gauvins

Two specific questions : (1) how do you determine the distance + elevation that is a reasonable goal for a day. (2) If there is a significant climb (500 meters +), you'd rather plan to spend the night just before or right after the monster?

I am asking because I've ditched an otherwise promising route going through a mountain range, because 14 500 meters elevation gain over 775 kms felt a bit much for a 2-week long tour. The last straw was a 1 000 meters gain over 10 kms (10% average over 10k...). Too bad because the area seemed nice.

---

My planning process is to use Strava (very fast and simple) to get a general idea. Then bRouter to get a more detailed routing. I form a final idea on the feasibility of a segment with Locus, which provides duration estimates using distance and elevation gains/losses.

Estimating the impact of gradients is not easy because the route often goes thru bridges and tunnels such that point-to-point elevation data obtained from GPS is often useless.

---

This is in the context of bike TOURING (emphasis on touring).

I understand that the ultimate decision wrt to a course is a very personal one. But if you have a method you'd like to share, please do.

tspoon

I don't always check ahead, although I may in future. In my home country I'll have a fair idea what's ahead, it's never as bad if you know what's coming up. I usually think of 1500-2000m total elevation gain (i.e. all climbing, not the start - end difference) as a reasonable amount of climbing, if it was more I would just dial back the distance I had planned to cover.
I would say that you may probably surprise yourself and 1-2000m a day would be achievable, although clearly it's down to your own preference and circumstances. As I said, knowing and being prepared can be worth a lot in those situations.

edit - It's also highly dependent on the traveling route, i.e. on single track 40km can be a big day, on tarmac a similar day might see you travel 100km.

BigAura

I use 50 miles/day, including days off, as my average measure for an entire tour. So if I have 28 days of touring that's 1400 miles. If I have 3500 mile route that's 70 days. The route can be anything because I know I can cover that distance no matter what. I'll vary my effort on different days based on conditions (weather, grade, surface, mood). I do a lot of wild-camping so planning doesn't need to be as precise. I'll look ahead on a daily basis if there's a specific place I need to be in the coming days.

Carbonfiberboy 

50'/mile is a good standard. More than that is a lot of work. We have trouble climbing anything over 15% on our tandem and try to avoid climbs of over 7%. We use RideWithGPS for our routing.

gauvins

Looks sensible. I have a 160kms ride on record, with 2 000 elevation gains, done a couple of times.

My question is going after something a bit different -- the distribution of elevation gains. I've never really calculated the maximum gradient I am happy to deal with, but I'd say that 5% is the most I'd sustain "indefinitely" and I wouldn't ride at 7.5% for more than a few hundred meters.

Tourist in MSN

I think I averaged about 2,400 feet of elevation gain per day when I did the Pacific Coast. Google conversion says that is roughly 730 meters per day. I was 60 at that time. If your route of 14,500 meters over two weeks is over a full 14 days of travel, that would be a bit over 1000 meters per day average, that would be roughly 40 percent more elevation gain per day than I did on that trip. I can understand your concern. Could I do that? Probably, but would I enjoy it? Probably not as much as I would if I climbed less per day.

boomhauer

This..
If you can't make the climb be prepared to camp half way up.
No pressure this way to make it all in one shot.

Camping at the top is the way to go usually. It's just hard to keep my two large beers cold for that long.

IK_biker

Overall, up to 90 feet gain per mile (17 m/km) is very reasonable for me.
Anything above that promises lots of challenges, and I might go for it if alone (no partners to complain and drag me down), or might not, depending on expected weather and on how I feel at the moment.

A camp after a climb is preferred for 2 reasons:
1. My muscle tone is much better in the second half of the day than in early morning, so I'd rather tackle the climb before stopping for the day.
2. A low camp in this sort of terrain is usually a colder camp, and likely - a more humid one (less breeze).
The possible drawback of a high camp is that it may be a dry one (no nearby water source), in which case the camp water has to be hauled up...

Machka 

I use this for my long distance rides ...

(Elevation in metres/Distance in metres) * 100



If the total is 0.5 or less ... it's a flat ride.

If the total is 0.75 or less ... the ride has some hills but nothing unmanageable.

If the total is 1 or less ... still doable.

If the total is 1 - 1.25 ... I'll do it, but I'm not sure I'd want the ride length to be anything over 100 km.

If the total is 1.25 - 1.5 ... I might give it a go if the ride is quite short, like, say 50 km.

If the total is over 1.5 ... I probably wouldn't be considering it unless it is a hill climbing event and I had been training for that.


Factor in touring with a load, and I'd probably shift those numbers over so that I'd be reluctant to tour on anything over a 1.


As for percentages ... under 10%, it's OK (maybe under 8% with a loaded touring bike). Between 10 and 15%, I might do the occasional short climb in that range. Over 15% and I probably won't do it (maybe walking) because my joints just don't stand up to that kind of pressure.

andrewclaus

You need to know your body's performance during climbs with your touring load to make climbing decisions.

A well-conditioned, experience athlete with a minimal load will have a different answer than most of us.

Every kg carried makes a difference on those grades. (I even dump my water bottles if I'm in wet country.)

One of my tours started with five mountain passes (North Cascades, WA state), 1000 to 2000+/- m each, every day. I trained for two months for that so it would be fun.

I don't like starting a day with a descent, way too cold. Sometimes weather is a concern at elevation. On the above ride, in early June, it was snowing at the summit of three of the passes, so I got as low as I could to camp in warmer temps. Generally I like to make a start on the climb, but camp well below tree line. Sometimes there's an inversion and the lowest terrain will be colder, often with dew or fog.

indyfabz

The tour I have planned for MT and ID is 12 days. 664 miles. 40,119' of climbing. That comes out to 60'/mile and about 3,345'/day. Making me a bit nervous. One day (Libby, MT to Rexford, MT) I did when I did the Northern Tier. I remember being wiped at the end of the day. RWGPS shows 61.7 miles with 4,752' of climbing. After mile 15 it's pretty much up or down, with a few breaks in between.


https://ridewithgps.com/routes/17946093

Ty0604

The night before I usually pull out my maps and pick 3 towns along the way for the next days ride, points A, B, and C.

