burnthesheep

I don't live near mountains, so let's get that out there. There is no climbing, there are hills from 1 minute to 4 minutes to get up.


But I can still make local routes up consisting of about 100 feet per mile without repeats. Doing loops, lollypops, and the like. Routes with decent "flow".


I find the local group rides really don't like routes over about 50 feet per mile. And, 50 feet per mile is usually pushing it already. Once out of town you're looking more at like 30 to 35 feet per mile.


I just find it tougher to find interest when elevation is involved.


-Is it because flatter routes keep people together better ?

-You avoid a lot of gaps and regrouping?

-You can take turns fighting the wind but you can't hide anyone from a hill?

-The group average speed will make the A-group look like a C-group?


I just find hills an integral part of cycling but feel like I'm in the minority in my area for how much elevation in a ride I feel "makes a ride".


I'd really like to see some 3 to 4 minute hills on the rides. Not make it all you do, but toss in a pair. Just something of beauty about having to pace hills with a group. Watching a few people go off the front, watch a few fall back. Everyone battling their way up. In the saddle spinning, seeing some folks out of saddle with bike swaying back and forth.


3 to 4 minute hills are pitiful compared to the 20 minute and longer climbs folks in the mountains do. I don't feel like 3 to 4 minute hills are THAT bad.

indyfabz

It must be the company you keep. I ride with plenty of people who don't prefer flat routes.

DrIsotope

First of all, where I'm from 20 minutes isn't a climb. That's a brief hill. Because I can head east from my door and climb 5,000ft essentially without going downhill. It's uphill without breaks for 20 miles.

That said, my annual average ft/mi? About 35. And I do 400,000ft a year. If you wanna go slug hills, go slug hills. Lots of group rides (at least locally) seem to be a group because they wanna go fast. Climbing isn't fast.

And as you mentioned, group rides have a tough time on hills unless everyone is of the same fitness level-- lots of regrouping even if the "climbs" are a few minutes long. If the routes are in that 30-40ft/mi avg, the 130lb guys and the 200lb guys can ride together.

Small guys can take advantage of the draft from the big guys on the flats-- little guys are zero help to big guys going up hills.

Campag4life

A few reasons really:
a. hills hurt
b. many get nose bleeds at elevation.
c. some are afraid of heights.
d. some don't have enough talent to descent with rim brakes and they haven't made it to the bike shop to buy a bike with 4 piston Brembos.

burnthesheep

That's what I figured I guess.

Also, I never considered slugging hills is probably a lonely affair anyway. No matter how you shake it, even really minor differences in ascent speed means you're not together.

Just gotta be comfortable hitting them up solo.

Sojodave

You can't go 10 miles without a climb in Utah

WhyFi

Cool story.

seypat

I would guess it has to do with speed and the paceline/pack mentality. People like to go fast. That means flat routes. Lots of climbing can be going nowhere slow. Think about the routes you are doing now. Cut the gearing on your bike so that you can only go half the speed you are going now. Would they be just as fun? Now cut that gearing/speed in half again. Are the routes and riding them just as fun? Probably not. Same for a drive. Think about a 2 to 5 hour drive that you like. Is that drive going to be just as enjoyable if you are going half the speed and it takes twice as long.

DrIsotope

Well, that all depends on what you call a "climb." I am a master of hill avoidance. There's nothing really flat in this part of SoCal-- but I can find the sorta flat parts. Flat by SoCal standards. I could find flat Utah.

Dan333SP

Yes, yes, and yes. Groups work on flat ground because drafting allows riders of varying weights/fitness levels to stay together as it's sooo much easier to sit in the back of a group going fast on the flat than it is to climb, because you can't hide and big dudes are going to get dropped no matter how much power they can put out. I agree with you, FWIW. I like riding uphill even though I'm terrible at it. I just make sure I do my hilly rides solo or with someone who is as close to my fitness level as I can find.

Bob Ross

^^^This.

You forgot to add "bro"

tagaproject6

Because the group you ride with are "basic bros".

Spoonrobot 

It'd be nice to have a 20 mile 5000 foot climb around here. Those kind of long mild grades don't seem to exist in this part of the US.

DrIsotope

Now see folks, that is the level of quality BS-talking that keeps me coming back to this place. Chapeau.

ksryder

Group rides in my neck of the woods (that don't have fixed routes) are determined by which direction the wind is blowing. We don't have anything that someone from Cali or Colorado would even consider a climb, just endless rollers, but we have lots and lots of wind, which can cause its own set of problems in a group ride. However, the group ride tends to stick together because no one wants to be alone in the wind.

I was somewhat surprised when a transplant from back east told me that he had never even considered the wind direction as a factor in route choice before moving to Kansas. So I guess in places with hills and trees to block the wind, such as North Carolina, maybe it's not an issue.

So my answer to the OP question is that it depends on where you're riding, and who you're riding with.

Spoonrobot 

I thought it might have been to subtle but I guess not

seypat

+1. Dude needs to do himself a 2 hour slog at 5-10 mph and report back on what a blast he had. Descending back down, that is where the fun is.

Spoonrobot 

Oh I do lots of climbing, but I was serious in that we don't have any climbs that long or high here in my area of the southeast. Longest climbs I've done has been around an hour but they're gravel or dirt. When I was younger I really liked the longer paved climbs but after getting a bit more experience off road, they're just a little boring for me, especially the descents.

WhyFi

I resent resemble that remark.

mstateglfr 

1- suggest routes to your local club. Then listen to feedback and adjust if needed.
2- 50' of climb per mile is about what I average here in Iowa and there is plenty of hill climbing and descending. Some routes are 55, some are 45. Its a pretty good general amount for groups because there are climbs that will still separate everyone, but not frequent enough that the separation is permanent.

Good luck on the 100' routes.

CliffordK

Most of my riding is long commuting, so hills just kind of get in the way. Generally, I neither specifically avoid them, nor go out of my way to find them, unless I am towing cargo, in which case I may choose a flatter route.

However, the local riding group divides so every Tuesday is their "Hill Day". Other days are faster flatter days. But, Tuesdays, expect a fair amount of climbing. Nothing insane, but a good climbing day.

Abe_Froman

Hah, just out of curiosity...I looked up the highest and lowest point in my county. 950' and 580', 40 miles apart. So 370' of climbing over 40 miles, or 9.5'/mile is about the max I could expect around here, short of doing highway overpass repeats

rubiksoval

You gotta up your group ride game. Start riding with a faster group and the route won't matter as much.

rms13

I live up against mountains. I would probably give up road cycling if I lived somewhere flat. Too boring and no work out for me if I'm just spinning along in flats

Abe_Froman

So, the idea of a hill is completely foreign to me. Why does everybody say hills are hard...flats are easy? I mean, you know you can pedal harder on flat ground anytime you want, right?