road cycling

[lightning]

I just started biking (about 100 miles a week)

 

A few questions:

 

Is there a comperable website (to this one) for cycling (advive for sale ...etc)

 

Do you find this combined with weights and real climbing is good training for some bigger (14k) peaks this summer?

 

Do you wanna ride?

[genepires]

not really to answer your question but here is something I have been thinking about. It seems like there are less climbers out there. At least, the rapid influx of climbers has slowed down. Maybe I am right, maybe wrong.

 

But I suspect that climbers have turned to road and mtn biking. Maybe because it requires less time and expenses. Maybe the risk is too much. (which would be strange because I think road biking is more dangerous)

 

wadda think?

 

 

[Sherri]

I can bike any time from my front door. I have to drive somewhere to climb. This results in doing more biking than climbing, but I still like climbing better.

 

I'm sure there are tons of forums out there for the spandex-clad. Here's one I've found myself using from time to time: bikeforums.net

[Dane]

I used to live in an area where I could rock climb within minutes of my door. Issaquah...not so much. I ended up on a road bike for the same reason...right out my front door.

 

If you train hard/right on a bike it will increase your endurance for everything from running to climbing. Little weak on the upper body though.

 

Not just bike specific but these two are good.

 

www.beginnertriathlete.com

 

www.slowtwitch.com

 

Climbers generally like to climb even on a bike. Ellensburg has the longest steep climb in the state just north of town once the snow is gone.

 

http://bicycleclimbs.com/climbdetail.aspx?ClimbId=234

(many west side climbs listed here as well)

 

http://www.cascade.org/Community/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=5&threadid=6040

 

Have fun!

[sk]

i have been trying to pick up road biking but it requires me to buy new expensive gear taht i know nothing about. waht i loved about climbing is that i could drop 20 to 300% at a time spread out over time. road biking is expensive all at one time... I will bike... eventualy.

[Couloir]

Hey Lightning...looks like you live (or sometimes live) in Vancouver?

 

If you cross the river there are some great hill climbs in the west hills. Here are the elevation profiles in and around Portland:

 

http://www.lclark.edu/~kolitch/cycling.html

 

And here is a great ride that does all of the most extreme hills in Portland...in one ride:

 

http://skylinevelo.com/deronde-van-oeste-portlandia/

 

Here's a great video that highlights last years ride.

 

cbvQqssD_jI

 

 

[lightning]

those guys are Nuckin Futz!

 

what crazy bastards...I am going to try and watch this ride the next time it happens.

[Lisa_D]

While mountains remain my first love, biking is cheaper, less weather-dependent, and doesn't require a partner. Mtn biking and road biking are both awesome, and possible almost year-round in the NW. And, when it's really raining, there is always spin class. I have wondered, though, if running is better training for climbing.. it seems like a more compatible type of fitness.

[Sherri]

Trailrunning on climbing trips--it's a win win. :tup:

[lightning]

i read once that running and cycling are almost identical for training

 

biking longer distances in the same amount of time as running just feels better.

[Dane]

i read once that running and cycling are almost identical for training

 

It's not. Your max heart rate will be higher running. Running will be harder on your body physically and you'll have a longer recovery time.

 

Not a big deal to spend 8 hrs on a bike working hard. Try that running. The recovery times are not easy to compare.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

Biking is better aerobic training for alpine climbing, IMO.

 

YMMV (pun intended)

 

[sprocket]

i read once that running and cycling are almost identical for training

 

It's not. Your max heart rate will be higher running. Running will be harder on your body physically and you'll have a longer recovery time.

 

Not a big deal to spend 8 hrs on a bike working hard. Try that running. The recovery times are not easy to compare.

 

Your max heart rate is the same no matter what exercise you do. How close you get to it might be different with different activities. You can get your heart as high riding a bike as you can running, you just need to pedal harder. Find a hill, do some sprints or intervals, train with a group etc. Running is harder on your body and recovery is tied to the pounding you take but I guarantee that if you were to go with some bike racers and you tried to keep up when the hammer is down you will get into the red very quickly. I do think you can probably get a more efficient workout with running and the pounding mimics approach hikes better. But since my body can’t take the pounding of running anymore I’ve found that regular riding coupled with weekly conditioning hikes usually get you in pretty good shape. There is no substitute for carrying a pack up hill.

