MTB seems so much harder than road riding

[sdifox]

That's for speed though, that does nothing to increase or decrease relative difficulty. A 100hp engine moving a 1 ton car vs a 2 ton car is still working just as hard regardless, the 1 ton will accelerate faster though.

being able to do more repetitions of bursts of accelerations is what makes the difference on races.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

It still makes a huge difference, otherwise you would not have carbon fiber rims/unibody. Rotational weight is nothing to laugh at.

The point I'm making is that either mtn or road can be made to be equally difficult. If you're not feeling enough leg burn then drop down a cog and pedal harder. Still not enough drop another cog. You will eventually get to the point where your legs can not pedal any faster or harder. Now tell me again why it matters if the bike is 15 or 30lbs or how much the wheels weigh?

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

being able to do more repetitions of bursts of accelerations is what makes the difference on races.

Sigh...

 

[JulesMaximus]

If it's easier on a smooth surface pedal harder pedal faster. Okay now you're pedaling like a maniac and you've reached your vo2 max. Does it matter if the bike is 30lbs or 15lbs, knobby or slick tires at this point? No.

Of course it matters. You'll wear out sooner on the 30lb bike with knobby tires. There's a reason nobody rides mountain bikes in the tour day france you know.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Of course it matters. You'll wear out sooner on the 30lb bike with knobby tires. There's a reason nobody rides mountain bikes in the tour day france you know.

Boy you people are dense. Yes if your desired goal is a set destination then yes you want the lighter faster bike. You said mtn biking was harder and I correctly disagreed. You have to think of it in time not distance. Say you do one hour at mtn biking but can only train out of that one hour 40 minutes at your maximum pace because the other 20 minutes were spent navigating creek beds or dodging fallen trees or rocks. Say I do that same hour on a road bike at my maximum pace but only 5 minutes were spent at stop signs and what not. In that hour of intense training which was harder? Which can give more consistent results so you know if you're progressing? Starting to understand yet?

 

[Blackjack200]

This thread is awesome.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Boy you people are dense. Yes if your desired goal is a set destination then yes you want the lighter faster bike. You said mtn biking was harder and I correctly disagreed. You have to think of it in time not distance. Say you do one hour at mtn biking but can only train out of that one hour 40 minutes at your maximum pace because the other 20 minutes were spent navigating creek beds or dodging fallen trees or rocks. Say I do that same hour on a road bike at my maximum pace but only 5 minutes were spent at stop signs and what not. In that hour of intense training which was harder? Which can give more consistent results so you know if you're progressing? Starting to understand yet?

Calm down nancy. No reason to start insulting people for fuck sake. :whiste:

I'm not racing and I'm not training to race so who gives a shit? Besides, I didn't say it WAS more difficult, just that it SEEMS more difficult. Christ, you could suck the life out the most lighthearted of threads.

 

[Phanuel]

Logic has apparently left the building here, oh well.

Mountain biking is way more fun than road biking for me, but fitness gains are had climbing 2-3k feet at a time with no break for me instead of dicking about on rolling hills on the mountain bike.

 

[rh71]

I do a lot of skating but ever since getting mtn bikes a month ago it's been fun working different muscles and I'm sure it will help long term. Haven't done actual trails other than paved and it's been fun so far. I'm not sure I want to really get into dirt trails (always with family anyway) - I got the mtb bike because I don't like the road bikes with where the brake handles are. One thing I've noticed is that even with 21 speeds, I'm only using 2, 3 max on pavement. Normal?

 

[BikeJunkie]

This thread inspired me to register and comment. Oilfieldtrash seems to be the only one here who actually knows what he's talking about (with Meghan coming in a very distant second), despite a number of others claiming to be cyclists themselves.

First, the premise of the thread itself is a little absurd:

MTB seems so much harder than road riding

Define "harder" so we know what we're actually comparing, because it sure ain't apples to apples. Road cycling demands consistently high output, whereas MTB'ing requires much more technical ability and the ability to live in an anaerobic zone in short frequent bursts. So what do we "care" about when we talk about difficulty?

Road riding is definitely harder than mountain biking workout wise. Mountain bike racers do 80% of their training on a road bike and just ride the mountain bike for skills sharpening and for variety.

From a pure cardiovascular fitness perspective, I would agree (which assumes that you're "training" for the duration of the road ride). Meghan's assertion that "you can hide being unfit on a road bike" is patently false if you're recording your ride data and sharing it publicly, or if you're riding with other "fit" cyclists. The same is true for MTB'ing.

