# 62 MPH Descent...



## Whale_520 (Aug 16, 2012)

Thought this was a cool shot... 62 MPH in the cars off of Cottonwood pass.


----------



## wiz525 (Dec 31, 2007)

pass................


----------



## Cableguy (Jun 6, 2010)

If I had super human ability and could output more power than anyone else... I'd probably never win a GT because I'd lose too much time going down the epic decents like a panzy. That or I'd just crash out. Bike handling skills and ballz ftw.


----------



## Lazy Spinner (Aug 30, 2009)

Cableguy said:


> If I had super human ability and could output more power than anyone else... I'd probably never win a GT because I'd lose too much time going down the epic decents like a panzy. That or I'd just crash out. Bike handling skills and ballz ftw.


Whoa! Andy Schleck is an RBR member?!


----------



## TheSingleGuy (Feb 20, 2009)

Lazy Spinner said:


> Whoa! Andy Schleck is an RBR member?!


HaHaHaHaHarrrrr!  that's funny! :thumbsup:


----------



## wiz525 (Dec 31, 2007)

Strava shows one of the pros hitting 73 mph on Stage 6 through Boulder! 

Bike Ride Profile | 110miles near Golden | Times and Records | Strava


----------



## Tlaloc (May 12, 2005)

*Strava is Crap*



wiz525 said:


> Strava shows one of the pros hitting 73 mph on Stage 6 through Boulder!


Speeds from Strava are BS. According to this site:

ClimbDB

Cottonwood east is a 4.1% grade and Cottonwood west is a 2.9% grade. In order to go 62 miles per hour you would need at least an 11% grade for a prolonged period. To go 72mph you would probably need a 15% grade. Strava is famous for calculating ridiculous maximum speeds. If it wasn't on a speedometer it doesn't count.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

Tlaloc said:


> Speeds from Strava are BS. According to this site:
> 
> ClimbDB
> 
> Cottonwood east is a 4.1% grade and Cottonwood west is a 2.9% grade. In order to go 62 miles per hour you would need at least an 11% grade for a prolonged period. To go 72mph you would probably need a 15% grade. Strava is famous for calculating ridiculous maximum speeds. If it wasn't on a speedometer it doesn't count.


it's not really strava's fault, it's the accuracy of gps....


----------



## Tlaloc (May 12, 2005)

den bakker said:


> it's not really strava's fault, it's the accuracy of gps....


It's probably a crappy algorithm in Strava. If GPS is accurate to say a meter and it gets it's position say every second and logs this as maximum speed then it will be inaccurate. A better algorithm would average several positions over a longer time.


----------



## mattsavage (Apr 25, 2007)

den bakker said:


> it's not really strava's fault, it's the accuracy of gps....


Wouldn't pros be using a speed and cadence sensor with their gps's?


----------



## Jwiffle (Mar 18, 2005)

wiz525 said:


> Strava shows one of the pros hitting 73 mph on Stage 6 through Boulder!
> 
> Bike Ride Profile | 110miles near Golden | Times and Records | Strava


When you click on performance, a click on the little box for speed, you see the highest speed recorded is 55 mph. The 73 given by strava may have been a momentary aberation.


----------



## jamesdak (Aug 22, 2010)

den bakker said:


> it's not really strava's fault, it's the accuracy of gps....


Not sure I agree with that. On longer climbing rides I tend to carry my handheld GPS with me to record the elevation data for me in conjunction with my Node2 computer. GPS will record a top speed for the ride within .1 mph of what the Node2 does. This is even true even on the typical 45+mph decents I routinely do. Waiting for that perfect day when I can break finally get past the 54.9 mph I recorded last year.


----------



## NealH (May 2, 2004)

Yes, GPS is accurate. Strava is not.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

Jwiffle said:


> When you click on performance, a click on the little box for speed, you see the highest speed recorded is 55 mph. The 73 given by strava may have been a momentary aberation.


there are a few 60.x if you zoom in, but I agree - 73mph is aberration - perhaps the GPS wasn't turned off and 73mph max was recorded in the car, before the ride was cropped? In places with bad GPS reception you can get weird speed readings.

as to "Strava vs. GPS - Strava sucks, GPS is always correct" - It's not really "strava" fault - strava IS GPS based, folks.

And while 70+ is impressive and difficult to achieve due to aerodynamics etc., 60-62 numbers are routine for fast descents even for joe schmoes - most members of my club recorded 60+ max on descents, and on straight non-technical roads it feels like 50mph.


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

It's pretty easy to see how innacurate strava is when using it in conjunction with Garmin Connect. Strava consistently overestimates elevation as well as top speed, especially on segments. 

Max I've recorded was 63mph on a 12-15ish percent descent. 62 mph on a 4% incline sounds pretty difficult, but if they were going at it and hit a steeper section, why not ?


----------



## Tlaloc (May 12, 2005)

moskowe said:


> ...Max I've recorded was 63mph on a 12-15ish percent descent. 62 mph on a 4% incline sounds pretty difficult, but if they were going at it and hit a steeper section, why not ?


It's possible if the steeper section is a mile or more of 12% or steeper grade.


----------



## cru_jones (Nov 29, 2009)

On today's ride my Edge 500 said my max speed was exactly 1 mph faster than Strava says (I loaded the Edge file into Strava, not using an app).


----------

