Help With Cadence
Discussion
I recently bought a cadence sensor and it confirms what I had long suspected that I am a spinner.
My average is 92-94rpm across a ride so with freewheeling bringing that value down from when I am pedalling, I suppose my actual rate is approaching 100rpm.
I have cycled like this for the last 2 years. Is it too high? Should I grow a pair and stick it in a higher gear and push a lower rate? I do have weak little legs so tend to use my heart and lungs more.
Thanks
Steve
My average is 92-94rpm across a ride so with freewheeling bringing that value down from when I am pedalling, I suppose my actual rate is approaching 100rpm.
I have cycled like this for the last 2 years. Is it too high? Should I grow a pair and stick it in a higher gear and push a lower rate? I do have weak little legs so tend to use my heart and lungs more.
Thanks
Steve
ewenm said:
Does it matter? What do you want to achieve by changing what works for you?
I suppose because I'm a slow climber. I can get over most things, but usually a bit behind group leaders. If modifying my cadence over the rest of the ride helps with this aspect, it might be worth modifying my style. Steve
ChrisMCoupe said:
What is wrong with 100 RPM? I tend to ride at a very similar rate and average 90-95 RPM on a ride. Steep hill rides tend to bring this down a little but my legs just don't like turning over a big gear at ~85rpm
Fair enough! I thought it might be a little on the high side. Happy to be corrected!Steve
In my experience being faster on the hills is about fitness rather than cadence. I was one of the better climbers in my group because I'm fit and relatively light (but not much power). On long climbs I switch between spinning a gear while seated and pushing a gear while standing, swapping between the two positions/gears as each gets tiring.
I'd say you're about average for cadence. Leg strength plays almost no role in cycling except for maybe sprinters and track riders. The actual force required to turn your cranks is very small compared with say doing a squat with 50+ kg on your shoulders. The power produced during cycling is down to your cardiovascular system.
Look at Chris Froome's legs compared with Chris Hoys and ask who has the higher threshold power for an hour.
Look at Chris Froome's legs compared with Chris Hoys and ask who has the higher threshold power for an hour.
nammynake said:
I'd say you're about average for cadence. Leg strength plays almost no role in cycling except for maybe sprinters and track riders. The actual force required to turn your cranks is very small compared with say doing a squat with 50+ kg on your shoulders. The power produced during cycling is down to your cardiovascular system.
Look at Chris Froome's legs compared with Chris Hoys and ask who has the higher threshold power for an hour.
Look at Chris Froome's legs compared with Chris Hoys and ask who has the higher threshold power for an hour.
The Froome/Hoy example just goes to show that muscular strength isn't the key factor for Froome's particular type of cycling, and that it is a key factor for Hoy's type of cycling. They are two extremes, and the rest of us sit somewhere in between. Most of us don't need much in the way of muscle, but many of us (me included) would like to be able to sprint a bit better.
If you sit there spinning at 100rpm all day then you will have twig legs, if you start grinding up some climbs in the saddle at low cadence or doing more sprints then you will probably put a bit of beef on your legs. Your body will just adapt itself to whatever you do most.
Your cadence average will only be measured from when you are pedalling, not when you are freewheeling. If your average is 92, then that's what you pedal at.
The slowest riders in my club group are always the grinders. They tire quickly. That isn't a generalisation as some grinders are fast riders but high cadence will normally mean good endurance.
If you look at a pro race pelleton, most of the riders will have a cadence in the 90s or 100s. There has been much research on this on various papers say we should be pedalling more slowly, but grinders don't win pro level races.
The slowest riders in my club group are always the grinders. They tire quickly. That isn't a generalisation as some grinders are fast riders but high cadence will normally mean good endurance.
If you look at a pro race pelleton, most of the riders will have a cadence in the 90s or 100s. There has been much research on this on various papers say we should be pedalling more slowly, but grinders don't win pro level races.
I need to get a cadence sensor for my bike.
I've recently changed my cassette to an 11-23 (Not the most sensible thing I've ever done given where I live) in an attempt to build a bit more leg strength and stop me from just spinning up a hill.
I seemed to be getting lazy and relying on bigger gears a little too much. (Never the 32 though!!)
Regarding "grinder" never winning. Chris Horner did OK at last years Vuelta.
I've recently changed my cassette to an 11-23 (Not the most sensible thing I've ever done given where I live) in an attempt to build a bit more leg strength and stop me from just spinning up a hill.
I seemed to be getting lazy and relying on bigger gears a little too much. (Never the 32 though!!)
Regarding "grinder" never winning. Chris Horner did OK at last years Vuelta.
Raven Flyer said:
Your cadence average will only be measured from when you are pedalling, not when you are freewheeling. If your average is 92, then that's what you pedal at.
The slowest riders in my club group are always the grinders. They tire quickly. That isn't a generalisation as some grinders are fast riders but high cadence will normally mean good endurance.
If you look at a pro race pelleton, most of the riders will have a cadence in the 90s or 100s. There has been much research on this on various papers say we should be pedalling more slowly, but grinders don't win pro level races.
Yep, Tony Martin, Voeckler, they've never won anything The slowest riders in my club group are always the grinders. They tire quickly. That isn't a generalisation as some grinders are fast riders but high cadence will normally mean good endurance.
