Max RPM's

[ckret]

Is there any standarize testing to compare max RPMS. My training partners and I have a standing competition on a lifecycle at our gym, but i know there has to be some type of testing that has been done.

Anyone interested, the best we can do is 254 at a standard level of 8. I am sure gym bikes are all different so unless you use the one we use there really is no comparison, but it makes our workouts a little more interesting.

 

[Sprinter_989]

254!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who got that???
Most I've ever got is 224 on indoor trainer.

 

[taras0000]

I do mine on rollers and the best i've done was 263. My rollers don't have any resistance unit on them, and i get the result off of my speedometer. Try it this way, on your own bike, you may get a higher reading. And no cheating, must be done with a fixed gear.

 

[Sprinter_989]

No resistance!!!!! thats a great idea no wonder i can only get up to 224

 

[VeloFlash]

My computer cadence readout stops at 199.

So my brag is I can do 199+ with and without resistance

 

[steve]

about 220 for me, although I havent tried it for 5 or 6 years

 

[velomanct]

i hit 242 on my trainer with no resistence about 4 years ago.
with light resistence i can do about 220

 

[Lasalles]

This may be incorrect but i think i recalled an old article saying that Gary Neiwand clocked 300rpm in training once.

 

[taras0000]

300 rpm, i could believe it. I witnessed Kurt Harnett hit 275

 

[drewjc]

300 sounds a lot but Gary Niewand was awesome in his day. My best is about 220 on the road and 240 on the rollers i think. Another slightly different comparison/competition would be to see who can travel at the higest speed on the rollers in any gear on any bike. My best is about 95km/h i think, not brilliant but i had that 53x12 pumping!

 

[bikeguy]

I don't see what's so fantastic/useful about 300 rpm with no resistance, it's equivalent to 5 stride per second turnover rate in a 60-100 meter dash (running) *except* that there is a high load and ROM in sprinting. I can hit 275 rpm with no load on a bicycle ergo, the gym guys asked me not to use the equipment anymore because they said I'd break it! My best 100 m is about 11.4 sec, but I can't approach 5 strides/sec (more like very low 4's) because my muscles power is poor in that range of motion. If you can reach 5 strides/sec with a reasonable stride length in a 100m dash, you'll win every race. I don't see the high rpm no load ergometer rpm relevance to cycle track sprinting as max rpm is 160-170, nowhere near 250+ rpm and the loads are quite high (if you can do 70+ km/h).

 

[bikeguy]

I don't see what's so fantastic/useful about 300 rpm with no resistance, it's equivalent to 5 stride per second turnover rate in a 60-100 meter dash (running) *except* that there is a high load and ROM in sprinting. I can hit 275 rpm with no load on a bicycle ergo, the gym guys asked me not to use the equipment anymore because they said I'd break it! My best 100 m is about 11.4 sec, but I can't approach 5 strides/sec (more like very low 4's) because my muscles power is poor in that range of motion. If you can reach 5 strides/sec with a reasonable stride length in a 100m dash, you'll win every race. I don't see the high rpm no load ergometer rpm relevance to cycle track sprinting as max rpm is 160-170, nowhere near 250+ rpm and the loads are quite high (if you can do 70+ km/h).

 

[VeloFlash]

Originally posted by bikeguy
I don't see what's so fantastic/useful about 300 rpm with no resistance, it's equivalent to 5 stride per second turnover rate in a 60-100 meter dash (running) *except* that there is a high load and ROM in sprinting. I can hit 275 rpm with no load on a bicycle ergo, the gym guys asked me not to use the equipment anymore because they said I'd break it! My best 100 m is about 11.4 sec, but I can't approach 5 strides/sec (more like very low 4's) because my muscles power is poor in that range of motion. If you can reach 5 strides/sec with a reasonable stride length in a 100m dash, you'll win every race. I don't see the high rpm no load ergometer rpm relevance to cycle track sprinting as max rpm is 160-170, nowhere near 250+ rpm and the loads are quite high (if you can do 70+ km/h).

Overspeed work is carried out for athletics track training. When I was sprint training we used a pulley tow device to ensure we went 10% over our max speed. The same device was used in reverse to limit our max speed at max effort to 90% for underspeed.

The Soviet Bloc during the Cold War had learned through their extensive sports research programs using human guinea pigs that overspeed and underspeed training at the same maximum effort allowed sprinters to break through a physiological speed barrier.

If you could achieve 11.4 secs for 100m and you did not carry out these methods (would be only through lack of equipment or you are showing your age ) then your coach would have you under instructions not to train at 100% speed but a maximum of 95-98%. Training at 100% re-inforced this barrier limit.

