|
Categorizing a climb
|
| hemsedal |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:04
|
Under 23
Posts: 62
Joined: 27-12-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Hey, I have a decent climb that I like to ride and I've always wondered what it would be categorized as.
It's only 4 km long so its not a long climb, but it averages at 10% as the road rises with 400 meters over those 4 km. And it's all on gravel.
Tell me in what category you think this climb is in. |
| |
|
|
| pbenoit4 |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:06
|
Free Agent
Posts: 147
Joined: 06-08-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
My opinion would be a Cat. 2 based on length and grade, but it's gravel, so I have no idea. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 23:11
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| hemsedal |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:16
|
Under 23
Posts: 62
Joined: 27-12-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
I also have another option on this climb, that would make it 5 km long and rise 600 meters. Haven't tried out this yet as the road there is terribly bad. |
| |
|
|
| Mr_Monk |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:18
|
Domestique
Posts: 718
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
You could go to https://www.mapmyride.com/ and map the climb there. It will classify the climb for you. |
| |
|
|
| JD317 |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:20
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 273
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
im with pbenoit. it aint long enough to be a category one. certainly steep enough...but the distance would make it a cat 2 in my opinion 
edit - for example - the 2010 TDF stage 12 - Col de la Croix Neuve averaged 10% and was a bit over 3km long. was given a cat 2 rating despite its short distance. so yeah...cat 2 at the highest. maybe even a cat 3 in some opinions. plus the gravel factor...i got not idea how to equate that into it
Edited by JD317 on 23-08-2011 02:24
Flying V
 |
| |
|
|
| hemsedal |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:32
|
Under 23
Posts: 62
Joined: 27-12-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
I've tried that site, for some reasons unknown to me, it doesn't make a profile for me...
Also I find it cool that you guys think it's a cat 2 climb  I thought it would be cat 3 'cause its not very long. |
| |
|
|
| Mr_Monk |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:39
|
Domestique
Posts: 718
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
hemsedal wrote:
I've tried that site, for some reasons unknown to me, it doesn't make a profile for me...
Also I find it cool that you guys think it's a cat 2 climb I thought it would be cat 3 'cause its not very long.
Do you have an account there?
It should show up after you save your route (you will probably have to sign up (for free, btw) to do that) |
| |
|
|
| JD317 |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:45
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 273
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
my opinion of it being a 2 is because it is on gravel. significantly harder than paved road. id give it a 3 on paved road with its distance. but a 2 on the gravel in my opinion
Flying V
|
| |
|
|
| hemsedal |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:47
|
Under 23
Posts: 62
Joined: 27-12-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Mr_Monk wrote:
hemsedal wrote:
I've tried that site, for some reasons unknown to me, it doesn't make a profile for me...
Also I find it cool that you guys think it's a cat 2 climb I thought it would be cat 3 'cause its not very long.
Do you have an account there?
It should show up after you save your route (you will probably have to sign up (for free, btw) to do that)
I do have an account there, but still it doesn't show anything from where I live. I tried to map Alpe D'Huez and that worked just fine. The site might not have coverage for Norway. |
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:54
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
I 've never climbed on gravel, but I'd give it a Cat 2 because of the steepness.Also because of the distance, preceeding road would be a factor. If it comes off of a downhill you can carry in momentum and it would be a Cat 3. But if it comes off a flat or false flat it would be tough. |
| |
|
|
| Mr_Monk |
Posted on 23-08-2011 02:56
|
Domestique
Posts: 718
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
hemsedal wrote:
Mr_Monk wrote:
hemsedal wrote:
I've tried that site, for some reasons unknown to me, it doesn't make a profile for me...
Also I find it cool that you guys think it's a cat 2 climb I thought it would be cat 3 'cause its not very long.
Do you have an account there?
It should show up after you save your route (you will probably have to sign up (for free, btw) to do that)
I do have an account there, but still it doesn't show anything from where I live. I tried to map Alpe D'Huez and that worked just fine. The site might not have coverage for Norway.
Too bad :/ |
| |
|
|
| hemsedal |
Posted on 23-08-2011 03:07
|
Under 23
Posts: 62
Joined: 27-12-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
baseballlover312 wrote:
I 've never climbed on gravel, but I'd give it a Cat 2 because of the steepness.Also because of the distance, preceeding road would be a factor. If it comes off of a downhill you can carry in momentum and it would be a Cat 3. But if it comes off a flat or false flat it would be tough.
Climbing on gravel is quite difficult as it is easy to spin with your back wheel if you put to much power into it, but the worst part is to cycle back down again as you have literally no grip with your tiers. |
| |
|
|
| Kentaurus |
Posted on 23-08-2011 03:41
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3999
Joined: 26-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
I would tend to agree with the Cat 2 ideas, and I checked map my ride for Norway, and it doesn't seem to have any elevation data for that area.
AZTECA - NBCSN  |
| |
|
|
| Maximka |
Posted on 23-08-2011 06:53
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1902
Joined: 22-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Hey, mates! I have one question for you. For WHICH RACE do you rate this mountain? Because, say, for tour of Poland it would be HC for sure, for Giro - heh, maybe second category.
It all depends on the race
|
| |
|
|
| JD317 |
Posted on 23-08-2011 07:09
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 273
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
i thought it was general across the board in regards to categorising climbs. how can a climb like this be given a HC in one race and then a 2 or a 3 in another? it is still the same distance and the same gradient no matter where it's at. im a bit confused at such a comment
Flying V
|
| |
|
|
| Maximka |
Posted on 23-08-2011 09:15
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1902
Joined: 22-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
It's because you don't have hard mountains in, say, Poland or Netherlands and there are plenty in Italy, Spain, etc. And every race organizers categorizing climbs basing on the existing profiles
|
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 23-08-2011 11:13
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3936
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Hey, on the route that I use for training there are a million small, but very steep hills (30 meters, but the gradient can be 20%), kinda Ardenne-terrain. However, there's one longer climb. It's around 1.8km so it's very short, but the average gradient would be at about 17%-18%. It's also on gravel, yet some of it is on hardpacked gravel which is just as good as asfalt.
How would you categorize it? It's very steep, but also very short. |
| |
|
|
| Martin_TB |
Posted on 23-08-2011 11:40
|
Stagiare
Posts: 216
Joined: 06-01-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Are the categories still based on the original system of which gear a 1910 car needed to get to the top?
Or is it more scientific now? |
| |
|
|
| JD317 |
Posted on 23-08-2011 12:20
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 273
Joined: 20-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
fair enough...but not really an apple is an apple...no matter how many times or where you look at it
Flying V
|
| |
|
|
| Inferio |
Posted on 23-08-2011 14:30
|
Domestique
Posts: 687
Joined: 31-12-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Martin_TB wrote:
Are the categories still based on the original system of which gear a 1910 car needed to get to the top?
Or is it more scientific now?
Huh, that system took into account only the steepness and no other parametres (like length), didn't it? |
| |
|
