how much faster for every pound saved?

[fogrider]

ok, I could loose about 10 pounds...I'm 165 now and about 5'-9. the question is, on a 30 minute climb, how much faster should i be for every pound lost? I'm hoping to knock 1 minute for every pound...is that reasonable?

[rugbysecondrow]

You mean turn a 30 min climb into a 20 minute climb by losing 10 pounds? I don't think is reasonable. You should improve, but I would think there are too many variables to be able to quantify a gain.

[goonster]

There is an online calculator for that somewhere, but you will also need to plug in distance and elevation.

One minute per pound sounds way too high.

[markie]

How much body fat do you have?

If you lose 10lbs do you think you will only lose fat? Most likely you will lose some muscle mass and your power will decrease, too.

Many hard to define variables.

[dekindy]

http://bikecalculator.com/veloUS.html

If you know the variables this will give you the answer.

1 to 1.25 minutes reduction in climbing time probably for a 10 pound weight loss.

[BengeBoy]

This calculator says you would save 4.7 seconds (given the assumptions I used...) for each 0.5 kg you lose (about a pound), or 42 seconds. I used about a five-mile climb at 3%.

http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html

[ultraman6970]

It means that if you suck as a rider no matter how light the bike u use is, you will suck anyways? :)

[false_Aest]

ok, I could loose about 10 pounds...I'm 165 now and about 5'-9. the question is, on a 30 minute climb, how much faster should i be for every pound lost? I'm hoping to knock 1 minute for every pound...is that reasonable?

getting lighter = getting lighter
getting faster = climbing faster

getting lighter ≠ getting faster

[fogrider]

I'm thinking I'm climbing closer to 35 minutes on a 30 minute climb today. when I've been in better shape, I've done it in about 26 minutes...can't remember what weight I was at. I agree that lighter does not necessary mean faster, but I'm thinking lighter and get in shape should mean faster up the hill.

[6mt]

hello,

I'm new to the forum.

and on the subject of loosing weight in order to ride faster. I've lost 12lbs over the last 6 month, however i don't think I'm any faster on the climb. I just have a easier time going up. perhaps i should time myself the next time.

[Cat3roadracer]

Less Guiness, less pizza will make all if us faster. We don't to consult Dr. OZ for that.

[Cat3roadracer]

All of us faster. I may need to consult Dr. Oz on how to type on an iPhone.

[Gummee]

getting lighter = getting lighter
getting faster = climbing faster

getting lighter ≠ getting fasterActually, it does. At one point I figured out that to get uphill at the same speed at 170 as my buddy that weighed 135 I'd have to put out something like 560 watts to his 235. Now, its been a few years and the page isn't on analytic cycling any more, so the link below is as close as I can get.
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html

At the top he's ahead by a fair margin.

I've dropped 30# of mostly fat since Nov and I can tell you from personal experience that less weight = go faster uphill *if you want to.* If you don't want to go faster, its easier to go up the same speed as when you were heavier.

Its nice knowing that you have reserves of oomph if someone attacks the hill.

As ole Greg LeMond said: climbing never gets any easier, just faster.

M

[palincss]

There is an online calculator for that somewhere, but you will also need to plug in distance and elevation.


I believe you're thinking about analyticcycling.com.

[palincss]

hello,
I've lost 12lbs over the last 6 month, however i don't think I'm any faster on the climb. I just have a easier time going up. perhaps i should time myself the next time.

Have you noticed whether you're using the same gear now as you did before?

[fogrider]

hello,

I'm new to the forum.

and on the subject of loosing weight in order to ride faster. I've lost 12lbs over the last 6 month, however i don't think I'm any faster on the climb. I just have a easier time going up. perhaps i should time myself the next time.
if you have an easier time going up, it means you're not trying hard enough! BREATH DEEP...FAST AND REPEAT!

[Chance]

Actually, it does. At one point I figured out that to get uphill at the same speed at 170 as my buddy that weighed 135 I'd have to put out something like 560 watts to his 235. Now, its been a few years and the page isn't on analytic cycling any more, so the link below is as close as I can get.
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html

Yes, weight matters, although power should be closer to proportional to total rider+bike+gear weight. More than doubling power shouldn't be required for a small weight difference of about 25 percent.

[dekindy]

Actually, it does. At one point I figured out that to get uphill at the same speed at 170 as my buddy that weighed 135 I'd have to put out something like 560 watts to his 235. Now, its been a few years and the page isn't on analytic cycling any more, so the link below is as close as I can get.
http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html

At the top he's ahead by a fair margin.

I've dropped 30# of mostly fat since Nov and I can tell you from personal experience that less weight = go faster uphill *if you want to.* If you don't want to go faster, its easier to go up the same speed as when you were heavier.

Its nice knowing that you have reserves of oomph if someone attacks the hill.

As ole Greg LeMond said: climbing never gets any easier, just faster.

M

Comparing a 135 lb. rider putting out 235 watts it would only take 285 watts for a 170 lb. rider to go the same speed all other things being equal. :)

[Dekonick]

I would think it depends on where you lose the weight... is it muscle? fat? upper body muscle?

