Last week, we published Zwift Charts: Rate of New Road Construction from 2015 to Present, charting the total kilometers of road added to Zwift over time.
One commenter astutely noted that the chart didn’t include Zwift’s Climb Portal, and that was indeed correct. While the Climb Portals are rideable in Zwift, they aren’t quite the same “roads” as you find elsewhere in the game (they don’t include surrounding scenery, and what’s the road surface, anyway?) Including them in the road construction timeline didn’t feel right.
In fairness to Zwift, though, lots of rideable roads have been added via the Climb Portal since mid-2023. So here’s a follow-up post charting Climb Portal growth over time.
Zwift Climb Portal Growth: Total Length and Count
A few notes:
- Zwift’s rate of Climb Portal growth has remained relatively steady since its launch, with approximately 200km of new Climb Portal roads being released each year. This is nearly 4x the rate of new “standard” roads released in Zwift’s biggest release years.
- If the Climb Portal roads were added to our chart from the earlier post, Zwift’s rate of construction from mid-2023 to present would be dramatically increased over previous years. In fact, here’s what it would look like (a bit messy, but you get the point):
Zwift Road Construction Timeline (Including Climb Portal)
Making the Library More Attractive
Zwift created the unique look and feel of the Climb Portal so they could easily add iconic climbs to the game without investing their art team’s time in replicating real-world surrounding scenery. Based on the 4x expansion rate noted above, it’s clear that the Climb Portal’s setup does indeed allow for quicker development and release of new “roads.”
But there’s a lot Zwift could do to make these new roads more attractive to riders. They recently adjusted the powerup probabilities, removing a key incentive for some Zwifters. I’d love to see Zwift implement some of the ideas from My Big List of Climb Portal Feature Requests, including letting us choose which portal we’d like to climb, giving us achievement badges for portals, and even having leaderboards in the Companion app.
Your Thoughts
Are you impressed by Zwift’s rate of Climb Portal growth? Does it take the edge off of their slowing expansion in regards to “real” roads outside of the Climb Portal? And what would you rather have: more Climb Portals, or more features to make Climb Portals more attractive?
Share your thoughts below!
For me the next logical step would be achievements for the portals or some easy way to track them all at the different levels.
I’m using an Excel spreadsheet to track my time at each of the four gradient options on every climb
Me too. Zwift should be a bit embarrassed that after all this time of having the portal, they couldn’t build that simple feature, so we need to resort to this.
I understand why they want to auto generate the “terrain” but I wish they would auto generate them based on topographic maps (to get the approximate look, such as surrounding peaks, waterfalls, and glaciers) instead of just GPS coordinates. It’s not terribly difficult to make, computer games 20-25 years ago managed to do so.
They could keep the gradient color of the road if they want, but I don’t see why the road needs to be all blue on the descent, even when it contains bumps/uphill segments…
I agree more proper climbs, I used the climb portal once it was just too boring to sit and look at, never again.
We just need more proper climbs in Zwift, with proper road and environment simulations! There are quite literally NO climbs on Zwift of around 35-40 minutes (at the average fit enthusiast’s 3.5-4 w/kg), which is perhaps the most useful length for training. The very few climbs are all longer (1h – 1.5h, like the Alpe and Ventoux) or shorter (20 mins like the epic KOM or Innsbruck),
The Alpe is 40 minutes at 4 w/kg if you’re willing to hit the U-turn button around turn 4
It’s not the same, it doesn’t work psychologically. If that’s the only option I’ll do another hill on Rouvy or BigRingVR instead… Zwift should implement a version of Sa Calobra. It would work very well in a fantasy landscape (Alpe du Zwift style), especially with the bridge loop at the top.
“Average fit enthusiast” at 3.5-4w/kg. That’s not average, that’s just you sitting in a bubble of above average fitness.
And why would you think 35-40 minutes is the most useful length for training when currently training methology heavily leans towards polarized & pyramidal training which is primairily done with shorter VO2 max efforts instead of longish sweet spot efforts?
Also, no one is telling you you can’t do efforts on flat bits of road leading into climbs that are currently in game to increase the length of your effort. You could just start from the Innsbruck lap banner for example emulating a break-away on the flat and keeping pace uphill… but of course you’re now gonna tell me “that’s just not the same”.
The reality is you say you’ll go to Rouvy or BigRing or MyWoosh for this but we all know none of those competitors come close to what Zwift can offer as a package. Which is why in the end you’ll always come back to Zwift regardless of those cherry picked 40minute climbs being there or not.
