How long before you saw improvement

Thejensierocks

Hi all

Just wondering how long before you saw improvement in your cycling?

I've been road cycling for around 2 years now.
In my first 6 months I obviously noticed a big improvement from when I started as my basic fitness improved but I musy say though the following year I seemed to plod along in a rut.

I then started a bit of a regime of intervals on the rollers and after a short while saw slight improvements again.

My latest acquisition to fulfill my gear addiction, speedplay pedals and new road shoes (used flats before that) has given me good boost again....of course after recovering from my first trip out topple! Haha :-)

Tonight I went out for a gentle roll for some fresh air more than anything else and I had to do a double take at the Garmin! With what felt like very little effort I was rolling along at 17-18mph.....I used to potter at 14-15.
Goes to show the efficiencey of clipless.

Although I'm not "pulling up" with my legs at the moment as it's all a bit new, I certainly feel my legs aren't fighting against each other by pushing the trailing leg against the pedal on the way up.
(There is a school of thought I know that says even the best pros in the world don't pull up but that's a topic maybe for a different day....)

Tonight for the first time feel like I have really improved from where I started.
Instead of slow, unnoticeable, marginal gains (that would make a good catch phrase! :-) ) I actually feel like a cycist....

How long was it for you?

Cheers.

simon_masterson

Clipless pedals don't make you any more efficient, but they do allow you to pedal in a different way. You can pedal 'push only' if you want - and some do. Pulling on the pedals serves primarily to bring the pedal through the back of the stroke - the oft-quoted analogy about shoe scraping is a good one.

But what are you looking to achieve?

charlie_potatoes

Simon Masterson wrote:

Clipless pedals don't make you any more efficient, but they do allow you to pedal in a different way.

Which, for the OP, has resulted in a nice increase in speed.

Simon Masterson wrote:

But what are you looking to achieve?

A nice increase in speed perhaps? See above... LOL

Quins

I've made some major improvements over a year. Started last May with a B group, went on to a B+ group and settled for most of last year with Intermediate group. Committed to riding with the club groups on weekends, rides from 45 to 85 miles. Kept it up through winter weather permitting ( floods mainly the issue). Then went to training at the club room on Tuesday nights, turbo and a circuit. Taken by the club coaches , for all abilities but attended by the racers too. Learned so much at these sessions. Invested in a garmin, so that I could keep to the cadences and heart rate zones ( calculated by coach on a separate 20 min turbo time trial test). Did my own turbo sessions and circuits and kept the club runs up ( invested in winter kit). Also bought a better bike, Giant defy comp 2 2012, what a difference to my old Evans pinnacle sentinel 1. Only started using the defy in about April this year as I had it on the turbo. Did 3 club runs with the fasT intermediates in Feb,March and nearly died at the effort! A big step,up from intermediates. Now back with fast intermediates. So over a little more than a year, huge improvements. Consistent riding, measured training ( strava, heart rates, recovery rides etc). I know I could do even better if I lost another 3/4 stone ( lost 2 already).

My improvements have been directly linked to my ambition to get better and go through the groups. I have been to hell and back on the bike but when I look back at where I started I am very pleased. Gone from avg 13-14 mph to 17-17.5 with about 3.5k ft climbing. Hills are still a mare for me and it's still a huge effort for me on fast inters club runs.

Went from toe clips to double sided shimano spds, v comfy shimano shoes too. Even did a stationary fall at a junction recently as I tried to shake sweat out of my right eye, unclipped right foot and lent left.....slow mo fall. Made the group laugh as they saw every detail.

smoggysteve

Simon Masterson wrote:

Clipless pedals don't make you any more efficient, but they do allow you to pedal in a different way.

If they make you pedal in a way that allows you to transfer more power to the wheels then I would call that being more efficient!

simon_masterson

SmoggySteve wrote:

Simon Masterson wrote:

Clipless pedals don't make you any more efficient, but they do allow you to pedal in a different way.

If they make you pedal in a way that allows you to transfer more power to the wheels then I would call that being more efficient!

