Walking Forum

Main Boards => General Walking Discussion => Topic started by: myxpyr on 20:51:23, 04/05/19

Title: Performance
Post by: myxpyr on 20:51:23, 04/05/19
OK I don't get obsessed by how fast or slow I walk. I do it to enjoy it. However, on my smartphone I've got the Viewranger app which indicates, distance walked, average speed etc.
When walking, if I stop for much more than a couple of minutes I set it to pause so, as far as possible, it only calculates on the actual time I am walking. It obviously takes account of ascent and descent and, at the end of a day over easy to moderate terrain, it gives an average speed of about 2 mph. Steeper/rougher terrain gives circa 1.5 mph sometimes less. The 2mph speed seems to correspond reasonably with Naismith after calculating height gain and loss.
Just wondering if anyone on here would consider either of those figures to be on the slow side.(Age factor - I'm 73)


Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Rob Goes Walking on 21:25:45, 04/05/19
Compared to who? It's a little (not much) slower than me normally but I'm half your age. Sussamb is around your age and faster but we can't all be of elite fitness. I think it's pretty good for your age, I'm faster than most older folk and you're not much different in speed to I am.

I've been persuaded pausing ViewRanger when stopping is a bad idea (unless you're stopping for the night or something). You get a better idea of what your actual performance is if you don't pause it.

Wouldn't worry about it? Like you say you do it for pleasure.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Mel on 21:43:47, 04/05/19
I think that sounds like the perfect speed to enjoy a walk  O0


I consider myself a slow walker (am always "the backmarker" on any group walk  :D  ) 


On the flat I average about 2.3mph
On gentle undulations I average about 1mph - 1.5mph
On gnarly, steep stuff I average about 0.5mph


I don't pause VR during a walk as I like to know how long it takes me to complete a walk from start to finish for future planning purposes so I don't get caught out and end a walk in the dark by over-estimating my speed rather than how fast I was walking.  If I want to know that I look at the uploaded stats and hover my cursor over the track recording which tells me my speed at that point.


So, I guess technically, I walk faster than the speeds quoted above  :-\


Naismiths rule is a load of twaddle IMHO.  Unless you just like to yomp on, head down, gritting your teeth whilst you "get through" your walk.


Title: Re: Performance
Post by: myxpyr on 22:03:45, 04/05/19
Thanks for both replies. Encouraging comments which suggest I'm not ready for the knacker's yard yet :D
Incidentally I ran a thread about knee supports elsewhere. I've started using them and my descents are now virtually pain free ;D
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: myxpyr on 22:06:24, 04/05/19
When I'm not on the hills I usually do a walk along our local prom(flattish with some very minor inclines). I usually average about 3mph :)
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Rob Goes Walking on 22:12:10, 04/05/19
When I'm not on the hills I usually do a walk along our local prom(flattish with some very minor inclines). I usually average about 3mph :)

Quicker than me on the flat. I average 2.2 mph but my stride length is very short.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: ninthace on 22:20:13, 04/05/19
I’m an overweight, 68, male and I’m a bit faster, around 2.5 mph taking into account terrain.  I actually work in kph because the maths are easier as OS maps are metric.  I reckon on 5 kph on the flat in good going. Rougher country flat perhaps 4.5 kph, climbs 3.5 to 4 kph but it really doesn’t matter.  I rarely stop for a break, eating and drinking on the go and resting by slowing down for a bit.
People were harder in Naismith’s day but you can tune his rule to your own performance.  These days I can usually estimate how long a walk will take by eye.  However, Memory map has a tuneable version of Naismith that you can use for route planning. The OS app has a crude version that usually overestimates route times.
As to ViewRanger, my advice would be to not bother pausing it.  VR has 3 graphs, speed/time, height/time, distance/time. You can overlay all 3 to see how gradient, going and time affect your progress.
I have a look at the graphs in the pub just after the walk. After that I forget it other than to add it to my experience bank for planning the next trip.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Mel on 22:27:38, 04/05/19
I get indigestion if I "eat on the go"  :-\



Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Mel on 22:28:55, 04/05/19
I wouldn't have said you were overweight ninthace... unless you've put on some, ahem, "muscle tone" since we last met  :D
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: ninthace on 22:31:57, 04/05/19
I wouldn't have said you were overweight ninthace... unless you've put on some, ahem, "muscle tone" since we last met  :D
Thanks Mel, I call it muscle  :) , the GP and Mrs N disagree.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: jimbob on 22:36:39, 04/05/19
I asked a similar question not too long ago.The answers led me to take it for granted that we all walk at differing speeds and accept what you do as your norm.

