Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

100m - times for running vs cycling

grimble

50/34 12/27
Can it really be right that the men cycle 100m in about 10.5 seconds, after building up to race speed, whereas the runners do it in under 10, from a standing start?
 
Can it really be right that the men cycle 100m in about 10.5 seconds, after building up to race speed, whereas the runners do it in under 10, from a standing start?

No the cyclists do 200 in about 9.8secs
 
How fast do you reckon a gymnast could flick-flack 100m?

Or what distance could they achieve in the long jump for that matter?
 
Not from a standing start though.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if a man beat the bike over 100m, with the gearing involved it takes a cyclist a fair old while to get up to speed.

On the lead out lap of the men's team sprint Jamie Staff did 250m in 17.1 seconds from a standing start, so it's probably still faster on a bike, but I don't know how much of the first 100m is getting up to speed.
 
Going 100 metres on a bike? Hardly worth it, might as well walk. Lazy bastards. :mad:
 
On the lead out lap of the men's team sprint Jamie Staff did 250m in 17.1 seconds from a standing start, so it's probably still faster on a bike, but I don't know how much of the first 100m is getting up to speed.

That actually makes it sound as if the times would be pretty close over the first 100 from a standing start, if you take it for granted that the likes of Staff would be going a hell of a lot faster over the last 150 than they would over the first 100. Would a cyclist even reach their very top speed by 100 metres?
 
Back
Top Bottom