> > I remember reading one report where a guy described climbing up an Alpine > road, fully loaded, in a bit over 5 hours. I got up that same col in 1 1/4 > hours. Maybe he had four times as much fun as I did, I don't know.
Roughly speaking, hill climbing speed is proportional to total weight, for a given person. But are you claiming that this dude's total weight, which is to say him, his bike and everything he was carrying on the bike, was four times as much as what you carry? That is, if your total weight of yourself, your bike and your gear is, say, 200 pounds, this dude was carrying 800 pounds? I don't think you're saying that. I think you are a fast cyclist, and this other dude was a slower cyclist. I think even if you switched bikes, you'd still beat him. So why are you harping on weight? Most likely, *if* this dude was carrying a lot of weight-- and we don't know that-- he could carry as little as you do, and then he'd make it up the hill in three hours. And you would still be twice as fast as he is. And he'd get to the top, still almost two hours after you, and not have all the things he likes to have when he camps, so what would be the point. -- -- Anne Paulson My hovercraft is full of eels -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
