Go on Dan tell them all what you can average on your fully loaded nomad i promise i wont spill the beans.
Aww, Anto...I am reminded of a quote attributed to our past American president, Abraham Lincoln, who was very tall for his time. When asked by a reporter, "Mr. Lincoln, how long do you think a man’s legs should be?" Lincoln replied, "Long enough to reach the ground."
When asked, "How fast should my average speed be when touring with a load?", I reply, "Fast enough to reach your daily objective, but slow enough to do so enjoyably. Wind, weather, and terrain will make all the difference".
Much depends on whether one is figuring running average (i.e. average speed while riding) or average speed overall (including stops; some computers stop automatically after a lag, then restart when you do. Others...don't). Stopping to take a lot of photos can really kill a running average. In fact, stopping at all really affects running average. This is one reason why -- when I want to make time/distance -- I stay on the bike as much as possible, eating on the bike and drinking enough on the bike to reach a balance so I can minimize toilet stops. I've even become pretty good at donning and doffing articles of clothing while still atop the bike. I slow down, but even that is much kinder to my running average than a full stop. When I reach stop signs I do stop completely and even do a toe-dab to document it for any watching members of the constabulary - but I make it quick! I once received a ticket for doing a full-stop track-stand instead of a "proper stop", so I take care with this.
There have been days when I have toiled all day to make 26km (on eroded bedrock and fresh, deep gravel on very steep logging roads in Oregon's Bohemia Mining District in the Calapooya Mountains) and against stiff 13kph headwinds as I churned though 13cm deep sand atop Hungary's dike-top roads (a day's efforts resulted in about 48km of forward movement). Sometimes, there's back-tracking in unfamiliar areas or you find a bridge is out, so average speed is really speed made good (forward movement between a starting and end fix). On the other hand, I made 200km pretty easily riding from Slovakia to Croatia one day while fully loaded and could have done another 100 if I had been well-equipped for night riding and hadn't wanted to see the scenery.
At home and when in good riding condition, I seem to average 17-21mph/~27-34kph on an unladen touring bike in relatively wind-free conditions on level ground. It doesn't seem to matter much whether I am on my favorite 14.5kg rando bike or my 20kg Nomad (dry weights). When touring with a load in similar conditions, I find I average ~15.6mph/25kph.
Regardless of which bike I use, I find my loaded touring speed takes an initial hit compared to my unladen speed, but comes around pretty quickly. Once I've been on the road awhile, my touring speed comes very close to my unladen speed for the same conditions. Same thing when switching from the rando bike to the Nomad for unladen day rides. The Nomad tends to be slower for the same recorded distance because it so often tempts me to try rough byways, poor gravel, and logging roads, so my speeds are objectively less.
Biggest determinants for me are where I go and the conditions, which can vary wildly in the course of a 200-400km day ride. Eugene is located in the southern end of the Willamette Valley, with open, flat farmlands to the north and mountains on the other three sides. If I go north, then I try to make as much northward progress as possible before the prevailing winds pick up at about 10:30am; they can be pretty brisk, but the tailwinds on my return sort of make up for the headwinds going out. If I go West, East, or South, then my speed depends on how many hills I encounter, how steep they are, and the road surface.
Sometimes, I have only a limited time for a tour, so I have to make a certain average if I am to cover the distance in the allotted time. Similarly, in my desert touring, I sometimes have to make a certain distance in a given time if I am to come out even on my water supplies. Then, I will push a bit, but mostly that just means more hours in the saddle and not a faster speed or higher average. It is not unusual for me to spend 17 hours in the saddle when touring in remote areas, with most of my rest breaks taken on the bike through changes in riding position, cadence, effort, or through coasting. This is where the many hand positions afforded by drop handlebars is a boon. My 400km day rides are usually completed within 24 hours including rest, food, and toilet breaks, but again it depends on terrain. My favored route has 53mi/85km of 5% upgrade, but the road surface is good, so it isn't too bad or slow. The longer I'm out the slower my running average, due partly to fatigue and partly to more off-bike stops.
And, sometimes, I just *
like* to go slow, to savor the experience of being on a bicycle, or to enjoy the day, or see and appreciate things in more detail than when I go faster. There's much to be said for going slow, as well. I
mostly no longer pedal downhill as I did when younger. Alone in remote areas, the risk:thrill ratio doesn't pencil out in my favor.
I've found wheel weight doesn't make much difference for me in steady-state riding
once up to speed. Where I've found it really noticeable is when there is a lot of
repeated acceleration -- commuting is one example, but also when starting and stopping repeatedly on really steep hills. It just takes a lot more effort for me to spin heavy wheels up to speed, and this takes a toll on my energy and average speed. Therefore, the Nomad
is definitely slower in conditions where I stop/start frequently, due mainly to its greater wheel weight.
Mostly, I seem to go at familiar speeds/effort regardless of the bike. I think for me it is more a matter of being able to maintain my fast, light cadence in the same preferred gears than it is sheer speed. Also, I do get used to the scenery passing at a pretty consistent rate, so that may be why I fall into similar speed averages regardless of bike or load.
One more note: I usually run 2.0 Schawalbe Duremes on the Nomad, but have sometimes fitted the 1.5in Bontrager SR1 road slicks stolen from my tandem. This is a remarkably light and supple road slick for the money (cheap and cheerful; usually <USD$$22-25 each from Trek dealers). They feel faster and certainly accelerate more easily than the 2in Duremes on the same Rigida Andra Rims, but much of it is illusory. They are smaller in diameter, so I spin out of each gear earlier, and I must remember to reset my computer to compensate for the change in effective wheel diameter or I get the false impression I really am going faster(!) and have suddenly become SuperDan.
Thinking back to Huernie's original question, I think a Mercury will certainly *feel* faster than his Koga, and there is likely enough weight savings to result in an actual increase in speed, perhaps due as much to lighter wheels/tires as to less overall weight. I think the larger diameter of 700C road wheels better bridge potholes and roll a bit easier on rough roads, all things being equal. If it were me and I wished to spend about USD$50 on the experiment, I'd buy and mount a pair of 1.5-1.6in road slicks on the Koga and see if I could feel the difference. Do be aware, however, the narrower, lower-profile tires will require comparatively higher pressures than fatter tires, so the ride is destined to be somewhat harsher.
All the best,
Dan. (...would much prefer to slow down and chat with a riding partner than ride faster alone)
