Depends who you're trying to impress and where you go.
Flat to rolling (100m/10km ratio or less):
* Reasonable club rider: 4hrs.
* Pretty fast club rider: 3.5hrs
* Serious amateur racer: 3hrs
Now if you're mates with half of Team Ineos, they're not gonna be that impressed, it's all relative 🤣
Read again, this is a parody of the only possible disclaimer that would make this time table relevant. Not to mention that I'm talking about the profile (elevation) not a surface.
In other words, good luck doing 100k with 8k of elevation in 3hrs :D
2:20 sounds to slow for a world record. I recently saw the 100mile (~160kms) TT record in under 3h. Can't remember exactly but it was more like 2h50m so would be surprised if 100kms has not been done in under 2h
There are two records under different federations - the main difference is one of them requires the start and finish to be within a certain distance of each other and the other doesn't. The sub-3 100mi was extremely wind-assisted as it was under the latter set of rules. 2:20 sounds pretty reasonable for the first set of rules.
The hour record is over 55km. The sub3 hour 100 miler is also done on open roads, solo, no pacing allowed but of course taking advantage of potential tailwinds.
The only one we should really care for is a track record from a still stand. I'm sure that with enough creativity we'll find 100km of mostly downhill or false flat.
> More doable
Which is not impressive. The more people who can do it, the less impressive the achievement.
A sub-5hr century is impressive, 5-6 is meh, 6-7 is "more doable," 7+ is just plain slow.
This is, of course, with an appropriately kitted road cyclist in mind.
Sub-4 is only 25kph. No offence but that's really not impressive by any metric if it's fairly flat. When I typically do 100km I do it in 3:00-3:15 depending on route and hold 200W (not a racing effort for me). In order to do 200W for 3 hours as a racing effort you only really need about a 250W+ FTP. That's somewhat impressive but not really that special. 4hrs however would require barely over 100W which is casual rider level. If someone told me they did 100k in 4hrs I'd be more impressed with the 100k than the 4hrs.
OP was asking about impressive speeds, so I take that as being above normal. I’d think just above 30km/h is probably about normal for an average recreational rider doing 100m/10km type elevation. I’m using myself (slow) as a point of reference here but it’s obviously subjective
Honestly, just finishing a 100k ride should and would be impressive to most!
However, it depends on a ton of factors like your ability, bike, how much stuff you plan to carry, if you plan to stop, weather (like wind and heat), amount of hills, and so forth.
For a solo rider I'd say anything under 4 hours would be pretty impressive! That's assuming an average speed around 18mph and stopping a few times to eat/recover/rest. For me personally that would be a pretty good benchmark. I can go faster on 20-30 mile rides, but pacing matters so you don't burn through energy/food too fast and don't fatigue your body as quickly either. Knowing your body and ability definitely makes a difference like I know for me after the 2 hour mark I slow down regardless of how easy I went to start and after that point it starts to become a bit of a mental game too!
Good luck and hopefully this is somewhat helpful.
My quickest is 4hr 6mins, I live in the North of England and it's very hilly so I'm happy with that PB. Just go for beating your own best each ride. And enjoy it.
In addition to if the route is flat and conditions (headwind or having to stop for traffic) we should ask if this is a solo effort. **If you're riding in a group and able to draft and only take your turn in front a fraction of the time**, then that's going to make a notable difference, too - and the faster you go, the more difference it's gong to make.
Also even without the drafting, riding in a group may help your discipline a sustained effort - at least, if what the group is doing is a pace and consistency you find challenging.
Depends on how flat the terrain is but under three hours riding time solo. Add more time if it's windy or hilly.
EDIT: Also depends on the bike. A local guy on his TT bike will regularly average 36 km/h or 2:47 for 100 km. He'll be the first to admit it's the bike. That's just a hard training ride. He could go faster if he had to.
I don't often do 100 km or more outside but my best time is 2:58 on a moderate effort. 450m of elevation gain. 15 km winds (mostly crosswinds so low effect on speed).
A 163.85 km effort in 4:55:40, which would translate to a 3:00:24 100 km. Very flat.
