5 mph

I'm a bit over 50 so I don't think I will grow much taller like my 12 year old daughter. That being said, I don't think I will get any faster. Having been a hard worker as an athlete and never naturally gifted, I've relied on my wits. Bikes that pass me, I study their gears too see what chainring or cog they are on, since I ride fixed. I note the seat position and pedal revolutions, and watch the hands too see if they are putting pressure or pulling on the handlebars.
I've noticed that the really tall 6' 1" plus riders have it made on the flats.Their legs just "shuffle" or "twitch" . I've shrunk to 5'10" so my legs are really "thrashing" or "churning". No way I can ever outrun them on the flats.
Just my 2 cents.

Wildwood 

And they look better shaved.

gregf83 

Shorter riders can get lower so require less power. Cadence has very little to do how much power you can generate and the correlation between height and cadence is very low. Maybe it’s time for some gears?

Carbonfiberboy 

Riding fixed is OK for a short while in winter. I don't know if you're right that you'll never get any faster, though. I used to lead a single-speed group ride when I was about 60. I could pull at 105 cadence and sit in at 135, 76 g.i. You do the math. I am a slowpoke BTW, pretty much untalented but well-trained. That said, my winter of leading SS rides did not improve my athleticism at all. I was no faster when I switched to geared rides. Other than low price, fixed really has no advantage. I was on a brevet once and came upon a fixed rider, walking. He'd blown his hub. Happens.

There is no advantage to height, other than being able to ride a bike with a shorter head tube, but at your height, a shorter head tube won't help. Greg's right. There's a guy I ride with, maybe 5'5", faster than stink on the flat. He's very strong. Strong is what does it. Strong meaning like when the TdF maven says that the strongest ride will win. They don't mean the person who can squat the most.

It's "just" training. Follow a structured plan for a few years, include strength training twice a week, ride group rides with folks faster than you and stay with them, do a lot of centuries, a few double centuries - you'll get faster. If one is in any kind of shape, one can ride a century on any given day, no problem. Right? Another truth: volume = strength.

Schwinneffect

I'm fairly tall, and I think the shorter guys have it made. I'm riding a 63cm frame bike, and it is a bit small. I'd like a 65 or 66cm frame bike, but they don't make them anymore.

Actually there are so many quality vintage bikes out there that it is not an issue. (Unless you are a racer who needs a carbon di2 dura ace rocket)

As far as racers are concerned... Big riders have more frontal area and require more power, but they have big legs. You would think height would be a wash for bike racers, but big guys don't necessarily have a whole lot more cardiac capacity than average sized riders.

For those of us over fifty training and conditioning probably matter more than our size and other traits, and always remember this is supposed to be fun.

big john

What makes a rider fast on the flats is power vs aerodynamic drag.

big john

I have a 62cm Gunnar and they have off the shelf frames up to 68cm. Also KHS makes lower priced bikes in a similar size.

Of course you could always go custom.

Cougrrcj

76gi at a 105 cadence is ~24mph.135 cadence is 30mph. That's spinning (and moving).

My favored gearing on the flats is in the 80-85gi range. my cadence is normally in the 90-100 range. That equates to a 22-25mph riding speed. That's fast enough for this 5'8" short legged(29" inseam) 195-pound old man... on his 24 pound steel bike. I just need to work on my endurance! I don't have to worry about hills around here, so there's that...

Schwinneffect

Thanks big John. Those Gunnar bikes look great. I exaggerated when I wrote that big bikes are not made. Gunnar, Zinn, Khs, Rivendell, and a bunch of others all make big bikes. It is only the very racy carbon bikes that seem to have mostly dropped the 3xl sizes. Canyon still makes some 2xl bikes. What do I care when I ride a forty year old 3 speed?

For the original poster... I feel your pain. I was the teen on my much too small Crest single speed when all the cool kids had ten speeds. It seemed like they had a huge advantage. Well--they did. Gears are a big advantage for training--not just riding.

Here is my version of Hiit on an old 3 speed. Pedal for 5 minutes at 70 rpm in first. Easy and relaxed. Flick to third and hammer it for 45 seconds to 1.5 minutes, or until I just get too winded. Flick to second and back off. Flick to first and go easy pace for 5 minutes. Then back to third and hammer it.

Interval training has made this old guy a lot stronger, but it is harder to do on a single speed. But fixed gear really is cool, so keep the fixed gear and get a second bike at a yard sale for training.

Carbonfiberboy 

I don't think so. My memory is pulling at ~19 and sitting in at 24-25, no big deal. 42X19. Maybe the g.i. I posted was an issue of tire size. I get different results on different calculators for 622 and 23mm, but nothing showing those speeds at those g.i. Those speeds are close to correct though. We went faster when the stronger riders were pulling. I'd blow up if I tried to hold over 105 in the wind.

One of the strongest fixed riders I ever rode with used 90" in the mountains. He set some local fixed records.

Cougrrcj

I used this gear calculator, and a chainring/sprocket combo that got me to around 76gi. Oh, and I was figuring 700x25c tires... https://www.gear-calculator.com/
Your 42/19 combo with 700x23c tires (23-622 ERTO size) is only a 58.9gi, and your speeds jives with that.

A 42/15 gives a 74.6gi with that 23-622 tire

big john

Here is my Gunnar a few years ago when I wanted to ride to the snow. The descent was freezing!

Carbonfiberboy 

Correct. It was 42X17 then, which gives the speeds I remember, ~20 and 25. Sorry for the confusion.

