, Concept on the
frame badge. 700/38 slickish (ie grooved but not knobbly) tyres. All of
?165 so suspect is more of a BSO than anything else. It suits my
purpose and the routes I'm using it on at present - ie to slownly burn
off the belly I've been acquiring, skinny with a gut is NOT a good look
:O)

Quoted message said:

Routes : normally about 75% road, 25% farm track / bridleway (I know,
being very polite to all and sundry - and I do appreciate the front
springing). Terrain : undulating (south-of-Huntingdon area - so no big
hills but not the Fens either). Started off around 8km in length, now
into the mid 30kms, time permitting.

Quoted message said:

Anyhow, 8k or 35k, windy or not (boy was it breezy today by the way),
the average speed is coming out consistently between 19 and 22kph, 12
to 14mph). Top whack on the flat (at an estimated cadence of 80ish -
certainly faster than 1 elephant 2 elephant etc - which I aim for most
of the time) in 21st appears to be about 38kph.

Quoted message said:

So, is this about par for the circumstances ? And, short of replacing
the machine (maybe next year - when distance as opposed to burning
excess baggage is the aim) what would anyone suggest for picking the
pace up ?

You need to decide whether you want the bike to go faster for the same
effort, or to improve your fitness. If the first, then lots of posters
will explain the virtues of crouching to avoid the wind, hard skinny
tyres, fastening your feet to the pedals, and other uncomfortable
stuff. But if all you want is to get fitter, which will be shown by
your being to go faster on the same presumably comfy bike, then all
you need to concern yourself with is your fitness.

Average speeds as you seem to realise are hugely dependent on terrain,
traffic, so all you need to bother with is how to improve, and whether
you're improving. There's a whole complex science of fitness training,
but fortunately there is a very simple way to get fitter which is
simply to keep trying. So long as there's some effort involved, your
body will notice and get stronger in response.

Even at an unfit 63 yrs old after some years of illness, and only
using the bike to potter a few miles on a shopping run a few times a
week, my average speed has climbed slowly over a year from about 7.5
to 8mph. Heavy vehicular traffic on roads, heavy pushchair and dog
traffic on the paths, and often returning carefully with a bit too
much strapped to the bike, all contribute to keeping my average low,
but that doesn't matter since all I'm looking for is improvement. That
rise from 7.5 to 8mpg has taken me back to the level of casual
pottering cycling fitness I had ten years ago. And in any case, having
had a heart attack I don't feel inclined to test experimentally my
doc's prediction of what might hapen if I exerted myself too much :-)

Just keep doing what you're doing, and logging it. Take a smoothed
average to separate fitness improvement from traffic noise.

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Quoted message said:

Just keep doing what you're doing, and logging it. Take a smoothed
average to separate fitness improvement from traffic noise.

--
Chris Malcolm

Yes just keep doing it, as much or as little as you want. A better bike
will give you greater distance/speed for the same effort. This doesn't
matter in terms of fitness but helps if you are going a long way, or
against the clock. I wouldn't bother about your performance as you will
soon get to recognise whether you are pushing it to the limit or not.
Or if you really want to get much fitter just think 'further, faster,
more often'.
cheers
Jacob

normanwisdom said:

Quoted message said:

Just keep doing what you're doing, and logging it. Take a smoothed
average to separate fitness improvement from traffic noise.

--
Chris Malcolm

Quoted message said:

Yes just keep doing it, as much or as little as you want. A better bike
will give you greater distance/speed for the same effort. This doesn't
matter in terms of fitness but helps if you are going a long way, or
against the clock. I wouldn't bother about your performance as you will
soon get to recognise whether you are pushing it to the limit or not.
Or if you really want to get much fitter just think 'further, faster,
more often'.

Or even just cycle for the joy of being out there and because it gets you
places 🙂

Roos

in message <[email hidden]>, Chris Malcolm

(') said:

If the first, then lots of posters
will explain the virtues of crouching to avoid the wind, hard skinny
tyres, fastening your feet to the pedals, and other uncomfortable
stuff.

Errrr... none of that stuff is uncomfortable, quite the contrary. You
need to be able to lounge on the bike, totally relaxed, and that's what
a good racing bike lets you do. Racing bikes are designed for racing all
day, day after day, for long periods. They /have/ to be supremely
comfortable, or no-one could do it.

Believe me, I've ridden a lot of bikes. Short of a recumbent, you won't
find anything as long-term comfortable as a good racing bike (that fits
you).

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; 99% of browsers can't run ActiveX controls. Unfortunately
;; 99% of users are using the 1% of browsers that can...
[seen on /. 08:04:02]

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Chris Malcolm
([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If the first, then lots of posters
will explain the virtues of crouching to avoid the wind, hard skinny
tyres, fastening your feet to the pedals, and other uncomfortable
stuff.

Quoted message said:

Errrr... none of that stuff is uncomfortable, quite the contrary. You
need to be able to lounge on the bike, totally relaxed, and that's what
a good racing bike lets you do. Racing bikes are designed for racing all
day, day after day, for long periods. They /have/ to be supremely
comfortable, or no-one could do it.

Quoted message said:

Believe me, I've ridden a lot of bikes. Short of a recumbent, you won't
find anything as long-term comfortable as a good racing bike (that fits
you).

Not even a tourer? Aren't tourers designed for cycling all day by
people who might not be as fit as racers and usually ride for longer
than racers? Isn't there the slightest concession towards tolerable
discomfort in the interests of extra speed on a racer? I'd be
surprised if there wasn't, because other things being equal, the racer
with the lowest wind resistance will win.

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]