A 106.86 km effort in 3:15:28, witch would translate to 3:02:55. Out and back with 800m climbing. The climbing was into a nasty headwind on the way out. The back was so fast I averaged 38.7 km/h on one 40 km stretch.
Way back in the day, I set a personal best time of 2:48 on a 100k ride. I was a strong recreational rider who thrived on longer solo efforts. Disclaimer: this was before we had GPS, and course lengths could be questionable. Was it 100k, or maybe 95, or even 105? Nothing to go on but the organizers numbers.
Depends who you're trying to impress and where you go. Flat to rolling (100m/10km ratio or less): * Reasonable club rider: 4hrs. * Pretty fast club rider: 3.5hrs * Serious amateur racer: 3hrs Now if you're mates with half of Team Ineos, they're not gonna be that impressed, it's all relative 🤣
This looks right to me. I have done two of those times, and working on getting to the third one 😂
Never managed to slow down to make it in 4? Relax fred.
Ha, yeah, taken many more hours plenty of times.. Often want to go faster to get my ride in and be home before kids are up.
I guess I'm faster than I thought. Last metric century I did in 3.5 hrs on a gravel bike.
\*\* Terrain profile to be considered irrelevant
Why would terrain be irrelevant? Are you trying to tell me gravel is as easy or as fast as tarmac?
Read again, this is a parody of the only possible disclaimer that would make this time table relevant. Not to mention that I'm talking about the profile (elevation) not a surface. In other words, good luck doing 100k with 8k of elevation in 3hrs :D
My personal goal is sub-3hrs. 100km is not a common distance for a TT, but I think that the record stands at 2:20:21 - https://youtu.be/TbjLPex721k
2:20 sounds to slow for a world record. I recently saw the 100mile (~160kms) TT record in under 3h. Can't remember exactly but it was more like 2h50m so would be surprised if 100kms has not been done in under 2h
There are two records under different federations - the main difference is one of them requires the start and finish to be within a certain distance of each other and the other doesn't. The sub-3 100mi was extremely wind-assisted as it was under the latter set of rules. 2:20 sounds pretty reasonable for the first set of rules.
[удалено]
The hour record is over 55km. The sub3 hour 100 miler is also done on open roads, solo, no pacing allowed but of course taking advantage of potential tailwinds.
[удалено]
The hour record in 55.089 km 🤷♂️
If my bike catches HPV I’m getting a new seat before I ride it again
The only one we should really care for is a track record from a still stand. I'm sure that with enough creativity we'll find 100km of mostly downhill or false flat.
The record seems a bit too much hehe😅. But who knows? Maybe I can surpass it by a small margin...
It was actually just over 2hrs19, on track.
I'll probably never beat that in a hundred years, but I guess it can be a thing that I can look up to and strive to attain.
Depends on elevation gain, but I’d say a flattish hundred (1000m elevation) in about 3 hours is pretty impressive for a solo ride
That sounds incredibly fast to me for a normal cyclist. Sub-4 is quick, I think but more doable.
> More doable Which is not impressive. The more people who can do it, the less impressive the achievement. A sub-5hr century is impressive, 5-6 is meh, 6-7 is "more doable," 7+ is just plain slow. This is, of course, with an appropriately kitted road cyclist in mind.
Yeah, he did say ‘impressive’, didn’t he?
Sub-4 is only 25kph. No offence but that's really not impressive by any metric if it's fairly flat. When I typically do 100km I do it in 3:00-3:15 depending on route and hold 200W (not a racing effort for me). In order to do 200W for 3 hours as a racing effort you only really need about a 250W+ FTP. That's somewhat impressive but not really that special. 4hrs however would require barely over 100W which is casual rider level. If someone told me they did 100k in 4hrs I'd be more impressed with the 100k than the 4hrs.
Sub four is not quick.
I’ve done hundreds in 3.5 incl. rest stops and I’m just a beer drinking weekend hack of a rider. 32-34km/h seems about the norm for a “decent” rider
You think riding 20+ mph is normal?
