# Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - cadence and me...

Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.

View Full Version : cadence and me...

Allen55
10-19-11, 11:09 PM
I hear a lot of people talking about cadence and that we need to be between 60-90 RPM's. Also, is that rpm with just one pedal or is it one with the right and one with the left equaling 1? How can I know how fast mine is? Also, at that speed, it would be like spinning right? If I am not in shape enough with my cardio, won't I blow up really quick with that high of a cadence?

It's weird that I am asking these questions...it's like never knowing how to even ride a bike at all. LOL.

Neil_B
10-19-11, 11:13 PM
I hear a lot of people talking about cadence and that we need to be between 60-90 RPM's. Also, is that rpm with just one pedal or is it one with the right and one with the left equaling 1? How can I know how fast mine is? Also, at that speed, it would be like spinning right? If I am not in shape enough with my cardio, won't I blow up really quick with that high of a cadence?

It's weird that I am asking these questions...it's like never knowing how to even ride a bike at all. LOL.

No, it's not weird. It's understandable since you are spending a lot of time here. You are reading too much. Just ride your bike when you want to.

I've been riding for five years in December, done two week tours, crossed a state, done a 3k mile year, and have never paid attention to cadence.

Mr. Beanz
10-20-11, 12:11 AM
rpm= revolution per minute....means one complete turn of the pedals...right foot at bottom to right foot at bottom, one total turn. ;)

I started out as a masher (pushing big gears). But I read about spinning then did some exercises to improve my spin. Like placing your bike on a trainer and doing high rpm intervals. Cruise for 3 or 4 minutes then for one minute, try to hold 100 rpm without bouncing around on the saddle. You won't be able to at first but it improves with time and practice. At first trying to spin, I couldn't talk much less breath. Kept practicing and about one month later I woke up one morning and my legs were spinning like crazy.

The bad thing is riders want results right away, it doesn't happen after 3 sessions so many say forget it. Stay with it and it pays off.

When I got on the bike, it was like a total change. I was doing 95 rpm, not breathing hard and talking like I was cruising in the park. Once you developed the leg speed, it's much easier to maintain high rpm.

When you see me riding in the videos, I'm in my small chainring doing 21 mph while all the others are in their big rings. I'm spinning! :thumb:

Benefits I see from high rpm? I see it like squats, you can squat 300 lbs 10 times but 100 lbs, you can squat 30 times. Big ring low rpm is like doing heavy squats and small ring high rpm is like squatting 100 lbs. I have a much better chance lasting longer with light squats. On the bike, I don't fatigue as fast with high rpm low gears. Others may very. ;)

To find out your cadence, I count pedal revolutions for 15 seconds then multiply by 4. 20 revolutions in 15 seconds multiplied by 4 would equal 80 in one minute.

I used to have a cadence but after you find you always do high rpm, the numbers don't matter. If I'm doing 95 vs 96, 97 or 98, who cares, I'm still up there.:D

Homeyba
10-20-11, 12:22 AM

1nterceptor
10-20-11, 12:26 AM
I hear a lot of people talking about cadence and that we need to be between 60-90 RPM's. Also, is that rpm with just one pedal or is it one with the right and one with the left equaling 1? How can I know how fast mine is? Also, at that speed, it would be like spinning right? If I am not in shape enough with my cardio, won't I blow up really quick with that high of a cadence?

It's weird that I am asking these questions...it's like never knowing how to even ride a bike at all. LOL.

You can get a bike computer that will tell your cadence, speed, mileage, etc. Like Neil B I don't really pay much
attention to my "exact" cadence, I don't even have a computer :) Although I do try to spin.

chasm54
10-20-11, 12:40 AM
If I am not in shape enough with my cardio, won't I blow up really quick with that high of a cadence?

Broadly, yes. There's an energy cost to spinning fast, so the less fit you are, the more difficulty you will have in maintaining a high cadence. However, once you are fit it has advantages because it is less tiring for the muscles, and easier on the knees, to spin instead of pushing bigger gears more slowly. Hence those with high cadences will find it easier to cycle bigger distances.