The same principle applies to overspeed work on a bicycle ergo or low gear downhill on the road.

A rider who can achieve these 200+ rpm's on either zero or low resistance on an ergo improves the firing signals to his/her sprinting muscles so improved cadence, better control and forces can be applied in the competitive sprint range of 140-170 rpms.

Overspeed work on a bicycle ergo was also recommended for track sprinters in some publications I read at the time. However, I consider the principles of specificity would be breached.

It is not recommended to overspeed regularly, as you can fatigue your central nervous system (CNS). That fatigue cannot be detected and can only be presumed on the days when for some unfathomable reason you lack the zip.

One report I heard (heresay) was that the Australian Institute of Sport (AIS) recommended at least 10 days to fully recover from CNS overspeed work.

 

[VeloFlash]

Bikeguy, here is part of a coaching article I located related to athletic overspeed training -

"At Lisle we have done quite a bit of research on the effects of overspeed training, and are convinced that two things occur when athletes are sprint assisted: first, the towing procedure "lights up" the central nervous system, bringing into play great numbers of neurons; second, it makes the legs more responsive to ground reaction. By lighting up the central nervous system, I mean that towing alters the timing of the nervous impulse to the effect on muscles. In other words, towing creates some anticipatory firing, and this kind of firing enhances intramuscular coordination. In terms of ground reaction response, we theorize that the increase in horizontal momentum resulting from towing alters the capacity for joint stabilization at the ankle and knee, thereby allowing for a greater transmission of force."

Overspeed training for cycle track sprinting is on the same parallel minus the ground reaction.

 

[VeloFlash]

Originally posted by bikeguy
I don't see what's so fantastic/useful about 300 rpm with no resistance, it's equivalent to 5 stride per second turnover rate in a 60-100 meter dash (running) *except* that there is a high load and ROM in sprinting. I can hit 275 rpm with no load on a bicycle ergo, the gym guys asked me not to use the equipment anymore because they said I'd break it! My best 100 m is about 11.4 sec, but I can't approach 5 strides/sec (more like very low 4's) because my muscles power is poor in that range of motion. If you can reach 5 strides/sec with a reasonable stride length in a 100m dash, you'll win every race. I don't see the high rpm no load ergometer rpm relevance to cycle track sprinting as max rpm is 160-170, nowhere near 250+ rpm and the loads are quite high (if you can do 70+ km/h).

Somehow my edit of a previous post left out another comment.

You are calculating a 5 strides per second running rate is equivalent to a 300rpm cycling cadence.

With due respect you have missed the point. A cyclist is computed at 300rpm (or 5 revs per second) for each leg whereas the runner, per leg, is only calculating a turnover of 2.5 strides per second.

So comparing apples with apples, the runner must have a stride rate of 10 strides per second to be equivalent to the cyclist at 300rpm.

A sub 5 second 100m?

 

[bikeguy]

Veloflash, hi there, yes I realised I made a mistake regarding the running turnover, indeed 300 rpm on an ergo is 'equivalent' to 12 steps per second in running. They aren't equivalent of course because in sprinting say at 45 kph the foot velocity may well exceed 100 km/hr (27.7 m/s) with a far longer range of motion while foot velocity in cycle sprinting is not significant, at 170 rpm and a crank diameter of 175 mm, is a mere 3.1 meters/sec.

As for overspeed training I am aware of it, but as you can see my ability to hit 275 rpm on an ergo didn't help me in sprinting. I'm simply a stiff person and a lot of eccentric work needs to be done on my hamstrings in particular before they will lengthen (wasted energy). This is why I abandoned sprinting, I feel that my ability to generate quite high power (my coach always told me I had a lot of power) when I'm not in a stretched position is well suited for cycling, where the ROM of the foot is so small compared to sprinting and my leg never gets stretched.

I'm still playing around with gearing (I've been pedaling too slowly, at 115 rpm max), and I haven't had the opportunity yet to do a real max sprint in a safe area. I will post my progress. I still haven't maxxed out my abilities with clipless pedals and really am still learning to use them after getting them one year ago.

I do have some questions though, in a track 200 m sprint, typically how long is the acceleration zone before peak velocity is reached?

Another, how much does frame and wheel flex effect maximum achievable speed ? Is an aluminum framed bicycle (I'm riding a Specialized Sirrus pro) sufficient to show my true sprinting ability (if I even have any). How would acceleration and top end speed on an aluminum road racing hybrid bike compare to a track sprinting bike ? I've looked on the internet for info on this, but I think only track cyclists who have actually ridden track bikes and know how they compare to road racing bikes would know.

