How important is the bike?

[Doosh]

I biked all through winter- granted not every day but at least a couple of leisure times a week on top of regular commutes- and since the weather picked up I've been out a bit more often, my problem is that whilst I can feel a very big improvement in my aerobic fitness I don't seem to be able to go any further distance wise.

I did a 45 mile round trip the other week and it nearly killed me, I was a mess on the way back and ended up walking most of it. Very moral sapping as I'd thought I should be able to manage this by now without too much bother.

Because I'm poor and don't have a lot of space I can only get by with the one bike and because this needs to be a jack of all trades I'm wondering if it's not suited to longer distance road cycling? but the Spock in me is saying I should be able to manage this distance on anything with air in it's tyres never mind anything remotely specialist.

I'm not really sure what I can do about it other than find a more suitable bike, but then I think it will be compromised for the other things I need it to do.

I'm not the most motivated of people at the best of times so lack of progress like this makes it really hard to find the will to keep going out.

Sorry for the naval gazing, I'm just at a loss with it.

[border-rider]

A fancy bike will let you go faster for the same effort, but if you're struggling to do more than 20-30 miles without suffering then speed isn't the issue right now.

What happens when it goes wrong ? I wonder if you're eating/drinking enough or maybe trying to go too fast ? Any reasonably fit person should be able to ride 45 miles at a leisurely pace with lots of stops, and if you've been riding all winter then you should be fine for this.

[simonp]

Doosh, could it be you didn’t take on enough energy during the ride and bonked.  I’ve bonked on 50 mile rides when going hard and not eating anything.

[arabella]

so was that in 3 hours or 7 hours
how muh did you drink, let alone eat
you haen't said what sort of bike but unless it's got the brakes permamently on then as said above it's not that important unless you want to win a race.

[Doosh]

Sorry for the lack of details, I was to busy getting my whinge on.

I can rattle 20-30 miles off with no bother, I do my 27 mile circuit in 1h 45m.

The first 25 miles of the 45 mile effort flew by but in total I think I was out for around 3.5-4 hours. I felt fine until on the way back I got to the first big hill and I just couldn't do more than 200 yards at a time, I must've stopped 6 or 7 times just up that one hill. I took two water bottles out with me and got them filled up at a garden centre on my way back and I drunk those as well.

Bike is an old steel MTB clunker with racks, kickstand and all the other paraphernalia, to be fair to it though running on 1.5" slicks and I re-did the hub bearings just before winter and I can keep it at 14-15mph without too much bother unless it's really steep. I do get quite a bit of shoulder, neck and wrist pain after the 30 mile mark though.

I'm wondering if I'm going out too hard? I do like the feeling of cracking on but it just feels so effortless at times, could I be going too hard without really knowing it?

Edit: oh and I am carrying around about 4 stone of extra *cough* baggage *cough*

[MSeries]

relative to being four stones overweight the bike isn't very important.  They say you should increase distance by 10% each week so try that.

[border-rider]

I'm wondering if I'm going out too hard? I do like the feeling of cracking on but it just feels so effortless at times, could I be going too hard without really knowing it?

That's what it sounds like to me. If you're covering 27 miles in 1 3/4 hours that's a decent pace; try consciously taking it a bit easier, factoring in a cafe stop (or grab something from a shop and take 10 m minutes out) about halfway round.

[rogerzilla]

The bike is important up to a point:

- it must fit you
- it must be suitable for the speed at which you intend to ride; a sit up and beg roadster is no good for 18mph because the position is too upright and puts all the weight on your bottom
- tyres are very important - buy the lightest and most free-running slicks you can find for road use unless conditions dictate that puncture resistance trumps all else.

The rest is less important, although a bike weighing more than about 28lb is going to be a bit of a drag on the hills.  Surprisingly, a pound off the bike seems to make a lot more difference than a pound off the rider, but is infinitely more expensive to achieve than just eating less.

