Can we get some comment from or about people with longer legs? Do longer legs affect how high one can effectively cadence? Laws of physics and limitations of geometry certainly affect gymnasts, etc. How might the same effect cyclists with longer legs??

+1 I do spinning classes in the winter occasionally and they are very useful. The high cadence definitely translates and they improved my standing climbs significantly.

When I restarted cycling in 2006, everything seemed hard to do and my cadence was lower. I thought I did 80 rpms but once I got a cadence meter on the bike, I discovered it was much lower. But I have always had fun on the bike whatever type of riding I do. If an activity is not fun and I am doing it on my discretionary time, I do not do it for very long.

My advice is to do both. I could offer more advice but I have no idea what your goals are or what type of shoes you wear. What I find fun, you may not like or be unwilling to commit resources to make it happen.

As the cadence increases, it puts more demand on the equipment. Better shoes and pedals are an asset when cycling.

I have used three excellent cycling coaches over the last five years. One consistent theme was to improve cadence and pedal stroke. I cannot spin fast enough to please them. The reason is that leg speed is an asset. One can always choose to spin slower but one must practice and train to spin faster. Smooth pedal stroke with the proper sequence of muscle engagement is much easier on the back and knees independent of the cadence.

I would not push to increase cadence. Instead, I suggest shifting into a lower gear and spin faster for the same speed. There is no rush to do anything other than ride your bike. The more you ride the better you will get at improving cadence.

Is 36.5" inseam long enough? I routinely turn my 175 cranks at 100-110 rpms flatland cruising, and 90+ on mountain-pass climbs.

The limiting factor IME is not leg length, but crank length. I've tried 180's a few times over the years, and every time my cadence always drops a few RPM: proportional to the diff in crank length. The main reason I keep coming back to 175's is the limited options available in 180 (like NO road triples - compact or "standard" road cranks only!).

And BTW, I spent the early years of my cycling "career" cultivating a smooth pedal stroke and fast cadence. Also raced track for several years, and used LOW (54-66") fixed gears for early season training. All of that gave me the ability to turn 200rpm for short bursts, as the need arises, which it doesn't much any more.

SP
Bend, OR

I'm 6'3" with proportionate inseam. I don't think it makes any significant difference.

I also am 6'3" with a 34" slack inseam. Yes, doesn't make much difference.

Personally, I have a difficult time with higher cadences. My legs are still pretty strong and I've always been a masher. On the Lifecycle, (home exercycle), it is calibrated to maintain 80 rpm on its built-in programming. On the road, I can hold 80 on the flats well enough, but once the road tilts up ... it seems the most comfortable cadence is around 60 on 3-5% grades, usually less if the grade is any steeper. On a recent ride, the after ride analysis on Garmin Connect horrified me when I saw that my cadence dropped to 40 rpm for a few miles. But, that was the only way I could get up that hill. Us mortals can only go so far up a steep hill at a high cadence.

It's all a matter of your gearing. Gear low enough and you can spin up anything as long as you're maintaining enough speed to keep the bike upright.

I'm 6'4", 175 cranks, no difference. I spin most comfortably at 90-95 but can do far more when sprinting/accelerating etc.

I doubt us tall guys are going to set any cadence records, but we can certainly train up our pedal strokes and get into solid cadence territory. When I started, I'd get bouncy at anything much over 100, and can now get up in the 130-140 range before I get too jerky. My sweet spot for is ~92 for max power, I spin between 100-110 when the load is lighter, go uphill seated in the 80's, and uphill standing in the mid 70's. I'll continue working to smooth out my stroke for as long as I cycle.

(6'6" - 175 cranks)

Thanks to all the "leggy" guys who responded. I've got a 34" inseam myself. I've been able to spin at 90+ rpm for several minutes at a time on the flat on my SS (175 cranks, a little over 75 gear inches). I have been able to hit 110 to 120, even 130, but I can't do it for very long. Of course the terrain and lack of gears has a lot to do with determining my cadence on a longer ride. So now...