If you look at a pro race pelleton, most of the riders will have a cadence in the 90s or 100s. There has been much research on this on various papers say we should be pedalling more slowly, but grinders don't win pro level races.
I think you are a better climber than you give yourself credit to be honest Steve, I am far from the benchmark but our times up Hellfire Pass are identical and we were only separated by seconds on that climb on the Silverstone sporitve and I dont consider myself to be that bad on the hills. We gave away a few seconds to Tony and Si on Hellfire Pass but they both need a few chipshop dinners! 
Spinning a low gear is fairly sensible technique and keeps you within the aerobic threshold. Maybe just find a local route with a short steep hill and use that as the benchmark. My cadence is probably quite low and I've noticed that switching to a compact chainset has really helped despite previously declaring them for mincers only!
Spinning a low gear is fairly sensible technique and keeps you within the aerobic threshold. Maybe just find a local route with a short steep hill and use that as the benchmark. My cadence is probably quite low and I've noticed that switching to a compact chainset has really helped despite previously declaring them for mincers only![quote=pablo]our times up Hellfire Pass are identical and we were only separated by seconds on that climb on the Silverstone sportive /quote]
That's because my Strava recording failed on the PH Weekend and you gave me a copy of your ride so that I could record the route on my feed!
I was left for dead recently riding with some racers up a hill in Cheshire. They were burger avoiders though and I doubt they use pints of bitter as carb boost sources!
Steve
That's because my Strava recording failed on the PH Weekend and you gave me a copy of your ride so that I could record the route on my feed!
I was left for dead recently riding with some racers up a hill in Cheshire. They were burger avoiders though and I doubt they use pints of bitter as carb boost sources
!Steve
Steve vRS said:
I was left for dead recently riding with some racers up a hill in Cheshire. They were burger avoiders though and I doubt they use pints of bitter as carb boost sources !
Steve
Exactly - to get faster up hills, lose weight and get fitter. Cadence is fiddling around the edges.!Steve
I do a lot of running and non-runners often ask how I avoid the hills in my training. They generally look confused when I respond that hills are good, I seek them out, I do reps on them. Hills are our friends not our enemies. Ride (or run) lots of hills and you'll get better at riding (or running) hills and faster/stronger on the flat bits too.
In my totally uneducated opinion your cadence sounds fine to me!, most coaches will advise endurance cyclists to spin between 90-105 rpm.
When I first jumped back into the saddle a few years back I was grinding along in the late 70's-early 80's and found my legs were getting fatigued quite early, I would struggle to hold an ave speed above 18mph over a flat 30-40 miles.
I made a very conscious effort to raise my cadence and now usually spin along at 95+ on the road, and often hold 110 on an hours turbo trainer session. Consequently my ave speed jumped and on a good day I can hold a 21moh ave over a lumpy 50+ miles, plus my endurance ability raised significantly - admittedly some of that is down to time in the saddle.
I can tell if I have been on a particularly lumpy or windy ride as my cadence ave drops to the late 80's.
If you are comfortable at spinning along at a high cadence the next step is to drop a cog and try to maintain the same cadence thus building power. I have been trying this recently on a few sections of road near me and it seems to be working (of course if you have a power meter there is no need for such crude methods!)...I find I don't need to look at my cadence anymore to get a measure of how fast I am spinning, it has become habitual.
When I first jumped back into the saddle a few years back I was grinding along in the late 70's-early 80's and found my legs were getting fatigued quite early, I would struggle to hold an ave speed above 18mph over a flat 30-40 miles.
I made a very conscious effort to raise my cadence and now usually spin along at 95+ on the road, and often hold 110 on an hours turbo trainer session. Consequently my ave speed jumped and on a good day I can hold a 21moh ave over a lumpy 50+ miles, plus my endurance ability raised significantly - admittedly some of that is down to time in the saddle.
I can tell if I have been on a particularly lumpy or windy ride as my cadence ave drops to the late 80's.
If you are comfortable at spinning along at a high cadence the next step is to drop a cog and try to maintain the same cadence thus building power. I have been trying this recently on a few sections of road near me and it seems to be working (of course if you have a power meter there is no need for such crude methods!
)...I find I don't need to look at my cadence anymore to get a measure of how fast I am spinning, it has become habitual.Ive just got an edge 800 with candence sensor, so this is all new to me. Ive come from mountain biking where im quite used to grinding up sudden short-sharp-shock hills, so i suppose ive applied the same to road biking. Its giving me chunky legs, but im trying to up my distances and change my style to be more effecient.
First ride with the sensor - at my usual cadence - suggested ~69rpm.
In the few rides since ive tried to spin more, and have now got up to an average of 80-82. To be honest, that feels fairly comfortable to me.
My question to the gurus is - does your crankset change what your optimum cadence should be?
Without really researching the difference, ive ended up with a road bike with a 53/39 crankset, and 11-25 on the back.
Or does the same principle apply - just drop down the gears until you are spinning 80-100 rpm?
First ride with the sensor - at my usual cadence - suggested ~69rpm.
In the few rides since ive tried to spin more, and have now got up to an average of 80-82. To be honest, that feels fairly comfortable to me.
My question to the gurus is - does your crankset change what your optimum cadence should be?
Without really researching the difference, ive ended up with a road bike with a 53/39 crankset, and 11-25 on the back.
Or does the same principle apply - just drop down the gears until you are spinning 80-100 rpm?
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff