So no to a new thread on the issue of descending and if pedal or tuck is better. My experience is limited for real climbing and descending. For pedaling basically I think my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110. Spinning faster than that I am not smooth enough to be efficient so at that point tuck would be better.

This really would be regardless of the speed in a sense. I have gone down maybe a few hills that were -5-6% grades for about 1/2 mile. If my memory serves me it certainly is faster t just tuck and avoid the brakes. I find however that sometimes if I am picking up speed and not pedaling at get a bit jittery as speed increases. Normally if I am in a an all out cadence and at around 30-33 mph I feel a lot of air resistance. When I am descending and a tailwind with not a much resistance I tend to want to back off. The fastest I have ever road is about 43 mph and that was enough.

I guess i could see a place where the pavement was really smooth and a downgrade wide open and one could feel comfortable picking up speed. The biggest problem is the road surface and if it is not smooth even little imperfections can cause problems. Stability is the key.

I think when I get my fastest going is on a good downhill and I am feeling resistance in the pedal and can pick up speed. However in these instances I am braver because I know in just a short bit the uphill will come an that brakes me.
This probably makes little sense but curious what others do? Also at what grade does a certain speed top out in a tuck? So if I am going down a %5 grade straight for a mile no pedaling what is top speed. all other things equal not wind.
Deacon mark

Mark cleary <deaconmark2007@gmail.com> writes:

> pedal or tuck

Tuck, by a land mile, at least for climbs/descents that deserve that
name.

> my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110

Roughly the same here.

Having done almost all of the major Alpine climbs I almost never thought
I should have higher gears. And typically my highest one was chosen to
be around 45 km/h at 105/min cadence, e.g. 44/13. This urged one bike
shop guy to comment that I will be at a severe disadvantage compared to
others running 50/11 (which allows for 62 km/h at that cadence). But I
thought not, here is why (by the way, this is roughly what Anquetil and
Coppi had for their hour records, who am I to claim I need more?):

On

http://kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

you can play around with the downhill speed (set Watts to 0 and use a
negative slope). I did so years back and found that with a slope of
little more than 3 % I need 0 W when using the drops and 250 W when
pedaling using the tops. For steeper descents and, consequently, higher
speeds you will need ever more power (using the tops) to compensate for
the aero advantage in the drops. This is of course somewhat simplified,
but I cannot pedal that fast in the drops.

Now longer stretches between 2 % and 4 % slope are a rare thing in the
Alps, and as soon as it gets steeper not minimizing the frontal area
puts you at a severe disadvantage.

Today I descended a 3.5 km climb with 9.2 % average slope. My Brompton
(with a huge frontal bag the size of a barn) reached a maximum of 74
km/h and an average of 62 km/h. With my road bike I managed a 85 km/h
maximum and a 78 km/h average. Almost no pedaling involved, just a
couple of revolutions at the summit to get going. And, as you might have
guessed, almost no braking involved, just some smooth curves with good
line of sight.

One caveat regarding this discussion: I am not sure about shorter
descents, especially those where you will not reach the slope-specific
terminal velocity because the descent is already over.

Best regards

Axel

On 8/15/2021 1:23 PM, Mark cleary wrote:
> So no to a new thread on the issue of descending and if pedal or tuck is better. My experience is limited for real climbing and descending. For pedaling basically I think my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110. Spinning faster than that I am not smooth enough to be efficient so at that point tuck would be better.
>
> This really would be regardless of the speed in a sense. I have gone down maybe a few hills that were -5-6% grades for about 1/2 mile. If my memory serves me it certainly is faster t just tuck and avoid the brakes. I find however that sometimes if I am picking up speed and not pedaling at get a bit jittery as speed increases. Normally if I am in a an all out cadence and at around 30-33 mph I feel a lot of air resistance. When I am descending and a tailwind with not a much resistance I tend to want to back off. The fastest I have ever road is about 43 mph and that was enough.
>
> I guess i could see a place where the pavement was really smooth and a downgrade wide open and one could feel comfortable picking up speed. The biggest problem is the road surface and if it is not smooth even little imperfections can cause problems. Stability is the key.
>
> I think when I get my fastest going is on a good downhill and I am feeling resistance in the pedal and can pick up speed. However in these instances I am braver because I know in just a short bit the uphill will come an that brakes me.
> This probably makes little sense but curious what others do? Also at what grade does a certain speed top out in a tuck? So if I am going down a %5 grade straight for a mile no pedaling what is top speed. all other things equal not wind.
> Deacon mark

Your coasting speed on a given grade depends mostly on your bike+rider
weight and on your position on the bike. Road surface has an effect too,
since rough roads can increase your effective rolling resistance, but
its effect is not as great. Flappy clothing slows you, aero bike bits
help only a tiny bit. So it depends.