Neil_B is right. Too many people worry too much about it. Don't sweat the numbers. The best policy is probably just to pedal in a gear that is one sprocket lower (easier) than you feel you could manage at that speed. This will encourage you to pedal just a bit faster without tiring you out too much, and as you get fitter your cadence will naturally increase.

chefisaac
10-20-11, 06:31 AM
For me, I find that you have to "bank accounts" when riding. One account is spinning which uses more of my arobic ability and the lungs and then there is the mashing which uses muscels. For me, it is important to know both because I can spin, I get out of breath but it is easier on my knees and muscels however, when I am tired or breathing too heavy from spinning, I usually go with using my muscels. Knowing both is key (to me at least) because they both can be used in times of need. For exmaple, windy condition i like to spin more versus mash. This works for me. I dont know my cadence numbers yet but I would like to get a computer someday. Just to see and work on it.

RichardGlover
10-20-11, 06:44 AM
Get a Cateye Astrale 8 computer. Performance & Nashbar usually have them for less than \$30 bucks or so.

It's wired, which is derided by the bleeding-edge techies and those who care more about how their bike looks than how it functions. Frankly - wired means no interference from other wireless devices, only one battery instead of 2 or 3, and a cost that's less than half for the same features.

The Astrale 8 has cadence, speed, odometer, time (since last reset), distance (since last reset), avg speed (since last reset), max speed (since last reset), a digital clock, and an auto-start feature. It doesn't have: backlight, wireless, two-tire settings (to move from bike to bike), or other wiz-bang things that have been put on computers recently.

But for cadence work? It's great. Set the big display onto cadence (RPM), and the small one on clock (handy that it's not a performance measurement to distract you). Glance down every once in a while. If it's low, and you can breathe, shift to an easier gear.

Neil_B
10-20-11, 07:38 AM

Push
10-20-11, 07:56 AM
No, it's not weird. It's understandable since you are spending a lot of time here. You are reading too much. Just ride your bike when you want to.

I've been riding for five years in December, done two week tours, crossed a state, done a 3k mile year, and have never paid attention to cadence.

This.

pdlamb
10-20-11, 10:21 AM
No, it's not weird. It's understandable since you are spending a lot of time here. You are reading too much. Just ride your bike when you want to.

I've been riding for five years in December, done two week tours, crossed a state, done a 3k mile year, and have never paid attention to cadence.

This is OK for some people, but I'd hesitate to make it a blanket recommendation.

I've found a higher cadence helps keep my knees from hurting. Found that out halfway across Virginia in the foothills on my Trans-Am tour. 90+ isn't really necessary for me (although I ran a yellow at 110 yesterday!), but keeping my cadence above 70 on hills means my knees don't hurt. Knees that don't hurt mean I can ride the next day, and the day after that, and so forth. That means I can go on long rides and tours. If I were content with flat rides, I might not worry about it.

If you want to increase your cadence, the Cateye Astrale is a fine choice. Go on some rides, and check occasionally what your cadence is. Then, see if you can get it 10 rpm higher. After a while (weeks or months) that will start to seem normal. You can then shoot for adding another 10 rpm, and repeat until you're satisfied.

tony_merlino
10-20-11, 10:42 AM
For me, I find that you have to "bank accounts" when riding. One account is spinning which uses more of my arobic ability and the lungs and then there is the mashing which uses muscels. For me, it is important to know both because I can spin, I get out of breath but it is easier on my knees and muscels however, when I am tired or breathing too heavy from spinning, I usually go with using my muscels. Knowing both is key (to me at least) because they both can be used in times of need. For exmaple, windy condition i like to spin more versus mash. This works for me. I dont know my cadence numbers yet but I would like to get a computer someday. Just to see and work on it.I think this is a great approach. I think the balance also depends on what you're trying to accomplish. As was pointed out on another thread, focusing solely on keeping a high cadence (which is what I did for years), is great - until you're carrying more weight, which can be any combination of rider, bike and cargo.

Spinning fast will really help build up the cardiovascular system, but "saving your legs" also has the effect of not really building up your leg muscles. And, particularly for heavier riders, or if you're schlepping a lot of weight in bike and cargo, building the legs is really important, especially for climbing. I think it really pays to do some slower cadence stuff, where you're working just below the "burn" feeling, to build up your leg muscles.

LazinCajun
10-20-11, 10:47 AM
Get a Cateye Astrale 8 computer. Performance & Nashbar usually have them for less than \$30 bucks or so.