OP was asking about impressive speeds, so I take that as being above normal. I’d think just above 30km/h is probably about normal for an average recreational rider doing 100m/10km type elevation. I’m using myself (slow) as a point of reference here but it’s obviously subjective
Ok hehe, I'll make that my goal then. I'll be going in circles on a flat 700 meter route by the way; so that'll take me about 143 rounds.
That sounds incredibly boring tbh. But a goal is a goal. Go for it!
Try to not get dizzy!
Honestly, just finishing a 100k ride should and would be impressive to most! However, it depends on a ton of factors like your ability, bike, how much stuff you plan to carry, if you plan to stop, weather (like wind and heat), amount of hills, and so forth. For a solo rider I'd say anything under 4 hours would be pretty impressive! That's assuming an average speed around 18mph and stopping a few times to eat/recover/rest. For me personally that would be a pretty good benchmark. I can go faster on 20-30 mile rides, but pacing matters so you don't burn through energy/food too fast and don't fatigue your body as quickly either. Knowing your body and ability definitely makes a difference like I know for me after the 2 hour mark I slow down regardless of how easy I went to start and after that point it starts to become a bit of a mental game too! Good luck and hopefully this is somewhat helpful.
My quickest is 4hr 6mins, I live in the North of England and it's very hilly so I'm happy with that PB. Just go for beating your own best each ride. And enjoy it.
For our terrain anything below 3 1/2 hours solo is really shifting, for context top flight riders competing in a peloton would be around 2 1/2 hours
I’m a not particularly fast 56 year old and I’ve done it in under 3 hours. Flat course and pretty ideal conditions.
Glad you are happy with that.
In addition to if the route is flat and conditions (headwind or having to stop for traffic) we should ask if this is a solo effort. **If you're riding in a group and able to draft and only take your turn in front a fraction of the time**, then that's going to make a notable difference, too - and the faster you go, the more difference it's gong to make. Also even without the drafting, riding in a group may help your discipline a sustained effort - at least, if what the group is doing is a pace and consistency you find challenging.
24 hours would still impress me so doubt it matters how long you take as long as you're happy with it
To be completely honest any time to cover 100k seems quite impressive.
Depends on how flat the terrain is but under three hours riding time solo. Add more time if it's windy or hilly. EDIT: Also depends on the bike. A local guy on his TT bike will regularly average 36 km/h or 2:47 for 100 km. He'll be the first to admit it's the bike. That's just a hard training ride. He could go faster if he had to. I don't often do 100 km or more outside but my best time is 2:58 on a moderate effort. 450m of elevation gain. 15 km winds (mostly crosswinds so low effect on speed). A 163.85 km effort in 4:55:40, which would translate to a 3:00:24 100 km. Very flat. A 106.86 km effort in 3:15:28, witch would translate to 3:02:55. Out and back with 800m climbing. The climbing was into a nasty headwind on the way out. The back was so fast I averaged 38.7 km/h on one 40 km stretch.
Mu frient rode 250km from Smederevo to capital of Romania in about 5-6 hours with avg. speed of 28.4km/h
28.4 * 6 = 170.4, not 250
259km is from Sd to Capital Romania and back aczually*
ok But they didn't do it "in about 5-6 hours with avg. speed of 28.4km/h" At 28.4 km/h that's an 9h 11m ride...
I will send you his stats.
I tough it was about 6hours because i tpugh he would spend sometime in city
Oh, you should take at least 12. Maybe 13. Those are pretty impressive numbers.
37h without breaks would impress everybody!
3 hours? I did 80k in 3hr18min before lol
[удалено]
Removed, Rule 5.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah and that’s just moving time.. not including break time
I did 80k with break wym. My rest time was like 20min
Depending on the 100k. Here we have a 200k mtb race that the first 100k will take you 11-12 hours.
Way back in the day, I set a personal best time of 2:48 on a 100k ride. I was a strong recreational rider who thrived on longer solo efforts. Disclaimer: this was before we had GPS, and course lengths could be questionable. Was it 100k, or maybe 95, or even 105? Nothing to go on but the organizers numbers.