Originally Posted by kbarch

Like most folks, I get "these ideas" from experience and observation. Of course someone who is practiced can modulate their speed finely from any cadence. It's been my observation that the steadiest wheels around often do maintain a high cadence, but spinners don't have a monopoly on that distinction, and some of the worst yo-yo-ers spin as fast as anyone - that is, when they aren't coasting.

I'm not sure what your example indicates either way, really. The 5 rpm cadence change is 5.5% for the guy starting at 90, 8.33% for the guy starting at 60 - of course it's going to make a bigger difference for the latter. It's also going to be far more noticeable in terms of effort - which gets to my point that, from any given speed, it's easier to accelerate more quickly with a higher starting cadence. Up to a point, the lower the cadence, the more sluggish acceleration tends to be. Anyone who has tried to take off again after slowing down to 5 mph or so while still on 53/11 knows this.


Which is catatonic? The 17mph, or the cadence one would be rolling with 53/11 at that speed? If the latter, I'd agree, but that's not what I was talking about. But if you're saying 17mph is catatonic, well, then more than half the folks out there every weekend on four- and five-figure road bikes are catatonic most of the time, regardless of what one might read here. And a lot of them find an 11t cog useful for "going fast" from time to time. It may seem silly to some, but they really do use it, and happily.

Oh, and by the way: as easy going, chatty and apparently "relaxed" as they may appear to be, toodling along at 35 mph or whatever, the pros in a race peloton (and those of you who ride like them) are hardly relaxed, they are WORKING. Some of it may be un-challenging, but if they were actually relaxed so much of time, those 140 lb guys wouldn't need to consume 8,000 calories a day.