It's wired, which is derided by the bleeding-edge techies and those who care more about how their bike looks than how it functions. Frankly - wired means no interference from other wireless devices, only one battery instead of 2 or 3, and a cost that's less than half for the same features.

The Astrale 8 has cadence, speed, odometer, time (since last reset), distance (since last reset), avg speed (since last reset), max speed (since last reset), a digital clock, and an auto-start feature. It doesn't have: backlight, wireless, two-tire settings (to move from bike to bike), or other wiz-bang things that have been put on computers recently.

But for cadence work? It's great. Set the big display onto cadence (RPM), and the small one on clock (handy that it's not a performance measurement to distract you). Glance down every once in a while. If it's low, and you can breathe, shift to an easier gear.

I just happened to stumble into this thread. A few minutes ago, I was about to make a thread asking for a similar minimal-frills cyclocomputer with cadence. Thanks, and have you considered a career as a psychic? :P

knobd
10-20-11, 10:53 AM
...
Neil_B is right. Too many people worry too much about it. Don't sweat the numbers. The best policy is probably just to pedal in a gear that is one sprocket lower (easier) than you feel you could manage at that speed. This will encourage you to pedal just a bit faster without tiring you out too much, and as you get fitter your cadence will naturally increase.

I think this is an appropriate level of attention to cadence but I don't think that it should be disregarded entirely. Certainly don't obsess about it but if you can get your cadence up it will put you in a better position when climbing and encountering heavy wind. It is basically your ability to downshift and rev up ... think of why you would need to do it when climbing a hill in a car.

Last weekend I went on a 20 mile ride with my sister-in-law and her husband. They have been riding for a much longer time than myself (grew up riding + last 4 years vs. me riding just 15 months starting 7/2010). They are both severe mashers and have stronger cores and on the flats her husband was faster than I was. However, it was a windy day and when we hit some 30 mph gusts they were in trouble and slowed down to a crawl. I simply went to a lower gear and revved it up. I ended up actually quicker than my sister-in-law on this windy day and she does tri's. Her husband actually took a different way on the back to be sheltered more by the wind. I looked at the wind as a fun challenge.

As far as measuring cadence I do it pretty informally. I map out my gears using this (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/). When I am out riding I'll take note of a speed at a certain gear combo (usually a spot where I am keeping constant speed and feeling comfortable). When I get home I check my mapping for my approxamate cadence. It's good enough for me. I've gone from about 55 in the beginning (7/2010) to about 85 now.

Mr. Beanz
10-20-11, 10:55 AM
Spinning fast will really help build up the cardiovascular system, but "saving your legs" also has the effect of not really building up your leg muscles. And, particularly for heavier riders, or if you're schlepping a lot of weight in bike and cargo, building the legs is really important, especially for climbing.

I hardly think it works that way. Out of ALL the riders I know, I ride the lowest gear highest cadence on the flats. Because all the other riders are pushing their big 53 rings and I'm spinning in my 39, they should be better climbers? :D\

However, it was a windy day and when we hit some 30 mph gusts they were in trouble and slowed down to a crawl. I simply went to a lower gear and revved it up. I ended up actually quicker than my sister-in-law on this windy day

This! Another big advantage of high rpm's. Other riders love to be behind me in stiff headwinds. I can keep a pretty good pace in the wind. When it gets tough, I shift down a gear and gain 1 mph. :thumb:

cleon
10-20-11, 11:01 AM
I always thought it was total..so I've only been doing 45 per leg :eek:!

cleon
10-20-11, 11:06 AM
I like this...

tony_merlino
10-20-11, 11:09 AM
I hardly think it works that way. Out of ALL the riders I know, I ride the lowest gear highest cadence on the flats. Because all the other riders are pushing their big 53 rings and I'm spinning in my 39, they should be better climbers? :DIt really depends on what sort of torque they're delivering to the pedals when they're pushing their big 53 rings. If all they're doing is overcoming rolling resistance, then you're definitely getting more out of the ride - they're neither building muscle strength nor cardiovascular endurance. On the other hand, if they make it a point to pull those bigger gears against a load (like in shorter climbs), and ALSO work on their cardio, they'll have an advantage over you.

You can spin fast, and sustain that, but if all you do is concentrate on being able to spin fast, you may not have the ability to deliver a lot of torque - particularly not for sustained periods of time. The amount of torque you can deliver is dependent on your leg muscles. For certain types of climbing, or for pushing heavily loaded bikes along, torque is king. Isn't that why we drop into a higher gear and stand for shorter climbs? Now, imagine being able to get that power without standing...

