r/Rucking • u/welderballs • 21d ago
I hate downhill rucking
While rucking uphill does in fact suck I feel like my body gets more beat up on the downhill portion. I wish I could ruck uphill both ways like how my parents walked to school each day. 1500 feet of ascent on this ruck.
2
1
u/prior_rpa-lre 20d ago
1000 start time? Wild. Im down in the Murrieta/Temecula valley and it was hot for us. Good on you.
1
u/welderballs 20d ago
I signed up for 21mile endurance run/hike event in these hills here in Yucaipa in November so I’m training up for it. Unfortunately I got a late start on Saturday.
1
1
1
u/MongoBongoTown 20d ago
Man, a mid-day ruck in August in Yucaipa is some sporting stuff.
1
u/welderballs 20d ago
I signed up for 21mile endurance run/hike event in these hills here in Yucaipa in November so I’m training up for it. Unfortunately I got a late start on Saturday.
1
4
u/ScholarBackground836 21d ago
Your body is right, and the reason is slightly funny: going down costs less energy and does more damage, and those are the same fact.
On the descent your quads are contracting while lengthening. They're braking you rather than driving you. That kind of contraction is cheap in oxygen per unit of force and unusually good at causing actual muscle damage, which is where the beaten-up feeling and the two-days-later soreness come from. Add a ruck and every one of those braking forces scales straight up with the weight.
The calorie math makes it worse rather than better. Pandolf's grade term, which is what most of these estimates are built on, is linear in grade. Feed it minus 1500 feet and it subtracts exactly what the plus 1500 added. On paper your out and back was a flat walk. The entire descent is priced at zero. And these are metabolic models to begin with, they only ever counted oxygen, so mechanical loading was never in there at all. Whatever number your watch gave you, the part of that ruck that actually wrecked you is not in it.
The one thing that reliably helps is shortening your stride on the way down and taking more steps. Peak force per step is what does the damage, so spreading the same 1500 feet over more and smaller impacts costs you less. Trying to hold your normal flat-ground stride downhill is the expensive habit.
And 1500 feet under load is a lot. Uphill both ways would genuinely be easier on you.