[Couloir]

Your max heart rate is the same no matter what exercise you do. How close you get to it might be different with different activities. You can get your heart as high riding a bike as you can running, you just need to pedal harder. Find a hill, do some sprints or intervals, train with a group etc. Running is harder on your body and recovery is tied to the pounding you take but I guarantee that if you were to go with some bike racers and you tried to keep up when the hammer is down you will get into the red very quickly. I do think you can probably get a more efficient workout with running and the pounding mimics approach hikes better. But since my body can’t take the pounding of running anymore I’ve found that regular riding coupled with weekly conditioning hikes usually get you in pretty good shape. There is no substitute for carrying a pack up hill.

 

I agree completely. In fact, I have found over the years, I generally get more benefit from cycling (hills in particular) than I do from trail running. Nothing empirical, it just seems to work better for me.

 

As far as getting thrashed is concerned; race cyclocross. Training for and racing 'cross is the best of both worlds in terms of anaerobic and aerobic training. Oddly, I seem to be in the best shape of the year around the first of December. Many, many scrapes, bruises, sprained body parts and broken/bent components, but a good workout nonetheless.

[sprocket]

Cyclocross seems like a seriously hard workout. Need to get my hips checked out to see if I can run again someday and try it.

 

If it didn't require driving cross-country skiing would be back in my routine, great workout, probably the best cardio workout around. But it's hard to beat being able to roll out my front door and bike for 2 or more hours.

[lizard_brain]

i read once that running and cycling are almost identical for training

 

biking longer distances in the same amount of time as running just feels better.

 

I call bull on that. I can bike for 4-5 hours and run 3 hours the next day no problem. Try running that amount of time. It would be like running a marathon 2 days in a row.

[Serenity]

While mountains remain my first love, biking is cheaper, less weather-dependent, and doesn't require a partner. Mtn biking and road biking are both awesome, and possible almost year-round in the NW. And, when it's really raining, there is always spin class. I have wondered, though, if running is better training for climbing.. it seems like a more compatible type of fitness.

 

Not sure what type of biking you are referring to, but climbing is much cheaper in comparison. MY DH race bike alone is around 6K and requires about 20% maintenance a year to maintain.

 

Running offers concentric loading, but in the long term I think you are better off cycling as a form of sustained training to build extensive cardiovascular endurance. Mostly from the perspective that running is hard on the knees and hips, and for most people leads to degenerative effects in the long term. Although boring at times, a treadmill can mitigate the impact of running a bit, and still provides a way to maintain your heart rate.

 

+2 for Cyclocross. Pure pain = pure ecstasy!

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Not sure what type of biking you are referring to, but climbing is much cheaper in comparison.

 

 

I think it depends on what kind of climbing you are getting into, and what kind of bike you are getting.

 

A decent road bike plus some minimal extras (helmets, lights, clothes, etc) will run you just above $1000. Someone just getting in to climbing can spend less than that - depending on what they are going to do.

 

Once you have your gear though, road biking is cheaper - since you don't need to drive anywhere. If you do drive your bike somewhere (mountain biking), well it's usually a lot closer than TH's for climbs.

[tvashtarkatena]

Max heart rate is fixed by age (but decreases by about a beat per minute per year of age), but anaerobic threshold, the heartrate at which you go from aerobic to anaerobic exercise, varies by activity. The AT for running is higher than for cycling by as much as 20%. Cycling is more efficient than running; it uses less muscle mass, takes advantage of more momentum, and doesn't require lifting the entire body up and down as much with each stride. AT for any activity, unlike max heart rate, can also be increased through training.

