I just want to point out that, in a lot of ways, this is the crux of the argument going on here. RChung may be correct in saying that a new rider doesn't have the experience to put cadence numbers into context. By the same token, a new rider may not have the experience to know what a proper saddle height is, or a comfortable saddle-to-bar drop or reach is. We all know that what may feel comfortable (or tolerable) for 30 minutes doesn't necessarily feel comfortable three hours later. As another illustration - I recently got a bike fit done by a pro fitter, and he raised my saddle about 2cm, which felt crazy high to me when I first sat on it. Now, a couple hundred miles later, it feels great, much better than my old position - and I'm an experienced rider.

In other words, a new rider doesn't necessarily have the experience to judge what a comfortable cadence is - or more accurately, doesn't have the experience to realize that what seems comfortable initially isn't going to remain comfortable an hour later. Offering a (fairly wide) cadence range of 80-100 rpms is a way of saying "in the accumulated experience of a lot of experienced cyclists, this is a range that works well for a lot of people, give it a try."

After all, when we talk about "comfort," let's be realistic - compared to sitting in a Barcalounger with your feet up, cycling isn't comfortable. As soon a s you choose to get on a bike and go for a ride, you are accepting a certain amount of discomfort inherent in the activity. In part, becoming a more experience cyclist means learning how much discomfort is acceptable or appropriate - x amount of knee pain is okay, x+10 means something is wrong - so for a new rider, some guidelines in terms of "best practices" might be helpful.

- sounddevisor