Google sponsored links
Ok, I am starting to get more serious in my training so I added a cadence computer to my recumbent.
My default cadence was about 70 rpm, but after seeing the suggested rates of 90 or more, I decided to practice spinning higher rpms. I did 7 miles this morning at 80-85 rpm and it felt pretty good.
After lunch, I decided to go out to do a 30 mile + since this morning was so good. Wow, I sucked. The first 10 miles were good, but I couldn't spin 80 and was not that great at 70. I limped back doing 18 instead of 30 and not having much fun.
I'm used to 30 mile rides, so what gives? Is 80-90 always better? What really determines an efficient cadence? I'm 360 or so and don't think of myself as a masher. Is this a matter of training your body for a cadence?
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content
here.
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
-
http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in
this thread)
-
http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in
this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
-
http://www.bikeforums.net
I've only been riding for a few months, but when I got my first cyclecomputer with cadence I found I was only spinning 60 - 70. By using the cadence display as a que to shift, I usually spin at 80 - 90 now. I find that the higher cadence is less tiring. As a matter of fact, if I find myself feeling fatigued I'll just shift down a cog and spin faster as a "rest".
I read somewhere that "mashing" in a higher gear causes the muscles to contract and restrict bloodflow, while spinning faster promotes better bloodflow, and consequently better muscular nourishment and waste removal.
I ripped the cadence wire off of my computer. All I care about is miles. When the bike turns into an exercise machine, I might as well go ride a stationary.
Biking should be fun!
Perm,
Fun is where it's at, I agree. However, I am doing RAGBRAI next year so I am interested in getting efficient, losing weight, and getting my miles in. I am interested in the efficiency angle right now.
it takes time to build up to 80-90. It's better on your knees, too. If you incorporate cadence rides with your normal ones, you'll get better at it over time. For example, one ride a week force yourself to ride in the little ring the whole ride (and or watch your cadence like a hawk). You're already at a good starting point of 70, just a few weeks of practice and 80ish should feel natural....
^^^ +1, you need to work up to the 90+, I started off in the 60's and after 15 months I avg in the high 80's low 90's. I was a masher, but had to learn to spin at a higher rate and get more efficient rides.
I made big rpm gains with a trainer and drills. Spin at a comfy rate for 3 or 4 minutes.
Try to maintain higher than 100 rpm for one minute without bouncing. Tough and prolly can't do it at the beginning but the effort is what makes you carry high rpm's.
Return to the 4 minutes of comfy rpm's then repeat the one minute intervals for aabove 100 rpm's.
Don't have or want a trainer, try it on the bike.
I used to mash at 60, now 95. Don't think I cna mashif I wanted to now!:D
Doggone cadence thing on my Garmin stopped working twice, second doggone battery replacement.
Now I don't think about cadence anymore.
I used to be a masher, then I rode fixed for a year.
I can spin upwards of 190 without bouncing badly now. I have also hit a ridiculous 237 coming down a hill on my fixie, thats around 43 mph.
Typically I ride in my 53x16 and spin around 95-97 giving me a typical race average of around 24 solo, or 27+ if i am in a pace. To upwards of 40 on flat sprinting.
But for regular rides I normally average around 22 in a 53x18 spinning around 95.
It doesn't even feel right anymore if I drop below 85. I normally spin between 90 and 100. Sometimes up to 110. Feels much easier to spin at those revolutions.
Today I did an avg of 18.3mph for a 15 mile ride and it felt good to spin fast.
Most everyone has said the same thing. Better for your knees, uses your body more efficiently, etc...
I use to be around 70 and thought that was better, after working with the cadence to stay around 90, I feel better, and I also pay attention to my heart rate monitor.
Generally speaking there are trade-offs. There is less tension on the knees is a positive, but at the same time if there is any problem with your mechanics you are perfroming more RPM's which can also cause injury. Also there is a link between cadence and HR. There is a reason Ulrich (and to a lesser extent Leiphiemer) used larger gears and were out of the saddle less than a Panatani or Armstrong.
