[ Homepage ]  [ General Lists ]

     Altimetry = Profile

    When speaking about the coefficient of difficulty of a mountain pass we are trying to give and objective and universal value to something that is very personal and subjective: What it is harder? In other words, what implies a bigger difficulty climbing, a continuous "wall" of 1 km. at 10% or a climb of 3 kms. at 5% of average gradient? 

     But if we knew all the answers we would be able to check how it is not so easy to come to an agreement. With the result that if you are fond of these topics of the Altimetries you will have observed the enormous diversity of coefficients that the authors present us. For some of them the Italian Mortirolo will be harder than the Gamonal, while, for others, a pass of exaggerated longitude like it could be the climb to the Veleta (Sierra Nevada), 41,35 km. would be the hardest.  

     Once explained this introduction, on which we all agree, we will pass to the explanation of how we obtain our coefficient. 

     We have taken more than 7 years of uninterrupted clims, with a multitude of different companions, and consulting with authentic interest everything published on the topic, we have decided to elaborate a coefficient that served us as an orientation. 

     After all this time studying and having carried out consultations with all kinds of cyclists the gist of the question is, without a doubt: what should prevail when elaborating the coefficient; the length and the time employed, or the gradient of each stretch of road and the total unevenness (the difference between the altitude at the beginning and the end of the climb)? 

     In our coefficient we use the two elements but giving more importance to the hardness of the "walls" to ascend. And we have done this because many cyclists like us have expressed to us many times that can ascend passes of average difficulty without an appropriate preparation but they would never dare with "walls" of high percentage. 

     Because  of everythingpreviously mentioned, and if you observe the table that we use, thoroughly, you will see that starting from superior percentages to 5% a progression begins in the coefficient. 

     We apply the coefficient corresponding to each kilometre of ascension, and the total sum would give us the coefficient of difficulty of the whole pass. Then, we take into consideration the difficulty of each kilometre and also the total length. And so, the average gradient of the pass and the total unevenness, would also be included in this coefficient . 

     You will notice that we have attributed coefficient 1 to 0% slope and even to a slight descent. We have done this because we continue on the bike: it is only necessary to think of when you are tired or when your companions go too fast an we are still making an effort. 

     Our measuraments are carried out with an altimetre Cateye CC-AT100, with variations metre by metre. The maximum "walls" are obtained by means of the use of a clinometre Sky Mounti with a maximum graduation of 27%. 

     Finally, we offer you the table that we have used and their comparison with Mario Ruiz's coefficients. In blue the percentage of a complete kilometre is expressed, and in yellow the coefficient that would correspond to this complete kilometre.  

TABLE

COMPARATIVE TABLE   

     And now, without hesitasion, to what really matters: the climbs. The more passes we ascend the easier it will be for each one of us to elaborate our own personal coefficient. And remember to do all those climbs as an amateur better to have a bike with three chainwheels (Ulrich, Heras or the Euskaltel team used them to climb l'Angliru). And to reach the objective that we all pursue: to arrive farther, higher, with more strength, CITIUS, ALTIUS, FORTIUS.