If various studies are anything to go by, they don't allow you to transfer more power. Making changes to leverage (e.g. knee flexion and angle) by altering crank length, seat height, fore-aft, frame angles etc, can have an effect.

danlikesbikes

Personally I noticed in the first few months a massive jump then less so, however had good base fitness from running and mtb'ing but it does depend on what your goals are distance, upping your average speed on a club run, racing, century rides as you need to train to those goals.

No matter what anyone says your improvements will be determined by your practice and training and almost everyone sees peaks and then flat levels in improvement. It's just how you manage it and review it over the long term.

smoggysteve

Simon Masterson wrote:

SmoggySteve wrote:

Simon Masterson wrote:

Clipless pedals don't make you any more efficient, but they do allow you to pedal in a different way.

If they make you pedal in a way that allows you to transfer more power to the wheels then I would call that being more efficient!

If various studies are anything to go by, they don't allow you to transfer more power. Making changes to leverage (e.g. knee flexion and angle) by altering crank length, seat height, fore-aft, frame angles etc, can have an effect.

Knee flexion and angle - do you get that sort of issue to deal with on flat pedals then? Or are you pretty much just pushing alternately at the top of the stroke? You get a smaller dead spot when clipped in so you are already more efficient no matter how high your seat is. When you are not in the saddle its a hell of a lot more efficient with clippless.

And crank length is still being disputed as to whether it makes enough difference. I went from 172.5 to 165 and it made minimal difference on the flat. Sod all when climbing

Thejensierocks

Frank Wilson wrote:

Was this a long winded way of telling us you now do 17mph. I expect you tried telling the lads at the pub but they were watching the footie.

No, actually.
I was simply enquiring about other peoples experiences and starting the conversation off by sharing my own.

I don't understand why people like you even bother posting comments like that. If you don't have anything constructive to add then butt out!

smoggysteve

I noticed a big drop off in performance earlier in the year when I was too busy to even get near the bike. It took about a month of riding every day around 70km average to feel like I was back to my best.

charlie_potatoes

Thejensierocks wrote:

Frank Wilson wrote:

Was this a long winded way of telling us you now do 17mph. I expect you tried telling the lads at the pub but they were watching the footie.

No, actually.
I was simply enquiring about other peoples experiences and starting the conversation off by sharing my own.

I don't understand why people like you even bother posting comments like that. If you don't have anything constructive to add then butt out!

Some people can never be pleased for you. Life is like that unfortunately.

Thejensierocks wrote:

I actually feel like a cyclist....

Good feeling this. I find that it comes and goes though, along with form

simon_masterson

SmoggySteve wrote:

Simon Masterson wrote:

SmoggySteve wrote:

Simon Masterson wrote:

Clipless pedals don't make you any more efficient, but they do allow you to pedal in a different way.

If they make you pedal in a way that allows you to transfer more power to the wheels then I would call that being more efficient!

If various studies are anything to go by, they don't allow you to transfer more power. Making changes to leverage (e.g. knee flexion and angle) by altering crank length, seat height, fore-aft, frame angles etc, can have an effect.

Knee flexion and angle - do you get that sort of issue to deal with on flat pedals then? Or are you pretty much just pushing alternately at the top of the stroke? You get a smaller dead spot when clipped in so you are already more efficient no matter how high your seat is. When you are not in the saddle its a hell of a lot more efficient with clippless.

And crank length is still being disputed as to whether it makes enough difference. I went from 172.5 to 165 and it made minimal difference on the flat. Sod all when climbing

The angle of your knee should make a difference whatever is on the end of your crank. I'm no expert, but it makes sense. There are various viewpoints out there but I read an article yesterday that argued that we should be using much shorter cranks than we currently do. I'm 6' with a 34.5 ish inseam and though I do have a set of 175mm cranks, I've mostly used 170mm; I do like both, but the main difference I've noticed is that I opt for lower cadence with the longer arms. I'll be interested to see if the professionals start trying short cranks...

smoggysteve

You can have the correct seat height and crank length but if you ride one with flat and one with clipless. The clipless will always allow you to put more power through the rear wheel by the fact you can apply power at angles tjat flat just won't let you. Therefore for every rotation of the crank to are being more efficient.

