Cadence-tastic!

lost_in_thought

Well, my shiny new Cateye Strada Cadence is a-sitting on my desk.

There are also many wires, and many instructions. So, in order to motivate me to actually install it on my bike and set it up, I demand to know what cadence you people all cycle around at.

And I'm not talking about the fastest cadence you can muster, I'm talking about your general cadence. Let's call it a mean fast-moving cadence.

Oh and how fast are you going at that cadence?

Hmmmmmmm??

redddraggon

95rpm is my ideal.

cjcp

I'm somewhere between 85-95 on the flat, but I don't have a cadence monitor; I'm just going by what I used to do when I had one. Now I just go by "feel".

thedaffodilfish

Commuting through town I generally sit around 84-95 rpm and that's about 17-22mph.

If I'm out for a ride then it can be 88-110rpm and anywhere between 17-28 mph.

Slow Downcp

I ride around the 95 mark - speed depends what gear I'm in

wgwarburton

Hi LiT,

I like to be at about 95-100rpm, which is about 18mph on the winter hack (64") or 20 on the summer lightweight (69"). I find this Hard Work going uphill or into the wind...

Cheers,
W.

windbreaker

I tend to go at 85-90 commuting, but 95+ on harder raining rides, and even more for sprints up to 130. I have successfully trained myself to spin faster. I now also have a sense of how fast I am spinning even without cadence data.

I would always have a cadence meter now. Well spent money IMHO. My cateye is doing well after 15,000 miles and a good few years, scratches from bashes etc.

Cantdosleepy

So what's the big deal with Cadence? Is there an ideal rpm for minimum effort per metre travelled? Is there an advantage to having a high one? Is it better for fitness?

What happens if I'm not happy travelling at much faster than about 14mph? When going downhill my wee legs whip round and round and round faster than I feel would be with me having total control. Is that a good thing? A very bad thing?

There's a lot to know about this cycling lark...

jonginge

Typically between 90 and 110 in 52x16 on the commute. On the Pearson I spin up a bit more (48x16).

The max I've noticed on the commute is 147 (up millbank) and I can normally get into the 130s through Blackfriars tunnel. Any scalps at those cadences are null and void, though, as I am definitely trying

redddraggon

Cantdosleepy wrote:

So what's the big deal with Cadence? Is there an ideal rpm for minimum effort per metre travelled? Is there an advantage to having a high one? Is it better for fitness?

What happens if I'm not happy travelling at much faster than about 14mph? When going downhill my wee legs whip round and round and round faster than I feel would be with me having total control. Is that a good thing? A very bad thing?

There's a lot to know about this cycling lark...

Cadence is personal - you pedal at you feel is right. But as you train more, get faster, generate more power, you naturally seem to pedal at a higher cadence. Basically I'm trying to say don't get hung up on cadence.

I've got a cadence meter, it's just good to look at.

tailwindhome

I don't know much about this but I seem to recall reading a article years ago written by Chris Boardman, I think it was a beginners guide to time trialing.

His advice was to experiment with different cadences and gears, using a heart rate monitor, to find the most efficient (fastest speed at a sustainable BPM) combination for yourself.

Cant remember the detail! :oops:

Jen J

I've only just got the cadence sensor to go with my Garmin 405 (used mainly for running) and although I knew I was slow, I hadn't realised how slow - ave cadence on a 30 minute turbo session was 60, and I've just checked the data from yesterday's RP ride and the ave was 70 :oops:

EDIT - Ooooh, I clocked a 2.24 minute mile yesterday, and quite a few other sub 3's

dirk_van_gently

100+ normally
I'm a spinner not a grinder

wgwarburton

cantdosleepy writes:

> So what's the big deal with Cadence? Is there an ideal rpm for minimum effort per metre travelled? Is there an advantage to having a high one? Is it better for fitness?

Experienced cyclists generally seem to spin faster. Biomechanically, it appears to be less efficient but there must be some advantage. I posted a link to an "interesting" research paper a week or so back that proposed that the body's preference is to spin at a speed that minimises joint movement.

> What happens if I'm not happy travelling at much faster than about 14mph? When going downhill my wee legs whip round and round and round faster than I feel would be with me having total control. Is that a good thing? A very bad thing?

That's what gears and freewheels are for... but riding fixed encourages a smoother pedalling style ("souplesse") that may improve your general technique. Gear selection is necessarily a compromise, especially if its hilly: the idea, as I understand it, is that you improve your cycling by learning to ride efficiently at high and low cadence.

You should, of course, stay in control at all times...

> There's a lot to know about this cycling lark...

Indeed, but you can get by knowing very little if you prefer.

JonGinge writes:
> Typically between 90 and 110 in 52x16 on the commute.

Commuting at 27mph.... Respect! I can't average 20 most of the time, even on my fairly short (4-5 mile) trip to the station.

