Sticking with a 12-27 cassette to increase leg strength?

lewisdmz

Hello,

First post although I have spend hours reading the forum since I started riding, lots of invaluable knowledge on here so thank you for that.

I live in Devon and there are quite a few 20%+ hills around as well as long 8-10% gradients. My riding style is definitely high cadence and in 'full gas' mode i'll be spinning at 110rpm on the flats, climbing I prefer to stay around 90-100.

I recently bought a second hand wheelset which came with a 105 12-27 cassette, my old cassette was a Tiagra 12-30 and i'm really suffering on the steeper hills, my cadence is dropping to ~75rpm and it feels horrible to me as well as being slower.

My question is - is it worth sticking with the 12-27 to increase leg strength until I can get back to that 90rpm cadence (making me much much faster) or should I put the 12-30 back on so i'm back in my comfort zone?

Thanks in advance

kajjal

I would put the old one back on until you no longer need to use the 30 and can use the 27 on the 12-30 cassette. Then you can swap back over.

dj58

Kajjal wrote:

I would put the old one back on until you no longer need to use the 30 and can use the 27 on the 12-30 cassette. Then you can swap back over.

^This. My road bike originally came fitted with a 12-28Tand I struggled on some hills, being used to lower gears on my road MTB. I fitted a 12-30T cassette and found it helped initially, now after a year on the road bike I find I tend to use the 27T more as my low gear, though I do still need the 30T at times.

NeXXus

Strength has very little to do with cycling, swap cassettes

simon_masterson

If you stick to the new cassette, you will adapt. My current lowest gear is 39x20 on my main road bike, and my climbing style is different to when I have had a 28t cog available. Climbing at 100rpm and climbing at 75rpm are both valid approaches; go with whatever suits you best.

lewisdmz

All iInteresting replies thanks,

oxoman wrote:

Having suffered on some of the nasty hills in Devon when on holiday, I would go back to your 12-30 cassette. I actually put a 48 tooth top ring on mine along with a 12 to 28 to make it easier. If your not careful you might end up doing yourself damage, take it steady.

Where did you ride?

NeXXus wrote:

Strength has very little to do with cycling, swap cassettes

Would you mind expanding on this? I understand up to a point, but surely if I can get my leg strength up so I can turn over the 27 at the same rpm I used to turn over the 30 then i'd be considerably faster for it.

NeXXus

NeXXus wrote:

Strength has very little to do with cycling, swap cassettes

Would you mind expanding on this? I understand up to a point, but surely if I can get my leg strength up so I can turn over the 27 at the same rpm I used to turn over the 30 then i'd be considerably faster for it.

The limiter is fitness, not strength.

daxplusplus

75 rpm is not too bad? If its lower then maybe switch back but if your cadence really is only dropping to 75 I'd stick with it.

You say that your faster on the 30 - are you really sure about that? Have you given the 27 a good shot and really gone for it? I'm not saying that it's not easier using the 30, it will be, and you find you can get up hills quickly by spinning but sometimes you just have to MTFU and give the harder gears a shot.

Again I'm not saying that spinning is bad - but if you use the harder gear and can recover from using it once your past the hill than persevere a bit longer. If you can't recover (the effort knackers you and you spend the rest of the ride suffering from the effects) then switch back to the 30 - no shame in that, a ride is made up of more than one hill and if the 30 means you can do the whole ride quicker\more comfortably then that's the choice for you.

Sometimes improvements come from changes in what you think you can do rather than actual changes in your fitness.

imposter2.0

lewisdmz wrote:

but surely if I can get my leg strength up so I can turn over the 27 at the same rpm I used to turn over the 30 then i'd be considerably faster for it.

Turning the 27 at the same cadence as the 30 would obviously mean you are faster - but you don't need stronger legs to do that - you need better fitness (ie better sustainable power). Assuming you can already support your bodyweight on one leg (ie stand or hop on one leg), then you already have all the 'strength' you need to win the Tour de France. What you might not have, is the w/kg.

jibberjim

DaxPlusPlus wrote:

You say that your faster on the 30 - are you really sure about that? Have you given the 27 a good shot and really gone for it? I'm not saying that it's not easier using the 30, it will be, and you find you can get up hills quickly by spinning but sometimes you just have to MTFU and give the harder gears a shot.

I'm just back from the national hill climb, I watched every female rider, it was won pretty comfortably by the woman with the lowest gearing by a long way, just like last year. Of course that doesn't prove anything, but we know that woman would've been slower with different gears.

