Cadence cadence cadence!!!

captain_kelly

Afternoon all

Now that I've been cycling for a while now (9 months) I figured i should get a bit more technical with my training.

Lots of people talk to me about having a 'high cadence' but non of them ever actually tell me a rough ball park for where it should be.

So this weekend i headed out for a short ride (50k) and averaged 74rpm. to me this doesn't sound high enough, but I really have no idea.

Happy to share the ride with anyone that wants to have a look and offer any advice.

Got a couple of sportives and dutahlons coming up so would be good to go in knowing where I should be hitting.

Cheers in advance

Strith

There are no set rules but most people are comfortable somewhere between 70 and 90. Just avoid grinding away as you're likely to build up lactic acid sooner.

A riding pal of mine with a power meter did a test on his rollers and said he can acheive the same power output at 70 and 90rpm but with the higher cadence his HR is a bit lower. I'm not sure if thats the case for everyone, but I'm sure someone will be along who understands this better and explain why.

Bobbinogs

Most folks aim for 90-100 as an average, with a climbing cadence of around 75 and a top cadence well over 120.

Bear in mind that cadence is no magic solution for all though. I find keeping mine around 95 to help me a lot on long rides (particularly in the last stages) but my Father in Law was a real old time grinder who pushed the biggest gear he could at any one time...his endurance stats blow mine out of the water (the last LEJOG he did was in a total time of 3.5 days, etc.).

Try to experiment and see how you get on is probably the best advice I can offer on this one.

thegodplato

I too have been wondering about this as a lot of my club mates use cadence sensors and my best mate has been trying to get me to get one for a while now. So I took the plunge last week and went out at the weekend using it for the first time. My mate reckons somewhere between 90-95 is ideal but I was struggling alot to keep at that pace, although this may partly be down to not cycling for 5 weeks so my fitness might not quite be what it was. My average was 84 but I was finding the actual rate depended on whether the road was flat or slightly uphill, etc - there was times were I could quite happily spin at 95-100 as the surface was nice and smooth. Other times I found that if I was struggling in a gear with low-ish cadence, I would drop a gear or 2 to increase cadence but then my speed would drop a bit as well. Maybe its just getting used to it?

bernithebiker

Bobbinogs wrote:

Most folks aim for 90-100 as an average, with a climbing cadence of around 75 and a top cadence well over 120.

Most folks I see are way lower than that, more like 60-80.

100 is pretty high, and I'm not sure that many would be comfortable holding that for several hours.

Also, no real reason why your cadence should drop when climbing - just pick the right gear and keep the cadence in your 'sweet spot'.

Having said all that, I'm a firm believer that high cadence is a good thing - it's another weapon to your armoury.

danlikesbikes

Go with what feels right for you - as others have said anywhere between 70 - 100 is OK, just depends on what you personally feel comfortable with & can maintain. Quick way to find out is to use the same hill and try to ride it in different gears and at different RPM to fin a crank speed and bike speed that your comfortable with.

I ride at about 85rpm on average & most of the people I ride with are similar but a few are higher and some lower.

Bobbinogs

thegodplato wrote:

I found that if I was struggling in a gear with low-ish cadence, I would drop a gear or 2 to increase cadence but then my speed would drop a bit as well.

I find this is one of the delights of cycling with others who are pretty good! When I am out on a decent club run everyone has the same dilema when climbing...dropping a gear to make things more comfortable often means that you get dropped on the climb unless you can compensate by upping the cadence, e.g.,
34x21 to a 34x23 can mean a drop of ~2kph...which needs nearly an extra 10 on the cadence to compensate.

Hence, we can end up watching each other to gauge the suffering to see who cracks first before easing up on the pace... but sometimes less is more and those that proactively keep their suffering sustainable can take the crest first anyway as everyone else blows up en route. Not always though, sometimes the lead group just keep the high pace going all the way to the top, shelling peas from the pod, b'stards

Bozman

The general rule(many moons ago) used to be mid eighties but I think the it's shot up a bit recently, probably down to Armstrong and compact chainsets.
Mine used to be 84 on a standard chainset but since I swapped to a compact it's gone up to 90/92, as the cadence has risen my leg strength has fallen too.

cougie

I'd really not worry too much about it. If you see novices on bikes - they do 60 rpm naturally.
Pros are much higher. So I think most of us on here should be somewhere in between.

captain_kelly

Thanks for all the responses, I'll keep an eye on this for more thoughts.

From the ride at the weekend the biggest hill was a 55 metre climb over 1.2km, again cadence stay between 74-80rpm.

