Originally Posted by Snicklefritz
that's what I've heard too - I've been trying to ride at a higher cadence 95+ rpm which is a lot easier now than it used to be and I'm trying for 100-105 for shorter durations. However, when I do work in the tempo zone at 100-105 rpm it drives my HR up. However, my legs end up being fresher. If I ride at A lower cadence, my HR stays down, but my legs tend to get a bit more tired. So where do you draw the line? I've heard people say if you pedal at a higher cadence it can help you avoid early onset of lactic acid accumulation, but if high cadence tends to drive your HR up, then isn't that making you tired too?
Muscle tends to recover much slower than your cardio. Getting your body used to higher cadence takes time, sometimes a year or more. In the long run it's less loading on the muscles and much easier on the knees, but it does depend on muscle type to be really effective. You can recruit fast twitch fibers, but if your starting off with predominantly slow twitch you won't make it.
I finally got my dedicated TT bike with the SRM going, and raced it for the first time at Districts. I found that as my cadence dropped off, so would my watts, kind of a direct line on the graph. I've also played around on a Computrainer tracking pedal stroke. Higher cadence sort of forces you to smooth out the stroke, so you get a more uniform application of power.
High cadence is also usefull in sprints, two of the best Cat 1 riders I know typically spin out at over 120. Seems to work for the little Aussie too.