So we had our State Championship ITT’s last week and they chip sealed the first/last 7.7 miles of the 40K course. Most people had slower times (1 - 1.5 minutes slower) than the year before and I’m trying to figure out how much of a difference it would make in times … wondering if I’m really that out of shape, or if the new surface was just slow (went from mid 54 minute to high 55 minutes this year).
The surface was not too bad for chip seal, pretty even overall, larger sized rocks, but sealed well. It did seem to have a bigger effect on the times (i.e. slower) of bigger riders compared to smaller riders.
Anybody have CCR data on chip seal vs. nice smooth asphalt that the course was in years prior?
So we had our State Championship ITT’s last week and they chip sealed the first/last 7.7 miles of the 40K course. Most people had slower times (1 - 1.5 minutes slower) than the year before and I’m trying to figure out how much of a difference it would make in times … wondering if I’m really that out of shape, or if the new surface was just slow (went from mid 54 minute to high 55 minutes this year).
The surface was not too bad for chip seal, pretty even overall, larger sized rocks, but sealed well. It did seem to have a bigger effect on the times (i.e. slower) of bigger riders compared to smaller riders.
Anybody have CCR data on chip seal vs. nice smooth asphalt that the course was in years prior?
Well … that’s kinda my thought, but a few guys seemed to be unaffected and a small few were faster … so I’m curious what the general effect would be on times.
There is bad Chip Seal on some of the climbs around here, you can literally feel the power being sucked away when riding over it. Id guess 10-20 watts depending on temperature.
rough chip? small chips of gravel? how old? riding in the wheel tracks or on the rougher part beside there wheel tracks?
In general, I find my speed drops by about 10% on average chip compared with average asphalt. New rough chip might be a bit more, and older smaller chip might be a bit less.
Some of that might be psych factor as well, but results are results.
Don’t have the data and this a bit late for you now but my tip is to ride on the white line at the road edge when riding on chip seal. The paint makes it a bit smoother.
Whatever you do don’t ride in the soft dark tar section when it’s sunny out. Super soft and Wayyyy slower.
Almost 1/3 of my long route is chip seal. IT really sucks when they just laid it down and you get the practice riding in 1/4" of loose pea gravel… on a downhill too. Almost like riding with snow on the ground… maybe worse.
So we had our State Championship ITT’s last week and they chip sealed the first/last 7.7 miles of the 40K course. Most people had slower times (1 - 1.5 minutes slower) than the year before and I’m trying to figure out how much of a difference it would make in times … wondering if I’m really that out of shape, or if the new surface was just slow (went from mid 54 minute to high 55 minutes this year).
The surface was not too bad for chip seal, pretty even overall, larger sized rocks, but sealed well. It did seem to have a bigger effect on the times (i.e. slower) of bigger riders compared to smaller riders.
Anybody have CCR data on chip seal vs. nice smooth asphalt that the course was in years prior?
How about doing a virtual elevation run: minimum 4x500m loops where you ride the non-sealed to sealed transition each time. We should be able to tell from the VE trace in Aerolab what’s going on.
Anybody have CCR data on chip seal vs. nice smooth asphalt that the course was in years prior?
How about doing a virtual elevation run: minimum 4x500m loops where you ride the non-sealed to sealed transition each time. We should be able to tell from the VE trace in Aerolab what’s going on.
Maybe, but you’d want to know pretty close to the actual profile for the smooth and chipseal sections (for example, if the sections both had the same slope).
I can only guess as to why. I’ve just seen it while training.
Nice steady 260 watts for the first 1/4 of the 40k
Then hit the nasty chipseal in the middle and I’m trying to hold 260 but it starts dropping. 255…250…
then 3/4 of the way through, back to smooth roads and the watts creep back up to 260 without any intentional extra effort
Could be in my head, could be the bumpyness taking energy to deal with somehow, I don’t know.
another confounding factor is I have some evidence that bad chipseal doesn’t just slow you down at the same watts
but actually causes you to put less watts to the rear wheel!
I’m in WI and we have many miserable roads and they are chip sealing more than ever. They are actually doing roads in great condition as an attempt to stay ahead of the cracking and honeycombing.
On the somewhat rare occasion I get to ride on glass smooth pavement there is zero doubt I’m faster. I would swear in many cases it’s a full mph, but I have not done any power testing to confirm that. It’s amazing to me how much better smooth pavement feels.
Locally here they use what they call “trap rock” I believe this is pure bedrock from the volcanic period that’s ground up into small pieces. It’s not smooth like pea gravel. This is sharp and definitely causes lots of flats for the cyclist. The trap rock here is so hard that NASA has used it for drill equipment testing…lol.
another confounding factor is I have some evidence that bad chipseal doesn’t just slow you down at the same watts
but actually causes you to put less watts to the rear wheel!
That’s actually not a problem for VE. You can (and probably should) do the loops at different power/speed.
As an aside, I’ve done VE tests where, in order to mark a particular point, I taped a car floor mat down on the road and rolled over it each lap. I could spot the car mat as a jump in the VE profile.
Right I just mean it is a problem for accounting for the overall affect chip seal may have on time.
another confounding factor is I have some evidence that bad chipseal doesn’t just slow you down at the same watts
but actually causes you to put less watts to the rear wheel!
That’s actually not a problem for VE. You can (and probably should) do the loops at different power/speed.
As an aside, I’ve done VE tests where, in order to mark a particular point, I taped a car floor mat down on the road and rolled over it each lap. I could spot the car mat as a jump in the VE profile.
Agree…makes Cancellara’s 500 watts through Arenburg all the more impressive!
-Physiojoe
I can only guess as to why. I’ve just seen it while training.
Nice steady 260 watts for the first 1/4 of the 40k
Then hit the nasty chipseal in the middle and I’m trying to hold 260 but it starts dropping. 255…250…
then 3/4 of the way through, back to smooth roads and the watts creep back up to 260 without any intentional extra effort
Could be in my head, could be the bumpyness taking energy to deal with somehow, I don’t know.
another confounding factor is I have some evidence that bad chipseal doesn’t just slow you down at the same watts
but actually causes you to put less watts to the rear wheel!
