Faster on the climbs than on the flats . . .

[gngroup]

Why is it so much easier for me to be faster on the climbs than on the flats?

Since I started cycling more a few years back, climbing just came very easily to me. I did not expect that it would and have no real explanation for it. Regardless, in terms of all of the people I ride with and see when I'm out, I am definitely amongst the quickest in the group up the hill. However, on the flats, it takes so much more effort for me to 'go fast' or stay with the group if we are going 'fast'. ('FAST' is for sure a relative term here).

I thought about this the other day as I was struggling to keep the wheel of my riding partner on the flat before the climb knowing that when we got to the climb I'd drop him. Just curious as to what answer(s) are out there for this as I'm sure I'm not alone.

[Mayhem]

So if you cruise on a flat section at 20mph, you're climbing at 21+?

[eBAUMANN]

power to weight is a big part of it...also aerobic thresholds n such...aerodynamics (not really a factor for climbing)...the list goes on...

long story short, you need power to be fast on the flats, you dont necessarily need as much power to be fast on a climb, only ENOUGH power to carry your weight.

watts/kg bro!

[gngroup]

So if you cruise on a flat section at 20mph, you're climbing at 21+?

lol. Not quite what I meant. Just that it takes more effort for me to stay with a group at speed on the flats versus on the hills I am able to sustain a better/faster pace than the riders in the same group. So, while I may be at the back of the group on the flats and straining to stay on, I am leading the group on the hills.

[Louis]

That means you're a puny little punk that guys like me love to hate. ;)

[TPetsch]

I go faster on the downhills than on the uphills.

Guess I'm special too? :)

[JimmyTango]

But mine is more specifically that I can hold higher power numbers for longer climbing than on flats.

For instance, in a 20min test set I can climb with an average around 360 watts, but if I try to hammer it out on the flats I can't peg much better than 325 or so for the same amount of time.

I've always chalked it up to a psychological thing, but as long as we've got a thread going I figured I'd throw it out and see if any others have a similar issue.

Thoughts?

[shovelhd]

Definitely special. I am faster on the flats than on an uphill at the same power output.

[gngroup]

Interesting. I don't have a power meter but from the way it feels, this is exactly the same thing I am experiencing. I can sustain an effort easier and longer up a hill than I can for the same period of time on a flat run.

But mine is more specifically that I can hold higher power numbers for longer climbing than on flats.

For instance, in a 20min test set I can climb with an average around 360 watts, but if I try to hammer it out on the flats I can't peg much better than 325 or so for the same amount of time.

I've always chalked it up to a psychological thing, but as long as we've got a thread going I figured I'd throw it out and see if any others have a similar issue.

Thoughts?

[gngroup]

:)

At 6'1" 165lbs I wouldn't say 'puny' but I'm certainly no linebacker!

That means you're a puny little punk that guys like me love to hate. ;)

[Mayhem]

lol. Not quite what I meant. Just that it takes more effort for me to stay with a group at speed on the flats versus on the hills I am able to sustain a better/faster pace than the riders in the same group. So, while I may be at the back of the group on the flats and straining to stay on, I am leading the group on the hills.

Oh, I got it. I was like what the heck haha

[rugbysecondrow]

I am a bigger guy (6'2" 230) and decently strong. I am a better climber than I should be, probably because the mental fun of cresting the hill is easier for me to fight than than monotony of churning on flats or in wind. It is more of an interval, which is not in my wheel house, than long and sustained churn.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rnhood]

Better riders take it easy on the hills - meaning they are holding the same power as on the flats or maybe a bit less assuming the typical 10K' mountain century (or even a 6K' metric). When they crest the top they hold the same power and keep going - no letting off. Obviously if its a race then strategy and opportunities often trump basic group training ride skills so the aforementioned may not apply.

Its hard to identify the issue here unless we know more about the distances and type group you are riding with. Also your fit on the bike may play a role here.

[aramis]

But mine is more specifically that I can hold higher power numbers for longer climbing than on flats.

For instance, in a 20min test set I can climb with an average around 360 watts, but if I try to hammer it out on the flats I can't peg much better than 325 or so for the same amount of time.

I've always chalked it up to a psychological thing, but as long as we've got a thread going I figured I'd throw it out and see if any others have a similar issue.

Thoughts?

For some people their position I think can make a big difference to their power output. I don't make that great power, but I can put out similar power in the drops with a pretty good position as I can climbing. I notice a lot of people that can destroy me in the climbs struggle on the flat parts especially if there are attacks. If you are a good climber, use that to your advantage. I'm jealous- anything over 5 minutes climbing and I'm just hanging on.

[carpediemracing]

When I started riding I thought I climbed well. I learned when I finally rode with some serious riders that I was mistaken. Basically it's easiest to see improvement on hills. However if you ride with stronger riders (like racers, even no-longer racing racers), you'll find that it's hard to be truly fast in any kind of terrain.

I'm no strong rider but others will comment on how fast I go on flat terrain. I don't go fast compared to other racers, but compared to a non-racer (who simply has never experienced fast) I appear fast. It's a boost to the ego until they shell me on a hill. When I say "they" I'm talking 50+ women who don't race. And everyone else of course.

My experience with the same thought process (i.e. when I thought I'd climb better than I'd do on the flats):
http://sprinterdellacasa.blogspot.com/2007/05/story-bloomin-metric-and-me.html

Ultimately I learned about speed by entering races and seeing what racers did. It was a horrific shock at the beginning. Now it's just horrific :)

[gngroup]

I have no way of knowing how much power I am holding on either the hills or the flats but it certainly does not feel like I'm pushing harder on the hills; more the opposite.