[Martin]

45 miles on road on an MTB would probably kill me too but that's just me; can't stand riding the things on road. And it's not just because of the tyres; it's weight, handlebar position, gearing, saddle etc.

[Doosh]

They say you should increase distance by 10% each week so try that.

The thing is I don't really do a fixed mileage every week, I just go out as and when I feel like it and for as long as I feel like it. If I started going about it too scientifically and getting into percentages I think I'd pack it in.

[hellymedic]

As the others have said, the bike makes little difference. You are not eating enough of the right foods to sustain this level of exertion.
The 'spare tyre' round your middle is all but inacessible on an intense ride.
Eat something rich in carbohydrates every 60-90 minutes and you'll be fine. A packet of teacakes from a supermarket (fruity baps, not chocolate mallows) will do the trick without breaking the bank.

[Manotea]

Bike is an old steel MTB clunker with racks, kickstand and all the other paraphernalia... I do get quite a bit of shoulder, neck and wrist pain after the 30 mile mark.

45 miles on road on an MTB would probably kill me too but that's just me; can't stand riding the things on road. And it's not just because of the tyres; it's weight, handlebar position, gearing, saddle etc.

I'm with Martin. I'm really not happy with the upright riding position of MTBs. They really are not meant for long distance riding. 45 miles on an old clunker (with suspension?) would kill me too. If you mainly ride on the road get a hybrid/tourer/roadster type bike. It doesn't have to be costly, just mechanically sound. The local small ads are your friend.

Which is not to say those suggesting look at having a snackette halfway round are wrong; you should do that as well, but first look at your position on the bike and consider replacing the bike as appropriate.

[Doosh]

If anything I thought I was too hunched over as my wrists, shoulders and neck are killing me at the 30 mile mark. The bars are as high as I can realistically get them but they are still a good inch or two below the saddle.

It's good for the weekly shop though with the racks and everything, and the kickstand has paid for itself 10 times over.

[mike]

the bike *is* important, a mtb will be much harder work than a road-y type bike, so you either work much harder at the same pace or have to slow down a bit.

As above, if you havent already then it's worth putting slick tyres on the mtb and getting someone to critique your position on the bike, then next time you set out for a long ride, slow down a bit and eat something every hour or so.

[simonp]

Doosh is already running 1.5" slicks. But a nice road bike would still be a bit faster.

However the symptoms described sound like the bonk to me.

[Doosh]

I'm confused as to how I can burn all this fat off if I need to stuff a load of carbs into me whilst riding  

After reading some other posts I've noticed I may be a "pusher" instead of a "spinner" I've got big strong legs and I used to be a sprinter in my younger days, they're good for out of the saddle bursts up hills and I can pull out of junctions in the big gears and be up to speed in a couple of turns but they don't seem to be much good over distance.

It sounds like to make this work I need to slow down a bit and try and spin a bit more, both things that don't come naturally and will take a concious effort.

[border-rider]

I'm confused as to how I can burn all this fat off if I need to stuff a load of carbs into me whilst riding  

The secret is to ride a bit slower so that you're not ripping through glycogen reserves but are running on fat, and to top up the carbs a bit so you have something in the tank for hills, sprints etc when you open up the throttle.

After a bit of this you'll find you're able to go faster, and to go further without eating, and the spare tyre will evaporate.  I think that what's being advocated by most people is a more gentle start to your attempts to build distance....

It sounds like to make this work I need to slow down a bit and try and spin a bit more, both things that don't come naturally and will take a concious effort.

That sounds about right to me. 

[simonp]

I have heard the phrase “carbohydrates are the fire in which fat burns”.

You always burn some amount of carbohydrate, even at rest.  When you exercise at high intensity, the fat burning can’t keep up so you burn more carbs.  You can do this up to a point, but you have only about 1500 calories of stored carbohydrates and it’s quite possible to rip through this in 45 miles, especially when going anaerobic which burns carbs 19x faster than aerobic metabolism; I’d agree with the others that you might be going a bit too hard.  In any case if your ride is burning 1800 calories as I suspect it might it’s a bad idea to have that much of a deficit so you will need to eat a bit extra when you ride that far so as to avoid overdoing it.

