"There are no hills in London"

[Wowbagger]

We managed a (short) day cycle camping in Yorkshire without crossing a contour line.  But the county makes up for it, with Park Rash, Rosedale Chimney, Sutton Bank, Tan Hill etc, which don't really have competition from The Great Wen.  Or even the worst that Lincolnshire can throw at you.

Of course Yorkshire's got higher hills than London - but my point was that the height above sea level isn't the only measure. I was most surprised, for example, to learn that Torbay's highest point is a long way short of the London Borough of Bromley's, but I know which one provides the easier cycling.

[Chris S]

After Boston, it's another 60 miles of dead flat, with headwind, until you reach Chris S's house. It's a bit like something from Tokien - the First Homely House after the North of England.

 

Necton ain't no Rivendell, but I like the analogy  . Does that make me Elrond? I always wanted to be a fairy elf.

I've found it best to avoid hill-related pissing contests with our friends West and North of the meridian. FWIW, I find climbing Holme Moss (7%) easier than some routes through Essex or Suffolk. No, it's not hilly there - but it sure is crinkly - and that hurts too.

Meh. What to I know? I ride a bike with only one gear. Crossing a railway bridge makes we puff and wheeze. 

[clarion]

I'm not talking in that list about altitude.  I know London doesn't have a climb as long as Park Rash, or as step as Rosedale.  Nothing like.  Yes, there are roads which I can't get up in one go, but that still doesn't come close.

[Exit Stage Left]

I feel that there has to be a formula for overall perceived hilliness. I think it might be. (Available metres climb) x (number of bums on bikes) x (the degree of confidence that anyone elsewhere cares at all.)
By this measure London is the hilliest place on the planet. If we remove the (number of bums on bikes)  Seattle or Portland would vie for the distinction.

[MSeries]

FWIW, I find climbing Holme Moss (7%) easier than some routes through Essex or Suffolk. No, it's not hilly there - but it sure is crinkly - and that hurts too.

Like all hills, it depends on what shape the rider is in when he arrives at the start of it and how good a climber he is.  The Derbyshire side of of Holme Moss is considered the easier side. A long route with lots of hills and little recovery will make Holme Moss feel harder than if it's tackled at the start of a ride.  Long climbs generally have long descents and some recovery time. Flat rides hurt if you go faster than you are comfortable with since there is little time to recover if you are to maintain your speed.

But a hill is a hill. It doesn't matter what shape a rider is in. A hill must be judged on it's own characteristics, length steepness etc etc.

[Exit Stage Left]

20 years ago I used to live here.  Google Maps

It's fairly hilly in that part of Greater London, there used to be an informal 8 mile TT from the Breakspear Pub up to Harefield and back down Harvil Road, people would travel to it as a hilly circuit is hard to concoct in that area.

[citoyen]

I've found it best to avoid hill-related pissing contests with our friends West and North of the meridian.

Indeed. And that wasn't the idea when I started this thread - if I'd wanted to impress people with my feats of alpinism, I'd have told my non-cycling colleagues rather than a bunch of experienced cyclists, some of whom live in properly mountainous regions.  

FWIW, I find climbing Holme Moss (7%) easier than some routes through Essex or Suffolk. No, it's not hilly there - but it sure is crinkly - and that hurts too.

Yeah, East Kent is the same - the altitude isn't great but there are lots and lots of short, sharp climbs.

Meh. What to I know? I ride a bike with only one gear. Crossing a railway bridge makes we puff and wheeze.  

It was because I didn't want to start a pissing contest that I didn't mention that I usually ride the aforementioned undulations on fixed.

Actually, when riding fixed, going down the other side of Shooter's Hill is far more challenging than going up it - top speed a shade under 60km/h. Good spinning practice.  

d.

[Wascally Weasel]

London certainly doesn’t abound with long, difficult ascents but has quite a few short but fairly steep bits, like Highgate West Hill and Muswell Hill in north London.

Admittedly, there are few places where you gain even as much as 60-70 metres in vertical height increase but there are a few where the height gained is over 100 metres (Chalk Farm to the top of Hampstead Heath being one).

I have a few bits of height gain on my cycle to work depending on route – sometimes I ride via Kingston Hill which is only a gain of about 43 metres but this is concentrated in to a much shorter and steeper climb if you do it via the parallel route in Richmond Park.

What London does have is relatively good quality climbing in the areas that immediately surround it – to the south and south-west are some relatively challenging bits here and there like Whitedown (18%).  I also remember some pretty steep bits in the Chilterns from the last time I rode there, like Bledlow Ridge.  In the south and south east are also some hilly bits as anyone who has ridden the Hell of the Ashdown can tell you. 

[pcolbeck]

Lincolnshire has a bit of Wolds, but really deserves its reputation as pretty flat.  Perhaps Wowbagger was thinking of the towering mountain ranges of Norfolk?

I was really surprised by Lincolnshire when I rode there last year.

The flattest, easiest 60-mile ride I've ever done was from York to Brigg. As far as the Humber bridge, all in that county whose name escapes me for a moment but that's renowned for its hills, it was incredibly easy riding.

Hardly surprising since you were essentially riding down the vale of York. The whole of the Vale is essentially the bottom of a large glacial valley widened by the rivers that flow through it. It's flatter than a flat thing. If you had gone 15 miles in at right angles to it either way it would have got hilly quickly.

[Salvatore]

Lincolnshire has a bit of Wolds, but really deserves its reputation as pretty flat.  Perhaps Wowbagger was thinking of the towering mountain ranges of Norfolk?

I was really surprised by Lincolnshire when I rode there last year.

When I organised an Easter Arrow team, our route took us over the Lincolnshire Wolds. One Welshman in the team mas moved to remark that that section was "harder than the Brevet Cymru".

[pcolbeck]

Living as I do in the Yorkshire Wolds which are essentially the same range of hills with the Humber estuary splitting them it depends which direction your cross them in. East to West isn't too bad as they tend to just role whereas North to South it's very lumpy.

[fuzzy]

I have toyed with putting together a "High Wycombe Lung Buster" ride, meeting folk at Wycombe railway station and taking folk up and down some short but entertaing climbs. Loads, all withing a 10 mile radius of the meeting point.

[Wowbagger]

I have toyed with putting together a "High Wycombe Lung Buster" ride, meeting folk at Wycombe railway station and taking folk up and down some short but entertaing climbs. Loads, all withing a 10 mile radius of the meeting point.

You could probably do something to rival Mr Legg-Bandage's C & M Hilly 50. High Wycombe's like the Alps.

[itsbruce]

I cycled out to Pinner to see some friends yesterday.  They have some hills around there.