The Numbers
Can't Live Without Them!
For all you Quants out there .... and me
The Numbers:
- Total Days 72
- Bike Days. 49
- Non Bike Days. 23
- Total Distance 2,804 km
- Total Ascent 40,776 m
- Avg Bike Day 57 km
- Avg Pedal time /day 3.9 hrs
- Avg Speed 14.7 km/hr
- Avg Daily Ascent. 832 m
- Avg Climb Intensity 14.6 m/km
- Max Day Distance 101 km
- Min Day Distance 21 km
- Max Daily Ascent 1655 m
- Gorges Ridden 12
- Col Signs 21
- The Other Gorging
- Michelin Recommended Restaurants 22
- with Michelin Bibs 2
- with Michelin Stars. 2
- Restaurants that should be Michelin recommended 2
- Michelin Recommended Restaurants 22
This tour was the shortest distance wise of the four multi month tours we've done, and had the lowest average speed and the lowest average moving time.
The shorter distances and hence moving times were conscious decisions on our part to dial things back a little more on this trip to have more time to smell the flowers .... and digest the food.
The lowest average speed though may be a result of the ascents, which were of course also a conscious decision on our part, and this wasn't a case of dialling it back. Quite the opposite in fact. We knew this was going to be the most climbing we've done for any trip.
One of the most telling statistics in the numbers up above may be what I'm calling the 'climb intensity', which is simply the total ascent divided by the total distance travelled. It's an indication of how 'hilly' the overall route is. There’s been some discussion on this factor in other recent journals here.
Our climb intensity on this tour of 14.6 m/km was almost double that for our 2019 Copenhagen to Lecce tour (7.5 m/km) where we rode over the Alps and then down the length of Italy through and along the Apennines. It was 3 1/2 times that for our 2017 EV6(ish) tour (4.0 m/km) and 2 1/2 times that for our cross Canada trip, the portion we did on our single bikes - we rode the prairies and Lake Superior section on our tandem (6.0 m/km).
And for those statistically inclined, there's a pretty decent correlation of average speed and climb intensity ( an R squared coefficient of 0.86, that's a strong correlation!):
| Heart | 1 | Comment | 0 | Link |
And for the realists out there, here's another plot:
.... and it's a much stronger correlation. We’ll hit 0 km/hr at 95. I’m OK with that 😎
So that's it for this tour, hope to see you on the next one, in the slow lane!
| Rate this entry's writing | Heart | 6 |
| Comment on this entry | Comment | 7 |
1 year ago
1 year ago
1 year ago
1 year ago
Pure dumb luck on my part that I have all the detailed data from our past rides. When I bought our original Garmin, a simple Edge 500 that we still use, I vaguely recalled having to sign up for a Garmin Connect account. I never used this or accessed it until after our 2017 EV6ish trip when I had a look at it and discovered that every ride that I had ever recorded, and synched to my computer, was stored in Garmin Connect. This goes back to 2012 and our Chartres / Normandy Beach loop tour (which I might get around to publishing here). If you have a Garmin Connect account, you might be in luck in having some historical data kicking around, and it’s very simple to download it from Connect in an MS Excel compatible .csv file.
Anyway, it great for a data junky like me and I can make up and play around with correlations like ‘climb intensity’ to convince myself that’s why we are going slower. After that I then go and look at my Dorian Gray picture in the attic … or is that a mirror?
1 year ago
You are welcome, thank you for following along. We write this mainly to keep the days straight in our heads as on longer trips they had a tendency to meld together so it is a great reminder.
Saying that we really appreciate that people follow along and enjoy the ride with us. Thanks for taking a moment to let us know.
1 year ago