- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Cross country mountain bikes
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Add new comment
13 comments
@bikebot, it's not a ride I am likely to be doing, but it is interesting to see how plotaroute can render it.
Google ride 100 garmin connect then log in and upload to garmin. It was someone else's route but worked for me.
Try it with plotaroute.com
It wouldn't import the tcx files from BRT, only the gpx. It's not a site I use, but if it's of any use to you or you can improve it, it's shared here.
www.plotaroute.com/route/98588
I messed around with the route a little with mixed results. As I mentioned at the top, I use BikeRouteToaster and in that I managed to improve the match with recorded data by adding more data points on the hills, and turning down the smoothing.
However, it's far from a good match, which I think is down to the resolution of the underlying elevation data, and that the roads will be slightly different to the surrounding terrain. Worse, I think RideWithGPS must be applying its own filter on import, as the gradient profile looks noticeably smoother when I mirror it over to there.
Same link on BRT for the revised version, new link for RideWithGPS.
http://bikeroutetoaster.com/BRTWebUI/Course/819114
http://ridewithgps.com/routes/9534042
I suspect the only way to get a really good accurate gradient match, it to manually patch those segments with recordings taken from previous years. I'm a bit of a anorak, but I doubt I'll have the time for that sort of fiddling.
I'm not sure that some of the gradient data is correct. My previous rides up that particular Leith Hill section push 9-10% both on Strava and RideWithGPS.
I haven't checked any other hills on your route.
Looks like there's a combination of not enough data points, and some smoothing going on. It may also be that the underlying elevation data (the DEM map) doesn't have enough resolution. Just reading this as a reference for Leith Hill - http://sportivecyclist.com/leith-hill-cycling-gradient-elevation/
Average gradient is 6.5%, but there are some short sections that go up to 12%. I'll try some tweaking later to see if I can get those to show up. It's worth having a try just to understand the limits of these tools.
Well I for one thank you Bikebot as others have said it comes in handy for elev action profile view, among other things!![41](https://cdn.road.cc/sites/all/modules/contrib/smiley/packs/smilies/41.gif)
I shall take my Garmin to record the ride but not to navigate with.
I'd be surprised if anyone did that, the course data is for the elevation view.
As above; it's a closed route and there are 25'000 other people on it. Leave the Garmin at home.
I am not sure why this is necessary. I don't think there is much chance of getting lost! The feed stations will be obvious from the large queues of cyclists waiting to grab something.
Obviously not for the directions! Although I would bet they've had someone go off course before... never underestimate peoples ability to screw up.
I like to have a course file for the gradient profile, the rest is just for the hell of it. Some of us like our gadgets, and there's nowt wrong with that.