Français (France)
English (UK)
English (US)
Deutsch (Deutschland)
Contents
4 hr, 5 hr 15 min, or 5 hr 40 min: for the same 8.7-mile (14 km) loop with 2,133 feet (650 m) of gain, the tool above gives three times, and none of them is wrong. Each one applies a different rule, with its own assumptions. Let’s run the numbers.
What each of the three results calculates
The simple calculation adds two times: the distance at 2.5 mph (4 km/h), and the climbing at about 1,000 feet (300 m) per hour. These are the French Hiking Federation’s (FFRandonnée) benchmarks for a hiker who is “neither a beginner nor a speedster,” breaks not included [1]. It leaves out the descent, even though the federation also gives 1,300 to 1,600 feet (400 to 500 m) of descent per hour [1].
The German standard DIN 33466 counts all three: 2.5 mph on the flat, 1,000 feet (300 m) per hour uphill, and 1,600 feet (500 m) per hour downhill. These are the values of the Austrian Alpine Club and of the German Alpine Club’s calculation table, whose trail signs rest on them [2, 3]. The standard, titled “Wegweiser für Wanderwege” (signposts for hiking trails), dates from May 2004 [4]. It doesn’t simply add them up: you work out the horizontal time on one side and the vertical time on the other, keep the longer one, and add half of the shorter [2].
Naismith’s rule dates from 1892: an hour for every three miles on the map, plus an hour for every 2,000 feet of climbing [5]. In metric terms, that’s about 5 km/h (3.1 mph) and 10 extra minutes per 100 m (about 330 feet) of climbing. Its known weakness: the planned speed doesn’t change on the descent, whatever the slope [6].
| Method | Speed on the flat | Climbing | Descent | Combination |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Simple calculation | 2.5 mph | about 1,000 ft/h | not counted | sum of the two times |
| German standard DIN 33466 | 2.5 mph | 1,000 ft/h | 1,600 ft/h | the longer, plus half of the shorter |
| Naismith’s rule | 3.1 mph | about 2,000 ft/h | not counted | sum of the two times |
Sources: FFRandonnée, Austrian Alpine Club, German Alpine Club, Naismith (1892). The tool uses the metric originals: 4 km/h, 300 m/h, and 500 m/h (DIN), 5 km/h and about 600 m/h (Naismith).
Four hikes, three results
Take the tool’s default values: 8.7 miles (14 km), 2,133 feet (650 m) of gain, and the same amount of descent. The simple calculation gives 3 hr 30 min on the flat plus 2 hr 10 min of climbing, or 5 hr 40 min. The DIN standard keeps the 3 hr 30 min on the flat (the vertical time, 2 hr 10 min of climbing plus 1 hr 18 min of descent, comes to 3 hr 28 min) and adds half of 3 hr 28 min: 5 hr 15 min. Naismith counts 8.7 miles ÷ 3 plus 2,133 feet ÷ 2,000: 4 hr.
| Hike | Simple calculation | DIN 33466 | Naismith |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stroll: 3.7 miles (6 km), 328 feet (100 m) of gain and descent | 1 hr 50 min | 1 hr 45 min | 1 hr 25 min |
| Loop: 8.7 miles (14 km), 2,133 feet (650 m) of gain and descent | 5 hr 40 min | 5 hr 15 min | 4 hr |
| Steep climb: 5.0 miles (8 km), 3,937 feet (1,200 m) of gain, no descent | 6 hr | 5 hr | 3 hr 40 min |
| Long day: 12.4 miles (20 km), 3,937 feet (1,200 m) of gain and descent | 9 hr | 8 hr 55 min | 6 hr 05 min |
Times rounded to the nearest 5 minutes and calculated on the metric values. The “steep climb” profile follows the Austrian Alpine Club’s example, which arrives at 5 hr with the DIN standard.
The gap between the longest and the shortest of the three results runs from 25 minutes on the stroll to nearly 3 hours on the long day. The longer and higher the hike, the more your choice of method matters: on a stroll, the gap stays at half an hour.