[forrestw]

Let's assume you're talking about a hill that limits you to a pace where wind is not an important factor. Let's also assume you have 10 lbs of fat to lose without being at an unhealthy body fat % and that you drop that weight at no more than a half lb / week and don't lose any muscle.

Dropping 5.4% of the combined weight of you and your gear. should make you no more than 5.4% faster, i.e. shave up to 1:37 off your 30 minute climb for the same level of effort. The steeper the climb in question, the closer you should be to that number due to lower losses to wind resistance.

[Peter B]

Worry less about weight and more about quality miles and nutrition. The rest will take care of itself.

[Jack Brunk]

Worry less about weight and more about quality miles and nutrition. The rest will take care of itself.
Peter should be president!

[1centaur]

The watts vs. pounds equation is a start but the watts part is not a given as the pounds change in the real world. Watts reflect training, fuel and psychology on top of genetics. Losing weight often entails changing fuel; vegetables and cottage cheese may give you different sensations on a bike from beer and chips. That may affect your training as you lose weight; you may feel weaker (for a while) and compensate by trying to pedal more efficiently which might turn into more easily. And then when you achieve the target weight if your diet is giving you good piston ignition the fact of your lightness may motivate you to try harder which leads to higher watts, assuming your heart's okay with that.

So it's a valid experiment that probably is better for you to try than not to try unless you are starting out emaciated, but an expectation that you will fly up a hill if you lose a few pounds is unfounded. Feeling like you are dragging less deadweight up the hill may be worth the effort no matter what the resulting speed, however. And you can never underplay the power of looking better in a cycling jersey :)

[godfrey1112000]

I lost 40 pounds 18 months ago, see Serotta Weight Loss Challenge 2010

Body Fat 24-25% to 15.9%, measured on the Dex Machine

1. Felt better after all rides
2. Increased Climbing by about 20% for 2010
3. Increased Speed by about 0.5 mph for the year
4. Also did yoga and weight training, better flexibility and balance

You will notice you speed improvement as you do rides with others, if you trailed them going up that hill you might now be closing the gap or even leading them up the hill, you know notice a big difference

to shave 10 minutes of a 30 minute ride,

8 miles at 16 mph equals 30 minutes
8 miles at 24 mph equals 20 minutes

you should be able to figure this out if it is possible

good luck on the weight loss, eat plenty of brocolli


getting lighter = getting lighter
getting faster = climbing faster

getting lighter ≠ getting faster

[Lifelover]

You mean turn a 30 min climb into a 20 minute climb by losing 10 pounds? I don't think is reasonable. You should improve, but I would think there are too many variables to be able to quantify a gain.


That's sweet! Using this math, if I were to get down to my ideal weight I would arrive at the top 20 minutes before I left the bottom!

[jgspin]

getting lighter = getting lighter
getting faster = climbing faster

getting lighter ≠ getting faster

I gained 4 lbs from 123 to 127 this last month. :crap: My pot belly got a little bigger but my quads got a little bigger too. My bike got heavier too with a new Brooks saddle. However, I can't believe it, I am climbing faster, descending faster too, and generally am riding faster with a lot more endurance. My spin has increased; I averaged 96 rpm over a 4 hour ride a couple of days ago. On short steep rollers where I've always gotten out of the saddle I can now power up in the saddle. Riding with stronger riders and trying to hang with them specially in the hills has improved my over-all cycling. I'm constantly trying to suppress the weight-weenie in me but with all the new, light components cropping up it's a battle.

[fogrider]

I lost 40 pounds 18 months ago, see Serotta Weight Loss Challenge 2010

Body Fat 24-25% to 15.9%, measured on the Dex Machine

1. Felt better after all rides
2. Increased Climbing by about 20% for 2010
3. Increased Speed by about 0.5 mph for the year
4. Also did yoga and weight training, better flexibility and balance

You will notice you speed improvement as you do rides with others, if you trailed them going up that hill you might now be closing the gap or even leading them up the hill, you know notice a big difference

to shave 10 minutes of a 30 minute ride,

8 miles at 16 mph equals 30 minutes
8 miles at 24 mph equals 20 minutes

you should be able to figure this out if it is possible

good luck on the weight loss, eat plenty of brocolli
my climb is only 3 miles. so increasing from 6 mph to to about 7.5 or mph is really not unreasonable. I can get my speed up some, I just can't hold it for very long. I pretty much do intervals the whole way up. I know its better to just find a good pace and hold it, but much of the difference is in standing or sitting. I'm pretty sure I if I can drop some weight I can push myself to do longer intervals and shorter recoveries. all these programs that calc. power output and time up the hill assumes the same power output for less weight. but I'm trying to drop some weight so I can get in better shape to increase power output and suffer longer in addition to lifting less weight up the hill.

[flydhest]

my climb is only 3 miles. so increasing from 6 mph to to about 7.5 or mph is really not unreasonable. I can get my speed up some, I just can't hold it for very long. I pretty much do intervals the whole way up. I know its better to just find a good pace and hold it, but much of the difference is in standing or sitting. I'm pretty sure I if I can drop some weight I can push myself to do longer intervals and shorter recoveries. all these programs that calc. power output and time up the hill assumes the same power output for less weight. but I'm trying to drop some weight so I can get in better shape to increase power output and suffer longer in addition to lifting less weight up the hill.

