Author Topic: Weight and speed  (Read 4431 times)

Wowbagger

  • Former Sylph
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Weight and speed
« on: 03 January, 2011, 06:50:25 pm »
I've put on at least a stone in the past couple of months and it's really pissing me off. Yesterday's ride was 60+ miles at 9.2 mph. That's boring. It's not in the least surprising that I'm as slow as I am. 115kg is stupidly fat for my height (178cm).

I've not joined in the weight loss thread for a year or two, because I found it wasn't helping, but I've started this year to record my miles and my weight on the same spreadsheet. Then it dawned on me: I've put a column on the spreadsheet which simply divides my weight in kg by my speed in mph (OK, mixed systems and all that but I don't care).

Yesterday's ride came out at 12.5 (115/9.2). I think ideally I'd like to get my weight / speed ratio down to 8 or better. That would be 13mph at 104kg. 15mph at 90kg would be a lovely 6.

I'd be interested in what others' weight / speed ratios are.
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

Gus

  • Loosing weight stone by stone
    • We will return
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #1 on: 03 January, 2011, 06:56:22 pm »
Great idea Wowbagger.
I'll try to make a spreadsheet too, but I think it will be incorrect right now, there are black  ice and snow everwhere.
Btw. I'll only calculate on rides over 30 miles/50 km.

Wowbagger

  • Former Sylph
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #2 on: 03 January, 2011, 07:00:06 pm »
Great idea Wowbagger.
I'll try to make a spreadsheet too, but I think it will be incorrect right now, there are black  ice and snow everwhere.
Btw. I'll only calculate on rides over 30 miles/50 km.

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.
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #3 on: 03 January, 2011, 08:19:55 pm »
Speed against age might be more meaningful.
Let right or wrong alone decide
God was never on your side.

Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #4 on: 03 January, 2011, 08:24:10 pm »
Far more meaningful is power/weight, but you need some expensive magic to be able to work it out properly.

Performance log thread
"Yes please" said Squirrel "biscuits are our favourite things."

Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #5 on: 03 January, 2011, 08:25:38 pm »
Shouldn't height or BMI be used in conjuction with weight if different individuals to be compared?

Chris S

Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #6 on: 03 January, 2011, 08:42:42 pm »
Weight and speed are very much influenced by topography. Bet you'd be faster if you did a Fenland ride.

Also - even properly fit riders are slow this time of year. Hell - most will lose 3km/hr just by putting on longs.

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #7 on: 03 January, 2011, 09:31:24 pm »
Hmm, interesting, if somewhat arbitrary...

Taking my regular 43km loop, which includes 450m of climbing and assuming nothing abnormal wind-wise, my average speed is typically somewhere between 12.5 and 14mph, variation largely depending on traffic conditions for the getting in/out of the city bit.  Interestingly it doesn't really matter which shape of heavy touring bike I use, though I haven't tried it on the folding BSO (would be interesting) or on the tandem (would be cheating).

Last time I looked, my weight was hovering just below the 80kg mark, so that works out at somewhere around your lovely 6.   :)

Wowbagger

  • Former Sylph
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #8 on: 03 January, 2011, 09:35:01 pm »
Weight and speed are very much influenced by topography. Bet you'd be faster if you did a Fenland ride.

Also - even properly fit riders are slow this time of year. Hell - most will lose 3km/hr just by putting on longs.

That's true, but you wouldn't believe how normally imperceptible gradients slow me down to about 6 mph when I'm in this state.
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

gordon taylor

Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #9 on: 03 January, 2011, 09:37:04 pm »
I started to reply a few hours ago but was distratced by skype and whisky...

I like the idea and will add it to my own spreadsheet.  :thumbsup: However, I'll do speed/weight because the number will go up as I improve, not down.

I've also experimented with speed squared/weight or speed/square root of weight because that gives a number closer to one.

Mind you, I don't record speeds ATM, so I'm stuffed. And half psised.
 :thumbsup:

Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #10 on: 03 January, 2011, 09:43:48 pm »
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. 8)
Quote from: Kim
^ This woman knows what she's talking about.

gordon taylor

Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #11 on: 03 January, 2011, 09:46:32 pm »
That sounds good. Speed/BMI  ?

