Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [tri_yoda] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There will be significant individual differences. I ran sub 33 for 10km over 15 years ago, but have never ridden under an hour for 40km.
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I was thinking 60 min/40 min.
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [tri_yoda] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think 40 min 10K is on par with a sub 60 40K. Coming to the sports as an older guy, I was able to go sub 60 on my first try at a 40KTT, whereas getting to 38 for a 10K took an exceptional amount of effort. That might be because of the higher body fat of an older guy or because I have shorter, stronger legs.
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [tri_yoda] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Problem is you can be faster or slower on the bike just with better or worse gear. Perhaps the baseline for the 60 minute 40k out to be the same as when someone goes for the hour record - no aero gear. Or instead of a 40k, compare times up something like Alpe d'Huez to normalize both running and cycling to a comparable W/kg ratio.

FYI, for myself I've managed a sea-level 40k in under 57 minutes on ~250-260 W. My best 10k is ~42 minutes (but I'm not a dedicated runner).
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [tigermilk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tigermilk wrote:
Or instead of a 40k, compare times up something like Alpe d'Huez to normalize both running and cycling to a comparable W/kg ratio.

Ballpark, m/s while running on flat ground is roughly equivalent to watts/kg, i.e., to run X m/s on flat ground requires roughly X watts/kg.

[Edit:] Upthread, sciguy suggests 37:30 for a 10K is the right number. Using the ballpark, a 37:30 10K is around 4.44 m/s, so would be around 300 watts for a 70 kg runner. Using the other rule of thumb that you need 1000 watts/m^2 for 40 km/h means that if you can put out 300 watts you'd need a CdA < .3.
Last edited by: RChung: Apr 19, 11 4:51
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [snackchair] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
agreed. you have to look at large data sets.

sounds like there are some assumptions several us are implying that aren't consistent.
  • are we comparing an open 60min 40K and the equivalent open 10K time or those same times from a triathlon race?

    • if the former, then we can't look at race results for help because of strategy/pacing and fatigue effects during races.
  • are we talking about these times for triathletes specifically or for single sport athletes?

    • doesn't seem like a big issue, but it really is. triathletes will always have a sport they are better at. i think you have to look at the cycling and running populations separately (including triathletes).
    • once you establish the relative difficulty of a 60min 40K to the WR for 40K, then you can multiply that same difficulty factor by the WR 10K time (26:17).

Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [RChung] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
RChung wrote:
tigermilk wrote:
Or instead of a 40k, compare times up something like Alpe d'Huez to normalize both running and cycling to a comparable W/kg ratio.

Ballpark, m/s while running on flat ground is roughly equivalent to watts/kg, i.e., to run X m/s on flat ground requires roughly X watts/kg.

[Edit:] Upthread, sciguy suggests 37:30 for a 10K is the right number. Using the ballpark, a 37:30 10K is around 4.44 m/s, so would be around 300 watts for a 70 kg runner. Using the other rule of thumb that you need 1000 watts/m^2 for 40 km/h means that if you can put out 300 watts you'd need a CdA < .3.

This.
I'll have to trust the maths, since I have too much blood in my coffee stream right now.

As a ~70kg human, who, at his best is in the ballpark (ok, just short - call it the warning track) of 300w for an hour, it would make sense that one could go a little harder/faster for a duration that was about a third less than an hour.

But - there's no way I'd need 300w to break an hour.
I've ridden 90k (ok, it was probably "only" 88k) at well north of 40kph for 2:05, at ~240w.
(plus I had that pesky wet warmup, and extended running warmdown to deal with).
Certainly not an all-out effort.


I think the 40 min # for 10k would be a little "too easy", and something <37 probably "too hard" by comparison.
YMMV.


float , hammer , and jog

Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [Murphy'sLaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Murphy'sLaw wrote:
RChung wrote:
tigermilk wrote:
Or instead of a 40k, compare times up something like Alpe d'Huez to normalize both running and cycling to a comparable W/kg ratio.

Ballpark, m/s while running on flat ground is roughly equivalent to watts/kg, i.e., to run X m/s on flat ground requires roughly X watts/kg.

[Edit:] Upthread, sciguy suggests 37:30 for a 10K is the right number. Using the ballpark, a 37:30 10K is around 4.44 m/s, so would be around 300 watts for a 70 kg runner. Using the other rule of thumb that you need 1000 watts/m^2 for 40 km/h means that if you can put out 300 watts you'd need a CdA < .3.


This.
I'll have to trust the maths, since I have too much blood in my coffee stream right now.

As a ~70kg human, who, at his best is in the ballpark (ok, just short - call it the warning track) of 300w for an hour, it would make sense that one could go a little harder/faster for a duration that was about a third less than an hour.

But - there's no way I'd need 300w to break an hour.
I've ridden 90k (ok, it was probably "only" 88k) at well north of 40kph for 2:05, at ~240w.
(plus I had that pesky wet warmup, and extended running warmdown to deal with).
Certainly not an all-out effort.


I think the 40 min # for 10k would be a little "too easy", and something <37 probably "too hard" by comparison.
YMMV.


Waitt a second here, are you saying for 88km you rode 42km/h on only 240 watts? Can any math guys find to CdA to do this? I had better work on my position if this is possible.

My experience would put the 10k run at around 37:30 for a 60min. 40k equivalent.