In my view, if you are talking about a difference of 6 versus 7.5 mph, you will notice some difference from dropping weight. That must be a steep hill. Otherwise, it is a power output issue, in which case if training is part of the effort to lose weight, you'll get better that way. Relying on people's experience is a bad way to go, in my view, because it will conflate these two issues, plus the issue of learning how to climb and learning how to suffer. The first bit of learning is likely more important for most recreational riders.

I would suggest you try the following experiment, try the climb again, but this time intentionally go slower on the first half than the second half. You said that you know it's better to find a good pace and hold it, but in my experience teaching riders, knowing it and realizing it are very different.

I think the analytical calculations are very good to give you an idea of how each component (weight, power, grade) would affect results in isolation. It seems important to understand that to set realistic expectations. Ultimately, of course, you never ride holding everything else constant, so alternating between thinking of the components and putting it all together can help you be a better rider.

[rugbysecondrow]

In my view, if you are talking about a difference of 6 versus 7.5 mph, you will notice some difference from dropping weight. That must be a steep hill. Otherwise, it is a power output issue, in which case if training is part of the effort to lose weight, you'll get better that way. Relying on people's experience is a bad way to go, in my view, because it will conflate these two issues, plus the issue of learning how to climb and learning how to suffer. The first bit of learning is likely more important for most recreational riders.

I would suggest you try the following experiment, try the climb again, but this time intentionally go slower on the first half than the second half. You said that you know it's better to find a good pace and hold it, but in my experience teaching riders, knowing it and realizing it are very different.

I think the analytical calculations are very good to give you an idea of how each component (weight, power, grade) would affect results in isolation. It seems important to understand that to set realistic expectations. Ultimately, of course, you never ride holding everything else constant, so alternating between thinking of the components and putting it all together can help you be a better rider.

I agree. I am not a fast rider, but I am a pretty strong rider (necessary for a heavy guy). Weight is a factor, but when I read the OPs follow up post, it seems muscle recovery and climbing technique are large factors, more so than maybe the weight he is carrying.

If the OP loses the weight doing hill climb repeats, he will be better at hills AND less 10 pounds. I don't think losing the weight will along compensate for what sounds like a recovery issue.

[dekindy]

This calculator says you would save 4.7 seconds (given the assumptions I used...) for each 0.5 kg you lose (about a pound), or 42 seconds. I used about a five-mile climb at 3%.

http://www.analyticcycling.com/ForcesLessWeight_Page.html

I compared a 5% and 10% grade and the savings was almost exactly the same so grade % does not matter.

[Chance]

my climb is only 3 miles. so increasing from 6 mph to to about 7.5 or mph is really not unreasonable. I can get my speed up some, I just can't hold it for very long. I pretty much do intervals the whole way up. I know its better to just find a good pace and hold it, but much of the difference is in standing or sitting. I'm pretty sure I if I can drop some weight I can push myself to do longer intervals and shorter recoveries. all these programs that calc. power output and time up the hill assumes the same power output for less weight. but I'm trying to drop some weight so I can get in better shape to increase power output and suffer longer in addition to lifting less weight up the hill.
Increasing climbing speed from 6.0 to 7.5 MPH is huge. It represents 25 percent. A 10 pound reduction in total weight represents only about 5 percent when bike, gear, clothing, and all is added. Unless you also become about 20 percent more powerful in addition to 10 pounds lighter it's unlikely you will climb at 7.5 instead of 6.0 MPH given the same effort and conditions.

On the plus side it is likely you will add sustainable power when you reduce body weight by 10 pounds.

[forrestw]

my climb is only 3 miles. so increasing from 6 mph to to about 7.5 or mph is really not unreasonable. I can get my speed up some, I just can't hold it for very long. I pretty much do intervals the whole way up. I know its better to just find a good pace and hold it, but much of the difference is in standing or sitting. I'm pretty sure I if I can drop some weight I can push myself to do longer intervals and shorter recoveries. all these programs that calc. power output and time up the hill assumes the same power output for less weight. but I'm trying to drop some weight so I can get in better shape to increase power output and suffer longer in addition to lifting less weight up the hill.
Expecting to increase your pace by 20% is quite unreasonable, especially based on a 5% weight change.

At 215 lbs I'm not a great climber. Since I am a fairly strong sprinter, I can fake it on a 3 mile hill, just push it anaerobic and I can climb ahead of younger, lighter riders. But it's a one-time trick, I can do that about once in a day and it will cost me a lot in recovery time.

Whether I'm going to hammer on a given climb or ride it sensibly, I'll take the approach given above by flydhest, staying conservative in the first half of a hill and building power as I approach the top.

On long rides I am often out with folks who will seem to float up the hills early on in the ride but 60 miles later are lagging behind and having problems keeping up even on the flats. The most valuable lesson I've learned in climbing more effectively is in so far as possible, to pace suitably for the overall distance of the ride. Learning to do that both in and out of the saddle is a key element.