Carbonfiberboy 

I train both ends of the cadence range - 115-120 for efficiency and 50-55 for strength. Normally on the flat it's 85-90, though if I'm loafing, it'll drop it to ~80. Climbing, it's 78-83. In the pack, it's whatever riders around me are using, to avoid acceleration issues as noted previously. At one time, I trained myself to run around 94-96 on the flat, but found no advantage. I'm amused to see young riders spinning along at 100 at 16mph on the flat, while I'm using 83 very comfortably. They heard it's better to spin.

That thing posted above by RChung about how torque is important - that's the reason that many cyclists have finally come around to strength training. Steady-state, spinning faster to produce more power works as does pushing harder on the pedals. However the former has greater aerobic demands than the latter. Thus each will suit a different physiology or racing profile. Spinning it up accelerates faster. Then one shifts up to lower the aerobic demand. Lance TTed at 110-115 when he was doping.

bampilot06

Used to be 105 was my preferred, then it became 95.

Now that I have gotten stronger, I find that most the of the time i’m in the 80s low 90s.

GhostRider62

Look at Tour rider's power files. On the flats and in the peloton when there are not attacks, they are doing relatively low RPM and low power. Of course low for them might be 250 watts and in the 70's. When there are breaks and it gets strung out, everyone's cadence increases. I'm not going to dredge up the power files, the reason they cut RPM at lower power is very obvious.

This guy would be a Bikeforum C- rider since he averaged only 78 RPM. 26.7 mph. For 24 straight hours. Christoph Strasser average power was only 265 watts in this race, I have seen him do higher. Marko Baloh will be in the 70's too.

https://www.strava.com/activities/5653170343

burnthesheep

You seem to have some weird bias or hangup about this. 80 rpm in zone 1 or 2 isn’t exactly a mash. Why do you feel you have to justify yourself?

You realize these folks’s ftp are so high that might be their zone 1 power, right?

Branko D

For me it depends on power, Z2 ride is generally from the low 70s to the low 80s with around 155-195W, riding at around FTP it's in the low 90s or high 80s.

rm -rf

Actual data vs self selected
This survey is kind of like the average speed reports. Riders tend to look down at the display when they are going pretty fast and feeling good, not doing random sampling of the whole ride!
I feel like I'm in the 90 rpm range a lot, but I don't really stay there too much.

I have the best power up toward 100 rpm. Short, fast sprints: 100 to 110. But for longer moderate pacing, it's varied a lot, but often in the mid 70s to low 80s.

Example ride data
here's an example 36 mile ride from Golden Cheetah charts. The charts are for the second part of the ride after a store stop.

The second part of the ride started with a climb, then short, easy rolling terrain. (That's about the closest I get to very flat roads around here.)
But it's not all that flat, since my speed regularly reaches 25-30 mph on the tiny downhills.

My heartrate was in the low 140s, that's upper Zone 2 into Zone 3 for me. Breathing a bit hard, but a nice, maintainable effort.

