Minimum Speed Climbing

[Always-Learnin]

Climbing balance at slow speeds is affected by two things, and one of those two things affects the other.

1. Skillset: aka your proficiency at balancing at slow speeds, this is different for everyone, and not everyone has equal potential.
2. Fatigue: the more tired you are, the less of your potential skillset you can draw from.

Practice will help with #1, endurance training and planning for those effort ahead will help with #2

It should also be noted because of #2 slow speed balancing on the flat is not reflective of balancing on a steep climb

yesterday I spent 90 mins of a 2 hour climb under at 3-4 mph and a cadence of in the 40's. I'm out of shape which is making it harder than it use to be but that is my balance speed limit. It's only 8% average grade but it's 9 miles long so you plan to start slow and finish, or you don't finish.

Anyone who can ride a V20 or C40 with no hands like @Jim Parker can may be able to go even slower.


View attachment 19259


Here's a link to the end of that same climb but years ago when I was in shape. The video doesn't show power data but I'm holding around 400 watts to maintain that 5 mph in the video. You can see my balance degrade as my HR rises and you can hear the tire break loose over some of the cracks in the road.

Welcome back! Long time no see.

 

[RojoRacing]

My low gear is 36-36 and my high gear is 52-11. My setup is all first gen wireless sram with 170mm cranks. I know I can gear lower, but I don't want to sacrifice tight gear steps or top end speed.

 

[TKimbirk]

Climbing hills, how low a speed can you go before the V20 or S40 become hard to balance and start wobbling? At what speed do you have to put your foot down?

I rode for the 1st time today. Noticed when I slow down the bike dives to the right. Any suggestions?

 

[jrs665]

I rode for the 1st time today. Noticed when I slow down the bike dives to the right. Any suggestions?

You are either pedaling and need to counter your left foot more with your handebars or are turning right too slow, causing the front end to flop into the corner.

 

[Greg S]

To add a bit of data to this thread.

I live in an area that's very hilly (the Driftless area of SW Wisconsin). Nearly every ride of any distance at all will feature numerous 8-12% grades and it's easy to find hills of 20% or more. This isn't the Rockies so climbs aren't particularly long (1/4 of a mile to 1 mile) but there are a lot of them.

A question I've been pondering lately is whether there's a point where easier gearing isn't helpful i.e., where at a sustainable cadence you're going too slowly to maintain control. So in an attempt to answer that question I did a bit of analysis. Although I can certainly spin faster, I used a cadence of 70 RPM since I'm certain I can maintain that with "suitable" gearing. I also figured that the slowest speed where I can maintain reasonable control is about 4.5 MPH. I hope to improve this over time but that's where things currently stand.

FWIW, my weight is 192 lbs (yes, I could stand to lose some weight!) and I assumed a total bike weight of 30 lbs.

Here are the results:

- 42x52 gearing at a cadence of 70 RPM yields a speed of 4.5 MPH (simple math, no weight factored in)
- Climbing a 1/4 mile hill at a constant 7% grade at a constant 166 watts results in a speed of 4.5 MPH.
- To maintain that speed (4.5 MPH) if the grade were 10.2% would require 224 watts
- A 12% grade would require 257 watts.

So as always, it comes down to weight vs watts. Less weight means fewer watts required.

And, for me at least, the component with the biggest opportunity for weight savings is the one pushing the pedals ;-)

 

[jrs665]

To add a bit of data to this thread.

I live in an area that's very hilly (the Driftless area of SW Wisconsin). Nearly every ride of any distance at all will feature numerous 8-12% grades and it's easy to find hills of 20% or more. This isn't the Rockies so climbs aren't particularly long (1/4 of a mile to 1 mile) but there are a lot of them.

A question I've been pondering lately is whether there's a point where easier gearing isn't helpful i.e., where at a sustainable cadence you're going too slowly to maintain control. So in an attempt to answer that question I did a bit of analysis. Although I can certainly spin faster, I used a cadence of 70 RPM since I'm certain I can maintain that with "suitable" gearing. I also figured that the slowest speed where I can maintain reasonable control is about 4.5 MPH. I hope to improve this over time but that's where things currently stand.

FWIW, my weight is 192 lbs (yes, I could stand to lose some weight!) and I assumed a total bike weight of 30 lbs.