It may not have been the best ride to judge on as I was riding with a much slower mate who still fell behind going up this slope.

I'll just say i need more rides to improve more, i'd like to get it up to 85-95 consistently

stephenlinden

Mine was 80(ish) on a older heavy bike but shot up to the mid-90s on my new lighter road bike. This meant my heart rate was also mid 150s (theoretical max of 175 - yes I'm getting on physically, not mentally) so I tried to reduce it over the weekend and keep it around 80 again. It felt slow but I felt as if I could ride further.

It's probably horses for courses really. At anything over 80 on a flat even road it doesn't feel like I'm pressing the pedals which is fine because Liverpool is generally flat.

ddraver

It's not something to worry about particularly, but many people find it more efficient to spin an easier gear over longer rides. That said, it's not possible to go out next weekend and "just do" and average 10rpm higher than what your comfortable with. It's the sort of thing you have to work on over a few years. A Turbo Trainer is particularly useful as you can concentrate on it specifically during "hard" intervals and the like. Gradually you ll find that it ll creep up during your normal riding.

For example, I used to ride on the road at about 80rpm and ride hard intervals (e.g. on Sufferfest) at 90-95. This year, I've been generally riding at 90 rpm and pushing the intervals at 100+...

That said, I'm not riding faster....

Bwgan

Bit of a side track, but to measure this do you acutually count it for a minute?

ddraver

Count for 6 seconds then add a zero....

TakeTurns

Riding at 90-100rpm has always been natural for me. It's easy to keep the momentum going, my legs feel relaxed and the motion is smooth.

jonomc4

I find myself comfortable at 85-90 on flat and on hills anything over 105 is just not right for me - but before I got a cadence meter I think it was closer to 70 - if you keep the gear low and focus on cadence you will find higher cadence becomes natural. But don't forget you need power and cadence

Pross

bernithebiker wrote:

Bobbinogs wrote:

Most folks aim for 90-100 as an average, with a climbing cadence of around 75 and a top cadence well over 120.

Most folks I see are way lower than that, more like 60-80.

100 is pretty high, and I'm not sure that many would be comfortable holding that for several hours.

Also, no real reason why your cadence should drop when climbing - just pick the right gear and keep the cadence in your 'sweet spot'.

Having said all that, I'm a firm believer that high cadence is a good thing - it's another weapon to your armoury.

This. Cadence seems to be one of those things that people over-estimate along with speed and 'size'. I ride with a slightly higher cadence than most of my clubmates but doubt I average over 80, when I target riding at 100 it feels quick generally although I can do 20 second bursts at 150+

Monty Dog

FWIW increasing cadence will result in an increased heart rate until your develop the economy or efficiency, so it will probably feel unnatural and uncomfortable for a while. Developing a high cadence can help improve your seated acceleration and 'pick up' as well as being able to maintain a higher speed comfortably.
FWIW Armstrong didn't 'invent' high-cadence pedalling, it was a bull$hit smoke-screen to cover up his drug abuse - if you want fast, try this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVbwngNoHm0

Mystique

Interestingly, I always assumed I averaged around 85rpm on the flat, although my riding partners have been known to comment on my "twiddling". Now I have a Garmin that actually measures my Cadence I see that I actually average between 100-105, even if I ride all day. I guess I'm just one of life's spinners.

MichaelW

High cadence pedalling requires that you have cranks of a suitable length. If you are average height, then 175mm may be too long for rapid cadence.
High cadence style favours a strong cardio-vascular system over strong legs. Some people have massive leg strength and work fine at lower cadence. If your legs hurt, gear down and spin up. If your lungs hurt, gear up and spin down. If nothing hurts, maybe you need to MTFU and get some nuts yer big girl's blouse.
Cadence is nothing to do with power. If you are riding at 100watts you can ride high cadence or low cadence, you just have to select a suitable gear.

Training to increase cadence is totally divorced from speed or power training. Pick a low gear. Gradually ramp up your cadence, always staying in a low gear for small resistance. Once you get to max revs, maintain that for a minute or so. Don't worry about your speed, you are training your leg muscles to move rapidly.

diy

MTB - 65-85, road, 75-95, I have a tendency to grind a bit on hill climbs. Never really go below cog 3 on my 25-12

marz

Unless you have particular problems (knee pain, thigh pain, slow on hills) don't worry about cadence. If your legs feel fine after 50k pedaling 74rpm, then why try and change a cadence that seems to work for you.

If though you're looking to go faster which means more power, then for most folks it's easier to produce additional power by pedaling faster than harder (shifting up a gear).

Small sets of intervals are a great way to increase cadence. For a set short time (1,2,5,20 mins) spin up to high cadence, hold that spin speed and then rest, then repeat maybe 3 or 6 times. Doing this will drag up your base cadence as your legs become comfortable with the higher speeds.

stueys

My legs naturally settle at 95-98 on the turbo, I find that the most comfortable pace to spin at. Outside on the road my cadence drops by about 7-8. Absolutely no idea why, guess its harder to get into a tempo.

99thmonkey

Im fairly consistant at an average of 93RPM I used to work at it in the early 90's but after 20 years its just natural all day long

GavH

I ride mostly on what feels comfortable and having just checked the average cadences from the last few weeks worth of riding, that appears to be anywhere between low 70s to mid 80s.

I think an ability to maintain a wide range of cadences is useful to have, but as if you do most of your riding alone or with one or two mates, beyond ensuring you're not riding at too low/high a cadence and potentially injuring yourself, it doesn't really matter what your average cadence is, so long as it's comfortable enough to get you around with a smile on your face.

gloomyandy

Well my cadence is all over the place. Looking at my last few rides the average is 75 or so, but given I typically ride in the hills around Huddersfield (reasonably steep and pretty frequent), during a ride it varies from as low as 50 to well over 100. Perhaps I need to change gear more often? Do people really manage to maintain 90 plus on steep hills? When out with my club I often climb in the saddle when others are standing and so use a lower gear, I seem to keep up with them so can only assume I'm using a higher cadence, but even so my cadence is nothing like 90+ on hills. Maybe I'm just in a club full of grinders...

GavH

Or perhaps you are confusing AVERAGE cadence across the duration of the ride with the various SPOT cadences that come with changes in gear, terrain, wind and other conditions? No one is saying you should constantly ride at 90 rpm when talking of having an Avg cadence of 90 rpm!

gloomyandy

No I'm very familiar with what average means, my above post was a little tongue in cheek. However I am a little surprised at how high some of the quoted average cadences are if people are riding in hilly parts of the world. Seems that this will mean either a significantly higher cadence on the flat parts of the ride, or pretty fast going up hills compared to what I see with the people I cycle with.

So perhaps I should rephrase my question. What sort of cadence do people use when climbing say 5% plus hills?

bernithebiker

gloomyandy wrote:

So perhaps I should rephrase my question. What sort of cadence do people use when climbing say 5% plus hills?

The same as when I'm riding on the flat.

Why should it be any different?

rolf_f

bernithebiker wrote:

gloomyandy wrote:

So perhaps I should rephrase my question. What sort of cadence do people use when climbing say 5% plus hills?

The same as when I'm riding on the flat.

Why should it be any different?

Because, if for a moment you pretend that grinding is 100% about strength and spinning 100% about cardio vascular, it's pretty obvious that you can pedal down a hill with minimal strength but plenty of cardio but you'll always need some strength to get you up a hill (this may be all bunk!).

If I look at my summary cadence stats, the uphill cadence is always lower than downhill. I can happily spin 100 on the flat but not climbing. I'd imagine most people have lower cadence on climbs.

bernithebiker

Rolf F wrote:

bernithebiker wrote:

gloomyandy wrote:

So perhaps I should rephrase my question. What sort of cadence do people use when climbing say 5% plus hills?

The same as when I'm riding on the flat.

Why should it be any different?

Because, if for a moment you pretend that grinding is 100% about strength and spinning 100% about cardio vascular, it's pretty obvious that you can pedal down a hill with minimal strength but plenty of cardio but you'll always need some strength to get you up a hill (this may be all bunk!).

If I look at my summary cadence stats, the uphill cadence is always lower than downhill. I can happily spin 100 on the flat but not climbing. I'd imagine most people have lower cadence on climbs.

But this is exactly where people are going wrong IMO.

No rule says when you hit a hill, you have to slow your cadence.

Imagine you're making 200W in 50/17 on the flat doing 30km/h. Cadence 85. You hit a 4% hill. You still want to put out 200W. You were happy at 85 cadence, so why change? CHANGE DOWN!! Simples! Find the gear that lets you keep a cadence of 85.

Where many go wrong is that they don't have that gear. In a chest beating macho frame of mind, they are running a 53/39 with a 25/12, and the 39/25 is simply not low enough.

At some point of course, no gear is low enough (probably above 8% for me on a 50/34, 28/11), and then your cadence must slow down, no choice.

But keeping your cadence in the sweet spot as long as possible makes sense, whether climbing, descending, whatever.

By the way, you can pedal downhill with as much strength as you like if it's <8% and you have 53/11, you just have to push harder......!