I was going to say that by memory, 5% downhill is good for roughly 30
mph with hands on the hoods, and significantly more in a tuck. Then I
found this site
http://bikecalculator.com/examples.html
that says (for their chosen weight, etc. and zero input power) coasting
down 5% on the hoods gives 28 mph, and using instead an aerobar gives 36
mph. My memory was pretty good.

OK, that site's fun. So let's choose riding on the hoods and see how
much power you have to input to ride 36 mph down a 5% grade. I did the
trial and error, and got 450 Watts.

450 Watts is a hell of a lot of power. That's why I'm saying it's not
productive to pedal down steep hills even if you have the gears to allow
it. It's better to tuck and coast.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 11:27:47 AM UTC-7, Axel Reichert wrote:
> Mark cleary <deaconm...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > pedal or tuck
>
> Tuck, by a land mile, at least for climbs/descents that deserve that
> name.
> > my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110
> Roughly the same here.
>
> Having done almost all of the major Alpine climbs I almost never thought
> I should have higher gears. And typically my highest one was chosen to
> be around 45 km/h at 105/min cadence, e.g. 44/13. This urged one bike
> shop guy to comment that I will be at a severe disadvantage compared to
> others running 50/11 (which allows for 62 km/h at that cadence). But I
> thought not, here is why (by the way, this is roughly what Anquetil and
> Coppi had for their hour records, who am I to claim I need more?):
>
> On
>
> http://kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
>
> you can play around with the downhill speed (set Watts to 0 and use a
> negative slope). I did so years back and found that with a slope of
> little more than 3 % I need 0 W when using the drops and 250 W when
> pedaling using the tops. For steeper descents and, consequently, higher
> speeds you will need ever more power (using the tops) to compensate for
> the aero advantage in the drops. This is of course somewhat simplified,
> but I cannot pedal that fast in the drops.
>
> Now longer stretches between 2 % and 4 % slope are a rare thing in the
> Alps, and as soon as it gets steeper not minimizing the frontal area
> puts you at a severe disadvantage.
>
> Today I descended a 3.5 km climb with 9.2 % average slope. My Brompton
> (with a huge frontal bag the size of a barn) reached a maximum of 74
> km/h and an average of 62 km/h. With my road bike I managed a 85 km/h
> maximum and a 78 km/h average. Almost no pedaling involved, just a
> couple of revolutions at the summit to get going. And, as you might have
> guessed, almost no braking involved, just some smooth curves with good
> line of sight.
>
> One caveat regarding this discussion: I am not sure about shorter
> descents, especially those where you will not reach the slope-specific
> terminal velocity because the descent is already over.

There are several descents around here where you CANNOT tuck and have to remain upright to watch for potholes but can go 40 mph pedaling while missing the potholes. I'm off to do one right now.

Tom Kunich <cyclintom@gmail.com> writes:

> There are several descents around here where you CANNOT tuck and have
> to remain upright to watch for potholes

How does tucking prevent you from watching for potholes? Send pics!
(-:

Axel

On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 1:00:17 PM UTC-7, Axel Reichert wrote:
> Tom Kunich <cycl...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > There are several descents around here where you CANNOT tuck and have
> > to remain upright to watch for potholes
> How does tucking prevent you from watching for potholes? Send pics!
> (-:

I usually don't take selfies riding down hills at 30 mph dodging pot holes and roots raising large bumps in the pavement. Perhaps you have the ability to tuck and turn your head 90 degrees and see forward but at nearly 77 I don't. As a matter of fact, For various reasons I haven't been on a climbing ride for 2 weeks and just went on one today I did the entire ride but I thought of taking downhill shortcuts at every turn. Hopefully I will get back into climbing shape shortly.

I was also nervous that I hadn't tightened the right lever enough to keep it from slipping on the bar. I also have to figure out how to get the rear derailleur adjusted so that it doesn't rattle in the large cog. Probably the limit screw on the rear derailleur. And the multiple positions of the front derailleur do not quite align with the positions of the Large ring not rattling in the lower half of the cogset. This is the one thing with the older Utra set-up that was superior. The left shifter was a simple ratchet so that you could place the derailleur anywhere. This has a five position setup and it goes from big ring to small ring in one click. That means that you can't trim the front derailleur.

