Chill out brah! You stated that you could find an "exact" cadence through which all cyclists will be optimally efficient. That number doesn't exist. Flatballer is right, you are wrong. We all make mistakes!

here we go

I hope we don't.. there's some good info in here

My question is, what happens when you GET comfortable at 90-100rpm? is there benefit to being able to hold 120? 140?

Yes. In a group ride or race there will be surges, say from 24mph to 27, or 27 to 30. You need to match the surge or lose the wheel you're following. Rather than having to drop a cog or two and perhaps standing to accelerate, when you're comfortable at higher cadences you can just spin up to hold the wheel and then drop a cog. It's smoother, quicker, and more efficient.

in my experience, i "can" spin 110-125 but on a long ride i find myself most comfortable (with more energy) when i ride about 100rpm with sprints and fast climbs at 105-115rpm.

makes sense.

a little too much sense.

not really. after a certain point your power production drops off or the economy of your motion decrease

:roflmao2:

If somebody thinks efficiency improves forever and that at 200rpm a cyclist is twice as efficient as somebody at 100rpm please come forward.

Nowhere did I write "cyclists" I wrote "cyclist" - check it out if you care - flatlander is the guy who added in the extra false generalization.

I will say this also, my educated guess is that the optimal cadence for many riders falls in a narrow band.

There's no sudden light-switch that goes off. It's all a linear effect based upon physics:

power = (force * distance) / time
power = PedalForce * (distance/time)
power = PedalForce * RPM

What happens is that there is limited force that you can apply to the pedals based upon your leg muscle's contractile strength (roughly related to number of recruited fibres and their cross-sectional size). At some point, you are pushing on the pedals at 100% and can not push harder. Yet, the power-generated also involves RPM as well. If we compare two scenarios of identical power-outputs, but at different RPMs (60 vs 120rpm), we get:

Power1 = PedalForce1 * RPM1
Power2 = PedalForce2 * RPM2
Power1 = Power2

RPM1 = 60
RPM2 = 120
RPM1 = RPM2/2

PedalForce1 * RPM1 = PedalForce2 * RPM2
PedalForce1 * RPM2/2 = PedalForce2 * RPM2
PedalForce1 = 2* PedalForce2
PedalForce2 = 1/2*PedalForce1

What this gives us is that spinning at 120rpms yields the SAME power (and same speed) as pushing twice as hard at 60rpms. When you are pushing twice as hard, your muscles are not as efficient (ATP generated per O2 & glucose consumed), and they will fatigue much, much faster. When you're doing a 100-mile ride at 20mph, the person who's pushing 60rpms will go just as fast as the person spinning 120rpms. However, the 60rpm person will wear out their muscles, fatigue and cramp up faster and most likely blow up and drop out sooner. In general, spinning faster allows you to generate the same or MORE power while pushing on the pedals less.

Another way to look at this is when you're already pushing 100% on your pedals and can't possibly push any harder. Two sprinters are of equal strength and can push on their pedals with 250-lbs of force. However, one pushes with all his might at 60rpms while the other pushes just as hard, but at 120rpms. The 2nd sprinter will generate DOUBLE the power and go 26% faster with exactly the same strength!

As for "optimum RPM" , there isn't one. There may be a different one for each person. That is based upon technique and form. Different people will lag their upstroke/dead leg more than others, thus requiring different amounts of wasted down-force from the other leg. This imbalance will cause rocking and bounding and limit how fast you can spin. Some people are better at applying force 90-degrees to the crank all the way around the pedal-stroke than others who may be pedaling squares. Riding one-legged on a CompuTrainer can generate a polar plot and show you exactly how smooth or not you are.

Once you get the spinning down, it becomes a delicate balancing act between your muscular and cardiovascular system:

Spin Faster = tax the muscles less, tax the heart/lungs more
Spin Slower = tax the muscles more, tax the heart/lungs less

This is why bulky sprinter types would ride at lower-RPMs than thin climber types who would be most efficient spinning. You can figure out the balancing act with a HRM.

Also the speed at which you ride will dictate the most effective RPM as well. Low-speeds of 15-20mph would favour lower-RPMs (70-90) because it doesn't require extreme amounts of pedaling-force and lower-RPMs will keep your HR low as well. Higher-speeds like 25-30mph would need higher-RPMs 90-110 so you can tax the legs at the same intensity as the heart & lungs (and blow them up at the same time). All-out sprints require the highest RPMs of 130-150rpms in order to generate the highest power-outputs and obtain the highest top-speeds possible. Of course, it takes some training to effectively spin the pedals and apply force at those RPMs. If you can spin 200rpms+, then you'll most likely be efficient at 150rpms. It can take a decade of training to reach this point.

was he?

lets check...

shal we start a poll?

lol... you are a day late and a dollar short. Go back under the bridge and set your alarm clock next time!

would i have been correct two days ago?

good one. You're so awesome.

No.