I used to bonk on those sorts of distances (certainly within 100km even when eating).  Back when I was 26.  Now at 39 I get through 100km on a light breakfast, an oat bar, and a couple of bottles of energy drink.  And riding at a reasonable pace.

[toestrap]

Very good advice above.

In terms of comfort, I've found it takes time to get used to distance. Don't be afraid to get off the bike every now and again to stretch, as well as take on  fuel. 45 miles is a fair distance, take two or three breaks. As you build up you can keep the same number of stops but ride longer between them.

Less (speed) is more (distance) - for us mortals anyway.

[inc]

my problem is that whilst I can feel a very big improvement in my aerobic fitness I don't seem to be able to go any further distance wise.


I'm not the most motivated of people at the best of times so lack of progress like this makes it really hard to find the will to keep going out.

I don't think there is much wrong with your motivation or your fitness, averaging 25kph on an MTB for nearly two hours sounds good to me.  You don't say why you want to go further.

[Doosh]

I don't think there is much wrong with your motivation or your fitness, averaging 25kph on an MTB for nearly two hours sounds good to me.  You don't say why you want to go further.

First off, thanks all for the great response, given me lots to think about.

As for the above, I suppose I've no real reason to go any further but doing long distances does appeal to me greatly. I've never been one for endurance sports because I get bored and tired of it very quickly, but cycling is different and I enjoy it.

Although I try not to have cast iron goals (to avoid disappointment like this!) eventually I would like to be able to go on a full blown solo cycle camping trip, only doing 25-30 miles between camp sites, in my mind, wouldn't make this much of an adventure. I like the idea of being out all day doing distances of 100 miles or more, for some reason it just appeals.

I'll take on board the advice and try and adapt how I approach things to see if I can improve. Meantime I'll still be keeping tabs on Ebay for the elusive road bike bargain that nobody else has spotted, yeah right!

[Wowbagger]

Four stone overweight you say? Sounds very like me.

There are two immediately obvious differences.

1. You are in North Derbyshire and I'm in Essex. 45 miles in the respective counties are very different propositions.

2. Even given the terrain difference, you are keeping up 15mph. Last year, my moving average was something like 9.5 mph. OK, we tend to do heavily-laden tandem tours and that brings it down, but even so, on my solo machine I reckon 11 mph is a good enough average.

I can keep going for a very long time if I need to. I haven't done any very long rides this year. I've done a few over 60 miles, and quite a lot over 50, but I've not had that much trouble. I always try to make sure that rides include pubs and tea rooms.

I'm 56 and arthritic. These two factors definitely contribute to my lack of speed, but as has been observed above, I probably benefit through extra stamina as a result.

I'm afraid that, although cycling gets you to a pretty good level of general fitness, you won't lose a lot of weight as a result. We just did a 550 mile tandem tour and I was about 1.5kg heavier after I got back. Full cooked breakfast (we were in B & Bs) as well as a big pub meal every night saw to that, but I bet my muscle mass had increased.

[Kim]

I'm afraid that, although cycling gets you to a pretty good level of general fitness, you won't lose a lot of weight as a result.

I used to think that...

To OP: slow down a bit.  2 hours would seem about right for 27 miles.  I can now do that without eating, last year I'd bonk about halfway.

[simonp]

You can speed up again when you get fitter and move to somewhere flat like here.  I did 26.5 miles in 1h33 on my Pompino on Saturday.

[Tewdric]

I'm afraid that, although cycling gets you to a pretty good level of general fitness, you won't lose a lot of weight as a result.

I always seem to put on a bit of weight during the SR season (i.e. this time of year).  I sometimes think I shock my body into squeezing every last calorie out of everything I eat and drink, where at other times of the year it is a bit lackadasical about letting the odd excess pass through without sticking.