Endurance cadence
- Thread starter Harrow
- Start date
my endurance training cadence would probably be 95-115. I find that once you're used to it, a higher cadance is easier to maintain for long spells.
my timetrialing cadance is round 110
maybe the optimum depends on the ratio of white/red/pink cells in your muscles?
my timetrialing cadance is round 110
maybe the optimum depends on the ratio of white/red/pink cells in your muscles?
This question is interesting for all bike riders and bike racers but should be more specified.
Optimum cadence for what?
1. mechanical efficiency,
2. maximal power output [given timeframe],
3. delay of onset of fatigue?
What optimum do you mean? Than we can give a good answer on the question. Now all the optimum values seems to be mixed together.
The best to you www.webtrainer.nl
Hi retrogeek,
That's just the point. You expect he is asking to "delaying the onset of fatigue". When you ask in a poll a questing it should be clear where to ask for.
Anyway it is interesting what the numbers are. I would like it more when there were steps of 5 rpm in stead of 10 rpm.
www.webtrainer.nl
Dear WebTrainer,
Very true, point well taken. I also agree with the 5rpm step increments.
When I was younger I had the concentration and the discipline to keep my cadence within a 5 rpm range, but now in my mid 40's I'm happy to keep it within 10rpm. Perhaps I just take more time to smell the roses now rather than just racing by them.
Very true, point well taken. I also agree with the 5rpm step increments.
When I was younger I had the concentration and the discipline to keep my cadence within a 5 rpm range, but now in my mid 40's I'm happy to keep it within 10rpm. Perhaps I just take more time to smell the roses now rather than just racing by them.
I can only begin to accurately answer this one as recently my bike computer died and I picked up a replacement with cadence sensor. So far my observations are:
Endurance Pace: 100-105
Climbing: 95-100
Both higher than I thought. However the one that suprised me the most is...
Hammer on the flats: 110-115
These are the cadences my body just naturally settles into. I plan do a bit of experimentation over the winter to see how different cadences affect my performance during various riding conditions. I do however suspect that overtime my body found the optimum ranges all by itself.
Endurance Pace: 100-105
Climbing: 95-100
Both higher than I thought. However the one that suprised me the most is...
Hammer on the flats: 110-115
These are the cadences my body just naturally settles into. I plan do a bit of experimentation over the winter to see how different cadences affect my performance during various riding conditions. I do however suspect that overtime my body found the optimum ranges all by itself.
anywhere from 100-115 is my goal and keeps me fresh. I pushed 85-95 as a junior, and as I got older, I worked on my spin, which has done a lot for multiple jumps and acceleration.
I tend to pay more attention to how hard I'm pushing on the pedals, rather than counting the cadence. I often use around 90 rpm, but also vary depending on the power required. If I'm riding easy with a tailwind or slight downhill, the big ring at 75 rpm seems perfect. If I'm cranking into a headwind, or taking a pull at the front of a paceline, then it may be 100-110 or so.
I don't see the need to spin at a high cadence all the time on a long ride; like to relax when the going is easy.
Dan
I don't see the need to spin at a high cadence all the time on a long ride; like to relax when the going is easy.
Dan
It is amazing how many older riders do not know how to spin. When I catch them or ride in a group. Most are in bigger gear spinning slower. Or in smaller gear spinning the same rpm, as they get dropped. To me it is second nature, even after all these yrs off my bike....
Memph
I happen to be on my trainer today and I happen to be quite confortable with the an average of 95 to 100 rpm. Another question should be at what gear ratio are we talking about. and for what purpose as webtrainer mentioned.
I'll have you know (young feller-mi-lad?) that back in the days when men were men, riders were breaking 3.30 for a hundred miles without aerobars on 56X12, 56X13 (56X14 in head wind).
I also know a couple of elite riders over 50 who use very big gears and whom most youngsters can't follow.
I speculate that big gears make fast twitch muscles take on slow twitch properties more than low gears do and that a big gear may not be quite the big disadvantage it is fashionable to regard it as being.
May I suggest we also ask the question: "what is your relative crank-length?". I have a theory that on standard cranks, tall riders will be "better" spinners.
Nothing wrong with big gears if you can push them. Have same arguement over ppl using wimpy 3rd chainring. Just a matter of riding techique. I do notice that these guys pushing bigger gears are not as fresh after ride, maybe it could do with age. The one thing that does bother me, is he factthat most of these oler guys have knee problems & walk funny.
Am not by any means telling ppl what gears to use. Just what I have noticed......
Memph
i must side with memph on the issue that around here the older tiders do push bigger gears, and some of them are damn fast too, but i think that they do really beat themselves up with that kind of cadence. it really is a matter of personal preference i guess, even if i'm agains't pushing big gears. plus it's kinda cool to be spinning a gear lower than anyone else at the midweek crits
I seem to remember reading somewhere that optimum cadence depends on power output - so for example, Lance Armstrong finds his optimum cadence for TTing and climbing to be around 110 (I think?) but for your average cyclist, the optimum cadence would be lower as they wouldn't be producing anywhere near the same power. Can any expert concur? (or even disagree if you have to!)
Similar threads
