Weight and speed

[mattc]

My inner physicist is appaled by this meaningless ratio 

As a comparative measure it's got no value at all.

But as a motivator, I can see the point:
it goes down if Wow speeds up,
it goes down if he loses weight.

And it's really easy to calculate. Win-win.

_{(p.s. About 4 for short flat rides, more like 6 for 400k+ )}

[Greenbank]

Christening it the Wowbagger number (W) I have:-

Fastest 3 laps of RP was about 19mph. I was a shade under 78kg then. So my W=4.1
LEL was 20kph moving average (12.4mph) and I was 77kg at the start. W=6.2
The Dean 2008 was dreadful weather, 17.8kph (11mph) and I was 84kg. W=7.6

[clarion]

As a rebel, I shall continue to use the Butterfly number (B).  Otherwise, the figures only make sense in relation to one person.  She makes it more comparable.

[Ray 6701]

I think small people have an advantage with this system. Mine comes out for today at 6.17 ish which is less impressive when you are 5'3.

Clarion is working out a spreadsheet that also has a BMI divided by speed colomn, which is a lower number, but more comparable between people . On the BMI column I am 2.41.

BMI/Speed, are you using Miles per hour or Kilometres 


Distance           Time     Avg Speed
20.36 miles   1.18.10   15.5mph

My BMI of 24.1 / This ride on New years day gives me a figure of 1.5. 

[David Martin]

Yebbut with a BMI/speed ratio, if you speed up at the same BMI it gets lower, but if you increase BMI at the same speed it goes up.

For performance comparison both figures need to move to counteract the natural relationship between BMI and speed.

..d

[Rhys W]

My Sunday post-Christmas-haven't ridden for 17 days-take it easy ride (92km) came out with a WB Number of 3.97. 

[Wowbagger]

Today's ride yielded a WI (Wowbagger Index) of 10.8!

My ride total was just short of 13 miles and the first couple of those were traffic-lighty town centre riding. Average speed of 10.4 mph!

And my 2011 mileage total is now greater than the number of kilogrammes of my mass.

[simonp]

When you gain weight your surface area increases and your power output might drop a little due to increased demands on the heart and increased rotating mass in your legs.

[Wowbagger]

I think it's the legs that have it.

I here wonderful tales of finely honed fixers spinning down Reigate hill at 200 rpm. I think my legs would actually disintegrate if I ever approached that sort of cadence.

[Alouicious]

The 'Wow' factor.

The pedant in me is saying "Your numerator is a metric measurement, and your denominator is an imperial measurement".

That aside, my 84kg at an average 100km speed of 12.4 mph on recent 100 km pop gives 6.8.

My PB for a 100km pop was the Charnwood Challenge at 4hrs 15 minutes to cover 117km. 17.1 mph.

At 84 kg, my WOW factor was 4.9.

[TheLurker]

Hmm.  W_range = 3.3 - 3.7

But I'm skinny and I have a more or less non-stop commute, which helps keep the average speed up.

[Alouicious]

Hmm.  W_range = 3.3 - 3.7

But I'm skinny and I have a more or less non-stop commute, which helps keep the average speed up.

If I did a sprint up Avon Park Dragway at average 26 mph, my W would be 3.2.

We're talking Brevet Populaire distances. 

[Blodwyn Pig]

I was thinking about the length of ride. Shortish rides around the town are always messed about by traffic & junctions. I think it has to be at least 10 miles. At least that gives me the chance to get out of the town.

Ah! think about this!!!!!!!! If you own / have owned  a car you'll appreciate how inefficient they are around town, 'urban cycle' this means they use more fuel per mile due to the stop start syndrome. I would presume you body acts the very same way, ie uses more fuel stop start  / burst of energy, that pootling along , therefore you burn more calories, that is why you never see an overweight cycle courier.