Thank you for your unhelpful and unnecessary impolite comment. 1) I don’t think 3.5 w/kg is unusual for a “fit enthusiast” (I did use these terms as qualifiers), although your definitions may vary. 2) current training methodology is a temporary fad, like all such. For me at least from experience, 40min durations at FTP work better than anything else for increasing ability on long climbs. Of course it works better when combined with VO2 max work as well. 3) as above, that just doesn’t work psychologically. It really isn’t the same. The truth is that Zwift just doesn’t cater very well for people focused on climbing. If you are replying further, please be polite, it doesn’t cost much and it facilitates meaningful discussion.
I’m sorry if you think my answer is unnecessary impolite. It just seems people often forget all the things Zwift does right (and frankly way better then competitors) and then laser focus on one very niche thing and go like “Zwift has had years to do/fix this! I’m going to competitor x because they do this 1 niche thing better”. That’s ok, you do you, but I don’t understand what the point is in posting this if you don’t want any pushback on it.
I think you’re not being enitrely realistic in what you wish for here. There are long climbs with Alpe & Ventoux. There’s shorter climbs with varying lengths: epic KoM, The Grade (2 ways), Volcano, Innsbruck… you just happen to cherry pick the one sort of blindspot in the line up. And blindspot is open to interpretation.
You’re claiming Zwift doesn’t cater to people focused on climbing. That is unfair to say the least, the article even shows Zwift has made a considerable effort in the last 2 years with the introduction of climb portal and the in total 44 climbs the’ve added since then in all kinds of shapes & sizes. The only problem is: that’s a feature you don’t want to use because it’s not éxáctly the way you want it.
Fact is: the large majority of Zwifters much prefer flatter routes. They know this at ZwiftHQ and they’ve communicated this in the past as well. This reasonably explains their focus on flat & rolling terrain, without completely ignoring the climbing aspect with the implementation of The Grade & Climb Portal in recent years.
Climbing is hardly “niche” in road cycling, it’s arguably the spiritual essence of the sport. The climb portal aside, there are basically four climbs in Zwift worthy of the name. The epic KOM and Innsbruck are rather short (although I like both a lot and use them more often than any other routes in Zwift). The Alpe and Ventoux are long or longish. Given the *vast* total length of road in the game, the selection is markedly biased against climbing routes.
The mistake Zwift are making is a common one in retail / service provision these days. It’s the assumption that by catering almost exclusively for the most popular preferences, you make the most people happy. It doesn’t work that way. This is the same problem I have in my local small big-chain grocery store, where I can literally buy three different types of macaroni cheese, but no other vegetarian ready meals. The stocking system algorithm blindly orders in whatever sells most, but doesn’t take account of the fact that if they stocked only two macaroni cheeses and one lentil bake, they would sell much more in total because the people who like the third brand of macaroni cheese would also quite happily buy one of the other two without really noticing. The tyranny of the majority makes less people happy in total, because it actively excludes all of the significant minorities.
With a (proportionately) relatively minor investment in a few more climbing routes, Zwift could make the significant minority of climbers much happier, and ensure their ongoing subscriptions. As it is, people like me are just sick of doing the same routes over and over again and our custom is certainly not assured, especially as the other platforms (ALL of which offer many more climbing options) continue to improve.
What would I like to see in the climb portals would be a “climb mode”, similar to how you pick 50%, 75% etc.
Climb mode would automatically set your trainer difficulty to 100%, disable the ability to do workouts and gave a separate achievement/leaderboard.
100% agree! Or just at least an easier accesible interface to adjust trainer difficulty. Now you always need to do quit some clicks to get there
Mandating 100% trainer difficulty does not work. Many people use the trainer difficulty setting to make up for the fact that the bike that they have on the trainer may not have the gearing that you would choose for big hills. Why make the feature inaccessible to those whose bottom gear is not small enough to enable them to maintain a reasonable cadence at 100% trainer difficulty?
Nicely illustrated Eric, thank you. Am I impressed with the rate of growth? Well yes and no. I’m delighted to have what’s become a big selection of iconic climbs, but the calendar is tedious. Perhaps now the xp farming opportuty has been quashed, Zwift can create open access to any climb??? And as you and many others have said, to award climb finishers with achievement badges, preferably for each level too. That would be nice.
I’d also love to see achievement badges added and the ability to access any climb instead of relying on a rotation. I think it would be awesome if, while free riding, we could roll up to a portal and choose a climb on the spot—without having to start a new ride.
