eddy Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 650B route Well, there is nothing that suits my physique except maybe the 7th stage.....
90 Inch Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Serious ? I know there is speculation about changing the ABSA part of the name, but may as well remove the Epic part as well now
Newboy Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Serious ? I know there is speculation about changing the ABSA part of the name, but may as well remove the Epic part as well nowWhy?
Shebeen Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 I used to dig seeing what route they came up with - this is very 'meh' for me. It seems like they've stopped exploring like in the past. instead of heading out there, they just go look at previous route books and link them up. I know this doesn't make it a bad course, but it has changed the way the route evolves ( for me at least).
90 Inch Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Why?Shortest Epic in terms of KM everLongest Stage of 106Km is shortest in Epic historyOnly 1 day over 2300m The "Epic" part of the Epic is when you need to dig deep, its the KM's after 100 and the climbing after 2000M, 2016 has virtually none of that. Yes they have the highest number of vertical m/Km, but that's because they have reduced the KM, not because they increased the climbing
V12man Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Well, there is nothing that suits my physique except maybe the 7th stage.....The 8th stage will suit you.... remember to book for it... and pay...
V12man Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Shortest Epic in terms of KM everLongest Stage of 106Km is shortest in Epic historyOnly 1 day over 2300m The "Epic" part of the Epic is when you need to dig deep, its the KM's after 100 and the climbing after 2000M, 2016 has virtually none of that. Yes they have the highest number of vertical m/Km, but that's because they have reduced the KM, not because they increased the climbingIt also has the highest percentage of singletrack.... which could make some of the climbs more interesting/harder. I doubt they made it easier especially for Kevin.... :ph34r:
GLuvsMtb Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 There seems to be very little "new" trail it seems, and old favourites like Oak Valley also gets a miss this year. Tulbagh and will probably be about 80 to 90% of what was done in previous years, Boschendal would probably use much of the old Mtb Argus routes, and whatever new trails they have been working on, and the drag to Meerendal will probably use much of the Grape Escape route. It seems like they've run out of ideas a bit here. Perhaps try something new, like going from Knysna to CT or something.
GLuvsMtb Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 On the plus side: a place like Paarl has ample accommodation available for supporters and riders, so once you're on the right side of the mountain, you'll be able to get accommodation for you and your crew fairly easily.
karma Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Tough crowd Looks easy, can we apply to do a second lap on day 3,4, 5?
nathrix Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Out of interest I compared all the previous year's total climbs devided by total distance to get the meters climbed per kilometer per year YEAR - CLIMBS / DIST. = ASCENT PER KM2016 - 14,950m / 647km = 23.10m per km *2015 - 16,000m / 739km = 21.65m per km2014 - 14,850m / 729km = 20.37m per km2013 - 15,950m / 706km = 22.59m per km2012 - 16,300m / 781km = 20.87m per km2011 - 14,550m / 707km = 20.58m per km **2010 - 14,635m / 722km = 20.27m per km2009 - 14,623m / 683km = 21.41m per km2008 - 18,529m / 966km = 19.18m per km ***2007 - 15,045m / 886km = 16.98m per km ****2006 - 16,605m / 940km = 17.66m per km2005 - 16,020m / 898km = 17.84m per km2004 - 17,380m / 788km = 22.05m per km*Year with the most climbing per km & shortest distance**Year with the least accumulative climbing***Year with the most accumulative climbing & longest distance****Year with the least climbing per km Edit: Obviously weather and terain also plays a huge part
Skubarra Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Out of interest I compared all the previous year's total climbs devided by total distance to get the meters climbed per kilometer per year Edit: Obviously weather and terain also plays a huge part So they reduced the amount of climbing, reduced the kilometers by even more and then sell it as more meters climb per kilometer than ever before. Are we seeing USN's marketing wizards at work here...
GLuvsMtb Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Out of interest I compared all the previous year's total climbs devided by total distance to get the meters climbed per kilometer per year Edit: Obviously weather and terain also plays a huge part now can we please see this chart again, but in R/m climbed, and R/km cycled since 2004.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.