Cadence

I use cadence as the main cyclometer setting and normally maintain 85-90 on a mostly flat road. On
my recumbent exercise bike with resistance that's set to feel about like my outside bike cruising in
the 18-20 mph range, I ride at 90-95 for 45 minutes. I'm 75 but in good condition. My max heart rate
(by the charts) is 150-155 and I stay in the 125-130 bpm range for a 45 minute exercise ride.
--
Bob Siegel in Gainesville FL "Dave Harney" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
kc.rr.com...

Quoted message said:

Sorry if this topic has been exhausted before, but...

I ride a Volae Club and I'm trying to establish a realistic goal for my cadence. I'm thinking that
low 80's is a reasonable rpm goal for a

60-some

Quoted message said:

year old road touring biker. I've probably had a cadence more in the

range

Quoted message said:

of 65 rpm. Various bike books list rpms from 55 to over a 100. I'd

greatly

Quoted message said:

appreciate the opinions of this group. Thanks

Dave, you seem to think that increasing your rpm/cadence is a major objective in itself. Determining
a reasonable rpm range is more a case of efficiency and less stress on the knees, etc. If I remember
correctly, the curve of power output versus rpm increases with increasing rpm, with a peak at about
80 to 100 rpm and then tends to slowly drop off. So a lot of cyclists, and certainly this one, tend
to ride at about 90 rpm. I use a computer with a cadence readout to monitor my cadence, especially
useful early in the season. If I let my cadence drop below say 80, my legs get tired quickly or my
knees start to hurt because I'm putting too much force on them. If during the ride I increase my
cadence to 90 or so, these problems disappear. As you know, we recumbent riders have the added
challenge to keeping a reasonable rpm since they can "leg press" the power at lower cadence but that
will lead to major joint problems. You will see people talking about spinning at high rpm; well, for
some, including me, high does not begin until over 105 -110 rpm. A number of racers spin higher
(over 120) but I tend to question the efficiency of that high a cadence.

So, to answer your question, yes, increase your rpm and save your body but start spinning at a
higher rpm range from the start, not incrementally. If anything, it will make the start of the
season easier. I would suggest you focus on averaging 90 - 100 rpm and definitely stay away from the
low 80's. BTW, I'm 60 also. Ron

"Dave Harney" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
kc.rr.com...

Quoted message said:

Sorry if this topic has been exhausted before, but...

I ride a Volae Club and I'm trying to establish a realistic goal for my cadence. I'm thinking that
low 80's is a reasonable rpm goal for a

60-some

Quoted message said:

year old road touring biker. I've probably had a cadence more in the

range

Quoted message said:

of 65 rpm. Various bike books list rpms from 55 to over a 100. I'd

greatly

Quoted message said:

appreciate the opinions of this group. Thanks

Hi Ron,
I agree completely with the points you make below. The cadence ranges
and effects you indicate are almost identical for me also.
Al Kubeluis
"ron" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dave, you seem to think that increasing your rpm/cadence is a major objective in itself.
Determining a reasonable rpm range is more a case of efficiency and less stress on the knees, etc.
If I remember correctly,

the

Quoted message said:

curve of power output versus rpm increases with increasing rpm, with a

peak

Quoted message said:

at about 80 to 100 rpm and then tends to slowly drop off. So a lot of cyclists, and certainly this
one, tend to ride at about 90 rpm. I use a computer with a cadence readout to monitor my cadence,
especially useful early in the season. If I let my cadence drop below say 80, my legs get tired
quickly or my knees start to hurt because I'm putting too much force on them. If during the ride I
increase my cadence to 90 or so, these problems disappear. As you know, we recumbent riders have
the added challenge to keeping a reasonable rpm since they can "leg press" the power at lower
cadence but that will lead to major joint problems. You will see people talking about spinning at
high rpm; well, for some, including me, high does not begin until over 105 -110 rpm. A number of
racers spin

higher

Quoted message said:

(over 120) but I tend to question the efficiency of that high a cadence.

So, to answer your question, yes, increase your rpm and save your body but start spinning at a
higher rpm range from the start, not incrementally.