Axel Reichert <mail@axel-reichert.de> wrote:
> Mark cleary <deaconmark2007@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> pedal or tuck
>
> Tuck, by a land mile, at least for climbs/descents that deserve that
> name.
>
>> my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110

Mine used to be a touch higher at 130+ but generally now don’t bother
beyond 100ish
>
> Roughly the same here.
>
> Having done almost all of the major Alpine climbs I almost never thought
> I should have higher gears. And typically my highest one was chosen to
> be around 45 km/h at 105/min cadence, e.g. 44/13. This urged one bike
> shop guy to comment that I will be at a severe disadvantage compared to
> others running 50/11 (which allows for 62 km/h at that cadence). But I
> thought not, here is why (by the way, this is roughly what Anquetil and
> Coppi had for their hour records, who am I to claim I need more?):

I personally generally, don’t do much peddling beyond 30mph (50kph) might
nudge it up to 35mph or so but mostly just roll on down as I’m quite heavy
so gravity will work well for me!
>
> On
>
> http://kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
>
> you can play around with the downhill speed (set Watts to 0 and use a
> negative slope). I did so years back and found that with a slope of
> little more than 3 % I need 0 W when using the drops and 250 W when
> pedaling using the tops. For steeper descents and, consequently, higher
> speeds you will need ever more power (using the tops) to compensate for
> the aero advantage in the drops. This is of course somewhat simplified,
> but I cannot pedal that fast in the drops.
>
> Now longer stretches between 2 % and 4 % slope are a rare thing in the
> Alps, and as soon as it gets steeper not minimizing the frontal area
> puts you at a severe disadvantage.
>
> Today I descended a 3.5 km climb with 9.2 % average slope. My Brompton
> (with a huge frontal bag the size of a barn) reached a maximum of 74
> km/h and an average of 62 km/h. With my road bike I managed a 85 km/h
> maximum and a 78 km/h average. Almost no pedaling involved, just a
> couple of revolutions at the summit to get going. And, as you might have
> guessed, almost no braking involved, just some smooth curves with good
> line of sight.

I was going to say a for a lot of hills they have corners and so on. That’s
one of the slightly annoying bit of Mt Teide is most ways have lots of
switch backs which are lovely on way up, but a bit tedious on way down! And
at 20 ish miles (30km give or take) fair time as well.
>
> One caveat regarding this discussion: I am not sure about shorter
> descents, especially those where you will not reach the slope-specific
> terminal velocity because the descent is already over.

You reach max quite quickly I find, but short often means steep and
possibly unwise to descend at speed, while there are few mini alp like bits
and bobs where I grew up ie 4/3 miles most is sub 1mile but with gradients
well into the 20% if not more, clearly passable but your on the brakes
generally rather than letting the bike roll.
>
> Best regards
>
> Axel
>
Roger Merriman

On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 11:50:49 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 8/15/2021 1:23 PM, Mark cleary wrote:
> > So no to a new thread on the issue of descending and if pedal or tuck is better. My experience is limited for real climbing and descending. For pedaling basically I think my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110. Spinning faster than that I am not smooth enough to be efficient so at that point tuck would be better.
> >
> > This really would be regardless of the speed in a sense. I have gone down maybe a few hills that were -5-6% grades for about 1/2 mile. If my memory serves me it certainly is faster t just tuck and avoid the brakes. I find however that sometimes if I am picking up speed and not pedaling at get a bit jittery as speed increases. Normally if I am in a an all out cadence and at around 30-33 mph I feel a lot of air resistance. When I am descending and a tailwind with not a much resistance I tend to want to back off. The fastest I have ever road is about 43 mph and that was enough.
> >
> > I guess i could see a place where the pavement was really smooth and a downgrade wide open and one could feel comfortable picking up speed. The biggest problem is the road surface and if it is not smooth even little imperfections can cause problems. Stability is the key.
> >
> > I think when I get my fastest going is on a good downhill and I am feeling resistance in the pedal and can pick up speed. However in these instances I am braver because I know in just a short bit the uphill will come an that brakes me.
> > This probably makes little sense but curious what others do? Also at what grade does a certain speed top out in a tuck? So if I am going down a %5 grade straight for a mile no pedaling what is top speed. all other things equal not wind.
> > Deacon mark
> Your coasting speed on a given grade depends mostly on your bike+rider
> weight and on your position on the bike. Road surface has an effect too,
> since rough roads can increase your effective rolling resistance, but
> its effect is not as great. Flappy clothing slows you, aero bike bits
> help only a tiny bit. So it depends.
>
> I was going to say that by memory, 5% downhill is good for roughly 30
> mph with hands on the hoods, and significantly more in a tuck. Then I
> found this site
> http://bikecalculator.com/examples.html
> that says (for their chosen weight, etc. and zero input power) coasting
> down 5% on the hoods gives 28 mph, and using instead an aerobar gives 36
> mph. My memory was pretty good.

I'm 6'3 1/2 and ride shallow drop bars. The difference between me on the hoods or on the hooks is minimal on 5% grade. I could go out and check since I live on a road that is about 5 or 6%, although you have to be pretty quick with the turn at the bottom. I can't believe my son did that in a wagon.

Also, I avoid anyone descending on aero bars.
> OK, that site's fun. So let's choose riding on the hoods and see how
> much power you have to input to ride 36 mph down a 5% grade. I did the
> trial and error, and got 450 Watts.
>
> 450 Watts is a hell of a lot of power. That's why I'm saying it's not
> productive to pedal down steep hills even if you have the gears to allow
> it. It's better to tuck and coast.

