Cadence and gearing for time trialing

benniehendrix
Posts: 58
I think the merits of spinning gears have been overemphasised. It is far less efficient than pushing a big gear. Most of the top time trialers now push big gears (Cancelara et al). With low gear you can be in a very small gear spinning very fast, using a lot of energy and going very slowly. It would be better to spread your effort and combine muscle power and aerobic power and use big gears smoothly. It's about technique.
I am doing a 3 lap time trial of Richmond Park, which is rolling terain. It far easier to stay in big gears, i.e 53 x 17 +, and glide around at high speeds, rather than using energy very quickly spinning small gears. I think optimal cadence for me is around 80-90 rpm in big gears and I am a reasonably slim build. This way speeds of 45 kph can be sustained for longer.
I would be interested to hear your thoughts about this subject.
I am doing a 3 lap time trial of Richmond Park, which is rolling terain. It far easier to stay in big gears, i.e 53 x 17 +, and glide around at high speeds, rather than using energy very quickly spinning small gears. I think optimal cadence for me is around 80-90 rpm in big gears and I am a reasonably slim build. This way speeds of 45 kph can be sustained for longer.
I would be interested to hear your thoughts about this subject.
0
Comments
-
The optimum cadence is widely accepted as being around 90rpm, which is what you've found. What you generally shouldn't do is push them at about 50rpm. So, what was your point again?0
-
I've no problem with 'pushing' big gears as long as you are strong enough to do it. I have always trained in the 'big' ring up untill this year. I have switched to smaller gears and bigger cadence now and have noticed a few things:-
1. No more knee pain
2. No/little back ache
3. I am able to 'carry' a consistantly greater speed across a varied terrain
4. I am able to switch pace on longer hills (not with devastating effect like the pros-but nevertheless :roll: )
Ok, I am doing triathlons now but the bike leg could still be viewed as a time trial, albeit with a run latched onto the end.
I appreciate your point but I'm patently anything but a professional rider. Therefore, I try to find things that work best for me rather than try to do what far more talented people can get away with'How can an opinion be bullsh1t?' High Fidelity0 -
You're so right about the top pros pushing big gears - that's exactly what they do - at 90+rpm!0
-
80-90 rpm is not pushing/grinding, it's more like spinning.0
-
whyamihere wrote:The optimum cadence is widely accepted as being around 90rpm, which is what you've found. What you generally shouldn't do is push them at about 50rpm. So, what was your point again?
My point is that 100+ rpm is not that effective. Having said that I would never want to try mashing a big gear below 75rpm either.0 -
'How can an opinion be bullsh1t?' High Fidelity0
-
Optimal cadence tends to be self selecting, although some people do deliberately train to ride lower (60-70rpm) or higher (100+ rpm) cadences.
I'm in the 90rpm camp. I've tried using lower revs but I can't get as much power out and I'm slower. I've yet to properly experiment with higher revs but I suspect it would be a waste of time.Jeff Jones
Product manager, Sports0 -
benniehendrix wrote:whyamihere wrote:The optimum cadence is widely accepted as being around 90rpm, which is what you've found. What you generally shouldn't do is push them at about 50rpm. So, what was your point again?
My point is that 100+ rpm is not that effective. Having said that I would never want to try mashing a big gear below 75rpm either.0 -
My point is that 100+ rpm is not that effective. Having said that I would never want to try mashing a big gear below 75rpm either.[/quote]Person most famous for spinning at 100+rpm? Lance Armstrong. Number of TDF victories? 7. It may not be that efficient for you, but it's obviously not that bad...[/quote]
This seems to be everyone's arguement, i.e. Armstrong spins gears at a tremendous cadence, therefore everyone should do it. However, lets be realistic, Armstrong was a complete 'one-off'. Nobody can replicate him. There has never been anyone with such a fast pedaling style and there never will be again. Diesel engine riding style is generally more effective than high reving petrol riders.0 -
Nobody says everyone should do it. What I generally see is suggestions that everyone should try it, which they should. Afterall, without trying different cadences, you won't know which cadence is best for you.0
-
true, u do have to try it, then disregard it0
-
Unless it works for you, in which case you shouldn't disregard it... The fact is, there's no 'one size fits all' solution with cadence.0
-
idaviesmoore wrote:I've no problem with 'pushing' big gears as long as you are strong enough to do it. I have always trained in the 'big' ring up untill this year. I have switched to smaller gears and bigger cadence now and have noticed a few things:-
1. No more knee pain
2. No/little back ache
3. I am able to 'carry' a consistantly greater speed across a varied terrain
4. I am able to switch pace on longer hills (not with devastating effect like the pros-but nevertheless :roll: )
Ok, I am doing triathlons now but the bike leg could still be viewed as a time trial, albeit with a run latched onto the end.