It's extremely unlikely that if you like climbing a hill an 8% hill at 80rpm, then you'd be faster climbing a 15% at 40rpm, so try and keep similar cadences when you don't have the gears to when you do. If I rode regularly in Devon, I'd have a triple.

baznett

Having ridden down in Cornwall with a compact crankset and 25T cassette up those 25% inclines, I'd suggest what was said earlier and stick your 30T back on till you feel you don't need it anymore, even then I'd probably just sell the new cassette you've acquired

brettjmcc

Personally I'd go with the 12-27. I took my training bike down to the south of france on holiday and had a 12-25 and 53/39 on it. Yes, it hurt at the beginning, but by the end of the holiday I was finding it easier going up the climbs, including the ones that had 18-20% bits on them. I am by no means the fastest or lightest person around either.

Just to add to the above as well. I no ride on a 12-23 on a compact around Essex and for the amount I get to ride, I would say my perception is that this has made me a better rider from a base level. A few years ago, I was on a 12-27 and going faster, but I was doing more TTing and riding more in general.

MartinB2444

If you are wanting to do flat out hill "sprints" up short climbs without being restricted by aerobic capacity then powerful legs will be a factor otherwise the fatigue you feel in those legs is due to lactic acid and is best improved by improving aerobic capacity. Try to gear so you can get as close as possible to your most efficient cadence. On a 25% you are going to be overgeared whatever you opt for because you have to have good options for the rest of the ride as well.

BobScarle

lewisdmz wrote:

I recently bought a second hand wheelset which came with a 105 12-27 cassette, my old cassette was a Tiagra 12-30 and i'm really suffering on the steeper hills, my cadence is dropping to ~75rpm and it feels horrible to me as well as being slower.

To be honest I think you have answered your own question. They are your legs and you know what feels right for the riding that you do. If the new set up feels horrible then go back to the old one.

lewisdmz

Wow, didn't realise how controversial the leg strength/cycling speed argument was.

Reading through a couple of mammoth threads on the subject:

viewtopic.php?f=40011&t=12796394&start=100

and

viewtopic.php?t=12753875&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=100

also this article which is very interesting

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/fitness/?id=strengthstern

Has led to me to believe that I would be better to put the 30 back on, and being able to load up my cardiovascular system more by spinning may actually help me improve more than grinding out a lower gear.

75rpm feels really bad to me, horses for courses and all that but I really don't know how people can ride at that sort of cadence all day. Reminds me of trying to run through water.

ForumNewbie

I wouldn't say 75 rpm is grinding. I think that's a pretty good cadence on a steep hill. If I could spin up a steep hill and keep up a cadence of 75 rpm I'd be happy. You said you are in a 27 at the back, but what size ring are you in at the front when doing 75 rpm uphill?

simon_masterson

ForumNewbie wrote:

I wouldn't say 75 rpm is grinding. I think that's a pretty good cadence on a steep hill. If I could spin up a steep hill and keep up a cadence of 75 rpm I'd be happy. You said you are in a 27 at the back, but what size ring are you in at the front when doing 75 rpm uphill?

Indeed - not so long ago 75rpm was considered by some to be the ideal - e.g. Greg LeMond explains in his book why he thinks 75rpm is preferable to a higher cadence for climbing. Granted, gearing was very different, but that just goes to show that there's more than one way to do it. Fashions come and go, and lower cadence climbing is nearly always portrayed negatively these days - you can't have a discussion about it without the word 'grinding' being used, for example.

JSpencer1

Where abouts in Devon are you Lewis? I live in Exeter so get out on Dartmoor often enough and really enjoy the climbing even if I'm pretty average at it!

At the beginning of the year I was riding with a 50/34 compact crankset, then went to a 52/36 by mid summer and now on a 53/39 (had a few bike changes...), all with the same 11-28 cassette. What I found was, although my cadence dropped a touch, actual time on the climbs was comparable. For me it just felt slower as my legs weren't spinning as quickly, I even setting a couple Strava PBs recently. Hoping to get the cadence back up too by training through it over the winter and smash everything next summer!

So in my opinion, if you can stick with the 12-27 and can train the cadence up you'll become a quicker rider, but, you might use more energy and tire quicker. I am thinking I might just stick on my 12-30 cassette for longer days in the saddle.

t4tomo

I have a compact and used to ride with a 12-25 or 11-25 cassette.

I stuck a 12-27 on for a longish hilly route and I'm not sure I can be bothered to change back now. i donrt notice that i have an extra 2 tooth jump somewhere down the range and Its nice to have the extra couple of teeth, particulalrly if you get a long steep slog when your legs are tiring.