Which makes me suspect the on-line calculator. Using this calculator, on the drops, going down a 5% grade at 36mph it is exactly 254 watts for a smallish rider. http://kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm Plug in -5 and 36mph. Do you see any problem with that calculator?

-- Jay Beattie

On 8/15/2021 8:24 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 11:50:49 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 8/15/2021 1:23 PM, Mark cleary wrote:
>>> So no to a new thread on the issue of descending and if pedal or tuck is better. My experience is limited for real climbing and descending. For pedaling basically I think my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110. Spinning faster than that I am not smooth enough to be efficient so at that point tuck would be better.
>>>
>>> This really would be regardless of the speed in a sense. I have gone down maybe a few hills that were -5-6% grades for about 1/2 mile. If my memory serves me it certainly is faster t just tuck and avoid the brakes. I find however that sometimes if I am picking up speed and not pedaling at get a bit jittery as speed increases. Normally if I am in a an all out cadence and at around 30-33 mph I feel a lot of air resistance. When I am descending and a tailwind with not a much resistance I tend to want to back off. The fastest I have ever road is about 43 mph and that was enough.
>>>
>>> I guess i could see a place where the pavement was really smooth and a downgrade wide open and one could feel comfortable picking up speed. The biggest problem is the road surface and if it is not smooth even little imperfections can cause problems. Stability is the key.
>>>
>>> I think when I get my fastest going is on a good downhill and I am feeling resistance in the pedal and can pick up speed. However in these instances I am braver because I know in just a short bit the uphill will come an that brakes me.
>>> This probably makes little sense but curious what others do? Also at what grade does a certain speed top out in a tuck? So if I am going down a %5 grade straight for a mile no pedaling what is top speed. all other things equal not wind.
>>> Deacon mark
>> Your coasting speed on a given grade depends mostly on your bike+rider
>> weight and on your position on the bike. Road surface has an effect too,
>> since rough roads can increase your effective rolling resistance, but
>> its effect is not as great. Flappy clothing slows you, aero bike bits
>> help only a tiny bit. So it depends.
>>
>> I was going to say that by memory, 5% downhill is good for roughly 30
>> mph with hands on the hoods, and significantly more in a tuck. Then I
>> found this site
>> http://bikecalculator.com/examples.html
>> that says (for their chosen weight, etc. and zero input power) coasting
>> down 5% on the hoods gives 28 mph, and using instead an aerobar gives 36
>> mph. My memory was pretty good.
>
> I'm 6'3 1/2 and ride shallow drop bars. The difference between me on the hoods or on the hooks is minimal on 5% grade. I could go out and check since I live on a road that is about 5 or 6%, although you have to be pretty quick with the turn at the bottom. I can't believe my son did that in a wagon.
>
> Also, I avoid anyone descending on aero bars.

I was using aero bars as the closest choice that calculator offered for
an aero tuck. I do use mine on descents, but only when I'm away from
others.

>> OK, that site's fun. So let's choose riding on the hoods and see how
>> much power you have to input to ride 36 mph down a 5% grade. I did the
>> trial and error, and got 450 Watts.
>>
>> 450 Watts is a hell of a lot of power. That's why I'm saying it's not
>> productive to pedal down steep hills even if you have the gears to allow
>> it. It's better to tuck and coast.
>
> Which makes me suspect the on-line calculator. Using this calculator, on the drops, going down a 5% grade at 36mph it is exactly 254 watts for a smallish rider. http://kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm Plug in -5 and 36mph. Do you see any problem with that calculator?

The number I cited was for on the hoods, not the drops. For the drops,
the two calculators agree pretty well, calling for 250W for -5% and 36
mph on the drops.