If you're on Strava, RWGPS, or MMR (god forbid), you aren't hiding anywhere.

err, no. riding on a smooth surface is a hell lot easier than off-road. Plus mountain bikes are heavy compared to road bikes.

This is retarded. Of course a smooth surface is easier to ride on, but it's also much more consistent, meaning you can sustain your output. This provides a lot more opportunity to train if you choose to take advantage of it. There are no breaks other than the ones you elect to take for yourself.

You can't "go all out" on your typical singletrack trail for any meaningful period of time because natural obstacles and technical sections are going to slow you down, allowing your HR and muscles to recover. Two different animals.

Yes, there are climbs and such, but you'll find those on a road bike, too. The world isn't flat. My quads get a lot more work on my road bike than they do on my mountain bike, but then again I've planned a route that has 1500 feet of elevation gain over 25 miles. Ride that loop twice and tell me it's easy

There are singletracks out there with tons of elevation too, so I'm not saying it can't be done there, but I'm just dispelling this whole "the world is flat for roadies" nonsense.

Yes, riding 20-25 MPH on a flat road on a road bike is easy.

This is retarded and hilarious. Cyclists place themselves into categories A - D. They're not consistent from club to club or region to region, but generally speaking, 20mph would put you in the B category no matter who you're talking to, and in most cases the A category. 22+ would put you squarely in the A category anywhere.

Riding 20 - 25mph on flat road is not easy. Not over any meaningful distance. I would love to see your Strava or RWGPS profile so we can all verify your truly elite cycling performance. If 20 - 25mph is "easy", then we'll no doubt see numerous rides of yours where you're averaging 25mph over 20 to 30 miles (which is trivial mileage on a road bike).

Reality: If you could do this, you would be at or damn near the top of every segment leader board out there.

Anything over 18mph is pretty respectable and out of reach by anyone who isn't dedicated to cycling fitness. 18mph is still considered class A by many outfits, and is high-end class B anywhere.

I could ride 15-20 miles on my road bike at a much faster pace easily.

That's because 15 - 20 miles is silly. To exaggerate a bit to prove a point, that's like saying I don't get tired when I run to the end of my driveway. Of course it's easy. The only place a 15 - 20 mile ride has in a cyclist's training regimen is for baselining and threshold training. If your cycling training revolves around such rides, you're doing very, very wrong.

Maintain even a class B pace for a century ride (the gold standard for testing your cycling fitness) and then tell us how easy road cycling is. Seriously. Let's toss out this "25mph" bs. Just do 17mph. I'll give you half credit for 16mph.

The point is it's all relative. Apples and oranges. Roadies don't test themselves over puny 45 minute rides. That's the wrong job for the tool. Given a surface that's suitable for both, is it easier to ride x distance at y pace on a road bike? Of course it is. That's why roadies ride further and faster, because you need to in order to achieve a meaningful workout.

What's nice about a road bike is that you can train aerobically with much more consistency. That's why so many MTB'ers spend so much more time on their Roubaix than their Stumpjumper.

At the end of the day, it's all about pushing yourself to whatever your limit is. When you hop on a road bike to train, your number one goal is to get your HR to a given zone (depending on your goals) and keep it there. Under this premise, a road bike will kick your ass a lot harder than a mountain bike will over a given period of time (out of the norm singletrack courses aside), because you simply can't maintain your HR in any zone when the terrain and obstacles are constantly forcing you to slow down, change direction, whatever.

I love my mountain bike, I love my road bike, and I love my jogging shoes, but they all serve different purposes. If I'm setting out to burn calories or improve my VO2 max, the last thing I'm picking up is my Rockhopper. If I want a mental challenge and an adrenaline rush, I head for the trails.

 

[BikeJunkie]

Mountain biking is way more fun than road biking for me, but fitness gains are had climbing 2-3k feet at a time with no break for me instead of dicking about on rolling hills on the mountain bike.

Nailed it. Mountain biking is awesome. I have WAY more miles logged mountain biking than I do road cycling, and I'm in no way saying that mountain biking doesn't burn calories and work the body. But there is so much more opportunity to push yourself fitness-wise on a road bike. It's just the nature of the beast.

 

[Dirigible]

This thread inspired me to register and comment. Oilfieldtrash seems to be the only one here who actually knows what he's talking about (with Meghan coming in a very distant second), despite a number of others claiming to be cyclists themselves.

First, the premise of the thread itself is a little absurd:

MTB seems so much harder than road riding

Define "harder" so we know what we're actually comparing, because it sure ain't apples to apples. Road cycling demands consistently high output, whereas MTB'ing requires much more technical ability and the ability to live in an anaerobic zone in short frequent bursts. So what do we "care" about when we talk about difficulty?