So my advice is to ride with as big a cog as you like on your cassette!

lewisdmz

I run a 50/34 compact which combined with even the 27 gives a very low gear by most amateur cyclists standards which is another reason for wondering if I should switch back. I guess everyone's physiology is different and maybe I am just better suited to high cadence, it definitely feels more natural too me so I think I will switch back.

JSpencer1 wrote:

Where abouts in Devon are you Lewis? I live in Exeter so get out on Dartmoor often enough and really enjoy the climbing even if I'm pretty average at it!

At the beginning of the year I was riding with a 50/34 compact crankset, then went to a 52/36 by mid summer and now on a 53/39 (had a few bike changes...), all with the same 11-28 cassette. What I found was, although my cadence dropped a touch, actual time on the climbs was comparable. For me it just felt slower as my legs weren't spinning as quickly, I even setting a couple Strava PBs recently. Hoping to get the cadence back up too by training through it over the winter and smash everything next summer!

So in my opinion, if you can stick with the 12-27 and can train the cadence up you'll become a quicker rider, but, you might use more energy and tire quicker. I am thinking I might just stick on my 12-30 cassette for longer days in the saddle.

Plymouth, so most rides end up on Dartmoor one way or another. I do love a good hill when you are in the mood, this is the best i've come across recently if you are in the area - http://www.strava.com/segments/6665214?filter=overall

From the longer/steep hills I have ridden since switching I seem to be hitting the same times I was at the start of the summer, when my times have been steadily improving up until the switch.

thegibdog

Being over-geared isn't going to make you a faster rider. To counter the other anecdotes here I know I am quicker up a steep hill in 34-27 than I am in 34-25. But being unwilling to put lower gears on the bike is a mistake that's made at all levels - as jibberjim mentioned earlier, some riders in the National Hill Climb Championships were definitely over-geared and it will have cost them places. You can also see it in pro races from time to time when they hit the steep stuff.

Zingzang

jibberjim wrote:

we know that woman would've been slower with different gears.

I don't follow the logic of that. It's as plausible to say she'd have been quicker with different gears. Yes, she won, but how do you know she wouldn't have won by an even bigger margin if her gears had been different from what they were?

maryka

Zingzang wrote:

jibberjim wrote:

we know that woman would've been slower with different gears.

I don't follow the logic of that. It's as plausible to say she'd have been quicker with different gears. Yes, she won, but how do you know she wouldn't have won by an even bigger margin if her gears had been different from what they were?

Because once my cadence drops below ~75rpm I just can't put out the same power comfortably for long. Ideally I need to be pushing 80-90rpm on steep climbs. So if I'd had only a 27 and not both a 27 and 30 I would have gone slower -- either because I would have been hitting it too hard on the 27t for the 30t bits of the climb (trying to keep my cadence up), and then would have lost power on the 27t bits, or I would have been struggling in the 27t to put out the same power in the 30t bits (failing to keep the cadence up). As it was, I used the 24, 27 and 30 as the gradient changed. I only stood up for the final 50m where it steepened to the finish line, in the 24 which is what I was already using on the slightly flatter bit before.

How do I know for sure? Well, I've trained quite a bit on different hills, different steepnesses with different cassettes. I know I put out more power seated than standing, my efficiency is better. And the higher the cadence, the better my efficiency and power. And last year it was pissing down rain at the Catford hill climb on Yorks hill (which has a final section of ~25%, goes for nearly a minute at my speed). I had a 32t low gear because I was worried that if I had to stand like I did in previous years, the wheel would be slipping all over. This year it was dry and I meant to put on the 30t but screwed up and didn't check and rode it with a 28t and really struggled to keep turning the pedals and went (virtually) slower.

Fitness was pretty much the same for both years, in the afternoon of both I went and rode the Bec hill climb and smashed my PB and the course record this year by several seconds whereas at Catford this year I only managed to go 1 second faster than last year and got nowhere near the course record (both set by the same person in 2012).

That's not to say that I don't think being able to climb out of the saddle is important, and for steep rollers I will do that and not use the lowest gears. In fact, for the OP, this is what I would work on for improving leg strength along with fitness -- start doing rollers and shorter climbs (< 1 min) out of the saddle rather than gearing down to get up them. Over time you will improve.

Personally I think you should just ride with the lowest gear you could need, but you don't NEED to use it. I can never understand people who say the gears force them to MTFU -- why can't you push yourself without handicapping yourself having gears that are too high for your needs?

Zingzang

maryka wrote:

Because once my cadence drops below ~75rpm I just can't put out the same power comfortably for long.....