If

Quoted message said:

anything, it will make the start of the season easier. I would suggest

you

Quoted message said:

focus on averaging 90 - 100 rpm and definitely stay away from the low

80's.

Quoted message said:

BTW, I'm 60 also. Ron

"Dave Harney" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
kc.rr.com...

Quoted message said:

Sorry if this topic has been exhausted before, but...

I ride a Volae Club and I'm trying to establish a realistic goal for my cadence. I'm thinking
that low 80's is a reasonable rpm goal for a

60-some

Quoted message said:

year old road touring biker. I've probably had a cadence more in the

range

Quoted message said:

of 65 rpm. Various bike books list rpms from 55 to over a 100. I'd

greatly

Quoted message said:

appreciate the opinions of this group. Thanks

Hi Ron,

Thanks for your thoughts. Actually, my motivation for looking carefully at cadence is exactly
because of the reasons you give - I just kept my original post brief so more people would actually
read it ;-)

Although switching to a bent helped my knee problems greatly, I'm still wary of that issue coming
back. However, my more pressing issue is foot numbness (much discussed on this newsgroup). There is
no doubt that I need a "lighter" foot on the pedals to help with this problem. As soon as one
mentions foot numbness, the recommendation for spinning pops up. I've been convinced that, in
theory, a higher rpm would help me with foot and knee problems; however, moving from theory to
practice is another matter. As I could not figure out how it is possible to increase rpms in even
moderately hilly terrain with more or less "standard" gearing, I changed my front chain rings: from
30/42/52 to 24/38/48 (11/32 cog & 650c tires). Next I wondered what cadence levels have proven to be
effective by others. It seemed common sense that one could waste energy on too high an rpm. So, I
researched several books on fitness and pedaling techniques for cycling and came up with a wide
range of recommendations - wide enough that the recommendations were pretty useless.

Once again, this newsgroup has proven its value. You and others (including one direct email) have
recommended a pretty consistent level of about 90 to 100 on level ground. Although I find this to be
about 10 rpm higher than I can manage right now, it helps me understand the issue better and set a
goal. So, thanks for taking the time to share your advice.

"ron" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dave, you seem to think that increasing your rpm/cadence is a major objective in itself.
Determining a reasonable rpm range is more a case of efficiency and less stress on the knees, etc.
If I remember correctly,

the

Quoted message said:

curve of power output versus rpm increases with increasing rpm, with a

peak

Quoted message said:

at about 80 to 100 rpm and then tends to slowly drop off. So a lot of cyclists, and certainly this
one, tend to ride at about 90 rpm. I use a computer with a cadence readout to monitor my cadence,
especially useful early in the season. If I let my cadence drop below say 80, my legs get tired
quickly or my knees start to hurt because I'm putting too much force on them. If during the ride I
increase my cadence to 90 or so, these problems disappear. As you know, we recumbent riders have
the added challenge to keeping a reasonable rpm since they can "leg press" the power at lower
cadence but that will lead to major joint problems. You will see people talking about spinning at
high rpm; well, for some, including me, high does not begin until over 105 -110 rpm. A number of
racers spin

higher

Quoted message said:

(over 120) but I tend to question the efficiency of that high a cadence.

So, to answer your question, yes, increase your rpm and save your body but start spinning at a
higher rpm range from the start, not incrementally.

If

Quoted message said:

anything, it will make the start of the season easier. I would suggest

you

Quoted message said:

focus on averaging 90 - 100 rpm and definitely stay away from the low

80's.

Quoted message said:

BTW, I'm 60 also. Ron

"Dave Harney" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
kc.rr.com...

Quoted message said:

Sorry if this topic has been exhausted before, but...

I ride a Volae Club and I'm trying to establish a realistic goal for my cadence. I'm thinking
that low 80's is a reasonable rpm goal for a

60-some

Quoted message said:

year old road touring biker. I've probably had a cadence more in the

range

Quoted message said:

of 65 rpm. Various bike books list rpms from 55 to over a 100. I'd

greatly

Quoted message said:

appreciate the opinions of this group. Thanks

Nothing wrong with 85ish ... so stay loose. Just try hard to stay above 80 for all normal-speed
rides on flatland. The 90s will come in time. Lower cadences are OK, obviously, under appropriate
circumstances, such as hills or deliberately slow pedaling.