But my point remains. Yes, you can shift into a big gear, get on the
drops and pedal with 250 Watts and you'll reach about 36 mph. Or you can
get into a tuck and reach the same speed. You gain nothing by pedaling,
except some wear on a tiny cog.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 7:19:44 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 8/15/2021 8:24 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 11:50:49 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> On 8/15/2021 1:23 PM, Mark cleary wrote:
> >>> So no to a new thread on the issue of descending and if pedal or tuck is better. My experience is limited for real climbing and descending. For pedaling basically I think my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110. Spinning faster than that I am not smooth enough to be efficient so at that point tuck would be better.
> >>>
> >>> This really would be regardless of the speed in a sense. I have gone down maybe a few hills that were -5-6% grades for about 1/2 mile. If my memory serves me it certainly is faster t just tuck and avoid the brakes. I find however that sometimes if I am picking up speed and not pedaling at get a bit jittery as speed increases. Normally if I am in a an all out cadence and at around 30-33 mph I feel a lot of air resistance. When I am descending and a tailwind with not a much resistance I tend to want to back off. The fastest I have ever road is about 43 mph and that was enough.
> >>>
> >>> I guess i could see a place where the pavement was really smooth and a downgrade wide open and one could feel comfortable picking up speed. The biggest problem is the road surface and if it is not smooth even little imperfections can cause problems. Stability is the key.
> >>>
> >>> I think when I get my fastest going is on a good downhill and I am feeling resistance in the pedal and can pick up speed. However in these instances I am braver because I know in just a short bit the uphill will come an that brakes me.
> >>> This probably makes little sense but curious what others do? Also at what grade does a certain speed top out in a tuck? So if I am going down a %5 grade straight for a mile no pedaling what is top speed. all other things equal not wind.
> >>> Deacon mark
> >> Your coasting speed on a given grade depends mostly on your bike+rider
> >> weight and on your position on the bike. Road surface has an effect too,
> >> since rough roads can increase your effective rolling resistance, but
> >> its effect is not as great. Flappy clothing slows you, aero bike bits
> >> help only a tiny bit. So it depends.
> >>
> >> I was going to say that by memory, 5% downhill is good for roughly 30
> >> mph with hands on the hoods, and significantly more in a tuck. Then I
> >> found this site
> >> http://bikecalculator.com/examples.html
> >> that says (for their chosen weight, etc. and zero input power) coasting
> >> down 5% on the hoods gives 28 mph, and using instead an aerobar gives 36
> >> mph. My memory was pretty good.
> >
> > I'm 6'3 1/2 and ride shallow drop bars. The difference between me on the hoods or on the hooks is minimal on 5% grade. I could go out and check since I live on a road that is about 5 or 6%, although you have to be pretty quick with the turn at the bottom. I can't believe my son did that in a wagon.
> >
> > Also, I avoid anyone descending on aero bars.
> I was using aero bars as the closest choice that calculator offered for
> an aero tuck. I do use mine on descents, but only when I'm away from
> others.
> >> OK, that site's fun. So let's choose riding on the hoods and see how
> >> much power you have to input to ride 36 mph down a 5% grade. I did the
> >> trial and error, and got 450 Watts.
> >>
> >> 450 Watts is a hell of a lot of power. That's why I'm saying it's not
> >> productive to pedal down steep hills even if you have the gears to allow
> >> it. It's better to tuck and coast.
> >
> > Which makes me suspect the on-line calculator. Using this calculator, on the drops, going down a 5% grade at 36mph it is exactly 254 watts for a smallish rider. http://kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm Plug in -5 and 36mph.. Do you see any problem with that calculator?
> The number I cited was for on the hoods, not the drops. For the drops,
> the two calculators agree pretty well, calling for 250W for -5% and 36
> mph on the drops.
>
> But my point remains. Yes, you can shift into a big gear, get on the
> drops and pedal with 250 Watts and you'll reach about 36 mph. Or you can
> get into a tuck and reach the same speed. You gain nothing by pedaling,
> except some wear on a tiny cog.