And still crank length has yet to be proved or disproved.

kajjal

Clipless lets you put more power down for longer. Flat pedals have less range but work well enough. Unless you are used to road bikes and fairly fit the difference can be minimal.

To the OP some people are just miserable and opionated which is why they post on forums ! Keeping 17mph or more going over a good distance on a solo ride is good work and more than most can manage. The main thing is you enjoy it and it keeps you fit / healthy. When I broke through the 17mph limit I was surprised I could do it

simon_masterson

SmoggySteve wrote:

You can have the correct seat height and crank length but if you ride one with flat and one with clipless. The clipless will always allow you to put more power through the rear wheel by the fact you can apply power at angles tjat flat just won't let you. Therefore for every rotation of the crank to are being more efficient.

And still crank length has yet to be proved or disproved.

Can I ask that you produce some studies that have demonstrated this, then? I have only ever seen evidence to prove what I consider to be pretty obvious: that clipless pedals do not increase power output. But varying crank length does affect that leverage; put some 180mm cranks on your bike and prove that for yourself.

smoggysteve

Why? You haven't produced anything other than saying studies you have seen. Until you do then why should I?

chrisaonabike

Sure it wasn't a bit of help from the wind today?

14.5 to 17.5 is a 20% improvement.

simon_masterson

SmoggySteve wrote:

Why? You haven't produced anything other than saying studies you have seen. Until you do then why should I?

You've picked a counterintuitive argument. The burden of proof is on the one that proclaims the sky to be green. But Andrew Coggan has done a lot of work in this area - effect of clipless use, pedal stroke, power meter use in general. But this is a grey area - e.g. we aren't all using asymmetric chainrings, are we?

smoggysteve

Considering you came out with the first statement that "clipless pedals don't make you more efficient" I think you are the one who should be backing up something instead of the one who challenges the stated.

charlie_potatoes

SmoggySteve wrote:

Considering you came out with the first statement that "clipless pedals don't make you more efficient" I think you are the one who should be backing up something instead of the one who challenges the stated.

Agreed. It would have made interesting reading but it doesn't look like we are going to see anything.

chrisaonabike

ChrisAOnABike wrote:

Sure it wasn't a bit of help from the wind today?

14.5 to 17.5 is a 20% improvement.

Isn't power required approximately proportional to the cube of the speed in nil-wind?

So a 20% improvement in speed requires a (1.2)^3 = 73% increase in power.

Even if it was only a square relationship, it would still be 44%

Just from switching to clipless? Pff...

simon_masterson

SmoggySteve wrote:

Why? You haven't produced anything other than saying studies you have seen. Until you do then why should I?

Refer to previous statement about counterintuitive arguments, but this one's a scintillating read...

https://www.academia.edu/238318/Coyle_E ... _2622-2630

smoggysteve

Lol. This is from 1988. The clipless systems used today had only been used for around 5-6 years at that point and dince not many pro cyclists had really being using clipless pedals for most of that time the conclusions raised by it are most likely so out of date they mean nothing. Also since the date of '88 is of publish I doubt most of the data was recorded that late as these types of studies take months if not years.

Now, considering every single pro cyclist use clipless, added to that innovations in the design of pedal, cleat amd shoe design have made them even more efficient. Money and research which would not have been spent if there was no basis for the argument for them. We have also people like Wiggins and Froome using Osymetric chainrings which are "supposed I admit" to eliminate dead spots and make pedalling even more efficient. Is there any truth in it? 2 TDF champions in 2 years suggests to me there may be more than a 3 decade old study which wasn't even based on the efficiency of flat over clipless which is what this discussion is about.

Thejensierocks

Errrrr.....this was only supposed to be a light hearted post about how good it feels to begin to feel like a cyclist rather than a guy pottering about on a bike peeps.

Wish I'd never mentioned clipless now

Chris, you been working that out since yesterday? Cheeesus.....chill mate! Haha :roll:

I don't for one second believe that my performance has increased overnight simply by riding clipless.
I was more trying to say that all of my efforts over a two year period SEEM now to be making me feel as though I am improving as a cyclist and I was interested to hear how long it has taken others to feel the same.
The clipless pedals are simply the last acquisition to help me along the way.