Why the three results part ways
First, because the starting speeds differ: 2.5 mph on the flat for the first two, 3.1 mph for Naismith. Second, because the descent gets three different treatments: ignored, ignored, or counted at 1,600 feet (500 m) per hour. A curve shows it better than a table. Tobler’s, from an American geographer who proposed a slope-based speed formula in 1993 [7], isn’t in the tool, but it makes a handy yardstick: 3.1 mph (5 km/h) on the flat, a top speed of 3.7 mph (6 km/h) on a gentle downhill [6].
The right choice depends on the terrain. On a good trail with a light pack, Naismith is a lower bound: it was aimed at “men in fair condition” on easy expeditions [5]. For a long, steep descent, go with the DIN standard, the only one that counts it. The simple calculation is a rule of thumb: handy, but blind to the descent, and longer than Naismith in all four examples above.
On trail signs, the time isn’t always yours
Yellow trail signs follow their own rules, and they vary from country to country. In Switzerland, the signs assume 4.2 km/h (2.6 mph) on the flat, plus an hour for every 400 m (1,312 feet) of climbing or 800 m (2,625 feet) of descent; until 1981, the benchmark was 4.5 km/h (2.8 mph) [8]. The current official formula is a 15th-degree polynomial of the grade: hard to redo by hand [8]. These are times for hiking without breaks, and not every sign carries them: a sign with times costs more, and a detour can make them misleading [9].
A time on a sign is therefore a signposting benchmark, not a promise. The tool doesn’t try to reproduce it: it calculates the time for a route you’ve drawn yourself, using rules you can read.
What the tool doesn’t know
A research team tested several hiking speed models on public GPS tracks covering nearly 55,000 miles (88,000 km) of British trails. Its model, which takes account of the type of terrain, the slope of the hillside, and obstacles, is off by 23.7% on average over a 164-foot (50 m) stretch; Naismith’s by 26.4% and Tobler’s by 26.2% [6]. In other words, even a model fitted on tens of thousands of miles is still out by about a quarter over a short stretch. The message is clear: a calculator’s result is a ballpark figure.
- Breaks are counted in none of the three methods: photos, map checks, a picnic, waiting for a hiking partner.
- Terrain matters: the type of ground and off-trail obstacles affect speed, whatever the slope [6].
- Your form that day, your pack, the weather appear in no formula: correcting for them is up to you.
- A group moves at the pace of its slowest hiker: run the numbers for that person.
From hiking time to a day out
The tool’s result is a hiking time, not a time to be home. To get to a full day, add about 10 minutes of stops per hour of hiking, then lunch: generous, and on purpose. On the default loop, the 5 hr 40 min of the simple calculation becomes about 7 hr 20 min out. Leave at 9 a.m. and you’ll be back around 4:20 p.m.
Finding your own correction factor
The most reliable method is still your own. The German Alpine Club offers a table where you swap in your own values: meters of climbing per hour, meters of descent per hour, and kilometers on the flat per hour [3]. The French Hiking Federation recommends comparing your actual hiking time with the guidebook times [1]. Do it on two or three hikes you know, taking off the breaks.
If a hike estimated at 4 hours took you 4 hr 40 min of hiking, your factor is 1.17 (280 minutes ÷ 240). Applied to the 5 hr 15 min of the DIN standard for the default loop, it gives about 6 hr 10 min: the time to allow for yourself, before breaks.
For the logic of the calculation and the corrections to make, see the hiking time guide; for effort on the trail, the kilometer-effort; for how hard a route is, the grading of mountain hikes; to forget nothing, planning your hike.
The rule fits in one sentence: pick one method and apply it in full, add your breaks, then correct with your own factor.
Gear related to this article
No affiliation: no commission, no sponsored products.
COROS PACE 3
A 1.1 oz GPS watch with a barometric altimeter: it records the distance and the elevation gain of every run, enough to track progress and km-effort.
View on Amazon (opens in a new tab)
Worth watching
Walks through Naismith’s rule, from its 1892 wording to the modern version of 5 km/h (about 3 mph) plus 10 minutes per 100 m (330 ft) of ascent, and explains why it is only a rough guide.
The video is hosted by YouTube (Google): nothing loads until you play it, and Google may then set cookies.
FAQ
Which method should I use to work out hiking time?
For a stroll, they agree to within half an hour. For a long hike, or one with a lot of descent, the DIN 33466 standard is the only one that counts the descent. Naismith gives the shortest time in our examples: keep it for strong hikers on an easy trail.