Point 'A' is the closest and least I'd like to make it to. I'll stop here and reevaluate for the day. If I'm tired etc I'll stop. If not I'll continue on. Point 'B' is where I plan to make it to. If I reach this point and I can make it to Point 'C' easily I'll continue on. Point 'C' being the furthest I'd like to ride.

Taking into account roads, elevation +/-, weather etc when picking the 3 towns.

Doesn't always work out as stuff comes up but it's how I prefer to do it.

Walter S

+1. Always on my mind in hilly country.

gauvins

Interesting approach - camping?

Ty0604

Yes, we camp. Usually behind churches and fire stations. Sometimes campgrounds but only if they have designated hiker/bike sights or they don't charge as much as a car camper. Nothing like being told that it's the same price as a solo bicyclist than as the 6 people with 2 cars camping next to you. No thanks.

cyccommute 

I'm not sure how other people would do it but, for me, it is what it is. If there is a giant hump in the middle of a day, I deal with it by just riding. Most of my tours are in locations and over terrain that I've never been to so it's difficult to set a day that starts or ends on a long climb. It just happens. Some days you even end up with multiple massive climbs in a day or you spend the whole day doing stupid little climbs that add up. Trying to plan to avoid them is pretty much a fools errand.

Rather than ditching a route because it's hilly, get gears that can handle the hills. Your route has a bit of climbing over a fairly short distance but it's not that much more then you'd expect crossing the Appalachias which are short and steep with lots of ups and downs. The Rockies, by comparison, tend to have long ups and long downs.

BigAura

+1. Low-gears up a hill and take your time. The other side is always downhill and you can to coast.

Happy Feet

Like some others I also use about 50 miles (or in metric terms about 100k) to roughly plan routes. From there I look at google maps a lot to find natural stop points more or less in that range which adjusts the distance up or down.

For example a natural run through the mountains is Calgary, Banff, Golden, Revelstoke, Salmon Arm, Kamloops, Merritt, Hope (east to west). This allows for a stop near a bigger town for either morning or evening supply runs and limits passes to one per day.

For the Sunshine Coast it's Gibsons, Earls Cove, Powell River, Nanaimo, Victoria. This takes into account campsites and ferry schedules.

Hills are hills - whaddayagonnado? I can say I feel more bagged after a day of up and down rollers than doing larger passes. The latter almost always having a corresponding downhill rest. There is also something satisfying about tackling a big pass more so than drudging up and down smaller nondescript hills.

saddlesores

so many variables, and everyone will be different.

how mature are you, how heavy, what would you say your
general physical condition to be?

how much weight are you carrying on the bike?

what are you two lowest gear-inch combinations?

don't fear the numbers. a 5% grade is really insignificant.
if you have the proper gearing, you should be able to sustain
8-10% indefinitely. just take is slow, take breaks, rest,
eat and drink.

using 17-18 gear inches, i've been riding 8-10% that seem
endless. 32-40 km long hils. 10% over 30km would be
3000 meters. ( holy carp! i never did the math!)
can cover that in 5-6 hours (including breaks) at
roughly 5-6 km/h.

low gears let me climb the hills at 60-70 cadence without
getting winded. hard part is NOT sprinting that last
couple hundred meters to the next false summit.

the bigger numbers are more trouble. can only
make a few hundred meters of 14%, maybe 100
meters of 18% if early in the day.

jamawani 

Rules of Thumb -
When playing the piano, it is O.K. from time to time to use your thumb on a black note.

Happy Feet

Awesome.

DropBarFan

I just guesstimate at distance vs terrain, if it's all mountains then go 25-40% of flat terrain distance. 2 week mountain tour would be nice since one could start off with a few shorter distance days until the training kicks in.

gauvins

Thanks everyone for your input. Will read again -- there are a couple of interesting nuggets.

FWIW -- I've looked at the power output of a professional cyclist. I came across this entry that pegs the figure at 247W. I would assume that this rider is much more fit than I am, and didn't ride merely for the joy of riding. I would therefore expect my personal average to be a bit above 100W. Now, on a 10% grade, 100W translates into a speed of 2 miles per hour (3kmh). I'd have to raise my effort to 150W, in the lowest gear (22x32), at 60rpm, to be able to climb a 10% grade. At 100W, I can climb a 5% grade in the lowest gear. These maths ring true to me, based on my limited experience -- for me, anything above 5% is a challenge. Anything above 10% cannot be sustained for more than a few meters.

FBinNY 

I still plan routes the same way as I did fifty years ago, using gas station maps (my favorite was Esso, produced by McMillan?). The legend gave me a decent sense of what the road would be like, and things like rivers, and how twisty roads were some sense of the topography.

As to mileage, I tried to base plans on 7 hours riding time, which was about 100 miles, but that was VERY flexible.

I also preferred to end, rather than start with a climb, but that's not always a choice.

In any case, I never planned more than a day or two ahead, except in a very general sense, and would make changes on a whim.

cyccommute 

I'd say that a 22/32 is a bit high for loaded touring. You could go lower, especially now. I use a 20/34 or 20/36 but that's difficult to engineer unless you find the right crankset. My old Raceface Turbine has is a 58mm inner BCD so I can run a much smaller inner ring. I've done several sustained 25% grades with it. It's not fast but it's not impossible either.