From a pure cardiovascular fitness perspective, I would agree (which assumes that you're "training" for the duration of the road ride). Meghan's assertion that "you can hide being unfit on a road bike" is patently false if you're recording your ride data and sharing it publicly, or if you're riding with other "fit" cyclists. The same is true for MTB'ing.

If you're on Strava, RWGPS, or MMR (god forbid), you aren't hiding anywhere.



This is retarded. Of course a smooth surface is easier to ride on, but it's also much more consistent, meaning you can sustain your output. This provides a lot more opportunity to train if you choose to take advantage of it. There are no breaks other than the ones you elect to take for yourself.

You can't "go all out" on your typical singletrack trail for any meaningful period of time because natural obstacles and technical sections are going to slow you down, allowing your HR and muscles to recover. Two different animals.

Yes, there are climbs and such, but you'll find those on a road bike, too. The world isn't flat. My quads get a lot more work on my road bike than they do on my mountain bike, but then again I've planned a route that has 1500 feet of elevation gain over 25 miles. Ride that loop twice and tell me it's easy

There are singletracks out there with tons of elevation too, so I'm not saying it can't be done there, but I'm just dispelling this whole "the world is flat for roadies" nonsense.



This is retarded and hilarious. Cyclists place themselves into categories A - D. They're not consistent from club to club or region to region, but generally speaking, 20mph would put you in the B category no matter who you're talking to, and in most cases the A category. 22+ would put you squarely in the A category anywhere.

Riding 20 - 25mph on flat road is not easy. Not over any meaningful distance. I would love to see your Strava or RWGPS profile so we can all verify your truly elite cycling performance. If 20 - 25mph is "easy", then we'll no doubt see numerous rides of yours where you're averaging 25mph over 20 to 30 miles (which is trivial mileage on a road bike).

Reality: If you could do this, you would be at or damn near the top of every segment leader board out there.

Anything over 18mph is pretty respectable and out of reach by anyone who isn't dedicated to cycling fitness. 18mph is still considered class A by many outfits, and is high-end class B anywhere.



That's because 15 - 20 miles is silly. To exaggerate a bit to prove a point, that's like saying I don't get tired when I run to the end of my driveway. Of course it's easy. The only place a 15 - 20 mile ride has in a cyclist's training regimen is for baselining and threshold training. If your cycling training revolves around such rides, you're doing very, very wrong.

Maintain even a class B pace for a century ride (the gold standard for testing your cycling fitness) and then tell us how easy road cycling is. Seriously. Let's toss out this "25mph" bs. Just do 17mph. I'll give you half credit for 16mph.

The point is it's all relative. Apples and oranges. Roadies don't test themselves over puny 45 minute rides. That's the wrong job for the tool. Given a surface that's suitable for both, is it easier to ride x distance at y pace on a road bike? Of course it is. That's why roadies ride further and faster, because you need to in order to achieve a meaningful workout.

What's nice about a road bike is that you can train aerobically with much more consistency. That's why so many MTB'ers spend so much more time on their Roubaix than their Stumpjumper.

At the end of the day, it's all about pushing yourself to whatever your limit is. When you hop on a road bike to train, your number one goal is to get your HR to a given zone (depending on your goals) and keep it there. Under this premise, a road bike will kick your ass a lot harder than a mountain bike will over a given period of time (out of the norm singletrack courses aside), because you simply can't maintain your HR in any zone when the terrain and obstacles are constantly forcing you to slow down, change direction, whatever.

I love my mountain bike, I love my road bike, and I love my jogging shoes, but they all serve different purposes. If I'm setting out to burn calories or improve my VO2 max, the last thing I'm picking up is my Rockhopper. If I want a mental challenge and an adrenaline rush, I head for the trails.

Thanks for being a condescending jerk with your first post. You'll fit right in!

Since we're being condescending, you mention a route with 1500' of elevation gain in 25 miles as if it's something hard. That's stupid easy. Come back after riding routes with 1500' of elevation gain in one mile.

 

[BikeJunkie]

Thanks for being a condescending jerk with your first post. You'll fit right in!

I'm not here to make friends. I just wanted to clear up all the BS.

Since we're being condescending, you mention a route with 1500' of elevation gain in 25 miles as if it's something hard. That's stupid easy. Come back after riding routes with 1500' of elevation gain in one mile.

I mentioned it as something hard in the context of someone who thought 15 - 20 miles counted as any sort of valid reference point.

 

[NIGELG]

I'm not here to make friends. I just wanted to clear up all the BS.



