Is high cadence efficient? Research doesn't agree!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Lovacott

Über Member
I don't fully understand the science and have only skimmed a couple of the links, but the gist seems to be that higher cadence used more oxygen and less carbs.

What you say makes perfect sense to me.

As a child of the 60's, I smoked cigarettes from the age of 11 until I was 51.

Doubtless, that this will have impacted on my body's ability to deliver oxygen quickly to where it was needed.

In my twenties to forties when I both cycle commuted and smoked like a trooper, fast pedalling was nigh on impossible.

I'd rely on brute strength alone but this would zap my energy on longer rides. I still ride the same way today even though I haven't smoked for over eight years.

I'm going to try and change my style of riding.
 
Location
London
I don't fully understand the science and have only skimmed a couple of the links, but the gist seems to be that higher cadence used more oxygen and less carbs.
Am not clever enough to figure out if this is the case.
But if true (I stress I'm not saying it's not), fair to assume that using more oxygen, which your body has to drag in/pump, has certain physical benefits?
 

Sharky

Guru
Location
Kent
Fixed isn’t nearly hard as people seem to think. Certainly easier than single speed.
I ride both. Once you've chosen an appropriate gear, riding on the flat and ascents are pretty similar. It's the descents, surprisingly where you notice the difference. On a fixed it can be very tiring to counter the extreme high cadences by having to apply brakes.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Why does it have to be so complicated? When pedaling becomes difficult, change to a lower gear!
I have no idea what my cadence might be, but not being over muscular in general, probably quite high. If you are built like a brick shitehouse, your maybe going to grind your knees to an early death in higher gears. Just stick to what suits you best.
Brother Brandane is wise - do what works for you personally, not what some chump sat at a desk in a publishers office tells you.

Why the likes of Road CC or GCN feel the need to make something very simple seem so complicated is beyond me.
 
D

Deleted member 1258

Guest
The only person I've ridden any distance with on a fixed is @skudupnorth.

After he shot past me at the base of a climb, he apologised for doing so but said the only way to get up steep banks was to attack them hard.

It all seemed a bit stressful to me, but I know Skudders loves his fixed.

Gearing on a fixed is usually a compromise, low enough to have a chance of getting up the local climbs, but high enough not to spin out too early on the level and on the descents. once you've got that sorted they're great fun to ride.
 

skudupnorth

Cycling Skoda lover
The only person I've ridden any distance with on a fixed is @skudupnorth.

After he shot past me at the base of a climb, he apologised for doing so but said the only way to get up steep banks was to attack them hard.

It all seemed a bit stressful to me, but I know Skudders loves his fixed.
Hopefully we can get out a play this year, I’ve missed our CC rides ....... fixed of course 😁
 

PaulSB

Legendary Member
Correct, probably not very well put in my post. Perhaps to put it better - try and maintain a comfortable cadence by efficient use of gears. "Comfortable" is what is going to vary between different riding styles.
I try to follow what I was taught to do when learning to drive a car - change down early.
Exactly. The point of gears is to use them in anticipation of what you will need ahead of you. Bike or car changing down at the correct point will result in a smooth ride. Changing down when the engine, human or combustion, has begun to struggle is too late.

When I'm climbing and pushing with a buddy for a bit of friendly competition as soon as I hear the click and clunk of a downward gear change I know I've dropped him/her. That change costs 10 metres and that's one hell of an effort on a good climb. This is when I'd push hard to gain another 10-15 metres.
 

PaulSB

Legendary Member
Yes. I know my routes. For one area that leads to from a relatively flat long section to a short increasingly steep small elevation and then levels out before a long gradual slope to the top. I start by building up my cadence and speed climbing the harder gears to hitting the smaller steep elevation then spin it on the level area to up my gears to climb the gradual slope. Depending on how consistently I follow the shifting and cadence the easier it is. If I don't go fast enough from the start then it's more draining.

You will always climb a hill faster by selecting the correct gear, settling in to a rhythm and relaxing. Hitting the bottom of a climb at speed will result in slowing as the climb increases. The exception would be short and sharp where you can power over the top.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Because people will click on the article and clicks = cash.
I think I have previously regaled you good folks with this, but its worth repeating.

Many moons ago I was reading a review in Road CC and even by their standards it was a corker - if there was a cliche, it was in there. Carbon soaking up road buzz. Ultegra being automatically better than 105 despite no mention of how the bikes being compared actually performed - it was Ultegra, therefore simply better in some way. Compliant and comfortable but somehow inexplicably stiff at the same time. Every piece of road bike BS you can imagine.

Out of curiosity I googled the reviewers name, and lo! 6 months earlier he had been writing for a model railway magazine. Never bothered buying a bike magazine since that day.
 

Twilkes

Guru
You will always climb a hill faster by selecting the correct gear, settling in to a rhythm and relaxing. Hitting the bottom of a climb at speed will result in slowing as the climb increases. The exception would be short and sharp where you can power over the top.

Any energy you expend trying to go into the hill fast is mostly used to overcome a lot of air resistance. It's much better to use that energy to counteract gravity and the much lower air resistance at the slower speed of the climb. Like you say the exception is a very short climb that you can power over without slowing down too much.

You might be able to get up a hill quicker by powering into it and then settling into your rhythm, but you would take longer to recover at the top
 
Last edited:

PaulSB

Legendary Member
Any energy you expend trying to go into the hill fast is mostly used to overcome a lot of air resistance. It's much better to use that energy to counteract gravity and the much lower air resistance at the slower speed of the climb. Like you say the exception is a very short climb that you can power over without slowing down too much.

You might be able to get up a hill quicker by powering into it and then settling into your rhythm, but you would take longer to recover at the top

I don't agree it would result in a faster climb but absolutely agree about longer recovery.

A great friend of mine is a superb climber, someone I aspire to match. Every time we chat after a good climb he'll smile quietly and say "I thought you went off a bit quick." 🙂 He's very often right no matter how hard I try to control my pace. His judgement is excellent aided by a power meter and knowledge of the watts he can maintain.
 

Once a Wheeler

…always a wheeler
Most people I know seem to settle on a kilometre-eater gear between 5 and 6 metres. My own preference is 5.62 metres (42x16 on 700c wheels). At a rough estimate, this rotates at around 75 revolutions a minute which gives an average speed of around 25kph. I knew I had the right gearing for me when distance suddenly became a matter of time rather than effort, a fantastic feeling of independent freedom. Enjoy the kilometres.
 
Top Bottom