148 mile ride on an aluminum bike and I'm not in the hospital

[Camilo]

Still... that's 24,000 km per year. Every year. for 47 years. That works out to 16 hours of riding time per week (based on an avg speed of 30 km/hr), every week without fail for half a century. I'm sure you ride a lot, but those numbers are awfully hard to believe. Maybe you overestimated a bit?

John Swanson
www.bikephysics.com

Just wondering what concern it is of yours whether he's exaggerating or not - which he pretty much says he isn't. You're quick with the algebra though!

 

[alienator]

Just wondering what concern it is of yours whether he's exaggerating or not - which he pretty much says he isn't. You're quick with the algebra though!

That is an excellent question. Now, if some "national rider" or "racing god" or just some run of the mill, hardworking CAT 3 talks about how much he rides in his training regimen, no one gives him ****, 'cuz, well, racers don't lie, right?

 

[ScienceIsCool]

<shrug> It seemed like an unlikely amount of mileage so I thought I'd ask for some clarification. He did.

John Swanson
www.bikephysics.com

 

[alienator]

Kerry Irons, as well as quite a few others, at RoadBikeReview, also has a high, 'unlikely' lifetime mileage. It's important to remember--and similarly is very often forgotten--that there are many folks who started cycling long before any of us ever saw a bicycle or knew what one was. Moreover, there have been dedicated or fervent cyclists since long before we were born.

It's common for newer/younger generations to think that they are the ones that excelled at something; that they are the ones that set the standard for something; or that they are the ones that defined something. Well, in a few cases this might be true, but in a lot more cases it's anything but true and is just a demonstration of the ignorance or hubris of that generation.

 

[BullGod]

I took part in a ride this past weekend from Boston to Vermont (148 miles). I have heard tales of how distances this long should never be attempted with an aluminum bike. Maybe if it the bike had carbon stays, post, and bar it could be done, but never on a bike with no carbon beyond the fork. I didn't think it could be done, but I finished and I'm not in traction. something must be wrong. I shouldn't still be able to walk after riding a CAAD8 with a Thomson post and standard Ritchey WCS alloy bars that far. What gives?

erm....I'm just about to start a 4 day stage race on an all aluminium bike....they'll be lots of hills, cobblestones etc. Only one guy on my team will be riding carbon bike. Are we all doomed?

 

[TheDarkLord]

erm....I'm just about to start a 4 day stage race on an all aluminium bike....they'll be lots of hills, cobblestones etc. Only one guy on my team will be riding carbon bike. Are we all doomed?

Yes you are. You better make some hospital arrangements.

 

[PeterF]

Yes you are. You better make some hospital arrangements.

And a dental appointment to replace any fillings that come loose. I remember a couple years ago cyclingnews did a piece on peter Van petegem's bike for Roubaix. He opted for an aluminum Ridley over carbon. He wasn't alone either.

 

[FreeHueco]

148 even on an aluminum bike doesn't seem all that bad.

I've done 8 double centuries on steel bikes (two on my old Fuji and six on my custom bike) with carbon forks. I've never even had a problem with chafing. And I have ridden over 20,000 miles in the past two years...

This Saturday I am going for my first triple century. Should be fun!

To the OP: nice job on the ride. Keep pushing your limits!