[Dane]

Max heart rate (MHR) is indeed fixed. Your AT and what you can hold and hit physically as a max is however typically different for each sport. Running, biking, swimming for example. In decreasing order for a typical age group athelete. If it is not either you are in the upper .01% of the population for fitness or you aren't working hard enough in any one sport. Most likely the latter.

 

The obvious goal is to make all sports hit your max and hit the same AT. Harder said than done. The key to what others have said doesn't typically apply in the real world because AT is fitness/sport specific.

 

The more fit you get in each sport, the closer the numbers are @ MHR and @ AT get when compared to each sports specific numbers. (Numbers are mine but mean nothing as a starting or ending point as every human body produces its own specific start and stop numbers) Max HR will as an example give you 196 running, the bike 192 and swimming 190. Your AT will normally run within a single beat or two of each other in all three sports (again all this depends on your level of fitness for each specific sport) Say 180r/178b/176 swimming. Closing that AT gap and the MHR attained can be a goal for a Triathelete. But most people will gauge AT by feel (inaccurate and more prone waver) and not use lab testing. So the numbers can easily be skewed up or down by your pain tolerence, hydration and rest cycles. AT is ever changing as you loose and gain fitness. Best way to track LT (outside of on the spot blood tests) is logging every workout with a HR monitor and continued PE tests on your own.

The only times of the year when my MHR #s meet on the bike and running is when I am intentionally peaking in late summer. By that time of year I am as fit as I'll be for the year in each sport.

 

Oh and by the way...there is no way in hell you can tell age by you Max Heart Rate. (MHR) That is ancient and horribly inaccurate science. Which is why you haven't been working hard enough and will generally have no clue what your max HR is if you are using system or your real AT.

Edited March 21, 2008 by Dane

[tvashtarkatena]

 

Oh and by the way...there is no way in hell you can tell age by you Max Heart Rate. (MHR) That is ancient and horribly inaccurate science. Which is why you haven't been working hard enough and will generally have no clue what your max HR is if you are using system or your real AT.

 

You might want to read more carefully before you respond next time. My previous statement holds true: "Max heart rate is fixed by age (but decreases by about a beat per minute per year of age)". At a given age, your MHR is what it is.

 

In addition, your statement about AT being only one beat off per sport is quite innaccurate for most people, including most elite athletes. Typically, it varies more than that.

 

Back to the original subject, I anecdotally found that cycling hilly terrain (both mountain and road bike) was excellent training for climbing on foot. Other than trail runs, I wound up cutting running out of my regimen altogether, substituting it with riding, and the rate at which I could gain altitude only increased and minor joint pain dissappeared.

 

Edited March 22, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[Dane]

We may well be miss reading each other. If so my apologies.

 

Max heart rate is not "fixed" by age. It is fixed by your body, individually. It does decline over time but not at a given figure of one beat per minute, per year.

 

Just so we are clear, 200-your age does not equal your MHR, correct? Which is what I had read into your previous statement.

ASSUME and all

 

AT will, again, depend on the sport and your level of fitness in that sport. The higher level of fitness and your level of specificity to training in that sport will define the differeneces in your AT. I'll stand by my previous statement the LT is "ever changing" and one (or two) beats can be the difference from studies I've seen.

[Dane]

OK, nice edit

 

"At a given age, your MHR is what it is."

 

On that we can agree.

 

I'd also agree that riding uphill is great training for actaul climbing on foot. I also find there are less injuries on the bike than the typical over use injuries I get trail ruinning up and down. And more importantly recovery is faster from hard work outs on the bike.

[lightning]

I cant run, it hurts and cycling offers much more enjoyable training that humping a pack in the hills to train for humping packs in the hills.

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Max heart rate is fixed by age (but decreases by about a beat per minute per year of age), but anaerobic threshold, the heartrate at which you go from aerobic to anaerobic exercise, varies by activity. The AT for running is higher than for cycling by as much as 20%. Cycling is more efficient than running; it uses less muscle mass, takes advantage of more momentum, and doesn't require lifting the entire body up and down as much with each stride. AT for any activity, unlike max heart rate, can also be increased through training.

 

How would one go about measuring or having one's AT measured?