Mr. Beanz
10-20-11, 11:15 AM
You can spin fast, and sustain that, but if all you do is concentrate on being able to spin fast, you may not have the ability to deliver a lot of torque - particularly not for sustained periods of time. . Isn't that why we drop into a higher gear and stand for shorter climbs? Now, imagine being able to get that power without standing...

Wow! I did a few centuries with 10,000 ft of sustained climbing and never stood up, it's not my style. I guess that's why I sucked on the ride.:innocent:

Isn't that why we drop into a higher gear and stand for shorter climbs? Now, imagine being able to get that power without standing...

If you think about it, riders stand because they can't hold the torque while sitting. If you watch a race, lead pack of riders climbing a mountain are seated. With the exception of standing to stretch and use alternate muscles on the bike. When do they start standing to get torque? When they are in trouble and in danger of getting dropped. Most will stand for a bit and hope to keep up but they usualy end of falling off the back. The riders that can hold the torque while seated will come out ahead.

Watch Jan Ullrich he'd drop Pantani while seated, he rarely stood up to crank. Of course Lance beat Jan but when Lance stood, it was usually a controlled standing style, dancing on the pedals and not one looking for torque.

Yes, some riders do stand to power over a short climb but try that on a long sustained climb, you won't be there very long. ;)

Seattle Forrest
10-20-11, 11:41 AM
One revolution = one pedal moving 360 degrees. Or both pedals - it's the same answer. :D

90 rpm is a guideline. Most people are at their maximum efficiency around here, but your mileage will vary, especially with your cardio fitness. In caveman days, people had to run after mastodons (aka dinner) and away from lions; they had to make love to produce more cavemen, break rocks to make tools, and the like. Lots of demands on lots of different muscle groups, but all of them were fed by the heart and lungs. What that means is that peoples' cardio vascular systems are made to recover more quickly from exertion than legs or arms.

If you want to know your cadence at any point in time, the easy way is to have a cadence sensor, and the other way is to have a clock with a second hand, or a metronome. Count your pedal strokes for 15 seconds and multiply by 4. Or 10 and 6.

If you want to improve your cardio fitness and your cadence, you can get the bike moving on flat ground, built up a little bit of inertia, and then shift into your granny gear and pedal as fast as you can. Try to do this for 30 seconds. Then relax for a while, recover, and do it again. I've been doing this, or something like it, and found that it makes me a better cyclist in several ways. I can get moving from a dead stop more quickly, and that makes me feel a bit safer in traffic. Not to mention saving my knees...!

Finally, ~90 rpm isn't something most cyclists would think of as a sprint. But you can sprint at any cadence - you need to know what gear a person is in, along with their cadence, to figure out their speed. It's like the way you aperture, shutter speed, and sensitivity all work together in a camera.

I hear a lot of people talking about cadence and that we need to be between 60-90 RPM's. Also, is that rpm with just one pedal or is it one with the right and one with the left equaling 1? How can I know how fast mine is? Also, at that speed, it would be like spinning right? If I am not in shape enough with my cardio, won't I blow up really quick with that high of a cadence?

It's weird that I am asking these questions...it's like never knowing how to even ride a bike at all. LOL.

DGozinya
10-20-11, 11:56 AM
If you don't have a computer with cadence try this...Hum the BeeGee's "Staying Alive." The actual song is at 103beats per minute. If you hum it to yourself a little slower, you're down to 90-95 or so. Try getting one foot at the bottom of your stroke on the beat and you'll be on tempo.
Another positive is if you ever need to do CPR on someone, that song is the recommended guideline speed for compression strokes to the chest.

Mr. Beanz
10-20-11, 12:03 PM
If you don't have a computer with cadence try this...Hum the BeeGee's "Staying Alive." The actual song is at 103beats per minute. If you hum it to yourself a little slower, you're down to 90-95 or so. Try getting one foot at the bottom of your stroke on the beat and you'll be on tempo.
Another positive is if you ever need to do CPR on someone, that song is the recommended guideline speed for compression strokes to the chest.