_______________________________________________
Last edited by: bonesbrigade: Apr 19, 11 5:52
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [bonesbrigade] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
bonesbrigade wrote:
Waitt a second here, are you saying for 88km you rode 42km/h on only 240 watts? Can any math guys find to CdA to do this? I had better work on my position if this is possible.

Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [bonesbrigade] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes.

Rode a rolling hilly 56m at Tupper Lake last year at 24.1 mph on only ~235 or so.
My position is pretty decent.


float , hammer , and jog

Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [Murphy'sLaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ML's position is almost invisible!!!!

Interesting thread. For those who remember the TT challenge that was posed earlier this year, you'd swear that 40 kph is a no brainer and we should all be able to do it off 225-235W (by the way, my 2:16 at Esprit was off 235W which was around 39 kph for that 88.5K course, with all the slingshotting and smooth pavement. I have not done a 40 k TT in years. My 10 K time in the last 2 years ranges between 37.15 and 38.20, and I find this much much harder than 40 kph. I'd put 40 kph in the range of a 40 min 10k, but I'm also 140 lbs
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [Murphy'sLaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
We'll wait here.


float , hammer , and jog

Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [Murphy'sLaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yeah, I think in general, too many people dismiss the 60min. 40k as being easy.

I'd be interested to know how many people think they can do it on a road bike - this may weed out a lot of folks.

I envy your position ML!

_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [RChung] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So, if I'm reading this right - a CdA of approx. .2

Thanks for the estimator!

_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [bonesbrigade] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
drastically different story on a road bike!

bonesbrigade wrote:
I'd be interested to know how many people think they can do it on a road bike - this may weed out a lot of folks.

I envy your position ML!



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [bonesbrigade] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think the "Eddy Merckx position" 40 kph would be equivalent to 36 minute 10K
I think the "Boardman Superman" 40 kph would be equivalent to 42 minute 10K

Most triathletes on ST are likely somewhere a lot worse than Boardman Superman and something better than Merckx. Bonesbrigade, let's get the boys out for the Merckx position 40 K TT. I have a course out in the west end of town, but it is a bit rolling (no major climbs though)....or we can just do 2 and 2/3 loops of the Rockcliffe Parkway, but that would entail 5 hairpin turns, which would likely end up being not much different than my rolling 40 k course.
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jackmott wrote:
drastically different story on a road bike!

bonesbrigade wrote:

I'd be interested to know how many people think they can do it on a road bike - this may weed out a lot of folks.

I envy your position ML!

Yeah, this has got me thinking lately about road vs. TT bike, and how I used to take for granted 40km/h speed. I'm only road racing this year, so I've been doing threshold workouts once or twice per week on a closed 2km road loop with average pavement. Yesterday on my 2x20 minute workout, I could only manage approx. 39km/h for each set. Of course I know there is a major difference between positions and bikes, but it just looks strange to see that number for the amount of effort put out!

_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I agree with those numbers, I think that is spot on.

devashish_paul wrote:
I think the "Eddy Merckx position" 40 kph would be equivalent to 36 minute 10K
I think the "Boardman Superman" 40 kph would be equivalent to 42 minute 10K

Most triathletes on ST are likely somewhere a lot worse than Boardman Superman and something better than Merckx. Bonesbrigade, let's get the boys out for the Merckx position 40 K TT. I have a course out in the west end of town, but it is a bit rolling (no major climbs though)....or we can just do 2 and 2/3 loops of the Rockcliffe Parkway, but that would entail 5 hairpin turns, which would likely end up being not much different than my rolling 40 k course.



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
devashish_paul wrote:
I think the "Eddy Merckx position" 40 kph would be equivalent to 36 minute 10K
I think the "Boardman Superman" 40 kph would be equivalent to 42 minute 10K

Most triathletes on ST are likely somewhere a lot worse than Boardman Superman and something better than Merckx. Bonesbrigade, let's get the boys out for the Merckx position 40 K TT. I have a course out in the west end of town, but it is a bit rolling (no major climbs though)....or we can just do 2 and 2/3 loops of the Rockcliffe Parkway, but that would entail 5 hairpin turns, which would likely end up being not much different than my rolling 40 k course.

I'd be game for that!

_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [ericlambi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericlambi wrote:
I vote for 37:30. I did this by arbitrarily deciding that an 18 minute 5k and a 1hr 40k are about equal and then using Jack Daniels VDOT table to convert to 10k.

x2

-------
http://www.y-rocket.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [tri_yoda] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Phil's n=1 for 2010: 40k, 60:15; 10k, 40:01 (I like to barely miss round numbers)

So for me, equivalent to about 39:50ish?
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [bonesbrigade] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
bonesbrigade wrote:
So, if I'm reading this right - a CdA of approx. .2
24.1 mph = 39 km/h
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [phil combs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
For those that are primarily cyclists, maybe 24.85 miles per hours isn't that fast...not sure.
For those that are primarily runners, 36min 10K is nothing.

For triathletes though, I don't think I ever really see anyone with a 24.85 mph average in triathlons around here.....most are hilly, but there are a few flat ones. Maybe one or 2 people. On the other hand, there are several people, at least top 10, at each race that hold sub 6min pace running.
Quote Reply
Re: 10K equivalent of a 60:00 40K TT? [tri_yoda] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Here's a little help for you guys:
29:05 - 10k US masters record, set by 42-year old former Olympian
47:35 - 40k US masters record

I'm sure some smart math guy can make something out of it.
Quote Reply

Prev Next