I am in the slower percentile.
BUT I daydream and wander about enjoying the views and the vegetation and backtracking a lot to get back onto the right track.
Even if you are not walking as fast as others you would need to adopt a serious training regimen to up your speed by anything that would make a big difference over a days walking. At our age voluntary movement of any sort is great. When we were kids not too many lived healthy lives at our current time of life.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: fernman on 22:52:36, 04/05/19
When we were kids not too many lived healthy lives at our current time of life.

Is that not still the case?
Every time I go shopping I never cease to be amazed by the numbers of people I see who are quite a bit younger than me and hobbling about with sticks and crutches, not to mention the amount of well-overweight ones for whom, it would appear, a bit of exercise would kill.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Bigfoot_Mike on 22:56:28, 04/05/19
I am 56 and overweight. Around town and on the flat I tend to walk at around 4 mph and can keep this up for a good few miles. Out hiking I walk a bit slower, maybe 3+ mph on the flat, slowing to 1.5 - 2 mph on the steeper bits, maybe 2.5 mph on the way down. My hiking speed depends on how often I go out and how fit I am. I woils probably be slower a the moment due to a long injury lay up.


If I am walking with my wife, my speed will be quite a bit slower, although usually still too fast for her. She is more than a foot shorter than me, so that does explain some of the speed difference.


When younger I found Naismith was a reasonable estimate for a day’s walking, if I included any breaks in the overall duration, so I was actually walking faster than the rule on average.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Dovegirl on 23:02:20, 04/05/19
I often like to have a rough idea of how long a walk will take and I reckon on 2 mph as an average, which allows time for varying my pace according to the terrain.  I like having time to take in the landscape and to look at wild flowers and to take photos, rather than racing along.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: richardh1905 on 09:13:53, 05/05/19
2mph is not bad as a very rough rule of thumb if I'm on the hill. Faster on the flat, of course, and a tad slower if it is really steep, rough or in the snow.

Useful for planning, but I really don't worry about it as a performance thing. As others have said, walking is about enjoyment!
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: happyhiker on 09:53:26, 05/05/19
Unless you are in a race, I would have thought walking was about the enjoyment rather than speed and that the main reason for knowing your speed was to know how long a walk would take you for safety reasons, so as to avoid being benighted or to be in time for the (last?) bus home. The overall speed needs to take account of everything including lunch stops, taking photos etc. Once you know your average walking speed over different types of terrain and can then assess roughly how long a walk will take, personally, I do not see a reason for monitoring it on a regular basis. Reference to the map and watch is the best monitor on individual walks.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: GnP on 10:44:02, 05/05/19
I thought I was a slow walker but having read some of these posts it seems I`m fairly average. Anything between 2 to 3 mile per hour or sometimes faster if its low level / flat and I`m on a road (say) or boring track I crack on just to get to more interesting fields or open land.I always estimate my time for the whole trip taking into account stops for taking pics & eating. Now & again I forget about how much ascent is on some routes and find it interesting how much my avergae speed can plummet....
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Slogger on 13:39:35, 05/05/19
Depending on amount of ascent, but over an undulating route I average around 2.6mph. I know lots of Ultra runners/walkers and to average 3mph over an undulating route usually means some running or trotting the downhills. Of course all that also depends on the distance. Those averageing 3 mph during the Lakeland 100 miler for example do a lot of running, but could average the same speed just fast walking if it were just 20 mile.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: BuzyG on 21:50:48, 05/05/19
Great thread.  I walk to keep fit as well as for pleasure.  I also have a 27 year old elite athlete my son, as motivation.  If I'm out basically training, then I will average 3 to 3.5 mph over 10 to 15 miles of typical moorland terrain including 3 to 4000 ft of ascent and descent.  I am no runner but I am 6ft 4, so my long stride on flat ground and gentle descents makes up for the steeper sections.

