Are there pros out there that use really high gears and low cadence?



LS17

New Member
Jun 24, 2005
48
0
0
For me it seems like I feel I can go faster with less effort with a moderate cadence and a higher gear rather than spinning very quickly in a lower gear. I was wondering if there are pros out there that use unusually high gears and pedal at a lower cadence? Or maybe my form is completely out of wack but it seems like I'd go faster if I had more (higher) gears.
 
LS17 said:
For me it seems like I feel I can go faster with less effort with a moderate cadence and a higher gear rather than spinning very quickly in a lower gear. I was wondering if there are pros out there that use unusually high gears and pedal at a lower cadence? Or maybe my form is completely out of wack but it seems like I'd go faster if I had more (higher) gears.

Ulrich is the most famous 'grinder' in that he pushes bigger gears at a lower cadence than say , for want of a better example , Lance Armstrong.

On paper and purely mathmatically its more efficient to sit in the saddle and push a gear of around 80 RPMs (ie Ulrich aka a 'diesel engine') than the faster cadence of Lance , at say 100 RPMs.
But in a race with the ebb and flow and fluctuating gradients and need to rest certain muscles , its clear the occasional 'honk' and higher cadence is superior.

Everyone has different muscle fibre aswell , and different cadences suit those different fibres.
Ulrich is known to have a higher density of slow twitch muscles , bad for sprinting but good for grinding - hence why he hasnt changed his style in 8 years.
He and his coaches obviously arent idiots , they'd have given the faster spin technique a try if they thought it was best for Jan.Armstrong obviously has different muscle fibres that suit this style.
There also must be some difference with lactic acid build up and breakdown.

If racing was about being wired up to a turbo trainer , Ulrich would probably be unbeatable , but its not.
 
LS17 said:
For me it seems like I feel I can go faster with less effort with a moderate cadence and a higher gear rather than spinning very quickly in a lower gear. I was wondering if there are pros out there that use unusually high gears and pedal at a lower cadence? Or maybe my form is completely out of wack but it seems like I'd go faster if I had more (higher) gears.

A wise belgian man once told me: "You have unlimited speed but limited power".

After much debate we agreed on this: you can turn a light gear over at a given speed for much longer that you can a heavy gear. Of course the terms light and heavy are infinitely debatable.

I'm of the opinion that 90rpm is a good number for flat roads - higher than that and I feel like I'm inefficient cos I can't control full rotation of the pedal. Lower than that causes my legs to feel 'pumped' and tight.

Anywhere between 80rpm and 100rpm I would consider 'normal' - you need to find the number that is right for you.
 
Eldron said:
..I'm of the opinion that 90rpm is a good number for flat roads - higher than that and I feel like I'm inefficient cos I can't control full rotation of the pedal. Lower than that causes my legs to feel 'pumped' and tight...

Exactly! The optimum cadence also varies with the speed and required power-output as well. What LS17 will find is that at a slow pace, slower-cadences are easier, say 80rpm at 15mph. But as speeds increases and power-output climbs, the force needed on the pedals increase exponentially and you get into the lactate-threshold easily. Try pushing 80rpm at 35mph in a TT compared to 100rpm and see how long you can hold that speed in both cases...
 
LS17 said:
For me it seems like I feel I can go faster with less effort with a moderate cadence and a higher gear rather than spinning very quickly in a lower gear. I was wondering if there are pros out there that use unusually high gears and pedal at a lower cadence? Or maybe my form is completely out of wack but it seems like I'd go faster if I had more (higher) gears.
I like to spin quite quickly. However when riding into a strong wind or going uphill I like to pedal much faster in a lower gear. When going donwhill I use higher gears but still pedal fast (I stay in low gears longer). I got 42mph out of my bike but even at 35mph I was pedaling at quite a rate in top gear. However, I do know some that seem to like riding in top gear in normal conditions.
 
