Fastest Speeds

[Climberruss]

Just got back from a trip to Stroud and back ( in a round about sort of way). Managed 49.6mph on some hill near Stratford. That is a new all time record for me. (79.82kph!)

Just got back from PAC Tour and some BIG American hills. INcreased my alltime max speed on several occaisions but the highest was set on the Talimena Parkway in Arkansas at 55.2 mph (88.84km/h). I don't think I'm likely to beat that in a hurry!!

[Euan Uzami]

Interesting how weight makes a difference. My normal 'terminal velocity' unladen is 44mph, but with the rack and racktop bag on I hit 49.4mph, that was coming down the horseshoe pass on offa's dyke. I did have some "ballast" in the bag, only a scone mind. I might be tempted to use some rocks next time. If cairns start appearing in Llangollen you'll know the idea has caught on. 

[Panoramix]

Interesting how weight makes a difference. My normal 'terminal velocity' unladen is 44mph, but with the rack and racktop bag on I hit 49.4mph, that was coming down the horseshoe pass on offa's dyke. I did have some "ballast" in the bag, only a scone mind. I might be tempted to use some rocks next time. If cairns start appearing in Llangollen you'll know the idea has caught on. 

I have also noticed that my racktop bag makes me faster downhill and I am wondering if this is not due to better aerodynamics.... a bit like a tailbox on a recumbent

[Biggsy]

Faster downhill with a racktop bag compared to what?  Nothing?  Weight increases your speed downhill.  A racktop bag will be more aerodynamic than panniers, but I would be surprised if it was aerodynamically better than nothing unless maybe it was a very special shape.

[Panoramix]

Faster downhill with a racktop bag compared to what?  Nothing?  Weight increases your speed downhill.  A racktop bag will be more aerodynamic than panniers, but I would be surprised if it was aerodynamically better than nothing unless maybe it was a very special shape.

Yes I mean compared to rack only as I have noticed that I descend well with it. When i carry stuff to work in my rackpack, it is rarely more than 1kg including the weight of the bag. Compared to the 85kg of bike + rider weight i don't think that the weight difference is important enough for me to notice hence the aerodynamic hypothesis.

[Biggsy]

I agree the weight's not going to be a noticeable factor when it's only 1kg.  You would need to eliminate wind conditions and the placeobo effect to be sure you're really faster because of the bag, or you could test it in a wind tunnel!

[Wendy]

Interesting how weight makes a difference. My normal 'terminal velocity' unladen is 44mph, but with the rack and racktop bag on I hit 49.4mph, that was coming down the horseshoe pass on offa's dyke. I did have some "ballast" in the bag, only a scone mind. I might be tempted to use some rocks next time. If cairns start appearing in Llangollen you'll know the idea has caught on. 

I bet that scone was later crushed and used as rockfill.

[Panoramix]

I agree the weight's not going to be a noticeable factor when it's only 1kg.  You would need to eliminate wind conditions and the placeobo effect to be sure you're really faster because of the bag, or you could test it in a wind tunnel!

A more scientific approach would be needed to be sure but Ben_Taylor remark made my suspicion a bit stronger!

Also during LEL, I had a self-inflatable matt strapped on top of my rackpack. It was nearly touching my bum. I was worried that this would create extra drag and despite the strong headwinds I did not feel any extra drag if not the contrary. So I am starting to think that  a rackpack tend to "close" neatly the air flow behind the rider bum. A bit like a properly designed hull does not "drag water" behind the boat.

[Jaded]

On my 80 mile ride with Mr P in the West Highlands, I hit over 45mph 5 separate times. Ace! 

[mattc]

I agree the weight's not going to be a noticeable factor when it's only 1kg.  You would need to eliminate wind conditions and the placeobo effect to be sure you're really faster because of the bag, or you could test it in a wind tunnel!

A more scientific approach would be needed to be sure but Ben_Taylor remark made my suspicion a bit stronger!

Also during LEL, I had a self-inflatable matt strapped on top of my rackpack. It was nearly touching my bum. I was worried that this would create extra drag and despite the strong headwinds I did not feel any extra drag if not the contrary. So I am starting to think that  a rackpack tend to "close" neatly the air flow behind the rider bum. A bit like a properly designed hull does not "drag water" behind the boat.

I can totally believe this is a measurable effect. At 44mph drag is big. (Just pushing one's knees against the top-tube speeds the bike up). Look at the money spent on desiging 'teardrop' tubing - the drag from the rider's arse is far higher than their frame tubing. Even water bottles have been measured as making a difference (that's a NORMAL bottle vs NO bottle).

Perhaps this is why so many LEL riders had itsy-bitsy backpacks?!?

[Fluffy]

Ive done 46mph once on my brand new bike, not done much cycling lately blood roads are treacherous (bloody snow)

[mattc]

I'm disappointed Fluffy:

I was expecting a Fastest Speed in Snow claim.

[andrew_s]

I'm disappointed Fluffy:

I was expecting a Fastest Speed in Snow claim.

222 kph (138mph) is the downhill on snow record
his offroad record is 107 mph, which he had a good wipeout whilst attempting to beat

[TimO]

222 kph (138mph) is the downhill on snow record
his offroad record is 107 mph, which he had a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/JLRDRzMWIsg&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/JLRDRzMWIsg&rel=1</a> whilst attempting to beat

What a loon.  I get nervous at anything close to 40mph, so doing it at that plus another 100mph...

I think they should do like the land speed bods (and others) do, and average it over two runs, one in each direction.

[Ray 6701]

In England probably only around 45mph but I managed 62mph descending in the pyrenees, I think it was the tourmalet but I'm not 100% sure.