--
Bob Siegel in Gainesville FL "Dave Harney" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
kc.rr.com...

Quoted message said:

Hi Ron,

Thanks for your thoughts. Actually, my motivation for looking carefully

at

Quoted message said:

cadence is exactly because of the reasons you give - I just kept my

original

Quoted message said:

post brief so more people would actually read it ;-)

Although switching to a bent helped my knee problems greatly, I'm still

wary

Quoted message said:

of that issue coming back. However, my more pressing issue is foot

numbness

Quoted message said:

(much discussed on this newsgroup). There is no doubt that I need a "lighter" foot on the pedals
to help with this problem. As soon as one mentions foot numbness, the recommendation for spinning
pops up. I've

been

Quoted message said:

convinced that, in theory, a higher rpm would help me with foot and knee problems; however, moving
from theory to practice is another matter. As I could not figure out how it is possible to
increase rpms in even

moderately

Quoted message said:

hilly terrain with more or less "standard" gearing, I changed my front chain rings: from 30/42/52
to 24/38/48 (11/32 cog & 650c tires). Next I wondered what cadence levels have proven to be
effective by others. It seemed common sense that one could waste energy on too high an rpm. So, I
researched several books on fitness and pedaling techniques for cycling

and

Quoted message said:

came up with a wide range of recommendations - wide enough that the recommendations were pretty
useless.

Once again, this newsgroup has proven its value. You and others

(including

Quoted message said:

one direct email) have recommended a pretty consistent level of about 90

to

Quoted message said:

100 on level ground. Although I find this to be about 10 rpm higher than

I

Quoted message said:

can manage right now, it helps me understand the issue better and set a goal. So, thanks for
taking the time to share your advice.

"ron" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dave, you seem to think that increasing your rpm/cadence is a major objective in itself.
Determining a reasonable rpm range is more a case

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

efficiency and less stress on the knees, etc. If I remember correctly,

the

Quoted message said:

curve of power output versus rpm increases with increasing rpm, with a

peak

Quoted message said:

at about 80 to 100 rpm and then tends to slowly drop off. So a lot of cyclists, and certainly
this one, tend to ride at about 90 rpm. I use a computer with a cadence readout to monitor my
cadence, especially useful early in the season. If I let my cadence drop below say 80, my legs
get tired quickly or my knees start to hurt because I'm putting too much

force

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

on them. If during the ride I increase my cadence to 90 or so, these problems disappear. As you
know, we recumbent riders have the added challenge to keeping a reasonable rpm since they can
"leg press" the

power

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at lower cadence but that will lead to major joint problems. You will

see

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

people talking about spinning at high rpm; well, for some, including me, high does not begin
until over 105 -110 rpm. A number of racers spin

higher

Quoted message said:

(over 120) but I tend to question the efficiency of that high a cadence.

So, to answer your question, yes, increase your rpm and save your body

but

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

start spinning at a higher rpm range from the start, not incrementally.

If

Quoted message said:

anything, it will make the start of the season easier. I would suggest

you

Quoted message said:

focus on averaging 90 - 100 rpm and definitely stay away from the low

80's.

Quoted message said:

BTW, I'm 60 also. Ron

"Dave Harney" <[email hidden]> wrote in message -"]news:[email hidden]-
kc.rr.com...

Quoted message said:

Sorry if this topic has been exhausted before, but...

I ride a Volae Club and I'm trying to establish a realistic goal for

my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

cadence. I'm thinking that low 80's is a reasonable rpm goal for a

60-some

Quoted message said:

year old road touring biker. I've probably had a cadence more in the

range

Quoted message said:

of 65 rpm. Various bike books list rpms from 55 to over a 100. I'd

greatly

Quoted message said:

appreciate the opinions of this group. Thanks