Is high cadence efficient? Research doesn't agree!

[Venod]

The best cadence average I have on Strava is 60 miles at an average cadence of 100 rpm with an average speed of 18mph, it was a solo ride with a cafe stop at about 30mile.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

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.

I would imagine his early reviews read something like rides like it’s on rails and allows you to build up a good head of steam...

 

[Sharky]

I don't have a cadence sensor on the bike, but as it is a single fixed gear (50*14) on my TT bike/10 mile course, I can calculate:-
Slowest, going the "Bridge", speed drops to about 12mph = 43 RPM
On the way back, some fast stretches and I max at 30mph = 107 RPM
I finish with a time equivalent to about 21 MPH so average for the 10 miles = 72 RPM

There was one course I rode, which had a "ski slope" start and I clocked 44MPH, which is 158 RPM - far too high for comfort, but fortunately only lasted for about 20 secs.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Go away. You are making me feel sick.

Feel even more sick.

This was heading uphill up one of the big alpine cols in 2019. We don’t get many hills taking over 2 hours in the UK!

 

[Drago]

If I pedal too fast the dried deposits in my Y fronts start to crack and flake, which is uncomfortable. Therefore, I grit my teeth and pull a fairly high gigh gear.

 

[lazybloke]

Well there are those who are interesting in measuring and increasing some measure of performance - could be climbing, sprinting, endurance, etc. If you want to push limits, then it make sense to understand which cadence suits your body.

The more casual cyclists

On the turbo last week I got bored of staring at the garage walls and noticed that the chain on the front chainring appeared to be stationary. 50 tooth chainring, 50Hz mains frequency therefore exactly 60 rpm. I dropped a few gears and spun it up until it appeared stationary again, so 120 rpm but I couldn't comfortably maintain that for long.

Interesting.... most (modern) lights are modulated at several kilohertz, but I guess it's difficult (or at least expensive) to filter out the mains frequencies entirely.


Edit: well, not very interesting.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

On the turbo last week I got bored of staring at the garage walls and noticed that the chain on the front chainring appeared to be stationary. 50 tooth chainring, 50Hz mains frequency therefore exactly 60 rpm. I dropped a few gears and spun it up until it appeared stationary again, so 120 rpm but I couldn't comfortably maintain that for long.

hmm, Hz is cycles per second , whilst rpm is revolutions per minute. You’ll have to explain the maths of your reasoning here.

 

[Lovacott]

Feel even more sick.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKqGXeX9LhQ

 

[rivers]

I'm naturally a spinner, and on a flattish route, I will be around 95-105 cadence average. Even on a hills, I tend to be between 70 and 90 depending on length and steepness. In a zwift race recently, I was pushing something like 240 watts to close a gap with a cadence over 120. However, my coach has me do low cadence drills a few times a month to work on leg strength, and on some of my workouts, I choose a harder gear and push 75-80rpm instead of my normal 95ish. All of this in hopes of being able to eventually spin a harder gear. I have gotten stronger on the bike, so obviously I'm doing something right.

 

[ColinJ]

hmm, Hz is cycles per second , whilst rpm is revolutions per minute. You’ll have to explain the maths of your reasoning here.

It will be exactly one link movement in 1/50th second, or 2 links worth, or 3... so a 50-tooth chainring worth in one second, or half a second, or a third of a second... hence 60 rpm, 120 rpm, 180 rpm...

 

[Smokin Joe]

Narrow tyres are better.
Wider tyres are better.

Tubs roll better than clinchers.
Clinchers roll better than tubs.

Big gears make you are faster.
Lower gears make you faster.

A smaller frame is better.
A larger frame is better.


It goes round and round over the years, depending on how fashionable the latest "Revelation" is or what kit the manufacturers are desperate to push on people. Ignore it all and do what suits you.

 

[Lovacott]

Narrow tyres are better.
Wider tyres are better.

Tubs roll better than clinchers.
Clinchers roll better than tubs.

I hear ya.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

I'm inclined to think there's an optimal torque output for each rider, and you tend to subconsciously vary your cadence in order to maintain a fairly consistent loading on your legs.

 

[Lovacott]

I'm inclined to think there's an optimal torque output for each rider, and you tend to subconsciously vary your cadence in order to maintain a fairly consistent loading on your legs.

We all want to go faster and easier and we are all crap at it when we first set out.

But you kind of work it out on your own as you go along.

I'm pretty sure that Roger Bannister didn't ask for advice from Runners World or watch tube vids for hints and tips.

For me, if it hurts a bit, I'll put up with it knowing that it will make me stronger.

If it hurts a lot, I'll simply give up.

 

[boydj]

I'm inclined to think there's an optimal torque output for each rider, and you tend to subconsciously vary your cadence in order to maintain a fairly consistent loading on your legs.

I'd go with that. I use my gears to keep my cadence and effort level in a fairly narrow range as much as possible.

I used similar logic in my running days, shortening the stride on hills to maintain the cadence, then stretching out over the top - which would usually see me passing all the guys who beasted by me on the hill while they tried to recover.