top speed play

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Raptor, Mar 13, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Raptor

    Raptor Guest

    A question prompted by the 50-mph leadout thread. Smack me if it's a faq.

    My meager top speed on a bike is 56.2 mph, which I hit riding alone down the back of the Parley's
    Summit frontage road on a very windy day. I spun out my 52/12 then tucked.

    I know I can spin pedals fast enough to achieve that speed at that gear, but not necessarily under
    load. Is it more likely that I pedalled to my top speed or achieved it by slimming my frontal area
    after spinning the gear out?

    --
    --
    Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
    could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
    charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.
     
    Tags:


  2. Deeznuts

    Deeznuts Guest

    Raptor <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > A question prompted by the 50-mph leadout thread. Smack me if it's a faq.
    >
    > My meager top speed on a bike is 56.2 mph, which I hit riding alone down the back of the Parley's
    > Summit frontage road on a very windy day. I spun out my 52/12 then tucked.
    >
    > I know I can spin pedals fast enough to achieve that speed at that gear, but not necessarily under
    > load. Is it more likely that I pedalled to my top speed or achieved it by slimming my frontal area
    > after spinning the gear out?
    >
    > --

    Man,

    that was a frequently asked question?

    Deeznuts
     
  3. In article <[email protected]>, Raptor <[email protected]> wrote:

    > I know I can spin pedals fast enough to achieve that speed at that gear, but not necessarily under
    > load. Is it more likely that I pedalled to my top speed or achieved it by slimming my frontal area
    > after spinning the gear out?

    I emphatically state that the only thing you did to get to 56.5 mph was choose the correct hill.
     
  4. chiefhiawatha wrote:
    > In article <[email protected]>, Raptor <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> I know I can spin pedals fast enough to achieve that speed at that gear, but not necessarily
    >> under load. Is it more likely that I pedalled to my top speed or achieved it by slimming my
    >> frontal area after spinning the gear out?
    >
    > I emphatically state that the only thing you did to get to 56.5 mph was choose the correct hill.

    So then, why doesn't everybody that rides this hill reach 56.5 mph?

    --
    Perre

    Remove the DOTs to reply
     
  5. "Per Elmsäter" <[email protected]> wrote in news:W%sca.404 [email protected]:

    <snip>

    > So then, why doesn't everybody that rides this hill reach 56.5 mph?
    >
    > --
    > Perre
    >
    > Remove the DOTs to reply

    Because their weight/drag coefficient is lower.
     
  6. Raptor

    Raptor Guest

    Deeznuts wrote:
    > Raptor <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    >>A question prompted by the 50-mph leadout thread. Smack me if it's a faq.
    >>
    >>My meager top speed on a bike is 56.2 mph, which I hit riding alone down the back of the Parley's
    >>Summit frontage road on a very windy day. I spun out my 52/12 then tucked.
    >>
    >>I know I can spin pedals fast enough to achieve that speed at that gear, but not necessarily under
    >>load. Is it more likely that I pedalled to my top speed or achieved it by slimming my frontal area
    >>after spinning the gear out?
    >>
    >>--
    >
    >
    > Man,
    >

    > that was a frequently asked question?
    >
    >
    > Deeznuts

    LOL. Okay, the could-be-a-faq is: Does speed typically increase after tucking? Never mind, it's a
    stupid question whose answer is, if the hill and wind are "correct," yes. As you were.

    --
    --
    Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
    could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
    charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.
     
  7. Boyd Speerschneider wrote:
    > "Per Elmsäter" <[email protected]> wrote in news:W%sca.404 [email protected]:
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    >> So then, why doesn't everybody that rides this hill reach 56.5 mph?
    >>
    >> --
    >> Perre
    >>
    >> Remove the DOTs to reply
    >
    > Because their weight/drag coefficient is lower.

    I understand. So as soon as an old lady comes along with the right weight/drag coefficient she
    will immediately hit 56.5 mph. Cool eh. Wish I had one of those hills at home, for climbing
    practise of course.

    --
    Perre

    Remove the DOTs to reply
     
  8. In article <[email protected]>, "Per Elmsäter" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > I understand. So as soon as an old lady comes along with the right weight/drag coefficient she
    > will immediately hit 56.5 mph. Cool eh. Wish I had one of those hills at home, for climbing
    > practise of course.

    Hey dork,

    If you could pedal your way to anywhere close to 56.5, we would be reading about you in
    cyclingnews.com.

    Amateur cyclists are hard-pressed to top 35mph unaided by wind or slope.
     
  9. chiefhiawatha wrote:
    > In article <[email protected]>, "Per Elmsäter"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> I understand. So as soon as an old lady comes along with the right weight/drag coefficient she
    >> will immediately hit 56.5 mph. Cool eh. Wish I had one of those hills at home, for climbing
    >> practise of course.
    >
    > Hey dork,
    >
    > If you could pedal your way to anywhere close to 56.5, we would be reading about you in
    > cyclingnews.com.
    >
    > Amateur cyclists are hard-pressed to top 35mph unaided by wind or slope.

