Author Topic: 84 vs 90  (Read 1662 times)

fboab

  • It's a fecking serious business, riding a bike
84 vs 90
« on: January 23, 2019, 11:46:13 am »
Generally, and specifically.

2011 (solo): 83:39
2015 (Tandem + chest infection): 84:45
2019 will be tandem, too

The way I see it
90hr
More fun (?)
Ahead of the Bulge
Extra night of riding
Less pressure

84hr
I'm a morning person
One fewer night
Less sleep deprivation
More solos to overtake

Thoughts?
TSS is not Total Sex Score, Chris!

Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #1 on: January 23, 2019, 11:54:42 am »
Looking at the finish times seems like 84 hours will put you under pressure unless you were very relaxed as you had 6 hours in hand on a 90 hour time limit.

I went for 90 as I wanted to be back earlier and because this is allegedly the more authentic pbp experience. But riding the 84 hour plan as basically four 300km days with m8nimal night riding appeals
   Eddington  81 miles  112 kms

fboab

  • It's a fecking serious business, riding a bike
Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #2 on: January 23, 2019, 01:14:45 pm »
I had 2 nights (? 5 hours- ish) sleep both times. It wouldn't be a huge amount of pressure- just take away a cushion.
TSS is not Total Sex Score, Chris!

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #3 on: January 23, 2019, 01:18:59 pm »
Thoughts?
Do you have a morning pilot?
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

fboab

  • It's a fecking serious business, riding a bike
Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #4 on: January 23, 2019, 02:08:18 pm »
More of a Gremlin, strange things happen after midnight.
TSS is not Total Sex Score, Chris!

Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2019, 02:57:52 pm »
From the 84-hour group in 2015, the main downside was a shit night's sleep the night before (but I'm not a morning person).

I was lucky with the logistics for the start, as I was in a campervan a 5-minute walk from the velodrome. If you're close to the start, then it'll be pretty easy, but less fun if you have to schlep 10 kms first thing.

A few other riders complained about controls not having food - me and Dave never had this, but we did catch up with the bulge by Loudeac westbound, and tended to eat away from the controls anyway.

Catching up the rest of the field is very good.

There'll be less night riding. but probably also less on the route, if you are taking the full allowance (or close to it).

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2019, 03:46:53 pm »
If you are a slow starter, the 84hr intermediate time limits are remarkably tight until just a few controls from the finish, at which point bags of time are gained each stage. The 'race out, tour back' advice kicks in much harder on the 84hr start than the 90hr IMHO.

EDIT: The minimum average speed required for the first 600km of a 84hr PBP is 16km/h (or thereabouts) and 12.7km/h for 600-1000km then 13.3km/h till the end, as per https://rusa.org/octime_rm.html
The minimum average for the 90hr starters is 15km/h for 600km, 11.5km/h-ish for 600-1000km, then 13.3km/h.
Remember that many slower folk want to sleep once in the first 600km of PBP but twice in the next 400km.

For me
1999, 2003 - 90hr solo, great fun, no time pressures at all, sub-70 and low-80 hour finishes.
2007, 2011 - 84hr solo, tighter on time than I'd hoped till well past Brest, sub-80 hour finishes.
2015 - 90hr tandem, great fun, no time pressures at all. Blast through the first night on adrenalin (and lots of sleep beforehand) and plenty of sleep every night after that, sub-90 hour finish.
2019 - same as 2015.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2019, 01:12:57 am »
I think the 84 hour start would put you under too much time pressure, particularly on the way to Brest as control closing times are tighter than for the 90 hour. A strong westerly wind or a time consuming mechanical and you could be in trouble.
I had the same dilemma last time except it wasn’t so risky for me as I’d never taken longer than 70 hours to get round previously, so I opted for the same 0530 start as Deano and fortunately “slept” in the same motorhome before the start. I was carrying my own food for the whole ride so didn’t have to queue at controls, otherwise going through the bulge would have been horrendous. I had planned on an early 90 hour start this time, but was a bit slow pre-registering and they had all gone so I signed up for the same start as last time.
A 90 hour special start would put you slightly ahead of where I wanted to be, and more importantly ahead of the bulge. Hopefully you’d stay ahead of it too!


Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2019, 08:49:46 am »
I did an 84 in 2011.
The control times were very tight
Especially after a fierce storm forced me to make an early sleep stop.
I'd say that it's really for the experienced soloist that can find food outside controls, you really do miss a proper sleep at the beginning.. and a lot of the fun and help from spectators and the pop-up food stalls during the last days
I'd thought the 84 was harder than the 80 in 2015.


Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2019, 10:13:12 am »
I've done all three starts and prefer the 84hour one.

But then I'm quite a fast rider and under no time pressure. Advantages for me are the more relaxed start (I'm a morning person anyway) and the fact that I can meet up with everyone on the 90 hour start as I ride through the bulge. If you're close on time it's probably better to do the 90 hour: you may not need the extra six hours but it's nice to know it's there.

fboab

  • It's a fecking serious business, riding a bike
Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2019, 10:41:14 am »
If we'd had to be back in less than 84 hours in 2015 we would have been. I let the pumpkin sleep at Dreux for an hour, maybe two.
I'm much less worried about the timings than the experience. And I'm conscious that in 4 years time we'll be 4 years older, and we're both over 50 already ...

[I just looked up strava- we checked in at Brest @ 39hr 14m following 6 hours off the bike just the other side of the river]
TSS is not Total Sex Score, Chris!

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2019, 10:45:27 am »
My 84hr starts seemed like almost entirely separate, much smaller events than my 90hr starts. To me, they didn't feel like proper PBPs most of the time but some folk prefer that lower-key style. Blasting the first couple of days of an 84hr start would get you deep into or through the 90hr starters fairly quickly, so would be quite a different experience to my basically even-paced rides where catching folk was comparatively rare until the last day.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Jem

  • ACME HR and Diversity officer
Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2019, 11:09:38 am »
Tried both the 84hr and the 90hr start. Preferred 84 as for me, personally, the low key, early morning start made it feel like I was just going on as usual on a ride.

This year I'm thinking of going back to the 90hr start however to enjoy the full experience again.
On the other hand, I'm torn between the low key, no queues, beds available experience of the 84hr start and the more relaxed and contained pace of experienced PBP riders who have a calming effect.

Jury is still out but as I am probably going to be riding with a first time offender (until the first bus shelter which he will no doubt, commandeer while I go on) , it may be the 90hr.

Decision, decisions.....

For the record:

2007 the Wet One - (90hour start)
Solo bike - 85h30
(Novice and got sleeping wrong - not enough)

2015
Tandem trike - 83h19 (84hr start)
4 hrs sleep every night

Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2019, 11:35:10 am »
The 90 hour start has changed its character over the years. When I first rode it was a free for all queue for the start times.

So there was a ritual, starting with the queue for the pre-start meal at 'Les Quadrants', a second queue for the start, which raised anticipation levels, and finally a headlong rush in the dark, with tail lights stretching into the distance.

2011 saw an earlier start, on Sunday, with the same procedure, which meant standing around in sweltering heat.

2015 had the lettered start which LEL had introduced to the GR world. So the queueing was for the meal, which ran out, as the Velodrome had catered for convention attendees, with elaborate finger-food.

The 90 hour start could be fun if you got behind the motorbikes, but that is something that only about the first 50 riders could appreciate. The earlier start time spoils the tail-light display, which was at its best through the Beauce.

It's unclear what the arrangements will be at the National Sheepfold. I'd guess that the 84 hour start will be largely unaffected, while the character of the first 150km of the 90 hours will be different, but we can't know how.

That first 150 km of the 90 hour sticks in the mind more than any other part of the ride, but it's been different in the last three editions.

Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #14 on: January 27, 2019, 04:55:25 pm »
I slept four times during the ride in 2015.  Night riding is not necessarily to be avoided.  I found the peak temps during the day early on a bit hot for me.  So an afternoon snooze and riding overnight worked well.

frankly frankie

  • I kid you not
    • Fuchsiaphile
Re: 84 vs 90
« Reply #15 on: January 27, 2019, 05:58:32 pm »
The 90 hour start has changed its character over the years. When I first rode it was a free for all queue for the start times.

When I first rode the 90h was a 4am start.  With 84h at 10am (very nice) and 78h at 4pm.  90h moved to the evening in 1991.  The 10am start made it pretty easy to get to the turn - or even back to Carhaix returning - before sleeping.
"This is a complex subject, with a need for more than one highlighter pen."