Here's the cadence range chart, with the full ride in dark blue-green, the second part of the ride in gray. A big range of cadences!
The chart is number of minutes at each rpm.



~~~
When I got a crank arm power meter, I was very surprised at how variable the power is, from one pedal stroke to the next. It feels like a steady amount of pedal force, but the range is quite large.

Cadence is the same way.
I have Di2 shifting, and I shift "continuously", looking for the best cadence at the moment. It's so easy to shift that I'll click to a different gear even for one or two pedal strokes, then shift again. I'd expect that would keep my cadence in a fairly narrow range, but no.

The second part of the ride, in a stacked chart.
Power in watts is the top graph. W'bal is an estimate of short term power reserves.
Heart rate in red. (the spike at the start is from static electricity on the jersey.)
Speed in the middle in green.
Cadence in blue just above the elevation chart at the bottom.

RChung

Nice. Yes, I've been looking at actual power, cadence, and torque data for a pretty long time. Most riders' self-reports of what they think they're doing are only a snapshot.

tomato coupe

Golden Cheetah is great for stuff like this. My results from a solo 30 mile ride:

canklecat

Before I caught the Super Cooties in late 2021, I typically did 90 rpm on flat terrain, and 100+ on hills. We don't have any mountains here and I can't recall ever encountering a continuous climb, without any rollers, lasting more than a few minutes. I doubt I could have sustained some of those 110+ rpm sessions for very long.

After the respiratory bug my aerobic capacity never fully recovered. My recent chest imaging shows some lung scarring. At the same time I was doing more running, which affected my cycling. My legs got stronger, but slower in terms of reflexes. And I'm just getting older.

So now I tend to mash more, averaging 75 rpm all around, often dropping to 40-50 rpm on climbs when I'm standing to stomp the pedals because I don't have the aerobic capacity to spin anymore. And we lose aerobic capacity and quick reflexes with age, quicker than we lose muscle strength. So for many of us it just makes sense to pedal harder gears at slower cadence.

I still do faster spinning sessions in intervals but can't sustain it like I did before the Super Cooties. But it's useful to mix up the training, same as I do when running.

I don't worry about the "spin to win" thing anymore, which was often taken out of context. It developed during the peak of the doping era when EPO and blood doping enabled turbocharged cadences that would have been impractical in other eras. Physiologically, sure, the respiratory system recovers more quickly than the leg muscles, so for a three week grand tour with lots of climbing, spinning was more efficient. If they could sustain it without gassing out. Which is where the EPO and blood doping came in. Steroids, such as testosterone patches, were for quicker recovery from intense muscle strain, not for bulking up or "strength" per se. Floyd Landis discussed these strategies in a long interview he did several years ago, which can be found online.

biker128pedal

I voted 81 to 90 but actually spin 85 to 95 on the flats. Used to spin 95 to 105 but with age slowed down.

BkSaGo

On a true flat without significant wind, about 85.
With a slight downgrade or tailwind, more like 88-90 - anything above that and my form starts getting a little ragged.

jaxgtr

Since I live in flat, I do a lot of heavy grinding. I only spin more than 90 if I and battling the wind, so I avg between 80 and 90.

Hermes

I voted 81-90 because that is the range I use for training most of the time. Depending the workout that could change either up or down. I find that at endurance power cadence is a big meh. I can ride most any cadence and make it work. At higher power, my cadence starts to increase just because my legs seem to sense the increased torque and want to spin faster. For time trials, I prefer a lower cadence.

roccobike

I never paid much attention to cadence before this year. I switched to an older Garmin unit and to a Speedzone 2 on the back up bike. Amazed that my cadence is always averaging 82 to 87 with 85 the most common number. Doesn't matter the terrain, the legs like 85. It's no problem when riding alone but when trying to hang onto a faster pace line, its not always possible to hold that number as almost everyone here knows. Still, 85 is absolutely the sweet spot and that's where I am cruising on the flats.

mschwett 

huh. looking at a bunch of extended, low wind segments on recent rides, it seems i pedal too slow. mid 70s RPM, around 220w sweet/sustained spot.

MinnMan

The collective expertise in this thread far exceeds my own, so I'll just say this is anecdotal and applies to me only..

I'll ride at 70-85 rpm if I'm not paying attention or not trying to ride particularly fast, but with a little concentration, I'll spin at 90-95 rpm.

With the higher cadence, in my experience, the pedaling mechanics are smoother - more spinning, less mashing - and leg fatigue is diminished, but HR is higher for the same power output.
With the lower cadence, I produce more power (or rather, the same power at lower apparent aerobic stress in zones 2-4 (Zone 5+ is another matter), but leg fatigue shows up sooner.

So outdoors, I mix it up and it depends on the terrane and the type of riding.

On the trainer, I mostly try to keep the cadence up, in part to make sure that I'm spinning well and recruiting a better distribution of muscles.

Also, as others have said, my RPM has overall tended to go down with age.

merlinextraligh

I agree it’s more about torque than cadence. Just putting around my cadence may be in the 70’s. Decent steady effort in the 80’s Going hard likely in the 90’s.

Also depends on the riding you’re doing. In a time trial where you’re trying to keep power pretty much constant, I find around 80 rpm’s is the most efficient for me. In a crit where you’re dealing with sudden accelerations, y cadence is likely going to be high 90’s and up. Sprinting 120-130.

So it all depends.

Joearch

Low to mid 80’s in the flats. Easier on the knees than more torque and in the 70’s

beng1

Yea, just collecting people's pedaling cadence is not much use. My theory is that it goes up and down with age and the height of the cyclist. I am pedaling in the 80-90rpm range on the flats with no wind and I will be 61 years old this year, am 6'2.5" tall and weigh over 200 pounds. When I was younger of course I pedaled faster especially in a Time-Trial. I also use as long a cranks as I can find, I have 180mm on one of my bikes, and plan on installing them on another. Shorter people and those with shorter cranks and legs are going to pedal faster naturally is my guess. Anything big moves slower generally in the world of nature and mechanics.

delbiker1 

I no longer don't pay much attention to the numbers when riding. It use to be 90 to 100, but pretty sure it is now more like 80. I mostly use the how I feel at the moment method.

ZHVelo

85-90 on flats. 75-80 on climbs. I used to be about 10 lower for both, but practiced a higher cadence and have gotten used to it. I feel like increasing that even more is not for me though. The increase I have already achieved from a feeling perspective certainly make the legs feel fresher. However, increasing it even further seems tiring.

On my indoor trainer I put resistance to 0 which theoretically should be a flat, and I am around 85.

Jughed

85-88 most of the time. When riding harder, the cadence goes up to 95-100.

While doing VO2 intervals last night I noticed that 93-96 was resulting in less power than 85-88 at the same heart rate. About 10-12 watts less.

PeteHski

That's because the higher cadence is putting more load on your cardio system. The trade-off is lower muscle loading at the higher cadence. I usually do VO2 max intervals at around 100 rpm, but for longer FTP intervals I drop to around 85 rpm as my HR tends to spike up after a few minutes - even at the lower power output. I also tend to reduce my cadence slightly during long intervals as my HR starts to creep up. So I might start a 20 min FTP interval at 90 rpm and gradually reduce to 80 rpm to keep my HR more stable.

Jughed

So being new to structured training... I was trying to figure out what is more effective during the VO2 intervals. I would think more power at the same HR would yield better results? Or is it just a function of time at that level of heart rate?

PeteHski

Good question. I think for VO2 max intervals it's more important to put out as much power as you physically can over the interval, regardless of your HR. I'm usually bouncing off my HR limiter after half a dozen VO2 max intervals! By definition, VO2 max intervals are designed to push your cardio system to its limit.

Edit: If you were physically unable to produce more power at the higher cadence, then that's a different issue. It takes some training to pedal effectively at a higher cadence - but it generally allows you to increase your power output.