Out with our ramblers walking group today we covered 17 miles, with 4350ft of ascents, in 7 hours including 3 stops. So 2.4 avearage. Age range in the group of 17, today included Ten tors challengers training for next weekend through to pentioners.  In fact there was one young lad walking with his grandmother. 

Out walking the coast path with my wife and daughter weekend before last, we covered, 5miles with 3520ft of ascents in 4.5 hours with plenty of stops for photos. So just over 1.1 mph average.

So horses for courses, you can walk as fast as you are able, or you can just walk as fast as you want to.. :)
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: myxpyr on 08:27:45, 06/05/19


Out with our ramblers walking group today


:( I tried going out with a ramblers group once. Not for me!(No disrespect to you - I enjoyed your response)
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: gunwharfman on 09:09:53, 06/05/19
I'm 74 and walk at the speed that feels comfortable and befitting the surroundings. Sometimes I just amble along, maybe stop a few times, even have an afternoon sleep but on other times I really make the effort to speed up. Usually when I want to get to a pub! For me it's not about speed, it's more to do with distance, how far do I want to walk, how far can I walk, how far I have to walk! I'm happy to walk 10 miles, often up to 15, but not keen to have to do 20 or more. That's why I don't love that hiking section from Kirk Yetholme to Byrness!
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: myxpyr on 10:13:39, 06/05/19
Usually when I want to get to a pub!
Can't complain at that O0
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: richardh1905 on 12:12:38, 06/05/19
Usually when I want to get to a pub!



Made me smile. I remember the bad old days when pubs in England and Wales used to shut for an afternoon break, rushing down off the hill to catch last orders.


Often resulted in a 'lock in'!
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: alan de enfield on 12:25:12, 06/05/19

Made me smile. I remember the bad old days when pubs in England and Wales used to shut for an afternoon break, rushing down off the hill to catch last orders.


Often resulted in a 'lock in'!



And, if you weren't quick enough, a 'lock-out' until about 7pm
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: fernman on 13:59:06, 06/05/19
I remember the bad old days when pubs in England and Wales used to shut for an afternoon break

Most of them still do in the Chilterns villages I pass on my day walks.
If there's a pub on my route it needs to be situated so that I reach it around midday to 1 pm, or around 2 pm after I've had my sandwiches..
It's heartbreaking to have to walk by ones that aren't yet open at the start of my walk, or closed in the afternoon.
On the bright side, it saves me a fiver each time  :)
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: bricam2096 on 14:03:17, 06/05/19
It's heartbreaking to have to walk by ones that aren't yet open at the start of my walk, or closed in the afternoon.

Not to mention the pubs that seem to be open all day every day, apart from the one day that you're passing through it  >:(
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: ninthace on 14:25:30, 06/05/19
Or even sadder - those pubs marked on the map that aren't there anymore  :(
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: BuzyG on 15:01:24, 06/05/19
Enjoying the irony of the performance thread turning into a pub crawl.  ;)
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Rob Goes Walking on 15:27:05, 06/05/19
Enjoying the irony of the performance thread turning into a pub crawl.  ;)

 ;D Well spotted. As we drifted off our bearing I didn't even notice  :)
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: bricam2096 on 16:01:19, 06/05/19
Pubs improve my performance  :D

A quick halfway pint tends to refresh me and pick up the pace  O0
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: ninthace on 16:21:31, 06/05/19
I plan my walks to finish at, or within striking distance of, a pub.  If you walk with me you will find the distance to go towards the latter part of the walk is given in minutes to beer o'clock.  It helps revive a flagging pace and is therefore performance related m'lud.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: fernman on 17:13:59, 06/05/19
Pubs improve my performance  :D

A quick halfway pint tends to refresh me and pick up the pace  O0

I second that. It's very important to keep topped up with liquid and avoid dehydration. Even if your pace is a bit wobbly afterwards.

To a golfer who shouted about my poles, "I don't think you'll find any snow that way", I replied, "They're to stop me falling over when I come out of the pub!"