Hermes

Here is an older article 2001 from Australian Track that discusses characteristic requirements of track racing and human morphology. https://hellyervelodrome.com/pdf/character_of_track.pdf

Iride01 

So why not get something more suitable for you to ride? If you feel like you are thrashing then you likely don't have the gear ratios for what terrain you ride and you current level of fitness. How you will get that on a fixie, I don't know. To not feel like you are thrashing when at speed, you'll have to have a higher gear ratio and that might leave you breathless and wore out trying to get to speed.

grizzly907la

It's all in the eye of the beholder. I'm 6'2" and my knees are shot from my time in the military. I have long legs. Arthritis set in years ago. I have to ride a tall bike so my my knees are not so crunched up peddling. I also have a hard time finding bicycles my size. I also bump my head in small spaces. Its not all bad though. I am good for reaching things on tall shelves, at the grocery store and at home. I think it comes down to training than any physical attribute.

5 mph

I had her at 46/16 in the fall, around the beginning of November. I'm sure lots of you can handle this, but a month and half of 46/16 burned me out. I have a 1100 feet of hills on my daily ride.
I started to dislike riding my bike or all bikes in general. I was really burned out. I went from maybe 18 mph to 14 mph.
I set her back to 44/16. I still haven't recovered.
I also bought a geared bike.
Now I've been riding my geared bike every second or third day, taking it easy
After I recover, I really don't know what direction I am going.
Its kind of nice to take in the scenery. At 46/16 I spent a lot of time looking inside my eyeballs or at my handlebars.
I'm probably going to ride more for fun. Somedays you just got to let them pass you.

Carbonfiberboy 

Wow. That is really not good. I've had that happen from serious over-exuberance leading to wonderful results then not so wonderful results. The question to ask yourself is "Did I back it off in time?" In your situation, my response would be to put my geared bike on my rollers and ride 30' every day for a week at ~95 HR or 88 watts, then go out on the fixed bike again and see if you're OK - that seems to be the only metric you have. If not, take a week off, no riding, try again.

You don't mention using any instrumentation to obtain ride data other than a speed/distance computer. You really need to be using a heart rate monitor. Not so much to determine how hard to ride, but rather to see when things aren't going well. The reason your average speed dropped is because your HR also dropped. Your HR is driven by your hormones. When your hormones drop off from overuse, your HR drops off with them, and boom, you're slow. With an HRM you see that in real time and get the clue to back if off before too much damage is done. An HRM will also tell you when you're dehydrated and when you need to eat. It can also help you to go both hard enough and easy enough to get results.

With an HRM you'd now go out and try a hill on any bike, see if you HR came up normally, no need to even look at speed. Not having that data, you're kind of lost without the information you need to find your way back.

Many riders on this forum deride HRMs, saying they give faulty data, useless, etc. Nothing can be further from the truth. A HRM will give you more data than a power meter, that's the problem. All the top riders trained with HR for decades and it worked fine. If one is competitive, sure power might work a few percent better and that's huge. Or it might not. Using HR, I've outridden riders using power just because they weren't aware of what was happening to their bodies until it was too late. What I'm saying here. Speed is an analogue of power. HR is an analogue of damage.

Moisture

OP, I think the sensation you are experiencing when you pedal has something to do with the cranks. Bouncy, uneven poker delivery...

First off, are your crank arms the right size for your legs? Second, try some clip or strap in pedals. They helped me minimize wasted power and help with a smoother cadence tremendously. Trying to ride without my feet strapped in really is like a night and day difference.

If you can't or don't wish to go that route, try installing a biopace chainring onto your bike. Also very helpful with increasing your efficiency.

Lastly, at your age, considering you're already an athletic guy, it's never too late to try some new forms of physical excersise, change your diet around and continue to improve as you age. Try some resistsnce workouts, try eating slower, watch what you eat, you'll feelnyourseld change very quickly.

5 mph

Thanks Carbonfiberboy and Moisture. I try to support the forum by posting Topics where everyone can communicate, contribute and learn and add to their enjoyment of biking. In this case I learned a lot.

chaadster

Carbonfiberboy it’d be pretty darn silly to try to train with power and without an HR. I’m not aware of any power-inclusive regimen built that way, nor of anyone who rides that way. Not that you’re wrong, but I do think you create a false dichotomy.

OSTB

I'm 5'10" with a 29" inseam...I envy you long-leggers!

Carbonfiberboy 

Well, yes, that's what I think. However so far I haven't seen a power-based training plan which made any mention of HR. I do know riders who ride with power and no HRM. I have communicated with riders on BF who have assured me that they don't use a HRM and that use of one is a mistake. I don't think it's a "false dichotomy," it's a real one, but one which I have disparaged. More knowledge is better than less. That said, one must be judicious when applying any training metric in real time, including HR.

Both metrics can be confusing until one has quite a bit of personal experience with them, though IMO the HRM takes more experience to interpret than does power. IMO, this latter is the reason for the quick adoption of power among cyclists. However the very complexity of HR is also its strength, as it reflects the complexity of human physiology.

chaadster

The seminal and most important book on power training, Training and Racing with a Power Meter by Allen and Coggan not only mentions HR, but acknowledges the benefit of HR awareness and includes it in their tables for setting zones, so I don’t know on what authority or expertise those who claim use of HR with power is a mistake, but it’s certainly a part of all major power training platforms I’ve seen, including Training Peaks, Carmichael, Friel, Wattbike, Strava to Zwift. I’m not familiar with any power based training program which does not use HR.

I disagree with your assesment of the reason for the dominance of power based training. It’s simply more time-efficient and effectivet HR. All top cyclists in every discipline, from road to track and even BMX, use power meters, and unless it’s your assertion that top level, professional racer coaching, from Tour de France teams to the Olympics, “lacks the experience” to understand HR training, your comment is obviously absurd.

downtube42

Tall, short-legged riders, on the other hand, have to kludge things together.

While I'm at it, why the $&^@ do clothing makers assume that if your torso is long, it's also huuuuuuuge around?