LS17 said:
For me it seems like I feel I can go faster with less effort with a moderate cadence and a higher gear rather than spinning very quickly in a lower gear. I was wondering if there are pros out there that use unusually high gears and pedal at a lower cadence? Or maybe my form is completely out of wack but it seems like I'd go faster if I had more (higher) gears.
Serhiy HONCHAR is the best example of low cadence pedaling.
 
Isn't it true the more you train and improve cadence and power increase together?

Eldron said:
A wise belgian man once told me: "You have unlimited speed but limited power".

After much debate we agreed on this: you can turn a light gear over at a given speed for much longer that you can a heavy gear. Of course the terms light and heavy are infinitely debatable.

I'm of the opinion that 90rpm is a good number for flat roads - higher than that and I feel like I'm inefficient cos I can't control full rotation of the pedal. Lower than that causes my legs to feel 'pumped' and tight.

Anywhere between 80rpm and 100rpm I would consider 'normal' - you need to find the number that is right for you.
 
Virenque said:
Serhiy HONCHAR is the best example of low cadence pedaling.
Cyrille Guimard advocated bigger gears, longer cranks, and lower cadences for his Renault-Elf-Gitane teams during the 80s, a style continued by Hinault and Lemond after they left for other teams. It seemed to work for a while.
 
wiredued said:
Isn't it true the more you train and improve cadence and power increase together?

Nope - your power will improve as the muscles develop but cadence is independant of power.

Well not quite - if you go the scientific route then cadence is important in that it forms the time portion of the equation.

Real world though - you'll get to a point where you're at a comfortable cadence and you'll stay there. Your riding will improve as you train but eventually your cadence will remain the same.

When I say 'the same' I mean for any given scenarion - you'll pedal slower on climbs, faster on flat roads and somewhere in between on the downhills.
 
When I say 'the same' I mean for any given scenarion - you'll pedal slower on climbs, faster on flat roads and somewhere in between on the downhills.

Your wrong there! For me anyway. I pedal faster when climbing but use lower gears. I also pedal fast when going downhill because my gears max out at about 35mph. I pedal slightly slower on a strait with little to no wind.
 
You are different I just did a one hour ride to the rail trail over rolling hills in the high eighties. Then averaged 102 on the flat rail trail and maintained 20 mph. I would like to be able to do 102 on the rolling hills but the the changing terrain makes it difficult you have to find the perfect gear to match the hill.

San Remo GT said:
When I say 'the same' I mean for any given scenarion - you'll pedal slower on climbs, faster on flat roads and somewhere in between on the downhills.

Your wrong there! For me anyway. I pedal faster when climbing but use lower gears. I also pedal fast when going downhill because my gears max out at about 35mph. I pedal slightly slower on a strait with little to no wind.
 
Roadrash Dunc said:
Ulrich is the most famous 'grinder' in that he pushes bigger gears at a lower cadence than say , for want of a better example , Lance Armstrong.

On paper and purely mathmatically its more efficient to sit in the saddle and push a gear of around 80 RPMs (ie Ulrich aka a 'diesel engine') than the faster cadence of Lance , at say 100 RPMs.
But in a race with the ebb and flow and fluctuating gradients and need to rest certain muscles , its clear the occasional 'honk' and higher cadence is superior.

Everyone has different muscle fibre aswell , and different cadences suit those different fibres.
Ulrich is known to have a higher density of slow twitch muscles , bad for sprinting but good for grinding - hence why he hasnt changed his style in 8 years.
He and his coaches obviously arent idiots , they'd have given the faster spin technique a try if they thought it was best for Jan.Armstrong obviously has different muscle fibres that suit this style.
There also must be some difference with lactic acid build up and breakdown.

If racing was about being wired up to a turbo trainer , Ulrich would probably be unbeatable , but its not.

Part of the reaspn for higher cadence is that it shifts more of the burden to aerobic load, which is why lance adopted it.
 
When I'm on flat roads, my cadence varies between 104-114.

I spin somewhere between 88-99, if there is a strong head-crosswind or when I'm climbing (39-23 is all I have..:) )
 
It`s good to have low cadence (around 70) on flat and high cadence (90+ if possible) when climbing.
 

Similar threads