I mentioned it as something hard in the context of someone who thought 15 - 20 miles counted as any sort of valid reference point.

Good first three posts.

I ride strictly road and it is fun.

Mountain biking is something I hope to get into some day.

 

[Dirigible]

I'm not here to make friends.

You succeeded!

I just wanted to clear up all the BS.

You failed.

 

[BikeJunkie]

You failed.

Instead of getting so worked up over calling out BS for what it was, why don't you tell me where I was wrong. Maybe you'll learn something. Maybe I'll learn something. Maybe I didn't word something very well.

Or if you just want to dwell on my approach rather than the points I made or failed to make, I suppose that's your prerogative.

Mountain biking is something I hope to get into some day.

It really is a blast especially if you're an adrenaline junkie, but as a general rule I try to put as much of my free time into physical fitness as possible. It's just where my interests are right now. Because of this I've been riding road much more than I had in the past. Trust me, if MTB'ing was the better workout that's where I'd be spending my cycling time

 

[JulesMaximus]

I'm not here to make friends. I just wanted to clear up all the BS.

Well, you're doing a fantastic job. :thumbsup:

I mentioned it as something hard in the context of someone who thought 15 - 20 miles counted as any sort of valid reference point.

For what it's worth I've ridden a few centuries on a road bike you condescending douche. All I said is that 15-20 miles on a road bike would be easy compared to 15-20 miles on a mountain bike and that riding mtb SEEMS harder than road.

Believe me, I've put in many thousands of miles riding road bikes, trained for century rides, commuted by bicycle to and from work for over 2 years 2-3 days a week and did training rides on the weekends. I know a little bit about road cycling.

 

[BikeJunkie]

Well, you're doing a fantastic job. :thumbsup:
For what it's worth I've centuries on a road bike you condescending douche. All I said is that 15-20 miles on a road bike would be easy compared to 15-20 miles on a mountain bike and that riding mtb SEEMS harder than road.

Believe me, I've put in many thousands of miles riding road bikes.

Your ride numbers don't mean anything to me, and they obviously didn't contribute much to your understanding of the sport (or at the very least, not your ability to articulate it). I don't care if you're Lance Armstrong. What you said was factually incorrect and incredibly ambiguous.

 

[Phanuel]

For what it's worth I've ridden a few centuries on a road bike you condescending douche. All I said is that 15-20 miles on a road bike would be easy compared to 15-20 miles on a mountain bike and that riding mtb SEEMS harder than road.

Comparing distance traveled vs distanced traveled, yes, the heavier, lower geared, bigger tired bike is going to take more effort to travel the same distance.

Compare time vs time though and they should be at least equal with road being harder once you throw in a hard steady state climb up a mountain pass.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Your ride numbers don't mean anything to me, and they obviously didn't contribute much to your understanding of the sport (or at the very least, not your ability to articulate it). I don't care if you're Lance Armstrong. What you said was factually incorrect and incredibly ambiguous.

Is this what you do in your spare time to try to feel better about yourself?

Compared to you I've barely said anything in this thread.

 

[JulesMaximus]

I do a lot of skating but ever since getting mtn bikes a month ago it's been fun working different muscles and I'm sure it will help long term. Haven't done actual trails other than paved and it's been fun so far. I'm not sure I want to really get into dirt trails (always with family anyway) - I got the mtb bike because I don't like the road bikes with where the brake handles are. One thing I've noticed is that even with 21 speeds, I'm only using 2, 3 max on pavement. Normal?

It depends. If your riding is mostly on flat surfaces or you like grinding out a big gear on rolling hills then yes, it's normal. Bikes typically have a fair amount of overlap in gearing, especially on a bike with a triple crankset, so even though you have 21 speeds you have a lot of overlap in gearing.

 

[GoSharks]

While BikeJunkie is lacking in tact, I agree with pretty much everything he has said.

 

[FleshLight]

They are not directly comparable unless you are going downhill. 200 watts is 200 watts. If you're going DH on an mtb, I agree that the beating you take in your joints, upper body, and back does contribute to your fatigue.

 

[JulesMaximus]

While BikeJunkie is lacking in tact, I agree with pretty much everything he has said.

He's not wrong, he's just an asshole.

 

[RichieZ]

why don't you guys just get a powermeter and show us how hard you are riding?

i'd probably agree that you perceive MTBing to be "harder" but at the end of the day watts are watts. i MTB'd for years and switched to road biking this past year, after learning how to properly spin it is much easier to ride longer, but I'm getting a better workout and climb much more than I ever did MTBing