:cry:

Next time you step in to correct somebody make sure you're sure you understand what they're trying to say. Hmm.

explain

You know, we could settle this if you were actually able to find that "exact number" for "a cyclist" (both pulled from your quote) to optimize performance. What is it?

I'm also interested in what the number is. He promised it a while ago, I asked him for it, he hasn't produced it.

Sure would be useful. Hell, people would pay a lot of money to know that number.

thats why i ask.

i did a quick 20mi today. most of the ride was sprint and cadence drills. i am sure it would have been much more effective if i was running the golden number.

Why should I waste time explaining it to somebody who is just rude and has an axe to grind. If i felt you really wanted an answer relevant to the thread, maybe things would be different.

when was i rude? please read the post above, or posts above. i am not the only one wanting this information. you said you know the optimum cadence. how is this not relevant to a thread about spinning?

I can't find your exact optimal cadence over the internet. Sorry. However there are a few studies hanging around which can give you a general idea of the cadence at which the majority of cyclists perform most efficiently.

Yes and they do pay a lot to know that number.

I am fairly sure you're just here to troll, for one you didn't even read what i wrote - instead you attack what i said and demand explanations.

troll? i have been participating in this thread since page one (longer than you)

i read your statement. the missing "s" is irrelevant. when people say "the american way" they are not referring to a single american, just like cyclist can encompass a group of people. either way, i do not care. the important thing is you told us you could find that number if we care. as it happens, i care. if you can not do it "over the internet" what info do you need?

I know a good number of older racers and work with one who was never a spinner and at 76 still pushes some big gears at a lower cadence than one would think was efficient... but when he and these other guys were racing here and abroad they started every season on their fixed gear with 75 gear inches and spun that for 1000 miles before they started shifting gears.

It got them in racing shape and got them spinning very smoothly efficiently... and there was no slacking off.

If your fg is set up perfectly and your pedal stroke is smooth there will be no bouncing in the saddle and I have spun out on descents at 180 rpm @ 45 mph with no issues with me bouncing in the saddle.

Watch track racers when they sprint... super high rpms and no bouncing.

I have to be able to maintain a high cadence these days as I have one leg that does not work as well as I would like it to and one leg that does a lot more of the work... I run some lower gears and spin faster to stay within my aerobic range (which has gotten better), to maintain speed, and not over stress the good leg.

Sixty Fiver - Not disagreeing with you here, a fixed gear will definitely force you to spin on the descents. However, it takes a lot of discipline to ensure a full pedal stroke instead of one aided by the forward motion of the drivetrain. I know one thing that has helped me is to run a slightly looser chain (on a fixed gear) so that I can feel it when I'm slacking.

That being said, it also takes a lot of discipline on a geared bike because at any point you can just let go and coast.

Either way, you have to really want it.

Also, I think there's a difference between learning how to spin quickly and smoothly, and learning how to pedal efficiently. I know that back when I was still using clips and straps, I was able to spin 150rpm smoothly, but I wasn't actually powering through the entire crank rotation. When I switched over to clipless, I paid a lot more attention to powering through the rotation evenly, which has helped both my form and, more importantly, my efficiency on the bike. I think when people begin focusing on high rpm spinning, they assume that as long as they are sitting still on the saddle and maintaining smooth form, they've mastered it. But how the power is applied through the crank rotation has had a greater effect on my cycling, personally.

It is relevant because it determines what i'm trying to say. Even now you don't want to listen to what i'm trying to say and i clarified what i was trying to say after the other poster misread it and made the same false generalization. Listen to me now - Your most efficient cadence can be found, just because I can't personally do it for you over the internet really isn't a reason to dismiss me.

i can agree with that statement. from experimenting, i think mine is about 105. (but i dont know)


should i dismiss this comment?

Well, if you're up for it you come to a sports lab and have them measure the whole package and you can find out if 105rpm is right.

Dismiss what you want. Like you said, through experimenting you can find or come close to the most efficient cadence. I am fairly confident i could find an efficient cadence for you or another cyclist but, i won't be doing it through this forum. Sorry no free handouts!

This is subject to debate. Have you ever tired riding an FG? If you cannot spin high and smooth on the flats, you will bounce on the saddle or have some very wounded calves on a big enough descent.

As I see it the so called flywheel assist on an FG that teaches you bad habits is akin to the myth that rollers do not strengthen you.

And so is the myth of old style clips that much inferior to clipless systems.

First, I'm not sure if you read my post thoroughly, but yes I did mention that I have a fixed gear bike which I ride more than anything else.

Second, the flywheel theory proved true in my own experience (which is all I have to work from). Fixed gear is the platform I started cycling on, and I rode fixed for a long time without really thinking much about performance at all... it wasn't until I put quite some conscious effort towards learning good pedaling technique that I actually began to understand and apply it, regardless of the drivetrain.

Finally, sure clips and straps can work, but back in the day I didn't yank down on the straps until my feet were as secure as clipless. With clipless, though, I don't really have a choice.