Re: RIDE WITH GPS elevation calculations
07-02-19, 12:44 PM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,270
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4254 Post(s)
Liked 1,353 Times
in
939 Posts
One of the problems in all this is that elevation gain is not clearly defined in the first place. If you're riding along, the road rises six inches and drops back down, should that add 0.5' to your total elevation gain? Logically, it should, but on the other hand, climbing that 0.5' hill is zero effort expended over riding flat, so it's not really a measure of difficulty, which is what we generally want out of those numbers. Around here, a ride with 5,000' of climbing means it has a hundred 50' hills, which does introduce some difficulty, but is not exactly the same as climbing one 5,000' climb in the middle of the ride, either. Or, if I include all the little bumps in the chip seal, my normal rides all have about 20,000' of climbing.
07-02-19, 01:36 PM
#27
Senior Member
I often get higher elevation gain in rwgps then any other method, and never lower. I've just gotten into my head what rwgps numbers feel like when I ride them.
Recently I did an out and back and the last few miles were showing the right zigzag pattern but all at 150 ft elevation higher than the matching part in the beginning. Obviously can't be.
Recently I did an out and back and the last few miles were showing the right zigzag pattern but all at 150 ft elevation higher than the matching part in the beginning. Obviously can't be.