I just got a geared road bike (also 175 cranks), so I should be able to keep my cadence pretty steady, right?. Well, I can pretty much. But...

On Sunday I went for a ride, 16 mile loop. I pushed myself somewhat to see what I could do and ended up with a 18.2 mph average...I've done better, but that's not bad for me. Today I did a 12 mile loop, specifically trying to cadence at around 90rpm. I dont' have a cadence computer, but I have a pretty good sense of meter and was using a couple of songs in my head. In reality, I was probably between 80 and 90 generally, but fell off of that on the steep hills. My average while trying to maintain a higher cadence was 17.5, and that was a shorter ride than Sunday. Both rides contained no stops, except for brief ones to wait for traffic.

My question to you spinning gurus is this: If I continue to concentrate on cadence rather than performance (speed) will I eventually get the performance as a benefit from spinning at higher rpm?

Thanks for any responses...

Errr, yes and no. Concentrating on cadence will improve your performance, but it's not the main thing that's going to improve your speed and endurance. So maybe it depends on what you mean by performance. If you want to get fast, you've got to train hard - hill climbs, intervals, etc - and if you want endurance, you have to increase the mileage of your rides.

Oh, and this brings up another point. We're focussing on cadence, but high cadences and better performance also come with better form - that is, pedaling circles. There have been lots of threads about pedaling circles - do a search on the phrase if you're interested.

I'm 6'3" and have 175 cranks. My average, year to date, is around 79 or so, but that includes some serious climbing when the cadence dropped. I find that riding by myself, I usually hit the low 80's, but get up into the 90's when I'm pushing to keep up with the younger guys in the 20+ mph range. It takes some time and some work to get the cadence up there, but it is worth it. It feels pretty effortless to be riding with a mid 80 cadence, hard in the low 70's and ridiculous when I get over 100.

One thing that you could try to get the cadence up is to spin on any downhill stretches you have. If you can spin at 110 to 120 going downhill, your cadence will improve.

On a side note, I live in South Florida, but was riding in the North Carolina mountains 2 weeks ago. A local hot shot told me he has hit 60+ mph going down mountains and that his downhill speed is limited only by his cadence. He told me he has hit 200 rpm on his trainer and is trying to get that high on the downhills. I find that hard to believe, but what do I, a mere flatlander, know? If I was any gear on flat land and got close to 200, I think I would be hitting 40 to 59 mph. It sounds impossible to me.

Any questions?

Yeah - why did you bother to post that? I've seen other videos that are better demonstrations of even faster spinning.

Because those other videos don't feature the incomparable Eddie Merckx?

The cadence isn't impossible. With training people (I mean other people, not me - look at some of the sprinters on the track) hit very high cadences. It's BS to suggest that his speed was limited only by his cadence, though. It's not that easy to get above 60 mph and stay on the bike. On the flat, the air resistance would stop you accelerating long before you spun out, so the limiting factor would be power, not cadence.

Don't fall into the trap that higher cadence is always better, it's just different. You will not really increase your speed with higher cadence, but you will both reduce the strain on your knees and increase your cardio workout.

If you have cardio issue, i.e. beta blockers, you may have to limit your cadence in order to get speed. I think best is to be able to run from 70 to 110 rpm for a steady five minutes of riding. Then you can naturally adjust your cadence as you feel on each day. It will take time and effort to get higher cadence, but it's sure nice to have it as an option. It's kind of like having another gearing option.

Kinda what I was thinkin'

Totally down with this...

Next time I bother to post something I will consult with "on the path" first. He will determine if it is worthwhile.

And thanks, MinnMan, I posted it because it features Eddie Merckx, because Eddy's legs are long, and because I believe that if you're going to work on improving something when you go out and ride, cadence should be somewhere on your to-do list.

Eddie is the greatest. Thanks for posting.