There, I've covered two threads in one post, Performance and Poles  ;)
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: Owen on 21:52:55, 06/05/19
Interesting thread, I've not really thought about it before. Here's some stats from my Sunday walk. Approx 22.5km, 1065m ascent and descent, 6.5 hours. That works out at 3.5kph or 2.2mph overall. What does that prove? I've no idea probably nothing.
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: maxmarengo on 09:00:14, 07/05/19
If you are using ViewRanger, the bit of data that you need is "Moving Average Speed" - that gives you your average speed when you are actually moving. That way you don't have to pause the recording all the time (though it is still advisable if you are going to spend some time indoors).
To see it, go into the supplementary tabs behind recording, find a bit of data you no not need (eg. "Heading" on the navigation tab), press and hold and a selection of data fields will come up. Select "Moving average speed" and that value will replace "Heading".
I find that very useful when I am on a walk involving lots of stops and starts (birdwatching, looking at flowers, making notes). In the end I am interested in how fast I walk for two reasons:1) A check on my fitness levels when I am walking on local terrain.2) To help estimate how quickly I can walk a particular distance if I have a deadline to meet (pub closing, bus to catch etc).
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: alan de enfield on 09:44:37, 07/05/19

And if using SatMap you get :


Max Speed
Average Speed
Average Moving Speed

Current Speed
Total Time
Moving Time


(https://i.postimg.cc/wyzsWqz9/1544369939895.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/wyzsWqz9)
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: bricam2096 on 18:51:57, 07/05/19
I use the Walkmeter App. Unless it's changed it has the option to have voice updates on your progtess, you just decide what info you want it to tell you and how often.

Did the Great Glen Way years ago using it, phone in the top of the rucksack, telling me every mile what my average mph was, distance walked etc. and every hour I got more info.

It's good but then you do feel like you need to speed up when it tells you your average pace is 2.9mph for example then you stop for a wee and the average goes down :D
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: sussamb on 20:52:17, 07/05/19
And if using SatMap you get :


Max Speed
Average Speed
Average Moving Speed

Current Speed
Total Time
Moving Time


(https://i.postimg.cc/wyzsWqz9/1544369939895.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/wyzsWqz9)

Or on a Garmin those data fields and many more besides, too many really but then they cater for all sorts, even have a data field for Vertical speed to destination  ;D
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: ninthace on 20:57:34, 07/05/19
Or on a Garmin those data fields and many more besides, too many really but then they cater for all sorts, even have a data field for Vertical speed to destination  ;D
  Of which my favourite is ETA!
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: myxpyr on 12:01:19, 08/05/19
If you are using ViewRanger, the bit of data that you need is "Moving Average Speed" - that gives you your average speed when you are actually moving. That way you don't have to pause the recording all the time (though it is still advisable if you are going to spend some time indoors).
To see it, go into the supplementary tabs behind recording, find a bit of data you no not need (eg. "Heading" on the navigation tab), press and hold and a selection of data fields will come up. Select "Moving average speed" and that value will replace "Heading".
I find that very useful when I am on a walk involving lots of stops and starts (birdwatching, looking at flowers, making notes). In the end I am interested in how fast I walk for two reasons:1) A check on my fitness levels when I am walking on local terrain.2) To help estimate how quickly I can walk a particular distance if I have a deadline to meet (pub closing, bus to catch etc).
Thanks for that. I've just reset my Viewranger and look forward to "field testing" it
Title: Re: Performance
Post by: tenmilesplus on 12:25:51, 08/05/19

Made me smile. I remember the bad old days when pubs in England and Wales used to shut for an afternoon break, rushing down off the hill to catch last orders.


Often resulted in a 'lock in'!

  If you want to revisit the 1970's pubs in Northampton don't open even when they are advertising they are open.. Spent 3 days walking there and learnt not to rely on them, the few we found that were open were very good and oldy Worldy with great food and beers but just unreliable.. Sorry don't mean to hijack this thread..

 Speed walking performance though is a personal thing.. Walking is not a sport but a hobby, it is generally open for all and my personal reason for Walking is only partly competitive, I set my own rules, targets and goals, sometimes these are low but sometimes I really push myself ( Test Way 44 miles in 18 hrs ) but for 99% of the time just enjoying the views and getting home are the only to achievements required.. We do try to keep to 2+ mph as an average which means walking at 3+ mph to allow stops for ( pub ) food and picture taking..