Thanks for any info you might have.

 

[VeloFlash]

Originally posted by bikeguy
I do have some questions though, in a track 200 m sprint, typically how long is the acceleration zone before peak velocity is reached?

Another, how much does frame and wheel flex effect maximum achievable speed ? Is an aluminum framed bicycle (I'm riding a Specialized Sirrus pro) sufficient to show my true sprinting ability (if I even have any). How would acceleration and top end speed on an aluminum road racing hybrid bike compare to a track sprinting bike ? I've looked on the internet for info on this, but I think only track cyclists who have actually ridden track bikes and know how they compare to road racing bikes would know.

Thanks for any info you might have.

I take it you mean an individual 200m TT. It depends on the track and your gearing. You can only hold maximum speed for about 6-8 seconds.

So you have to know thyself how you fade after those 6-8 seconds. If you are a serious fader then you would want your 6-8 seconds to cover the last part of the 200m.

It is a balance between the speed of acceleration to max speed within the 200m and the speed of deceleration when you start fading.

The object is to use the high banking on the velodrome (250m) in the half lap before the 200m start strip so as to economically get up to a speed at the mark that allows you to hit top speed by the middle to end of the back straight. Try to carry that speed through the bend to the finish.

In a match sprint, tactics and positioning (and the lack of opportunity to use the high banking) can cancel out raw speed. That is why those 200m times are usually significantly less.

I would not know what amount of flex would lead to a deterioration in speed. Several years ago Bontrager, the bike and component builder, conducted tests on bottom bracket movement on several bikes and concluded the measured movement was so minuscule to affect power delivery. His tests brought to account that it is more likely to be flex movement in the crank arm that would affect performance.

If you have a stiff frame, stiff wheels and a stiff crankset you cover all bases and should not go wrong.

A track bike has a feeling of being one with you and more responsive to power input. It feels much faster. On a track it would be faster than a road bike. My computer readout of max speeds would suggest this to be so.

 

[bikeguy]

Veloflash, thanks for your reply. I'm kinda limited on funds right now, so I might be able to spring for a new stiff wheel, or a crank but definitely not a new frame. I busted two spokes on the rear wheel (aero spokes were replaced with normal round ones) and it wobbles a bit, so I figure a new wheel is probably better overall. What would you recommend as a good stiff, aerodynamic wheel?

I'm not clear on how many meters the individual 200 mm TT'ers have to accelerate before they reach the timed 200 zone?

Thanks for any advice you may have.

 

[VeloFlash]

Originally posted by bikeguy
Veloflash, thanks for your reply. I'm kinda limited on funds right now, so I might be able to spring for a new stiff wheel, or a crank but definitely not a new frame. I busted two spokes on the rear wheel (aero spokes were replaced with normal round ones) and it wobbles a bit, so I figure a new wheel is probably better overall. What would you recommend as a good stiff, aerodynamic wheel?

I'm not clear on how many meters the individual 200 mm TT'ers have to accelerate before they reach the timed 200 zone?

Thanks for any advice you may have.

I would not to be too concerned about frame and wheel stiffness. Unless you are putting out more than 2000 watts. If you were that powerful you would be sponsored or part of a national program and all your equipment would be supplied.

On a 250m track you are given 3 laps (or 3.5) which includes the 200m run.

The build up to the 200m TT is track dependent. On a 250m track you would be building speed high along the top of the opposite banking and just before the banking commences to flatten out to become the front straight start your acceleration to use the benefit of the descent. It would be about 125m plus the width of the track from where you commence your major acceleration.

You should have time to practice on the track before the event so I would not be too concerned about nailing the acceleration timing.

 

[drewjc]

I agree that acceleration usually takes about 125-150m during a flying 200m TT. The trouble is if you are measuring acceleration a 200m fly isnt ideal as the riders generally dont kick into the sprint as this saps valuable energy. It is more of a fast wind-up, usually starting at about 25-30km/h up to a max of 65-70 depending on the rider and conditions. Now if u want a real test of acceleration a team sprint start would be an ideal test. the top speed of the first rider from a standing start usually occurs entering turn 3 as the rider sits down (although they can accelerate in the seat it is usually a miniscule change). This i would estimate to be around 170m.

Also, i have found that my track bike has significantly better acceleration possibly due to the fixed gear or lighter weight (while still being stiffer) but most likely due to the age of the bikes. Track is 1yr old and road is about 10yrs (carbon Cadex) one of the flimsiest frames known to man!! I still think that regardless of gearing etc. track bikes are faster in a drag race than a road bike. the direct drive is much more efficient and track bikes are lighter (although not significantly so) and stiffer.