Why does Naismith’s rule give a shorter time?
It assumes about 3.1 mph (5 km/h) on the flat, against 2.5 mph (4 km/h) for the other two, and it dates from 1892: its author had in mind “men in fair condition” on easy expeditions. On the default 8.7-mile (14 km) loop it gives 4 hr, against 5 hr 15 min for the DIN standard and 5 hr 40 min for the simple calculation.
Does the tool count the descent?
Only the DIN 33466 standard does: 1,600 feet (500 m) of descent per hour, combined with the rest by its own rule of the longer plus half of the shorter. The simple calculation and Naismith’s rule ignore it. Enter the descent anyway: it changes the DIN result.
Are breaks included in the result?
No: the three times are hiking times without breaks, like those on Swiss trail signs and in the French Hiking Federation’s benchmarks. Add about 10 minutes per hour of hiking, then lunch, before deciding on your start time and your return time.
Sources
- French Hiking Federation (FFRandonnée), “Les itinéraires de randonnée” (in French), accessed November 4, 2026. ffrandonnee.fr https://www.ffrandonnee.fr/randonner/ou-pratiquer/les-itineraires-de-randonnee ↩
- Austrian Alpine Club (Österreichischer Alpenverein), “Wie berechnet man die Gehzeit auf Wanderwegen?” (in German), June 14, 2018. alpenverein.at https://www.alpenverein.at/portal/news/aktuelle_news_kurz/2018/2018_06_14_wie-berechnet-man-die-gehzeit-auf-wanderwegen.php ↩
- German Alpine Club (Deutscher Alpenverein), “Berechnungstabelle für Ihre persönliche Gehzeit” (in German; PDF form, DAV signposting values: 300 m, 500 m, and 4 km per hour). alpenverein.de https://www.alpenverein.de/files/DAV_Gehzeitrechner_acrobat_8_1_19002.pdf ↩
- DIN 33466:2004-05 standard, Wegweiser für Wanderwege, Deutsches Institut für Normung, May 2004. dinmedia.de https://www.dinmedia.de/en/standard/din-33466/71697858 ↩
- William W. Naismith, “Cruach Ardran, Stobinian, and Ben More,” Scottish Mountaineering Club Journal, vol. 2, no. 3, September 1892, transcribed by the Glasgow Digital Library. gdl.cdlr.strath.ac.uk http://gdl.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/smcj/smcj009/smcj0090603.htm ↩
- Andrew Wood, William Mackaness, T. Ian Simpson, and J. Douglas Armstrong, “Improved prediction of hiking speeds using a data driven approach,” arXiv:2303.16065, version 7 of November 21, 2023, also published in PLOS ONE. arxiv.org https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.16065 ↩
- Waldo Tobler, Three Presentations on Geographical Analysis and Modeling, Technical Report 93-1, NCGIA, University of California, Santa Barbara, 1993. escholarship.org https://escholarship.org/uc/item/05r820mz ↩
- Yvonne Eisenring, “Wanderwegweiser: die gelben Zeiten” (in German), Beobachter, May 7, 2014. beobachter.ch https://www.beobachter.ch/ausfluge-freizeit/wanderwegweiser-die-gelben-zeiten ↩
- Schweizer Wanderwege (Swiss hiking trails association), “Wieso hat es nicht auf allen Wegweisern Zeitangaben?” (in German), article published in amirando in 2012, posted online by the canton of Graubünden. gr.ch https://www.gr.ch/DE/institutionen/verwaltung/diem/tba/flv/Documents/sw-artikel_zeitangaben-wegweiser-2012.pdf ↩
- French Hiking Federation (FFRandonnée), “Recommandations pour la randonnée en montagne l’été” (in French), October 19, 2023, accessed November 4, 2026. ffrandonnee.fr https://www.ffrandonnee.fr/randonner/securite/recommandations-pour-la-randonnee-en-montagne-l-ete ↩
Vans, RVs, biking and calculators
Julien de Jurquet writes for Outfarer about camper vans, RVs, biking, and calculators. He reads manuals cover to cover and never lets a number slide without its unit, so your choices rest on math, not promises.
Guillaume Hoarau
Nolwenn Bastide