OK, my local training route starts with a 2.5 mile climb with a height gain of about 1000 feet.

As a little test I climbed it on the bike, keeping HR down below 150 time to top +/-23 minutes. Next day did the same, running in the same zone - time to top +/-26 minutes.

When I did the same experiment in the summer going balls out to the top the times were 19 and 21 respectively. (Hard tail MTB)

These are the door to top times that cover the 800 meters of flat at the bottom which is where the bike makes up the time.

I feel the gap should be bigger - am I a crap cyclist?

Upper brook street, then up Broomhall Lane turning right up the hill

In case anyone has some sort of gps do dah that can tell me the gradient?

Why should the Gap be bigger ??  what is your MAX and the MAX you actually run at ??

Too go from average 10mph to average 11mph takes more than 10% more power for instance.

I have found this also to be the case, especially for steep hills. It is always fun to run away from cyclists who are struggling to the top.

Dont forget that when biking you are carrying an extra 25lbs too.

Dont forget that when biking you are carrying an extra 25lbs too.

If you are Dylan then there is the weight of the bike on top of that!

That's more like it John.

So on that course the bikes are 2.3 times as quick as the runners - whereas I'm 1.1 times as quick - meaning I should ride just over twice as quick .(as your figures are for a bigger gradient)

So the target time for me to the top of the hill is just over 10 minutes.

Fek me where did I leave the turbo?

You could get seriously geeky about this by asking these guys!