Cycling cadence and speed?
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
2005-05-09 9:07 AM |
Pro 3903 Andover | Subject: Cycling cadence and speed? Here's a question for ya'... On the trainer: Up until recently I had been pedaling around 100 rpm. Now I'm trying for 90, by pushing a larger gear, but usually end up on the higher end of 90-95 rpm. The strange, to me, thing is that, even though I'm pushing a larger gear, it's taking me a few minutes longer to cover the same mileage as when I'm spinning at 100 rpm. Shouldn't I be going faster in a larger gear??? Thanks for any insight. Rob Edited by MountainBreeze 2005-05-09 9:07 AM |
|
2005-05-09 9:26 AM in reply to: #154739 |
Resident Curmudgeon 25290 The Road Back | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? Depends on how much bigger of a gear. Let's look at an example using your big (53-tooth) chainring and the middle of your sprocket (say your 14 and 15-tooth gears) The 53-15 @ 100 rpm =27.89 mph The (bigger) 53-14 @ 90 rpm =26.90 mph It's solely a function of mathematics: |
2005-05-09 9:37 AM in reply to: #154744 |
Pro 3903 Andover | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? Thanks, Bear. Good link! Now, new question: Do you think I'd be better off staying in the larger gear, trying to drop down to a cadence of 90 rpm, even if it means going slower, until I can build my legs up to get to the same speed I was going when spinning at 100 rpm? Or, should I keep spinning? Thanks again, Rob |
2005-05-09 10:13 AM in reply to: #154753 |
Champion 6742 The Green Between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? Ahhhh, grasshopper....you have discovered....spinning! Spin! It's faster. It's more efficient. It works your lungs more than your legs, keeping them for the run.... |
2005-05-09 10:22 AM in reply to: #154771 |
Pro 3903 Andover | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? FishrCutB8 - 2005-05-09 10:13 AM Ahhhh, grasshopper....you have discovered....spinning! Spin! It's faster. It's more efficient. It works your lungs more than your legs, keeping them for the run.... You know, back in the day, I used to push big gears but, when I started riding again, I figured I'd give spinning a try this time around. However, a lot of stuff I read says that the most efficient pedaling cadence is 90 rpm. To be honest, spinning is easier (not that I'm, looking for an easy way out!), and faster for me so I'd be inclined to stick with it. But, if pedaling a larger gear at 90 really is more efficient, once one has built their legs up, it might be worth the time/effort investment. Anyone else care to weigh in, please? |
2005-05-09 11:28 AM in reply to: #154775 |
Elite 3088 Austin, TX | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? Optimum cadence will vary by individual based on muscle composition. Someone with lots of fast twitch fibers is not going to spin well because those fibers will be underutilized. The reverse is also true. I'd say your best bet is work at a constant speed in various gear/cadence combos and check your heart rate for each. |
|
2005-05-09 11:31 AM in reply to: #154739 |
Champion 5183 Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? REALLY good thread. this stuff fascinates me, and I am posting just so I'll be emailed when there is an update. I am a total cycling beginner, and I have been told to just try and keep that rpm up for now, that cadence is more impt for me at this stage than speed. I LOVE what it has done for my cardio fitness, I can see major improvement in other activities. (but my legs still tire I guess I gotta RIDE LOTS MORE....) |
2005-05-09 11:37 AM in reply to: #154739 |
Veteran 237 | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? It's true, a lot of the cadence and speed is definately dependant on each person. It has taken me a really long time to find out my optimal performance figures and cadence numbers and i think I had a "revelation" this past weekend on my long ride up to Nyack, NY. For me personally, the 88-95 rpms does not good b/c my legs are entering the triathlon arena with a runners' marathon experience. So my slow-twitch muscles are more developed than the large-twitch ones. I tried as hard as i could to hit the large gears at 90-095 rpms but I was constantly gassed and my quads just burned. Then I found out this weekend by staying with the lighter gears, I'd get about 100+ rpms and it would seem a lot easier yet I'm still traveling at the same speed as before. Most importantly, I don't find the need to switch gears unless I'm on a really steep hill. So for me, 100+ rpms is best since I rely more on my aerobic fitness (which I have a ton of) instead of my muscle endurance (completely lacking) , but that's how my background translates best in Tris... in the end, you've just to go out and see what works best. But as people say, the 88-95rpms is strictly a recommendation, not engraved in stone.. |
2005-05-09 2:47 PM in reply to: #154739 |
Regular 91 St.John's | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? I get frusrtrated when I read about cadence and speed. I can only get speed in big gears. big hills I don't find so bad. Maybe its becasue I am new to the sport and have been putting alot of time into learning how to swim . The run part I have down, biking so far for me has not been the greatest experience . I realise that a lot of time can be gained in the bike section of the course and I want to use this to my full advantage . Maybe its just the amount of hills around here...its all hills. I feel I am constantly switching gears. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. |