That being said, I think most people would agree that if you can achieve a higher cadence, it is probably better in the long run. My recommendation would be to increase in much smaller increments. If you are normally a 70 RPM spinner, try going to 73 for a couple of weeks then 76 and so on. It is kind of like adjusting your saddle height or cable tension, make small changes and you will probably see better results.
A couple observations-
1. I think you need to "work up" to a faster cadence. Get comfortable doing 5 RPM more until it seems "normal". Also, if you weigh 360, you have a lot heavier legs to keep changing direction. You may be putting a slight strain on your knees, with the faster speed, that you don't notice. X miles down the road and BINGO. (Or is that BONKO?)
2. You didn't say what your crank length or inseam is. It may be that your cranks are a bit too long for your body proportions to spin fast.
I'm 6' & 240+. I have 175mm cranks on my bike and they are simply too long to spin fast, with my "chubby" legs and arthritic knees. I have to pay attention to maintain 65 RPM.
I use platform pedals (for a couple reasons and am not changing that). If I try for 70 RPM, my feet start coming off the pedals. I'm looking for 165mm cranks. I really expect that will allow me to increase my cadence.
I'm 6' & 240+. I have 175mm cranks on my bike and they are simply too long to spin fast, with my "chubby" legs and arthritic knees. I have to pay attention to maintain 65 RPM.
I use platform pedals (for a couple reasons and am not changing that). If I try for 70 RPM, my feet start coming off the pedals. I'm looking for 165mm cranks. I really expect that will allow me to increase my cadence.
Hate to say it, but clipless pedals (or at least toe clips) will help your cadence more than shorter cranks.
Hate to say it, but clipless pedals (or at least toe clips) will help your cadence more than shorter cranks.
+1 It's really hard to spin if your feet are slipping all over the place. Clipless pedals also allow you to let other leg muscles do some of the work.
I agree about working up to a faster cadence. That's pretty much true for any aspect of fitness and training. I've read a few sources that say ideal cadence is different for different riders, too. I think it depends on your muscle fiber ratio, power output, cardio fitness, age and other factors. I imagine you would need professional monitoring equipment to actually determine your ideal cadence, so most of us just have to go by what feels best for ourselves.
Hate to say it, but clipless pedals (or at least toe clips) will help your cadence more than shorter cranks.
It still ain't gonna happen.
Too much stop & go, too clumsy and no health ins.
Cadence is where it's at. I was missing the boat completely, until I installed a computer with cadence. I've gradually increased my cadence up to 85-95 now. My millage went WAY up as my cadence went up. I can't believe I rode all those miles killing myself before at 60-70rpm's. I don't run that low any more unless I'm climbing. Sure you can get a work out and put on a bunch of miles at any cadence. If you want to do it the most efficiently as possible then cadence will come into play.
Perm,
Fun is where it's at, I agree. However, I am doing RAGBRAI next year so I am interested in getting efficient, losing weight, and getting my miles in. I am interested in the efficiency angle right now.
Tom, Let's break this down. You are new to Recumbents? Cadence and knowing when to change gears is everything on a Recumbent or a Tandem. As others have stated, you have to build up your cadence and it does take awhile. It is very tough to be a masher on a Bent due to the physics involved.
When I am on my Rans Rocket and I am trying to get my cadence back up to my peak, I ride along this one section of trail that the Marines and the Army Guard have marked out in 1/2 mile increments. I try and maintain my 90 rpm for 1 mile, and then cool down for a 1/2 mile running about 70-80 rpm. I then kick it back up on the return leg to the 90 for another mile with the same cool down. After a few weeks of this I start to try and do 100-110 for a 1/2 mile with a 1/2 mile cool down at 90 rpm.
I try and keep very aware of my cadence and I strive to maintain 90 rpms during my entire ride.
Another important thing about recumbents is finding that sweet spot where you and the bike are the most comfortable. Seat angle, "X" measurement adjustments and even crank length can all come into play. Got a bunch of riders around here that have gone to 165mm cranks and for many it has helped with their cadence.