Thanks for that. Unfortunately it fails to address my point, which was that, although winning the hill climb clearly meant you had a good enough combination of fitness and gearing, we do not know for sure whether different gearing would have helped you go faster still. Saying "we know that woman would have been slower with different gears" is merely unscientific speculation when there are so many variables to take into account on any strip of road, ridden on a particular day by particular rider.

maryka

Did you not read the rest of my post about the Catford climb? Last year I rode it with 32t in the rain and did the same time as this year, dry and warmer, that I did with a 28t. I simply struggled to put out the same power seated with the 28t that I did last year with the 32t. Needed the 30t.

Obviously you can never know anything "for sure" but given that hill climbs are my thing, you can trust me that I've done quite a bit of testing and racing with different gears, and I know what works for me.

SoSimple

maryka wrote:

Zingzang wrote:

jibberjim wrote:

we know that woman would've been slower with different gears.

I don't follow the logic of that. It's as plausible to say she'd have been quicker with different gears. Yes, she won, but how do you know she wouldn't have won by an even bigger margin if her gears had been different from what they were?

Because once my cadence drops below ~75rpm I just can't put out the same power comfortably for long. Ideally I need to be pushing 80-90rpm on steep climbs. So if I'd had only a 27 and not both a 27 and 30 I would have gone slower -- either because I would have been hitting it too hard on the 27t for the 30t bits of the climb (trying to keep my cadence up), and then would have lost power on the 27t bits, or I would have been struggling in the 27t to put out the same power in the 30t bits (failing to keep the cadence up). As it was, I used the 24, 27 and 30 as the gradient changed. I only stood up for the final 50m where it steepened to the finish line, in the 24 which is what I was already using on the slightly flatter bit before.

How do I know for sure? Well, I've trained quite a bit on different hills, different steepnesses with different cassettes. I know I put out more power seated than standing, my efficiency is better. And the higher the cadence, the better my efficiency and power. And last year it was pissing down rain at the Catford hill climb on Yorks hill (which has a final section of ~25%, goes for nearly a minute at my speed). I had a 32t low gear because I was worried that if I had to stand like I did in previous years, the wheel would be slipping all over. This year it was dry and I meant to put on the 30t but screwed up and didn't check and rode it with a 28t and really struggled to keep turning the pedals and went (virtually) slower.

Fitness was pretty much the same for both years, in the afternoon of both I went and rode the Bec hill climb and smashed my PB and the course record this year by several seconds whereas at Catford this year I only managed to go 1 second faster than last year and got nowhere near the course record (both set by the same person in 2012).

That's not to say that I don't think being able to climb out of the saddle is important, and for steep rollers I will do that and not use the lowest gears. In fact, for the OP, this is what I would work on for improving leg strength along with fitness -- start doing rollers and shorter climbs (< 1 min) out of the saddle rather than gearing down to get up them. Over time you will improve.

Personally I think you should just ride with the lowest gear you could need, but you don't NEED to use it. I can never understand people who say the gears force them to MTFU -- why can't you push yourself without handicapping yourself having gears that are too high for your needs?

What a cracking post.

Makes absolute sense now - thank you

willnewtonclare

Keep your old cassette, you never know when you need an easier gear and grinding is generally not a great idea. The argument has been put forward eloquently by Maryka.
My experience is - I put a 34T on the back of a compact (I know!) for a silly hilly day out and I've kept it for now (partly laziness!).
I'm no slower than I was before and I go up York's regularly and am quite glad to be seated - no way would that happen on a 34x28.
I don't know where the big gap is on my new cassette but if I fancied some "strength" work surely I can do that by clicking up a gear on the flat?
Having a low gear gives you more leeway for tough rides etc ....however if you click into it at the first sight of a hill...no it won't help!

simon_masterson

willnewtonclare wrote:

and grinding is generally not a great idea.

What's your definition of 'grinding'?

willnewtonclare

When you'd go faster in an easier gear!

simon_masterson

Regardless of what works best for you though, riding at 75rpm (or even a bit lower) isn't wrong, or 'not a great idea'. It seems to me that the term 'grinding' has become all but useless, as - for all of its negative implications - it seems to be mainly used to refer to anything below what anyone thinks is the ideal climbing cadence.

willnewtonclare

At 75rpm you're going 11.5mph uphill in your bottom gear Simon which is about the same speed as a pro on an alpine ascent or a short sharp 15% ascent. For me 75 feels horrendous and I'd be out of the saddle. If you go faster at 60rpm go for it, no-one I know climbs well at that cadence but if it's your speciality..go for it! And yep grinding is religiously sticky to a harder gear...