coasting 

I usually follow the often repeated advice of a 90+ rpm (except when a climb is too steep to achieve this on lowest gear). But on a long flat road or downhill, a higher gear that requirs me to pedal much slower doesn't strain my legs so why should a high cadence be important here?

Busta Quad

Try going fast for a long time.

mattm

i would think lower cadence = more strain on the climbs.

AEO

it's totally a function of your muscle make up and stuff like that.
I have no idea, but I like to keep 100~120 on flats and probably 90ish on hills

more work less often.
or
less work more often.

coasting 

Yes so I always try to keep cadence high when climbing and I hate standing climbing. I ust don't quite understand the high cadence idea for downhill or flat. I get more tired spinning fast.

coasting 

Maybe I never have long enough flat or downhill for a low cadence to last that long before getting back to high cadence for the next climb.

coasting 

I have, even before getting into cycling, been a leg person. Chin-ups have always been a joke but i could leg press an elephant.

AEO

sprinter or long distance runner?

160rpm is easy, 200 is a bit hard to attain and 220rpm I might as well try out for that roller game.

mattm

oops, i misread your original post. for downhills/flats, i think the general idea is that you can accelerate easier (if need be) starting in a higher cadence, e.g. jump in on a break.

but if your plowing at 50 rpm's and a pack shoots by you, it'll be harder to catch up. but if you're doing 90 rpm, then an upshift won't kill your cadence.

coasting 

Actually front crawl swimmer mostly. And when forced to run, sprinter. Long distance?...stuff that. Anything above 200m would kill me. Which makes it ironic that my interest in cycling is to ride further rather than faster.

AEO

200m is about where I like it.

unlike running, if you get tired while biking, you can just let momentum carry you.

coasting 

aaaahhhh. Now that makes sense. It is a racing thing, not a general how to ride efficient thing, so wouldn't apply for solo slow pokes who want to ride longer.

Thank you for introducing me to a new experience...enlightenment on BF.

FLvector

I do think it has more to do with efficiency. Each rider has their own efficient range that works for them. My target is in the low to mid 90's. I've biked with strong riders with a slow cadence - probably low to mid 80's and others over 120 rpm in the same pack.

tribble222

My understanding is that for long rides, a higher cadence/lower force is better because it uses mostly the glucose in your blood, which you can replenish with power bars, etc. A lower cadence/higher force uses up the glycogen in your muscles and once that's gone you run out of energy and need to sleep overnight to replenish it.

gregf83 

In general, lower cadences are more efficient but can be harder on your knees and muscles.

khatfull

You sound like me. I have a hard time doing pushups but can leg press 450 for one rep .

When I was little (I'm 45 now) I was born with short Achilles tendons and walked on my toes ALL the time, sometimes toes curled UNDER. My mom, for three years, had to do stretching exercises to try to lengthen the tendons. I now have calves that look like a lot of people's legs and my legs are like tree trunks compared to the rest of me. I suspect all the walking on my toes as a youngster has something to do with my legs now.