Who says you reach the same speed not pedaling? The calculator assumes the rider is maintaining 90 RPMs, in what gear who knows. It doesn't say what the speed would be without any RPMs. And the disparity in watts between hoods and hooks is ridiculous, e.g. https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/descending-1.jpg
Note the difference between the two riders -- or lack thereof. How could that produce 400 extra watts for the same speed. That guy should be a half-mile back. Note: https://road.cc/content/news/133598-want-ride-faster-hunker-down-hoods I do mundane descents on the hoods all the time -- although long or technical descents are on the hooks. And I ride a lot of hills, assuming I'm not wounded. The end of my block: 43mph on a big wheel. My personal best is 50mph on a road bike, not pedaling after maybe 35mph. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BirBFFQXdS4&ab_channel=dirtyBMXpunk4130 I used to ride up that hill with zero shoulder until I discovered the back-way through the cemetery.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 8/15/2021 11:29 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 7:19:44 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 8/15/2021 8:24 PM, jbeattie wrote:
>>> On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 11:50:49 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 8/15/2021 1:23 PM, Mark cleary wrote:
>>>>> So no to a new thread on the issue of descending and if pedal or tuck is better. My experience is limited for real climbing and descending. For pedaling basically I think my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110. Spinning faster than that I am not smooth enough to be efficient so at that point tuck would be better.
>>>>>
>>>>> This really would be regardless of the speed in a sense. I have gone down maybe a few hills that were -5-6% grades for about 1/2 mile. If my memory serves me it certainly is faster t just tuck and avoid the brakes. I find however that sometimes if I am picking up speed and not pedaling at get a bit jittery as speed increases. Normally if I am in a an all out cadence and at around 30-33 mph I feel a lot of air resistance. When I am descending and a tailwind with not a much resistance I tend to want to back off. The fastest I have ever road is about 43 mph and that was enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess i could see a place where the pavement was really smooth and a downgrade wide open and one could feel comfortable picking up speed. The biggest problem is the road surface and if it is not smooth even little imperfections can cause problems. Stability is the key.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think when I get my fastest going is on a good downhill and I am feeling resistance in the pedal and can pick up speed. However in these instances I am braver because I know in just a short bit the uphill will come an that brakes me.
>>>>> This probably makes little sense but curious what others do? Also at what grade does a certain speed top out in a tuck? So if I am going down a %5 grade straight for a mile no pedaling what is top speed. all other things equal not wind.
>>>>> Deacon mark
>>>> Your coasting speed on a given grade depends mostly on your bike+rider
>>>> weight and on your position on the bike. Road surface has an effect too,
>>>> since rough roads can increase your effective rolling resistance, but
>>>> its effect is not as great. Flappy clothing slows you, aero bike bits
>>>> help only a tiny bit. So it depends.
>>>>
>>>> I was going to say that by memory, 5% downhill is good for roughly 30
>>>> mph with hands on the hoods, and significantly more in a tuck. Then I
>>>> found this site
>>>> http://bikecalculator.com/examples.html
>>>> that says (for their chosen weight, etc. and zero input power) coasting
>>>> down 5% on the hoods gives 28 mph, and using instead an aerobar gives 36
>>>> mph. My memory was pretty good.
>>>
>>> I'm 6'3 1/2 and ride shallow drop bars. The difference between me on the hoods or on the hooks is minimal on 5% grade. I could go out and check since I live on a road that is about 5 or 6%, although you have to be pretty quick with the turn at the bottom. I can't believe my son did that in a wagon.
>>>
>>> Also, I avoid anyone descending on aero bars.
>> I was using aero bars as the closest choice that calculator offered for
>> an aero tuck. I do use mine on descents, but only when I'm away from
>> others.
>>>> OK, that site's fun. So let's choose riding on the hoods and see how
>>>> much power you have to input to ride 36 mph down a 5% grade. I did the
>>>> trial and error, and got 450 Watts.
>>>>
>>>> 450 Watts is a hell of a lot of power. That's why I'm saying it's not
>>>> productive to pedal down steep hills even if you have the gears to allow
>>>> it. It's better to tuck and coast.
>>>
>>> Which makes me suspect the on-line calculator. Using this calculator, on the drops, going down a 5% grade at 36mph it is exactly 254 watts for a smallish rider. http://kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm Plug in -5 and 36mph. Do you see any problem with that calculator?
>> The number I cited was for on the hoods, not the drops. For the drops,
>> the two calculators agree pretty well, calling for 250W for -5% and 36
>> mph on the drops.
>>
>> But my point remains. Yes, you can shift into a big gear, get on the
>> drops and pedal with 250 Watts and you'll reach about 36 mph. Or you can
>> get into a tuck and reach the same speed. You gain nothing by pedaling,
>> except some wear on a tiny cog.
>
> Who says you reach the same speed not pedaling? The calculator assumes the rider is maintaining 90 RPMs, in what gear who knows.

For the calculator I used, I specified input power equal to zero.

> And the disparity in watts between hoods and hooks is ridiculous, e.g. https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/descending-1.jpg

So a photo taken in unknown conditions should trump all physics
calculations? Are all your expert witnesses just dudes with cameras?

> My personal best is 50mph on a road bike, not pedaling after maybe 35mph.

Well that settles it! As I've mentioned before, my personal best was 54
mph, and it would have been higher but I couldn't see to pass the car in
front of me.

So it's obvious you know less about descending than I do, by the data! ;-)