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #12 on: 03 January, 2011, 09:50:49 pm »
This really needs to be adjusted for terrain though, bikes go so much faster in flat places, like That London.

Wowbagger

  • Former Sylph
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #13 on: 03 January, 2011, 09:54:21 pm »
I suppose the only way you could do that would be either use a garmin to record the height (my ride yesterday involved 1660 feet of limbing, according to the GPS) or plot it on something which will tell you the amount of climbing. I assume Googlemaps would do this, but I've never experimented. it starts to become quite complicated then, though.
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

Wowbagger

  • Former Sylph
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #14 on: 03 January, 2011, 10:02:50 pm »
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. 8)

My BMI / speed = 3.95 for yesterday's ride.

If I lose 11 kg my BMI drops to 32ish and I maintain 13 mph over the same ride, then it's about 2.5.

I think I prefer weight in kg / speed in mph. For BMI you ned to do a calculation to find out what it is. My formula may well favour little people but would BMI make a lot of difference?
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #15 on: 03 January, 2011, 10:03:20 pm »
This really needs to be adjusted for terrain though, bikes go so much faster in flat places, like That London.

They might if it weren't for the number of traffic lights ::-)
Getting there...

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #16 on: 03 January, 2011, 10:04:26 pm »
BMI would equalise it slightly and make it more comparable.  Your height being a constant TAIAP, you still only need one calculation.
Getting there...

Wowbagger

  • Former Sylph
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #17 on: 03 January, 2011, 10:07:11 pm »
TAIAP?
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #18 on: 03 January, 2011, 10:08:59 pm »
To All Intents And Purposes
Getting there...

Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #19 on: 03 January, 2011, 11:03:44 pm »
On Wow's scheme for my most common ride and speed I get about 5.5, but you wouldn't believe how slow it really is!
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #20 on: 03 January, 2011, 11:26:46 pm »
I've not thought of logging my weight on the same database as my rides because weight will fluctuate with hydration and large bowel contents etc. I do log my weight, but not very often, as I know that adding or losing a stone takes at least a month.

I do log climbing on my database, but not windspeed and not temperature - which I have no accurate measure for.
It is simpler than it looks.

Wowbagger

  • Former Sylph
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #21 on: 03 January, 2011, 11:31:49 pm »
I've not thought of logging my weight on the same database as my rides because weight will fluctuate with hydration and large bowel contents etc. I do log my weight, but not very often, as I know that adding or losing a stone takes at least a month.

I do log climbing on my database, but not windspeed and not temperature - which I have no accurate measure for.

I took my weight at the start of the day.

I accept that there are lots of variables, but because it's not possible to be perfectly scientific I assume that over a period other things will even themselves out.
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #22 on: 03 January, 2011, 11:33:07 pm »
I guess so, yes. Also you'll get a feeling for how much the spot weight varies in the short term when you know that your 'underlying' weight hasn't changed.
It is simpler than it looks.

Panoramix

  • .--. .- -. --- .-. .- -- .. -..-
  • Suus cuique crepitus bene olet
    • Some routes
Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #23 on: 03 January, 2011, 11:33:31 pm »
Far more meaningful is power/weight, but you need some expensive magic to be able to work it out properly.

Performance log thread

But on a steep enough uphill, power is roughly proportional to weight (including bike weight though).
Chief cat entertainer.

Re: Weight and speed
« Reply #24 on: 04 January, 2011, 12:03:04 am »
Far more meaningful is power/weight, but you need some expensive magic to be able to work it out properly.

Performance log thread

But on a steep enough uphill, power is roughly proportional to weight (including bike weight though).
But the same laws of physics apply to the downhill part.

On gentle slopes you get back nearly as much time as you lose on the climbs.

On steep slopes you'll be slower. That's for the same reason that the GWR (railway) line from the Midlands to Cheltenham Spa doesn't go over Cleeve Hill.

But the view from the top of the hill is not an option if you choose not to undertake the climb. (Or in my 2010 ride, the cloud base was lower than the hilltop).