Hahahaha! I have this CD and DVD.....good concert by the BeeGees. "One Night Only" :thumb:

tony_merlino
10-20-11, 12:10 PM
Wow! I did a few centuries with 10,000 ft of sustained climbing and never stood up, it's not my style. I guess that's why I sucked on the ride.:innocent:

If you think about it, riders stand because they can't hold the torque while sitting. If you watch a race, lead pack of riders climbing a mountain are seated. With the exception of standing to stretch and use alternate muscles on the bike. When do they start standing to get torque? When they are in trouble and in danger of getting dropped. Most will stand for a bit and hope to keep up but they usualy end of falling off the back. The riders that can hold the torque while seated will come out ahead.

Watch Jan Ullrich he'd drop Pantani while seated, he rarely stood up to crank. Of course Lance beat Jan but when Lance stood, it was usually a controlled standing style, dancing on the pedals and not one looking for torque.

Yes, some riders do stand to power over a short climb but try that on a long sustained climb, you won't be there very long. ;)That's true - that's why I specifically mentioned a short climb, for standing. I was also told that standing was a good thing to do near the crest of a climb, if you wanted to get a burst to drop someone. I did find that standing for the last few tens of meters could really make a difference if I was burning out.

And, of course, standing isn't something you can sustain for very long - but I wasn't really talking about standing, other than as an extreme example of when you choose torque over RPM. I'm really just saying that it's a good idea to work on both strength, which you get from pulling bigger gears against a load, and cardio-fitness, which you get from spinning fast. I think my old scheme, back when I considered myself a roadie, was to focus almost entirely on cardio. And that strategy did bite me, particularly after I gained a lot of weight. Now, I'm trying to build up both legs and lungs.

Mr. Beanz
10-20-11, 12:20 PM
Oh, sorry, I guess I misunderstood this statement. :D

You can spin fast, and sustain that, but if all you do is concentrate on being able to spin fast, you may not have the ability to deliver a lot of torque - particularly not for sustained periods of time. ...

tony_merlino
10-20-11, 12:54 PM
Oh, sorry, I guess I misunderstood this statement. :DYeah, all I'm saying is that it's a good idea to sometimes make your legs work a little harder to build them up for when you need them.

wphamilton
10-20-11, 01:02 PM
It's a chicken and egg thing: maybe you can feel your cadence without a meter, but I could never learn that without a meter. After you have one for awhile, you don't need one. It's kind of a waste. But fortunately you don't have to buy a cadence meter either - any \$8 bike computer will work (sensor on chainstay, magnet on pedal, magic number is 1667).

I spent about a month this summer concentrating on spinning at a higher cadence, every ride. I got accustomed to about 90-95 rpm for "normal" riding, sometimes spinning along at 100. I didn't get the same thing out of it that some people report, except for the first week to a degree. I have the same muscle fatigue, and get the same amount out of breath, at a given speed whether I'm mashing or spinning. (I get out of breath and give out at slower speeds than I'd like regardless but's a whole 'nuther story) What is helpful to me about it is that changing pace during a ride seems to help me recover, and being able to sustain a higher cadence improves my pedal stroke (making it more efficient). So I think the effects of higher vs lower cadence are highly individual depending on your weight, your strength and conditioning, and just how hard you're pushing it.

RichardGlover
10-20-11, 02:39 PM
I like being able to mix it up with cadence.

The bank analogy is a good one.

On a ride where I didn't have enough fuel for the first 40 miles (aka "what? 65 miles today? Sure!" (crap, only 1 bottle of carb-filled hydration, and no snacks)), I lowered my cadence to reduce my heart rate, and therefore, lowered my glycogen burn rate to a point where I was able to not bonk with the limited fuel source I had. After the 40-mile stop, I downed what carbs I could, filled my bottles, and kept my cadence low for the next 30 minutes while it worked into my system.

Had I kept a higher cadence, I'd have bonked. But I knew I was working my muscles more than normal, so I revved up the cadence later to finish the ride without blowing what endurance my muscles had.

zjrog
10-20-11, 03:19 PM
I've never been a spinner. Gear masher supreme, but always knew that was holding me back. I got away from riding before tackling the art of the spin. Since I've decided to return to riding this past year with a new knee I've been working at spinning, but just can't seem to get my big legs to do it. Little did I know there was a secret... Maybe I've been on the wrong bike... I recently crashed and sustained back injuries requiring the T7-12 vertebra to be fused. I'm in physical therapy and and the stationary bike there has me happily spinning away in the mid 80s... Everytime they up my level, I add 5 RPM. I hope when I get on the bike on the trainer soon, that will equate to spinning on the trainer.