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Monday, August 16, 2021 at 7:07:09 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 8/15/2021 11:29 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 7:19:44 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> On 8/15/2021 8:24 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 11:50:49 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>> On 8/15/2021 1:23 PM, Mark cleary wrote:
> >>>>> So no to a new thread on the issue of descending and if pedal or tuck is better. My experience is limited for real climbing and descending. For pedaling basically I think my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110. Spinning faster than that I am not smooth enough to be efficient so at that point tuck would be better.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This really would be regardless of the speed in a sense. I have gone down maybe a few hills that were -5-6% grades for about 1/2 mile. If my memory serves me it certainly is faster t just tuck and avoid the brakes. I find however that sometimes if I am picking up speed and not pedaling at get a bit jittery as speed increases. Normally if I am in a an all out cadence and at around 30-33 mph I feel a lot of air resistance. When I am descending and a tailwind with not a much resistance I tend to want to back off. The fastest I have ever road is about 43 mph and that was enough.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I guess i could see a place where the pavement was really smooth and a downgrade wide open and one could feel comfortable picking up speed. The biggest problem is the road surface and if it is not smooth even little imperfections can cause problems. Stability is the key.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think when I get my fastest going is on a good downhill and I am feeling resistance in the pedal and can pick up speed. However in these instances I am braver because I know in just a short bit the uphill will come an that brakes me.
> >>>>> This probably makes little sense but curious what others do? Also at what grade does a certain speed top out in a tuck? So if I am going down a %5 grade straight for a mile no pedaling what is top speed. all other things equal not wind.
> >>>>> Deacon mark
> >>>> Your coasting speed on a given grade depends mostly on your bike+rider
> >>>> weight and on your position on the bike. Road surface has an effect too,
> >>>> since rough roads can increase your effective rolling resistance, but
> >>>> its effect is not as great. Flappy clothing slows you, aero bike bits
> >>>> help only a tiny bit. So it depends.
> >>>>
> >>>> I was going to say that by memory, 5% downhill is good for roughly 30
> >>>> mph with hands on the hoods, and significantly more in a tuck. Then I
> >>>> found this site
> >>>> http://bikecalculator.com/examples.html
> >>>> that says (for their chosen weight, etc. and zero input power) coasting
> >>>> down 5% on the hoods gives 28 mph, and using instead an aerobar gives 36
> >>>> mph. My memory was pretty good.
> >>>
> >>> I'm 6'3 1/2 and ride shallow drop bars. The difference between me on the hoods or on the hooks is minimal on 5% grade. I could go out and check since I live on a road that is about 5 or 6%, although you have to be pretty quick with the turn at the bottom. I can't believe my son did that in a wagon.
> >>>
> >>> Also, I avoid anyone descending on aero bars.
> >> I was using aero bars as the closest choice that calculator offered for
> >> an aero tuck. I do use mine on descents, but only when I'm away from
> >> others.
> >>>> OK, that site's fun. So let's choose riding on the hoods and see how
> >>>> much power you have to input to ride 36 mph down a 5% grade. I did the
> >>>> trial and error, and got 450 Watts.
> >>>>
> >>>> 450 Watts is a hell of a lot of power. That's why I'm saying it's not
> >>>> productive to pedal down steep hills even if you have the gears to allow
> >>>> it. It's better to tuck and coast.
> >>>
> >>> Which makes me suspect the on-line calculator. Using this calculator, on the drops, going down a 5% grade at 36mph it is exactly 254 watts for a smallish rider. http://kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm Plug in -5 and 36mph. Do you see any problem with that calculator?
> >> The number I cited was for on the hoods, not the drops. For the drops,
> >> the two calculators agree pretty well, calling for 250W for -5% and 36
> >> mph on the drops.
> >>
> >> But my point remains. Yes, you can shift into a big gear, get on the
> >> drops and pedal with 250 Watts and you'll reach about 36 mph. Or you can
> >> get into a tuck and reach the same speed. You gain nothing by pedaling,
> >> except some wear on a tiny cog.
> >
> > Who says you reach the same speed not pedaling? The calculator assumes the rider is maintaining 90 RPMs, in what gear who knows.
> For the calculator I used, I specified input power equal to zero.
> > And the disparity in watts between hoods and hooks is ridiculous, e.g. https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/descending-1.jpg
> So a photo taken in unknown conditions should trump all physics
> calculations? Are all your expert witnesses just dudes with cameras?
> > My personal best is 50mph on a road bike, not pedaling after maybe 35mph.
> Well that settles it! As I've mentioned before, my personal best was 54
> mph, and it would have been higher but I couldn't see to pass the car in
> front of me.
>
> So it's obvious you know less about descending than I do, by the data! ;-)

50mph is my personal best on that hill at the end of my street. My personal best on any hill is 61.5mph on Carson Pass. At least that is my fastest measured time. I rarely ride with instrumentation. I may have gone that fast on HWY 26 coming down Mt. Hood, but I don't know. It is even more open than Carson Pass. https://i.redd.it/ubz1s86s7a561.jpg

-- Jay Beattie.