    Never said you'd read anything about me. You may already have read about old ladies though.

    Why do you call me a dork just because I don't know everything that you do, or think you do maybe?

    --
    Perre

    Remove the DOTs to reply
     
  10. On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 22:40:19 GMT, chiefhiawatha wrote:
    >Amateur cyclists are hard-pressed to top 35mph unaided by wind or slope.

    Did it yesterday, but with wind. However, it *was* with cadence 132 (and out of the saddle) so no
    way 130+ is "spun out" (re. some other thread). Ah well never mind.
     
  11. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "Raptor" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > A question prompted by the 50-mph leadout thread. Smack me if it's
    a faq.
    >
    > My meager top speed on a bike is 56.2 mph, which I hit riding alone
    down
    > the back of the Parley's Summit frontage road on a very windy day.
    I
    > spun out my 52/12 then tucked.
    >
    > I know I can spin pedals fast enough to achieve that speed at that
    gear,
    > but not necessarily under load. Is it more likely that I pedalled
    to my
    > top speed or achieved it by slimming my frontal area after spinning
    the
    > gear out?

    Your speed kicked WAY up after you tucked. There's no way that you could hit 50 mph and be pedaling.
    In the first place that is about 150 rpm and very few people can make power at that speed. So you
    probably pedaled up to about 46 or so mph and then gained another 10 mph in your tuck.
     
  12. On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 22:57:23 GMT, Tom Kunich wrote:
    >There's no way that you could hit 50 mph and be pedaling. In the first place that is about 150 rpm

    In the 53x12.5 yes. I think I can pedal to about 140 rpm, but very few Alpine descents allow for
    that speed with the 53x11.

    >So you probably pedaled up to about 46 or so mph and then gained another 10 mph in your tuck.

    Seems like a reasonable guess, yes.
     
  13. Ewoud Dronkert wrote:
    > On Sat, 15 Mar 2003 22:40:19 GMT, chiefhiawatha wrote:
    >> Amateur cyclists are hard-pressed to top 35mph unaided by wind or slope.
    >
    > Did it yesterday, but with wind. However, it *was* with cadence 132 (and out of the saddle) so no
    > way 130+ is "spun out" (re. some other thread). Ah well never mind.

    I bet you're not an amateur then.

    --
    Perre

    Remove the DOTs to reply
     
  14. On Sun, 16 Mar 2003 15:25:53 GMT, Per Elms=E4ter wrote:
    >I bet you're not an amateur then.

    WTF are you implying. I regularly outsprint Michael Boogerd.
     
  15. "chiefhiawatha" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > In article <[email protected]>, "Per Elmsäter"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > I understand. So as soon as an old lady comes along with the right weight/drag coefficient she
    > > will immediately hit 56.5 mph. Cool eh.
    Wish I
    > > had one of those hills at home, for climbing practise of course.
    >
    > Hey dork,

    I've heard it said that people perceive the world around them based on their own state of
    consciousness.

    >
    > If you could pedal your way to anywhere close to 56.5, we would be reading about you in
    > cyclingnews.com.
    >
    > Amateur cyclists are hard-pressed to top 35mph unaided by wind or slope.

    The question was about the contribution to pedaling on a steep hill.

    Regarding the OP, I have a hill where I live that if I coast I'll hit 38 mph and if I pedal as fast
    as I can I'll hit 45 mph. The hill that I can hit 50+ on requires no pedaling.
     
  16. Loverboyd

    Loverboyd Guest

    > Your speed kicked WAY up after you tucked. There's no way that you could hit 50 mph and be
    > pedaling. In the first place that is about 150 rpm and very few people can make power at that
    > speed. So you probably pedaled up to about 46 or so mph and then gained another 10 mph in
    > your tuck.

    It's possible to hit 50+ mph while pedaling. I do it all the time motorpacing behind my dad's van. .
    and thats in a 53X12. Granted I am spinning my ass off, but it is possible
     
  17. hoser

    hoser Guest

    >> I know I can spin pedals fast enough to achieve that speed at that gear, but not necessarily
    >> under load. Is it more likely that I pedalled to my top speed or achieved it by slimming my
    >> frontal area after spinning the gear out?

    I can coast to that speed down a hill. Pedalling has nothing to do with it.
     
  18. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "loverboyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > > Your speed kicked WAY up after you tucked. There's no way that you could hit 50 mph and be
    > > pedaling. In the first place that is about
    150
    > > rpm and very few people can make power at that speed. So you
    probably
    > > pedaled up to about 46 or so mph and then gained another 10 mph in your tuck.
    >
    > It's possible to hit 50+ mph while pedaling. I do it all the time motorpacing behind my dad's van.
    > . and thats in a 53X12. Granted I
    am
    > spinning my ass off, but it is possible

    You can only do it because you're in the aerodynamic dead zone. On a straight hill pedaling over 42
    or 43 mph makes more air resistance than power.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...