Here are the results:

- 42x52 gearing at a cadence of 70 RPM yields a speed of 4.5 MPH (simple math, no weight factored in)
- Climbing a 1/4 mile hill at a constant 7% grade at a constant 166 watts results in a speed of 4.5 MPH.
- To maintain that speed (4.5 MPH) if the grade were 10.2% would require 224 watts
- A 12% grade would require 257 watts.

So as always, it comes down to weight vs watts. Less weight means fewer watts required.

And, for me at least, the component with the biggest opportunity for weight savings is the one pushing the pedals ;-)

I generally take it easy and ride with a cadence of 70.
But when I need to put out alot of watts such as to climb a step hill or go fast, it is much easier riding at a cadence of 90-95, 70 requires alot more effort from your legs.

I have heard that people can climb at 3mph with practice.

If you want low gears but still be able to go fast , a shlump drive instead of chainrings is an option with 250% range

 

[RojoRacing]

To add a bit of data to this thread.

I live in an area that's very hilly (the Driftless area of SW Wisconsin). Nearly every ride of any distance at all will feature numerous 8-12% grades and it's easy to find hills of 20% or more. This isn't the Rockies so climbs aren't particularly long (1/4 of a mile to 1 mile) but there are a lot of them.

A question I've been pondering lately is whether there's a point where easier gearing isn't helpful i.e., where at a sustainable cadence you're going too slowly to maintain control. So in an attempt to answer that question I did a bit of analysis. Although I can certainly spin faster, I used a cadence of 70 RPM since I'm certain I can maintain that with "suitable" gearing. I also figured that the slowest speed where I can maintain reasonable control is about 4.5 MPH. I hope to improve this over time but that's where things currently stand.

FWIW, my weight is 192 lbs (yes, I could stand to lose some weight!) and I assumed a total bike weight of 30 lbs.

Here are the results:

- 42x52 gearing at a cadence of 70 RPM yields a speed of 4.5 MPH (simple math, no weight factored in)
- Climbing a 1/4 mile hill at a constant 7% grade at a constant 166 watts results in a speed of 4.5 MPH.
- To maintain that speed (4.5 MPH) if the grade were 10.2% would require 224 watts
- A 12% grade would require 257 watts.

So as always, it comes down to weight vs watts. Less weight means fewer watts required.

And, for me at least, the component with the biggest opportunity for weight savings is the one pushing the pedals ;-)

math checks out compared to my real world daily riding. That's the reason only 1% of the riders in my area that ride up to Mt.Baldy village, continue up the next 5 mile section to the bottom of the sky lifts. It's average for the 5 mailes is 10% and very few riders can maintain over 200w to make that climb after already climbing to the village.

 

[jrs665]

math checks out compared to my real world daily riding. That's the reason only 1% of the riders in my area that ride up to Mt.Baldy village, continue up the next 5 mile section to the bottom of the sky lifts. It's average for the 5 mailes is 10% and very few riders can maintain over 200w to make that climb after already climbing to the village.

Have climbed upto 15% on he S40 for short climbs. But not an issue on one of my recumebent trikes as don't have to worry about balance. On a trike will climb a 12 % at maybe 130 Watts, taking it easy, but at the moment will need to do double that on the S40 for balance.

I am hoping that with experience, will be able to travel slower up hills on the S40 needed less power.

 

[Greg S]

I've climbed 19% on an S40 and this after a fairly long climb in the 7-10% range but it definitely requires more power to maintain reasonable control. I'll confess that at this point I doubt I could do that climb again but hope to be able to in the future.

 

[jrs665]

I've climbed 19% on an S40 and this after a fairly long climb in the 7-10% range but it definitely requires more power to maintain reasonable control. I'll confess that at this point I doubt I could do that climb again but hope to be able to in the future.

What speed did you climb at?

 

[Greg S]

What speed did you climb at?

Average speed for the whole climb which includes a runout at 2-3% after the steeper bit was 10.1 MPH, the steeper part (which includes the 19%) was 7 MPH and the 19% was 5 MPH.

 

[jrs665]

Average speed for the whole climb which includes a runout at 2-3% after the steeper bit was 10.1 MPH, the steeper part (which includes the 19%) was 7 MPH and the 19% was 5 MPH.

This is alot more power than most people can put out. I posted a video of me doing 5-6mph up a 12 % on an sS40, but there is no way I could do that speed up a 19%

 

[Greg S]

This is alot more power than most people can put out. I posted a video of me doing 5-6mph up a 12 % on an sS40, but there is no way I could do that speed up a 19%

Right now, it's a lot more power than I can put out

This was from 2017.