I’d love for Zwift to add Mt Donna Buang as a homage to Everesting being the first ever mountain Everested. Also for selfish reasons as it’s my local climb and I’d love to be able to ride it both in the real world and Zwift.
It is always nice to see a graph trending upward, but sometimes it all depends on how you look at it. To be fair, Climb Portal has not really changed much since it first launched—the graphics still have that retro Atari vibe from the ‘80s. Climbing can already feel a bit repetitive, and when the environment does not offer much variety, it can make things even less exciting.
But let’s be really honest: expecting improvements to the graphics might be a stretch if Zwift is still working through some basic issues, like making sure races actually finish at the top of the Climb Portal. There are also those quirks with high-power efforts on short climbs, like Cauberg, where a rider might get disqualified and told they should join a pro team!
It seems like there are some bigger priorities to tackle first, but hopefully, we’ll see some positive changes down the road.
do you have stats on portal use?
it may be just my friends, but I don’t know anyone that regularly use it or enjoy it.
De we need:
Improved graphics would be nice altough…
I think they should continue to schedule “featured” climbs on the homescreen, but ALSO give people access to ride any climb they’d like, through a sort of “back door”.
So people can do an off-schedule climb, knowing it’ll be pretty empty, if they’d like. Or ride the on-schedule one if you want company.
Same idea as riding in an off-schedule world by doing the ol’ workout or “my list” hack…
Completely agree, especially considering how many climbs there are now. For example Coll d’Ordino hasn’t been on the schedule for 10 months now. In the current situation, when it does come around, you’d better hope it’ll fit in your schedule.
Maybe they could even implement a system where you can only free climb when you’ve not done that climb for x number of days (you know, prevent Cauberg/Kwaremont levelling (because those 2 are still more effective than a workout even at my pedestrian pace))
There are so many Climb Portal routes it makes no sense to restrict to just two available each day. Also, please give us a Climb Portal routes completed record …
I like the way you think….more badges…
I would like accuracy from IRL, and more options, only two for choosing seems too poor.
Implement a speed handicap for ppl who don’t ride up at 100%. Friggin frustrating to get raced past by someone doing 2wkg less than you.
I doesn’t bother me. If someone comes past me at 75% I know that they are doing an easier route than me. They are irrelevant.
But from their perspective, they need a realistic ride at the lower incline. It would not work if they were crawling up a 5% incline at a snail’s pace.
Honestly, don’t care what others do. What’s the point? You don’t know their situation, their goals. Maybe they have less time available than you. Maybe they’re coming back from knee surgery and want to try a climb but avoid the 15% inclines.
I like the look and feel of the climbs. It would be nice to have badges for completions.
We need to be able to pick any portal anytime, the calendar with only 2 a day is stupid
Thanks for giving us the complete picture of route expansion. The only portal improvements I’d like to see are a completion list and a choice to select more upbeat background sounds instead of that very somber sound motif.
I vote Climb Portal Badges, I only need 2 more Routes badges and I need a new carrot to chase
It would be alright for just 100% gradient, but 50%, 75% and 125% would be better
Now that XP bonuses have been nerfed, I have no reason to use Climb Portal
Soooooo. . . is anyone going to talk about the promised but not yet available Stelvio? It’s been two years since they teased it. Two Giros have come and gone, and not a whiff of it being available to climb in the game. In case anyone (Eric Min) wants to know what I REALLY want for Christmas this year . . .
To be fair, Zwift never promised the Stelvio.
It showed up in the portal list, but was never actually featured… I assume because there was a bug of some sort. I added it to my list of portals when it showed up in the game dictionary, but removed it from that list recently because it was just annoying people who wanted to ride it but never got it.
They totally missed an opportunity to release it this month as the weekend celebrating the 200th anniversary of the completion of the pass was July 5/6.
I wish there was a way to see a map of the whole climb, either in Zwift or in companion app. It would feel less like pedaling into the void if you knew where the road was going.
Agreed! That’s on my list of improvements I’d like to see.
I’d like to see the actual climb map in the companion app rather than a bunch of dots in the ocean.
CP projected finishing time and ride time needs to be added to Alpe and Ventop climb data and on both of those they need to do away with van and aero power ups. TDF climb list needs to be used to add missing climbs so we can have watch parties climbing the same climbs. The user climb selector would be amazing. The monthly climb selections are poor at times a climb less than 500 feet all month, come on give us the big climbs for a month not the warmup climbs