Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Ironman Muskoka 134.4 (170km/106 mile bike) [SubaruTriathlon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SubaruTriathlon wrote:
Ironman Muskoka bike is 112m/180km. Be ready. You will deserve to hear "you are an Ironman" at Muskoka finish line. See you August 30th in Huntsville!

Janet/Mitch....you all did such a good job with the Whistler event that we're heading back there for race + family vacation. Provided we can clear up family work schedules, Muskoka 70.3 is a must do (perfect timing for Whistler too). I am waiting to see if any of the buddies qualify for Austria WC if not, plan to pass on that and be in Muskoka for the IM either as a racer or volunteer.
Quote Reply
Re: Ironman Muskoka 134.4 (170km/106 mile bike) [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Whoa! Those downhills really take a toll on the run. Not too many courses have have 2k feet on the run. Los Cabos has a gradual 1200ft and it stung.

Thanks for the info.
Quote Reply
Re: Ironman Muskoka 134.4 (170km/106 mile bike) [jjh] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jjh wrote:
Whoa! Those downhills really take a toll on the run. Not too many courses have have 2k feet on the run. Los Cabos has a gradual 1200ft and it stung.

Thanks for the info.
. There are very few steep downhills on the Muskoka course. IMLP is much worse for steep downhill as is Kona (Palani). Tremblant also had steeper ups and downs.
Quote Reply
Re: Ironman Muskoka 134.4 (170km/106 mile bike) [sinkinswimmer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sinkinswimmer wrote:





Maybe the disagreement is because many folks don't understand physics.

No Dev...the disagreement is simple. An ironman is 140.6 miles or it isn't. Cobble, Staz, the rest of the world, and I think it is. You, and your friends at TriMuskoka think its not.

And I do get physics. Do you get how a GPS works? When it says 112 miles...stop pedaling. And next time, don't think you are smarter than us because you have some bullshit excuse for cutting these courses, think again. You are usually better than that.

Bike racing is different than swimming and running. Wind and terrain can make distance a very poor indicator of effort required to do a bike course.
Quote Reply
Re: Ironman Muskoka 134.4 (170km/106 mile bike) [BBB1975] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BBB1975 wrote:
sinkinswimmer wrote:





Maybe the disagreement is because many folks don't understand physics.

No Dev...the disagreement is simple. An ironman is 140.6 miles or it isn't. Cobble, Staz, the rest of the world, and I think it is. You, and your friends at TriMuskoka think its not.

And I do get physics. Do you get how a GPS works? When it says 112 miles...stop pedaling. And next time, don't think you are smarter than us because you have some bullshit excuse for cutting these courses, think again. You are usually better than that.


Bike racing is different than swimming and running. Wind and terrain can make distance a very poor indicator of effort required to do a bike course.

Guys...please relax...the course at Muskoka is now the "full 180K distance" (maybe someone can change the thread title now). You also get to do 2200+ of climbing. I hope Sinkinswimmer shows up to race and when he gets to 160 k and his race time is the same as 180K at IMFlorida or Arizona there will be 20K with a ton of climbing left to go.

By the way, we could go tell Fredrik Van Lierde and Jodie Swallow that they did not complete an IM at South Africa and should not get their auto Kona slots. Bike course there was short, but it is impossible to make it exactly 180K on a dual loop course with tons of road closures....distance was ONLY 177K. There was a ton of climbing and wind to more than make up for the missing 3K. As an example Jodie Swallow's bike split was like 20 minutes slower than Kona on that South Africa course even though it was short.
Quote Reply
Post deleted by jjh [ In reply to ]
Re: Ironman Muskoka 134.4 (170km/106 mile bike) [Scott_B] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You think the IM Muskoka really has 2000ft of elevation gain on the run? That is crazy hilly. I wonder if they meant 2000 feet of change(up and down)??
Quote Reply
Re: Ironman Muskoka 134.4 (170km/106 mile bike) [jjh] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Anyone have a prediction of water temp for late August?
Quote Reply
Re: Ironman Muskoka 134.4 (170km/106 mile bike) [mx441] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mx441 wrote:
Anyone have a prediction of water temp for late August?

Probably 70-74 range. 100 percent sure to be wetsuit legal for age groupers
Quote Reply
Re: Ironman Muskoka 134.4 (170km/106 mile bike) [jjh] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That does seem a little high. I have always found the run course quite hilly, but a lot of that has to do with the bike course. The run course has a couple of long low grade slopes, several short punchy hills, and no sustained steep hills. The average run splits will be much longer than most IMs, but that will be because the bike course is going to wreck the majority of participants. IM Muskoka will be much harder than IM Mont-Tremblant, harder than IMLP, and likely harder than IM Canada.
Quote Reply

Prev Next