On Monday, August 16, 2021 at 8:15:25 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
> On Monday, August 16, 2021 at 7:07:09 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 8/15/2021 11:29 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> > > On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 7:19:44 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >> On 8/15/2021 8:24 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> > >>> On Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 11:50:49 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >>>> On 8/15/2021 1:23 PM, Mark cleary wrote:
> > >>>>> So no to a new thread on the issue of descending and if pedal or tuck is better. My experience is limited for real climbing and descending. For pedaling basically I think my max cadence that is worth anything is around 110. Spinning faster than that I am not smooth enough to be efficient so at that point tuck would be better.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This really would be regardless of the speed in a sense. I have gone down maybe a few hills that were -5-6% grades for about 1/2 mile. If my memory serves me it certainly is faster t just tuck and avoid the brakes. I find however that sometimes if I am picking up speed and not pedaling at get a bit jittery as speed increases. Normally if I am in a an all out cadence and at around 30-33 mph I feel a lot of air resistance. When I am descending and a tailwind with not a much resistance I tend to want to back off. The fastest I have ever road is about 43 mph and that was enough.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I guess i could see a place where the pavement was really smooth and a downgrade wide open and one could feel comfortable picking up speed. The biggest problem is the road surface and if it is not smooth even little imperfections can cause problems. Stability is the key.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I think when I get my fastest going is on a good downhill and I am feeling resistance in the pedal and can pick up speed. However in these instances I am braver because I know in just a short bit the uphill will come an that brakes me.
> > >>>>> This probably makes little sense but curious what others do? Also at what grade does a certain speed top out in a tuck? So if I am going down a %5 grade straight for a mile no pedaling what is top speed. all other things equal not wind.
> > >>>>> Deacon mark
> > >>>> Your coasting speed on a given grade depends mostly on your bike+rider
> > >>>> weight and on your position on the bike. Road surface has an effect too,
> > >>>> since rough roads can increase your effective rolling resistance, but
> > >>>> its effect is not as great. Flappy clothing slows you, aero bike bits
> > >>>> help only a tiny bit. So it depends.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I was going to say that by memory, 5% downhill is good for roughly 30
> > >>>> mph with hands on the hoods, and significantly more in a tuck. Then I
> > >>>> found this site
> > >>>> http://bikecalculator.com/examples.html
> > >>>> that says (for their chosen weight, etc. and zero input power) coasting
> > >>>> down 5% on the hoods gives 28 mph, and using instead an aerobar gives 36
> > >>>> mph. My memory was pretty good.
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm 6'3 1/2 and ride shallow drop bars. The difference between me on the hoods or on the hooks is minimal on 5% grade. I could go out and check since I live on a road that is about 5 or 6%, although you have to be pretty quick with the turn at the bottom. I can't believe my son did that in a wagon.
> > >>>
> > >>> Also, I avoid anyone descending on aero bars.
> > >> I was using aero bars as the closest choice that calculator offered for
> > >> an aero tuck. I do use mine on descents, but only when I'm away from
> > >> others.
> > >>>> OK, that site's fun. So let's choose riding on the hoods and see how
> > >>>> much power you have to input to ride 36 mph down a 5% grade. I did the
> > >>>> trial and error, and got 450 Watts.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 450 Watts is a hell of a lot of power. That's why I'm saying it's not
> > >>>> productive to pedal down steep hills even if you have the gears to allow
> > >>>> it. It's better to tuck and coast.
> > >>>
> > >>> Which makes me suspect the on-line calculator. Using this calculator, on the drops, going down a 5% grade at 36mph it is exactly 254 watts for a smallish rider. http://kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm Plug in -5 and 36mph. Do you see any problem with that calculator?
> > >> The number I cited was for on the hoods, not the drops. For the drops,
> > >> the two calculators agree pretty well, calling for 250W for -5% and 36
> > >> mph on the drops.
> > >>
> > >> But my point remains. Yes, you can shift into a big gear, get on the
> > >> drops and pedal with 250 Watts and you'll reach about 36 mph. Or you can
> > >> get into a tuck and reach the same speed. You gain nothing by pedaling,
> > >> except some wear on a tiny cog.
> > >
> > > Who says you reach the same speed not pedaling? The calculator assumes the rider is maintaining 90 RPMs, in what gear who knows.
> > For the calculator I used, I specified input power equal to zero.
> > > And the disparity in watts between hoods and hooks is ridiculous, e.g.. https://cdn.road.cc/sites/default/files/styles/main_width/public/descending-1.jpg
> > So a photo taken in unknown conditions should trump all physics
> > calculations? Are all your expert witnesses just dudes with cameras?
> > > My personal best is 50mph on a road bike, not pedaling after maybe 35mph.
> > Well that settles it! As I've mentioned before, my personal best was 54
> > mph, and it would have been higher but I couldn't see to pass the car in
> > front of me.
> >
> > So it's obvious you know less about descending than I do, by the data! ;-)
> 50mph is my personal best on that hill at the end of my street. My personal best on any hill is 61.5mph on Carson Pass. At least that is my fastest measured time. I rarely ride with instrumentation. I may have gone that fast on HWY 26 coming down Mt. Hood, but I don't know. It is even more open than Carson Pass. https://i.redd.it/ubz1s86s7a561.jpg
>
> -- Jay Beattie.
For one reason or another, I haven't done a climbing ride in three weeks. So yesterday I did a 26 mile 1854 foot climbing ride. I think that every inch of the way I was planning a bail-out route but I ended up doing the full thing.

It was so damn painful that I could barely pedal downhill after doing that climbing. So the only problem was the damn traffic which used to be near zilch during the lockdown.

This morning I had to take a couple of Ibuprofen which I hardly do anymore because it can upset my stomach. Luckily it didn't.