Let's say on a flat road, no wind, the guy is a sub 2:10 marathon runner (anywhere sub 2:10) near peak shape, 30 years old.
The guy has no experience of biking except for fun with family, kids etc. a few times a year.
Let's say on a flat road, no wind, the guy is a sub 2:10 marathon runner (anywhere sub 2:10) near peak shape, 30 years old.
The guy has no experience of biking except for fun with family, kids etc. a few times a year.
* I should add : using a nice road bike.
I was looking what was the speed of the winner of different categories of national road biking championship in my country.
The closest I found to that speed was the championship of women between the age of 15-16 yo. The winner won the race riding at 21-22 mph, riding for 1h44min.
So I will say 60 minutes. But maybe I'm wrong ?
I would say it depends a lot on the morphology of the runner. I guess he is kind of skinny to be sub 2h10, which is a problem for biking. If he has large quads he will be a lot faster on the bike.
Much longer than 60 minutes on a road bike. That pace is not even tempo pace for an aerobically fit person. If there were any hills, someone without experience of cycling might tire quickly. But on the flat without wind it doesn't matter too much muscle you have, an aerobically fit person with any kind of leg strengh just turning the pedals over comfortably but with a little effort will hit that speed on a road bike.
flat road? im gonna say something like 3 to 5 hours.
On a flat road with no wind? Basically until they get bored or run out of food. 32km/h does not require much effort for me on the flat and I'm nowhere near a 2:10 marathoner.
Maybe up to an hour if he doesn't ride regularly, but he's not going to like it. Hours on end if he puts in a couple of months training. I'm a former cat 1 road racer, so I went the other way, but I can tell you that running and cycling aren't nearly as fungible as many people think. The aerobic capacity carries over, but there's a lot of specific muscles and motions that need to be developed for both sports that have nothing in common.
I knew several former runners who became very good cyclists and vice versa, but you can't just switch overnight. You'll get much better, much faster than someone coming off the couch, but you still need time to adapt.
20-30 minutes before their quads give out. With zero experience as posited, their musculature would fatigue quickly. This is like putting Chris Froome or Egan Bernal on a track or flat road and telling them to run WR marathon pace for as long as they can. I would be surprised if either one could last 800-1000 meters at that pace.
Everyone involved would have a big aerobic engine but, specificity rules when it comes to sports performance.
Portland Hobby Jogger wrote:
20-30 minutes before their quads give out. With zero experience as posited, their musculature would fatigue quickly. This is like putting Chris Froome or Egan Bernal on a track or flat road and telling them to run WR marathon pace for as long as they can. I would be surprised if either one could last 800-1000 meters at that pace.
Everyone involved would have a big aerobic engine but, specificity rules when it comes to sports performance.
1st, 20 mph on a flat road is nothing close to WR marathon pace.
I'd say 4 hours, a 2:10 marathoner is insane shape. I randomly did 90 mins at that 31 km/h on a slightly hilly road (300m elevation) as an XC runner in about 32-33 min 10k shape at the time and it was easy ... you guys are underestimating how fit these guys are and how easy 32 km/h on a flat road is. Add some hills, surges, etc... that would make it harder on the marathon runners, but just rolling at a medium pace is a joke for a 2:10 runner.
they may be able to cruise at that speed for some time and aerobically will have no problem
the issues comes with how uncomfortable it is to be sitting on a bike for long periods of time for someone who isn't used to it (even with a nice pair of bib shorts). Especially considering the build of a marathon runner, I think that uncomfortableness hits them a lot earlier than youd think
id put it at 1.5-2 hours
Maybe 30-40 mins
Look, I'd consider being a marathoner a disadvantage in terms of trying to bike 20mph. Even moreso being a 2:10 guy. I'd rather take a non-fat but sedentary guy, or a CrossFit guy.
Running that fast means you have no power at all. You're probably 5'11" 125 lbs and spent decades forcing your body to learn how to run 5:00 pace for a long time. How's that translste to cycling? Not well. Yeah, riding in Ohio at 20mph isn't that hard but with elevation changes it becomes significant.
Also, before someone tries this argument, TdF riders have serious power in their legs even though their body weight is low. Look at Wout van aerts legs, or van der poels. Or nino schurter...
Always love when these threads pop up from time to time. Runners thinking they'd be amazing cyclists LOL.
embarrassing honestly sad wrote:
Always love when these threads pop up from time to time. Runners thinking they'd be amazing cyclists LOL.
Exactly. Consider Lance Armstrong's marathon times. Very good for the general public, but not even remotely world class. Do you really think most runners would fair better as cyclists? They're different sports, with some shared underlying physical elements. Some football players make good basketball players, but not all of them. Same thing going on here.
I mean, I'm in some of my best running shape ever, and I suck on a bike since I never ride. And I used to race with the pros.
The point is that 32 km/h is very easy on a road bike on flat ground with no wind. It's like 5:00 / km running or something like that. Not remotely competitive. A 2:10 marathoner has some quad strength.
Somepaths wrote:
Let's say on a flat road, no wind, the guy is a sub 2:10 marathon runner (anywhere sub 2:10) near peak shape, 30 years old.
The guy has no experience of biking except for fun with family, kids etc. a few times a year.
A lot of it depends on how much "fun" biking they have done. If their efficiency on the pedals is horrible, they won't last long no matter how big their aerobic engine is.
much longer wrote:
The point is that 32 km/h is very easy on a road bike on flat ground with no wind. It's like 5:00 / km running or something like that. Not remotely competitive. A 2:10 marathoner has some quad strength.
Can you link us to some of your 3-hour easy endurance rides where you averaged 20mph? Thanks.
going from a bike to running is much harder than from running to a bike.
I almost never get my bike out, but once a year I ride 19 miles to work with a friend. And then home again at the end of the day. The 19 miles has around 400 feet of climb. I do it in around 65 minutes. The times I have done this I have probably been around 4 hour marathon shape. maybe 3:40. THat is to say that I am hobby jogging around 20 miles per week.
I can't imagine this being anything less than 2 hours. Not saying they'd be comfortable, but we are talking about people with pretty high tolerance for discomfort.
He would probably bike 10-15ft before crashing
20 mph is way faster than 5 min/km
maybe if in a group where you can draft but even then its not that slow of a trot
I second the guy saying how runners estimate the transition from running to cycling. I knew a guy who was 15 mid for 5k and spent 1.5 years seriously cycling and his FTP is still shy of 300 watts