2005-05-09 3:09 PM in reply to: #154739 |
Expert 743 Minnesota | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? Rich Strauss' article (http://beginnertriathlete.com/cms/article-detail.asp?articleid=433) inspired me to begin this thread: http://beginnertriathlete.com/discussion/forums/thread-view.asp?tid... Rich, Mike Ricci and Jonathan Siegel added some excellent commentary. Further research turned up this article: http://www.trifuel.com/triathlon/bike/why-fast-pedaling-makes-sense... During my tri this weekend I was turning the pedals at a smooth 107 to 112 RPM. I believe that we all have physiological differences that determine our optimum cadence. I also believe that one should train weaknesses and mine happens to be slow (85-95 RPM) cadence and high force efforts. I will probably end up maintaining the 107-112 RPM cadence, but if I occasionally train with 85-95 (or lower) RPM and higher force I will have that additional tool in my box if I need it. |
2005-05-09 6:37 PM in reply to: #154771 |
Elite 3498 Chicago | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? FishrCutB8 - 2005-05-09 9:13 AM Ahhhh, grasshopper....you have discovered....spinning! Spin! It's faster. It's more efficient. It works your lungs more than your legs, keeping them for the run.... I think I heard that once before.... |
|
2005-05-09 7:09 PM in reply to: #155104 |
Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. Edited by Gwozdzilla 2005-05-09 7:12 PM |
2005-05-10 12:52 AM in reply to: #154739 |
Elite 2468 Racine, WI | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? I practiced and practiced higher (108 ish) rpms on a spin bike over the winter...only to enter my only cycling race and have experienced cyclists yell at me to "GET IN A BIGGER GEAR!" I have gotten the same comment on training rides...seems I learned my lesson too well. I was spinning too fast and not getting enough force behind the pedals. It's time to teach my quads NOT to burn in that slightly higher gear |
2005-05-10 1:33 AM in reply to: #154739 |
Member 176 | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? There is certainly an optimum cadence for everyone. Remember this: Building strength requires bigger gears and slower cadence; endurance requires higher cadence and lower gears. Endurance comes from hours in the saddle. Strength comes from periodic hill rides or rides pushing big gears. Up to 80% of your bike training should be of the endurance variety. The rest comes from strength workouts and interval workouts. If you try and do more of this you will thrash your legs. |
2005-05-10 7:31 AM in reply to: #154739 |
Pro 3903 Andover | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? Thanks so much for the informative replies, and links, folks. I'll play around with cadence a bit and see what works. I'm going to go for a short ride at lunch today and I'll try and shoot for 95-100 rpm, a range I haven't been in yet and one that is in the middle of the 2 cadences I've been trying (spinning at 100, pushing at 90 - 95). Thanks again and all the best. Rob |
2005-05-10 11:42 AM in reply to: #154739 |
Lethbridge, Alberta | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? I've pushed big gears for years but only for short commutes or while playing so there were lots of rest breaks. Now I'm trying to ride longer and, thanks to what I've learned here, trying to adjust to spinning more. Since I'm no longer mashing as hard as I can all the time, I've found I have to concentrate on not slacking off too much while I spin. To keep my cadence over 90 when I upshift, I have to spin my mtn.bike up over 100 first. 95 to 100 rpm now seems comfortable but sometimes too comfortable and I have to mentally kick myself in the butt to spin up and grab another gear. I guess it's taking me a while to figure out how hard I can push and still go longer distances. That's probably a moving target now too because of more training. *sigh* Ride lots more! Edited by Micawber 2005-05-10 11:43 AM |
|
2005-05-10 11:56 AM in reply to: #154739 |
Pro 3870 Virginia Beach, VA | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? If you have a HRM and cycle computer you xcan do some testing to determine your personal best cadence range. Basically find a nice flat section of road a mile+ long with no stop signs/lights and do repeats changing your gearing each time but keeping your HR constant. You're basically looking for the cadence that gives you the fastest average speed over the mile. Since you are keeping a constant HR over all intervals your body is working at roughly the same effort level. This is just a way to get a ballpark and let you know if you should be in the 80s, 90s, 100+...for most speed from a given effort. |
2005-05-10 12:50 PM in reply to: #154739 |
Pro 3903 Andover | Subject: RE: Cycling cadence and speed? Well, I didn't wear my HRM but I did stay around 95-100 and faired much better than trying to push between 90-95. I think I'm going to stay here for a bit and see how it goes. |