For myself the last couple of years, I canned the cycle computers and other gimicks I used to ride with and just enjoy the ride. I know my trails well enough and know what times I have to beat to know I've put in a good effort. Yesterdays 20 miler seemed short, but the effort was fine with me due to the gusty wind conditions. I figure that 1.5 to 2 hours out on the bike are way better than the same time taking space on the couch.
Chris
I used to be a masher, then I rode fixed for a year.
I can spin upwards of 190 without bouncing badly now. I have also hit a ridiculous 237 coming down a hill on my fixie, thats around 43 mph.
Typically I ride in my 53x16 and spin around 95-97 giving me a typical race average of around 24 solo, or 27+ if i am in a pace. To upwards of 40 on flat sprinting.
But for regular rides I normally average around 22 in a 53x18 spinning around 95.
237 on a bike ? holy crap. I can punch 211 on my spinner but it ain't pretty. on the bike I can haul 140 all day (i am dying but not blowing up), and burst 160-170. 237 on a bike is just nuts. I mean you know how fast your legs are moving holy jeeze!!!
THis thread is why this is such a great subforum. I will be trying several of the recommended training methods and I'm sure my rpms will increase. I may play a bit with the fit as well.
Thanks!
Tom
Crank set Shimano 170mm 48/36/26
Rear Cogs 9-speed: 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 21, 23, and 26
Yesterday I worked on cadence during my normal route. The main loop is 7.7 miles. I rode the first loop my normal way (crank gear on 36 and combinations of 11, 12, and 13 on the rear). My cadence stays between 60 – 80 rpm. The second loop I tried with increased cadence (crank gear on 36 and combinations of 14, 17, and 19 on the rear). My cadence rose to between 70 – 90 rpm
My first impressions were while the bike was easier to move using more cadence, it took longer to complete the same distance. I know this was my first try and I did it on the second lap. I figured that if the higher cadence is more efficient then my second lap should be equal or faster than the first.
In two days I will do the same course and try the higher cadence on the first lap followed by my normal way on the second. This should tell me if the second lap just suffers from fatigue more so than cadence.
I have all my data from the Garmin Edge 305 stored on my pc. I would like to request help from someone to upload it to Motion Based or some other site so I can get input for better training. Please send me a PM with your phone number so I can call for help getting the data uploaded and shared for analysis by more experienced riders.
Thanks, Jerry
Jerry, I think you need to try some gears in between your 2 "sets".
Like 12-17 ish, depending on hills.
Crank set Shimano 170mm 48/36/26
Rear Cogs 9-speed: 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19, 21, 23, and 26
Yesterday I worked on cadence during my normal route. The main loop is 7.7 miles. I rode the first loop my normal way (crank gear on 36 and combinations of 11, 12, and 13 on the rear). My cadence stays between 60 – 80 rpm. The second loop I tried with increased cadence (crank gear on 36 and combinations of 14, 17, and 19 on the rear). My cadence rose to between 70 – 90 rpm
My first impressions were while the bike was easier to move using more cadence, it took longer to complete the same distance. I know this was my first try and I did it on the second lap. I figured that if the higher cadence is more efficient then my second lap should be equal or faster than the first.
In two days I will do the same course and try the higher cadence on the first lap followed by my normal way on the second. This should tell me if the second lap just suffers from fatigue more so than cadence.
Thanks, Jerry
Just stick with it, you'll see a difference after a couple of weeks. I know I did and it made a world of difference for me even though it slowed me down for a couple weeks.
After working on spinning for the past few months, I decided to see if it was making any difference to my cadence numbers. Before installing my computer, I figured I was probably turning in the 60-70 RPM range. You can imagine my suprise when, after installing my new Blackburn Delphi 3, I discovered I was really running in the 90-105 RPM range. I could probably go a bit quicker, but now I would rather start trying to push that RPM in some larger gears and increase my overall speed.
It still ain't gonna happen.
Too much stop & go, too clumsy and no health ins.
Clipless pedals and shoes are way more predictable than any of the alternatives. Safety is not an issue past the first week or so.
Previous -
Top -
Next
Copyright 1999 - 2007
BikeForums.Net - All rights reserved.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.