The ride I did last weekend that made me think of this was 59 miles with about 5,800 feet of climbing. The main climb is about 8 miles with an average gradient of 5% and about 2,100 feet of climbing. There are some steep sections up to about 18% but they are short. The hardest portion of the climb is 3.9 miles at 7.1% avg gradient with 1,500 feet of vertical. I averaged just under 8 mph on that section and did not feel I was pushing particularly hard. In fact, I was focusing on 'spinning' as much as possible.

I'm not sure if these numbers mean anything to anyone! I am not racing and this was just a casual ride with a buddy on a Saturday morning. We did ride with Tom Boonen for a part of the climb and I kept up with him for a couple miles until he disappeared around a corner never to be seen again!

I also want to point out that I don't think this issue I'm describing is necessarily a problem. I just found it curious that I seem to climb better or easier than I ride on the flats and figured some others out there would have insight or shared experiences, etc.

Better riders take it easy on the hills - meaning they are holding the same power as on the flats or maybe a bit less assuming the typical 10K' mountain century (or even a 6K' metric). When they crest the top they hold the same power and keep going - no letting off. Obviously if its a race then strategy and opportunities often trump basic group training ride skills so the aforementioned may not apply.

Its hard to identify the issue here unless we know more about the distances and type group you are riding with. Also your fit on the bike may play a role here.

[FlashUNC]

At 6'2" and 155 when I raced in college I looked like I'd just gotten out of an internment camp. Flew uphill but couldn't hang on the sprints.

Fast forward more than a decade and I'm now closer to 200. Can hang in a group and put it down in a sprint, but the hills I might as well be popping a drag chute.

As others mentioned, all about power to weight uphill, and that weight doesnt matter so much when the road flattens.

[MattTuck]

watts/kg bro!

/thread

At 162lbs and 6'2'' (or 74 inches), you're set up to climb. But you could be even better if you shrunk 5 or 6 inches, got lighter still, and maintained your power.

http://www.wenzelcoaching.com/images/weight-chart.jpg

[jackattack]

The answer to this question is simply: mass.

When you're riding on flat ground, you're primarily working against wind resistance. The momentum of a larger rider (mass x velocity) will always allow them to maintain speed easier. A body in motion stays in motion, etc...

Going up a hill, wind is not an issue, but gravity is. The effect of gravity on a larger rider is proportional to their mass. Therefore, the heavier rider must work harder to ascend at the same speed as a lighter rider.

6'+ and 165 lbs just means you're a skinny b!$@# and I'm jealous of your advantage on the uphill even though I would drop you on the down. ;)

[brando]

We did ride with Tom Boonen for a part of the climb and I kept up with him for a couple miles until he disappeared around a corner never to be seen again!

Can't let that go unnoticed, where were you riding? Yes!

[gngroup]

That pretty much sums it up! Simple physics I guess.

The answer to this question is simply: mass.

When you're riding on flat ground, you're primarily working against wind resistance. The momentum of a larger rider (mass x velocity) will always allow them to maintain speed easier. A body in motion stays in motion, etc...

Going up a hill, wind is not an issue, but gravity is. The effect of gravity on a larger rider is proportional to their mass. Therefore, the heavier rider must work harder to ascend at the same speed as a lighter rider.

6'+ and 165 lbs just means you're a skinny b!$@# and I'm jealous of your advantage on the uphill even though I would drop you on the down. ;)

[shovelhd]

You are also basing this on a variable control, comparing yourself to others at any given moment. All it means is that you chose to climb harder than those around you that day. Keep working on the flats to become more of an all around rider.

[gngroup]

Can't let that go unnoticed, where were you riding? Yes!

I was in Marin County. He was riding solo and just rode up at some point and started chatting. To be honest, I didn't know exactly who he was until we finished. He took off at some point so I followed and we chatted a bit more. He lost me on the downhill after talking about his Ferrari and how beautiful the ride was and lamenting that the pros don't get to enjoy it when they ride in beautiful places. It seemed like he was just out for a social ride and I felt lucky to cross paths with him.

[John H.]

Do you practice riding a solid effort on the flats?
It seems that you know what type of effort you can ride up a climb?
I bet you would improve if you did some blocks of training at a similar effort on flats.
Also, what is your cadence like on flats vs. climbs?
Is your technique good on flats? Do you hold a wheel well?
These things matter too.

[David Kirk]

The answer to this question is simply: mass.

When you're riding on flat ground, you're primarily working against wind resistance. The momentum of a larger rider (mass x velocity) will always allow them to maintain speed easier. A body in motion stays in motion, etc...

Going up a hill, wind is not an issue, but gravity is. The effect of gravity on a larger rider is proportional to their mass. Therefore, the heavier rider must work harder to ascend at the same speed as a lighter rider.

6'+ and 165 lbs just means you're a skinny b!$@# and I'm jealous of your advantage on the uphill even though I would drop you on the down. ;)

Nailed it - power to weight to frontal area.

Even with a great power/weight ratio you will suffer from having a large frontal area. You are a barn door trying to push thought he wind at higher speeds. But on a climb, where the aero resistance is much less a factor your power/weigh can shine. I'm in a similar boat and know how it feels. On fast group rides I do my best to find someone tall enough to get some draft from and I can't wait for it to go uphill. I'm 6'4" and 178#.

dave

[seanile]

:)

At 6'1" 165lbs I wouldn't say 'puny' but I'm certainly no linebacker!
at 6'1 and 200lbs i would say you sure are! i haven't seen 165lbs since 8th grade. and i aint no linebacker either. im pretty sure at 5% body fat i'd still only be 175 hah