Cheers,
W.

Littigator

85-95 seems comfortable. Up to 110 is manageable and sprints of 120 plus are possible...for me that is anyway.

jonginge

WGWarburton wrote:

JonGinge writes:
> Typically between 90 and 110 in 52x16 on the commute.

Commuting at 27mph.... Respect! I can't average 20 most of the time, even on my fairly short (4-5 mile) trip to the station.

Cheers,
W.

Not for the whole 11 miles though And it's a flat route through london...

Crapaud

redddraggon wrote:

Cadence is personal - you pedal at you feel is right. But as you train more, get faster, generate more power, you naturally seem to pedal at a higher cadence. Basically I'm trying to say don't get hung up on cadence.

I've got a cadence meter, it's just good to look at.

^^^This^^^

Loads more on cadence in Training. Forum search that board and you'll have to take a day or 2 off to read it all. Also, there're a couple of qualified coaches post in there, so good info.

greg66_tri_v2.0

When things are working, I am to sit between 90 & 100 in 53x16. I tend not to shift gear commuting, cos it's mostly pancake flat, and what isn't, isn't very long.

Right now ... hmm. Up to 75 in 53x17, bailing into 19 at the slightest gradient. Although my general movement is improving week by week, I'm still finding it hard to put the power down. It all feels a bit raw and unstable still when I do, and I'd rather not do meself a mischief (again).

I tried 39x15 to try to look like I was working on my souplesse. But I got bored sh!tless inside 30 seconds.

e999sam

My average is usually around 85 but on the flat I'm ride between 90 & 100.
Just did some 20 sec reps on my turbo and hit 159.

JGS

I usually vary between 90rpm for a "grind" and 110rpm to cruise, although my current saddle is a bit crap and I bounce around a lot. I need to get something similar to my MTB saddle that flexes a bit more.

lost_in_thought

Now, I thought bouncing around in the saddle at higher cadence was due to pedalling technique rather than flex in the saddle or lack thereof - am I being blonde again?

jonginge

Mostly pedalling technique, possibly saddle height. Saddle flex? sounds painful

c12345

Don't you ride a fixed?
cadence will be the same as speed - just a diferent number

lost_in_thought

c12345 wrote:

Don't you ride a fixed?
cadence will be the same as speed - just a diferent number

Don't know why, but that really made me laugh. I can't really explain why, but it's with, not at!

It's that other number that I'm trying to find out, and I'm too lazy to do the maths myself.

biondino

90-95 is my comfort zone. Below 85 and above 100 and I'm looking to change gear immediately.

flattythehurdler

LA changed perception when using a lower gear /higher cadence to climb than most of the pro peleton, claiming it was more efficient. Recent research suggests that a cadence of around 60 delivers maximum efficiency for climbing , but, more interestingly, when testing power outputs of a group of individuals over a range of cadences, maximum output for each was at the cadence they usually used without thinking. I.E. use whatever cadence feels right and it will be best for you.
It's always nice to have raw superstition backed up by cutting edge science. BTW my mega scalp yesterday was at about 120 I reckon but he may have been spinning home after a training session at the velodrome (see scr).

ride_whenever

where your optimum cadence is is very personal, due mostly to lactate threshold, training and muscle fibre types.

flattythehurdler

That's what I meant. Much better put.

timrude

hmm, I got a computer with cadence earlier this year and started trying to maintain 85-100 as I'd read somewhere that was supposed to be more efficient, however I found that when I came to anything more than a really short hill, I just died straightaway.

Now I normally maintain 75-85 and when I come to a climb I'm not wiped out.

greg66_tri_v2.0

flattythehurdler wrote:

LA changed perception when using a lower gear /higher cadence to climb than most of the pro peloton, claiming it was more efficient. Recent research suggests that a cadence of around 60 delivers maximum efficiency for climbing , but, more interestingly, when testing power outputs of a group of individuals over a range of cadences, maximum output for each was at the cadence they usually used without thinking. I.E. use whatever cadence feels right and it will be best for you.
It's always nice to have raw superstition backed up by cutting edge science. BTW my mega scalp yesterday was at about 120 I reckon but he may have been spinning home after a training session at the velodrome (see scr).

It may be most efficient, but it's very difficult to accelerate from 60 rpm pushing a big gear on a climb, compared to the guy spinning at 100 in a smaller gear (ask Jan Ulrich about this )

always_tyred

Greg66 wrote:

It may be most efficient, but it's very difficult to accelerate from 60 rpm pushing a big gear on a climb, compared to the guy spinning at 100 in a smaller gear (ask Jan Ulrich about this )

Yes, it takes ages to stop for a blood transfusion.... or was it an injection.... or was it a line of coke.... or was it damnable lies?