I appreciate your point but I'm patently anything but a professional rider. Therefore, I try to find things that work best for me rather than try to do what far more talented people can get away with
Hi there.
For triathlon I find that matching my cycling cadence to my running one makes for smoother transition from bike to run. Personally I'm 90rpm riding and 180 strides per minute running - which is the same thing.
Testers are the wrong people to look to for optimum cadence as they traditionally push bigger gears - over flatter terrain than you would road racing.
Higher cadences are probably more important when climbing, as if you have a slow pedal rate then you will lose significant amounts of momentum between the power phases of each stroke.
Cheers, Andy0 -
There has never been anyone with such a fast pedaling style and there never will be again
lol. what a crock...0 -
I'm completely new to road riding and a complete novice - I'm a very experienced MTBer and have started to use a road bike to keep fit.
I naturally ride at 100-110rpm and did so from the moment I hopped on the thing and it really works for me. I'm quite small (68kgs) and for me I really have to keep the cadence up and just spin through the ups.0 -
whyamihere wrote:Unless it works for you, in which case you shouldn't disregard it... The fact is, there's no 'one size fits all' solution with cadence.
but it probably wont work for you.0 -
benniehendrix wrote:whyamihere wrote:Unless it works for you, in which case you shouldn't disregard it... The fact is, there's no 'one size fits all' solution with cadence.
but it probably wont work for you.0 -
benniehendrix wrote:whyamihere wrote:Unless it works for you, in which case you shouldn't disregard it... The fact is, there's no 'one size fits all' solution with cadence.
but it probably wont work for you.0 -
spinning beyond a 100 rpm is not good - IN a TIME TRIAL - you dont need to accellerate and you concentrate on a steady rythem, in a road race you need the ability to accellerate which does take you will past 100. In the end its about the individuals physiology. BTW Armstrong did not have an exceptionally high cadence - nor was it particularly unusual in that respect. It seems that it was more of something for the commentators to natter on about when they had nothing else to say0
-
spinning beyond 100rpm in a time trial is fine if that's what works for you.0
-
I was going to post a serious response regarding personal preference of cadence depending on your physiology, but then I thought what's the point. The OP seems to know everything already. Seeing as you know everything, what's better shimano or campag, not sure why everyone's been debating it for years, we could have just asked you.....0
-
Fact: high cadence uses less resistance on joints, muscles etc.
It uses aerobic more than pure power. Therefore, inefficient use of energy when 100+ rpm in time trials. High cadence more suited to road stages when accelerations are needed.
Fact: 80-90 rpm (slower cadence) more resistance, but more efficient use of power and aerobic capacities. Cancelara and Evans etc are best time trailers and use this technique. They use slower cadences. No doubt Armstrong will blow them away in the next TDF, but he's a one off.0 -
Fact: you're talking sh1te.0
-
benniehendrix wrote:but he's a one off.
No he's not :shock: I think, OP, you need to consider the possibility that what works for you (and I've no doubt it does work for you) may not work for me or a million other cyclists. I have tried differing cadences and going on:-
1. My spilt times
2. My comfort level
3. My heart rate
4. My joint reactions
deduce that smaller gearing bigger cadence results in bigger gains for me.'How can an opinion be bullsh1t?' High Fidelity0 -
singlespeedexplosif wrote:Fact: you're talking sh1te.
Very insightful comment there.0 -
What are your TT times bennie? Maybe we can all draw conclusions from your sample size of 1 to show that your TT times on routes that others could compare to would categorically prove you are correct.
I always thought 70rpm was pushing gears. 90 - 100rpm was spinning and anything in between was 'in between'0 -
sums it up perfectly, don't you think? More factual than your 'facts' too.0
-
singlespeedexplosif wrote:sums it up perfectly, don't you think? More factual than your 'facts' too.
I don't agree, but if you want you can join the debate. If you don't, then you may as well join a forum you are interested in. Just a thought.0 -
mackdaddy wrote:What are your TT times bennie? Maybe we can all draw conclusions from your sample size of 1 to show that your TT times on routes that others could compare to would categorically prove you are correct.
What are your time trial times Mack?
I just wanted to make a point that very high cadences have been overated and talked up in the press too much. That's all. It's not a personal critisism of you as a cyclist. I just wanted to see if there was anyone else who was thinking along the same lines.0 -
bennie, I think the problem is that you're are totally discounting anyone's physiology etc when making your statements and discounting anyone else's opinion, even though you asked for it.
I think singlespeeds comments are attempting to point this out.
Not everyone has the power in thier legs to push the gears and may have huge aerobic engines instead (my son is like this). Now this may mean their natural tendency doesn't align with TTs but they can ride TTs most effectively by spinning.
I may be completely wrong but doesn't Contador spin? He seems to do okay.0