Having said that, simply making the step towards clipless has indeed totally changed the way I ride my bike.
I feel more connected (obviously......even more connected when I fell over ) and more efficient. Maybe, and I'm throwing a curved ball here, maybe I'm trying harder simply because I feel more of a cyclist......
Judging by the way my legs feel after tonights ride I would say this was probably the case. :-)

Perhaps it was the way I worded the original post....

Tell you what....I'll fetch my coat.

simon_masterson

SmoggySteve wrote:

Lol. This is from 1988. The clipless systems used today had only been used for around 5-6 years at that point and dince not many pro cyclists had really being using clipless pedals for most of that time the conclusions raised by it are most likely so out of date they mean nothing. Also since the date of '88 is of publish I doubt most of the data was recorded that late as these types of studies take months if not years.

Now, considering every single pro cyclist use clipless, added to that innovations in the design of pedal, cleat amd shoe design have made them even more efficient. Money and research which would not have been spent if there was no basis for the argument for them. We have also people like Wiggins and Froome using Osymetric chainrings which are "supposed I admit" to eliminate dead spots and make pedalling even more efficient. Is there any truth in it? 2 TDF champions in 2 years suggests to me there may be more than a 3 decade old study which wasn't even based on the efficiency of flat over clipless which is what this discussion is about.

Pardon me for stating the obvious, but there are limits to what you can change about the bicycle transmission, and the pedals that Look and Shimano make today are much the same as those of yesterday. As for asymmetric chainrings, those have been in and out of popularity since Biopace 30 years ago. Wiggins for example doesn't always use them - this is a problem far from solved; and it doesn't have much to do with the efficiency savings or lack thereof of clipless pedal use. 'Pros use them' and 'it's old' are very weak reasons to discount research - racing cyclists don't use clipless pedals for the sole reason of efficiency, do they?

Moonbiker

racing cyclists don't use clipless pedals for the sole reason of efficiency, do they?

What other reason is there?

smoggysteve

I challenge you or anyone to go and sprint as fast as you can for 100m with flat pedals and again with clipless. You are going to be using the same bike, same setup, same muscles.

Tell me that you can sprint just as fast with the flat pedals as you can with the clipless. I bet you now you can't because for every rotation of that crank at speed you cannot possibly apply as much power through a flat pefal for as many degrees of a rotation as you can with clipless that are fixed to the pedals.

Argue all you like, that is efficiency of your ability to transfer power from you to the rear wheel via the transmission.

chrisaonabike

Thejensierocks wrote:

Chris, you been working that out since yesterday? Cheeesus.....chill mate! Haha :roll:

Yep, I'm a bit thick

I don't for one second believe that my performance has increased overnight simply by riding clipless.

Who cares, if it's a chance for everyone to dive in with controversy and abuse, all good

But to your OP...

I was more trying to say that all of my efforts over a two year period SEEM now to be making me feel as though I am improving as a cyclist and I was interested to hear how long it has taken others to feel the same.

I've been riding almost two years as well, and I'm generally about 1-1.5 mph faster on average over the same sort of routes.

So about 15.5 rather than 14.5 - which I was thinking was a pathetic increase, until I started thinking about power... that works out to a 20% power increase in two years, which I'm actually quite pleased with!

simon_masterson

SmoggySteve wrote:

I challenge you or anyone to go and sprint as fast as you can for 100m with flat pedals and again with clipless. You are going to be using the same bike, same setup, same muscles.

Tell me that you can sprint just as fast with the flat pedals as you can with the clipless. I bet you now you can't because for every rotation of that crank at speed you cannot possibly apply as much power through a flat pefal for as many degrees of a rotation as you can with clipless that are fixed to the pedals.

Argue all you like, that is efficiency of your ability to transfer power from you to the rear wheel via the transmission.

Which is exactly what Coggan et al were measuring in that study. If you go for it hard enough on your flat platforms, your foot might just come unstuck on account of your coordination, but that's a different problem. I get the impression that you prefer your version of reality!

smoggysteve

Yes I do, cos yours is nonsense

simon_masterson

Evidence-based reasoning is boring, I know.