Yeah, I'm odd, I treat physical therapy like a workout. I leave it all with the therapists...

shawmutt
10-20-11, 04:22 PM
It's a chicken and egg thing: maybe you can feel your cadence without a meter, but I could never learn that without a meter.

+1. The meter keeps me honest and shows my improvement over time. It's nice to glance down and see the number there--no counting or humming needed, and I can get back to riding and enjoying the scenery and yelling at the kids for playing with my back wheel. It's also teaching me efficient shifting. Sure, I could learn that over months or years--or the days it took me with the meter.

10-20-11, 05:44 PM

Another +1 on this. This rule of thumb will guide every cyclist to the correct cadence for their body and fitness level.

That said, what I have read is that our instinct is to ride a bike with approximately the same cadence we might walk, which is about 60rpm. And for almost everybody that is too slow of a cadence, i.e. physiologically inefficient. If you find your legs tiring, but you're not even breathing hard, shift to an easier gear and try to maintain or even slightly increase speed.

Another thing to note: all of this goes out the window when you're going uphill, especially for us clydes. I try to keep a cadence of around 90, but I'm all the time finding myself getting down to the granny gear and still having to slow down. And. That's. O. K. It's just a matter of individual fitness at what incline a 90rpm cadence is unsustainable.

Another thing to note: don't bother with a cadence-reporting cyclocomputer. Look at a digital watch and get a 1-second pulse in your head (or you can probably do pretty well even without a watch). Then, to the beat of that pulse, do three pedals (half-rotations) per beat; (left-right-left) (right-left-right)... The first time you try it it will seem ridiculously fast. But it is good. If you keep being a masher (50-70rpm in high, hard gears) as your fitness improves (your pushing becomes harder and harder) you will end up hurting your knees. You want to save your body for more biking, train your body to keep a cadence of 80-100rpm (until you bottom out on your granny gear uphill).

Neil_B
10-20-11, 11:30 PM
This is OK for some people, but I'd hesitate to make it a blanket recommendation.

I've found a higher cadence helps keep my knees from hurting. Found that out halfway across Virginia in the foothills on my Trans-Am tour. 90+ isn't really necessary for me (although I ran a yellow at 110 yesterday!), but keeping my cadence above 70 on hills means my knees don't hurt. Knees that don't hurt mean I can ride the next day, and the day after that, and so forth. That means I can go on long rides and tours. If I were content with flat rides, I might not worry about it.

If you want to increase your cadence, the Cateye Astrale is a fine choice. Go on some rides, and check occasionally what your cadence is. Then, see if you can get it 10 rpm higher. After a while (weeks or months) that will start to seem normal. You can then shoot for adding another 10 rpm, and repeat until you're satisfied.

I don't disagree with your advice, but I find I can spin without knowing a cadence number. Also, the OP isn't riding a cross country tour.... yet. He wants to learn the tricks of the trade; let him learn the trade first.

Rowan
10-21-11, 02:19 AM
Beanz has posted some valuable information on cadence that is worth reading for anyone.

High cadence is certainly an acquired "taste", particularly because of the load it does place on the cardiovascular system. It can be useful for endurance riding (centuries and randonnees), but in my opinion, it's a moving target on shorter rides.

Anyone who uses a fixed-gear knows this -- cadence can go from 30 to 160 in an instant with absolutely no option! And high-speed pedalling on an FG down a hill can be really educational as to the harmonics of the body, whether your seat height is right or your butt is seesawing, and whether your overall posture is right, including keeping your pelvis level.

My cadence can vary quite a lot even on a flat century on a geared bike. It depends on whether I want to cruise, or pick up the pace a bit more.

The real proviso hinges on the condition of the rider's knees; I've always advocated that anyone with suspicions about their knees should err on the side of lower gearing. If that means using a triple, an MTB cassette and a long-cage rear derailleur, then so-be-it. If it means using a fixed gear on 16% grades without damaging the knees, then likewise, so-be-it.

Which doesn't really help the OP, I suppose. But riding 75-90rpm is a sound recommendation for most people.