Cadence

[PK99]

My normal, "natural" cadence was 65 to 70 rpm, less on hills.

Recently, recovering from ACL injury, Sports Physio advice was to keep pedal pressure low ie Increase cadence. My normal cadence is now around 90rpm, dropping slightly on hills, including up Mt Ventoux a few weeks ago.

Now that I have got used to the higher cadence, it feels natural and far more comfortable on hills.

 

[smutchin]

65 is too slow for most people

I would guess most people naturally pedal at around 60-65rpm unless they have trained themselves to ride at a higher cadence. When I first got a computer that measured cadence, I was surprised at how slow I was pedalling - it's a long time ago but I think it was in the 60-70 region. I did train myself to increase my cadence, and I found it suited me to pedal faster, but that doesn't mean it will suit everyone so I'd be reluctant to tell someone their cadence is "too slow". You have to experiment and work out for yourself what's best for you.

I don't often think about my cadence these days but I do still have a cadence sensor on one of my bikes, so I just had a look at my ride logs. This is from a recent 107km group ride -

Ignore the spikes because they are computer glitches - no way could I ever pedal at 250rpm!

My average cadence for the whole ride was 85rpm (Garmin doesn't include zeros in the average calculation), but you can see from the graph that there are long-ish spells where I'm staying in the 90-110 range. You can also see that I spend a lot of time soft-pedalling or not pedalling at all, which is probably when I was sitting in the middle of the bunch rather than at the front.

What can we learn from this fascinating bit of data? Hmmm. Not a lot, really.

 

[cyberknight]

If your legs hurt drop a gear and pedal faster,if your lungs hurt go up a gear.If both hurt slow down

 

[Wolf616]

I thought it was if both hurt you are hitting the sweet spot?

 

[Alan O]

Cobblers

oldfatfool (love the name) has summed it up well - everything else that has been added is just icing on the cake

 

[fatjel]

I have a cadence sensor primarily for use on the turbo trainer but tried it on the road where I found it much less entertaining than expected.

 

[Sandra6]

When people run, the median of their cadence (the number of double paces per minute) is about 85. (Try finding what you run at normally, at a steady speed and when running faster. Then try that test on a different day - you'll find the results remarkably consistent.) This is true whatever their pace (the time it takes to run a kilometre or mile (the OP will be using a mile, I think)). So I suspect that this cadence is, very roughly and depending on the individual, close to the sweet spot for cycling.
But if you don't use a sensor to record and a screen to display cadence (normally a magnet on the left crank and a sensor on the chainstay) then it really doesn't matter (as many above have said). A key function of the bike's gearing is to allow the rider to maintain a comfortable balance between the cadence and the force required on the pedals, for a given speed in the conditions of the moment (gradient, road surface, drafting). Many people recommend that a higher cadence is easier on the knees (as the force being pushed through them is less).

Where do you get that from, please?

A fitness instructor shared that pearl with me. I've read it a couple of times too.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I thought it was if both hurt you are hitting the sweet spot?

That would depend on what distance you are riding. If you don't go for the "slow down" option you're not likely to get very far

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

A fitness instructor shared that pearl with me. I've read it a couple of times too.

They are the often the fonts of knowledge

 

[Sandra6]

Fair point.
But he was a fairly dedicated cyclist, and a good laugh, so I choose to believe him.

 

[Ajax Bay]

A fitness instructor shared that pearl with me [Between 65 and 85 (cadence) is the optimum for fat burning].

They are the often the fonts of knowledge

I bet he says that to all the girls.

 

[cd365]

Your aim is to burn fat for fuel during your road cycling. After you burn off stored glycogen, fat supplies the fuel. A high calorie-burning cadence is one that is near the higher range, such as 100 to 110 RPM, and is performed in a low gear with not a lot of resistance. This ensures that you are able to maintain your workout for an extended duration to burn fat calories and add to your weight loss

http://www.livestrong.com/article/454690-road-cycling-lose-weight-cadence/

 

[cd365]

Between 65 and 85 is the optimum for fat burning.

I think this value is a percentage of your maximum heart rate, not cadence.

 

[Ajax Bay]

I think this value (65-85) is a percentage of your maximum heart rate, not cadence.

Maybe. But 85% of max HRM is way too high for the normal 55-70% mantra. Worth a read. Work harder and you'll use up more calories per minute. Less (as a percentage) of the calories you use at the harder work level will be from fat, but still more fat sourced calories will be used in total. Whether that's a good thing if losing weight is of interest is moot.

 

[cd365]

Maybe. But 85% of max HRM is way too high for the normal 55-70% mantra. Worth a read. Work harder and you'll use up more calories per minute. Less (as a percentage) of the calories you use at the harder work level will be from fat, but still more fat sourced calories will be used in total. Whether that's a good thing if losing weight is of interest is moot.

Not saying that is what I think, I was trying to say, badly I know, that that is what I think the fitness instructor meant!

edit: interesting article