Cadence Question

Quoted message said:

"John Green" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
I know it means RPM that you are pedalling, but if you are in a low gear
your Cadence will be high, and if you are in a high gear, it will be lower.

Exactly.

Quoted message said:

So what should I aim for to be beneficial?

Around 90rpm is a good start. Lower cadence generally means more
strain on the knees because you're pushing too big of a gear (or you're climbing, which is the same thing - painful :-) ). Higher cadence is good
if you can do it without bobbing your butt up and down all over the
place.

Speaking of cadence, I just fitted my first cadence measuring device
in the form of a Polar sensor.. I'll review the data tonight and have a
detailed report asap - because I know you all want to see the cadence
graph from my commute.. right? :P

hippy

hippy said:

Speaking of cadence, I just fitted my first cadence measuring device
in the form of a Polar sensor.. I'll review the data tonight and have a
detailed report asap - because I know you all want to see the cadence
graph from my commute.. right? :P

hippy

data-wars!

yeah, i wanna see these mythical rpms you hit going down hill :P

Quoted message said:

flyingdutch
data-wars!

🙂

Quoted message said:

yeah, i wanna see these mythical rpms you hit going down hill :P

Okay.. Well I set the display so that I couldn't see cadence as I wanted a
baseline for a 'normal' commute. I also raised my saddle by .75cm last night
as I'm making some adjustments to my road bike setup. ALSO.. I'm starting
a new training scheme so I was keeping my HR below 170, which meant I
wasn't sprinting down any hills.. So, I'll have a better go at max rpm's soon,
but for now, my commute average was 95rpm and the max was 186rpm...
All I need to do is get it to 204 and that will verify my cadence 'counting' method.. although that was on the GT SS..

hippy

Quoted message said:

Around 90rpm is a good start. Lower cadence generally means more
strain on the knees because you're pushing too big of a gear (or you're
climbing, which is the same thing - painful :-) ). Higher cadence is
good if you can do it without bobbing your butt up and down all over the
place.

I was once told that if your legs hurt then you are pushng too high a gear.
If your lungs hurt you are spinning in too low a gear, and if both your
lungs and legs hurt, you are in the right gear :-)

Dave

hippy said:

the max was 186rpm...
hippy

jeeeezzzzussss! 186

im suspecting my saddle height on the commuter isnt right cos I get the bobbing [censored] like yuou mentioned when spinning real fast

Russ at Spoken gave me a tip re technique to avoid the 'figure 8' my right knee was doing crazily (thanks to Tony for pointing that one out "hey; look at flashing light on the video..." )
which was to ' from the hips' (not shoot).
Basically i found that if i rock my pelvis/hips back a tad and spin it really smooths things out nicely. makes me look like a 'proper' cyclist in all them shop window reflections too 😄

[quote="Quoted message"]

Dave@fnq said:

Around 90rpm is a good start. Lower cadence generally means more
strain on the knees because you're pushing too big of a gear (or you're
climbing, which is the same thing - painful :-) ). Higher cadence is
good if you can do it without bobbing your butt up and down all over the
place.

I was once told that if your legs hurt then you are pushng too high a gear.
If your lungs hurt you are spinning in too low a gear, and if both your
lungs and legs hurt, you are in the right gear :-)

[quote="Quoted message"]

flyingdutch said:

jeeeezzzzussss! 186

Quoted message said:

im suspecting my saddle height on the commuter isnt right cos I get the >bobbing [censored] like yuou mentioned when spinning real fast

[quote="hippy"]>

flyingdutch said:

Quoted message said:

jeeeezzzzussss! 186

I wont be happy until I hit at least 204 again...

Quoted message said:

im suspecting my saddle height on the commuter isnt right cos I get the >bobbing [censored] like yuou mentioned when spinning real fast

It's also a matter of technique. You might have the right saddle height
but just aren't used to spinning so fast. I'm not making any claims to
being smooth myself but that's a definate possibility..

hippy

Quoted message said:

flyingdutch
so what constitutes 'good technique' ?

I wish I knew! 🙂
Like I said, I'm not claiming to 'have' a good technique, but I've pedaled
fast for long enough to be able to get high(ish?) leg speed I guess without
hammering my backside on the seat..
I guess it's just a matter of 'muscle memory', where your legs have done
the same thing for ages and every now and then you add a little speed
until eventually you can spin fast on command?

Quoted message said:

Russ's tip opened my eyes a bit to what certainly feels a darned side >smoother but I have heard so many conflicting theories on foot >angle, 'ankling', flatspots, push up down, etc

Well, no wonder you can't pedal smooth.. you've got all those theories
rattling around in your head!! 😄

I remember reading about ankling years ago and probably trying it. I think
it's been canned. I've never thought about foot angles other than when
reading about pedaling theory in books.
I'll tell you the theory that I've probably used the most. The most powerful
part of the stroke is the down pedal (1-5 o'clock) so don't skimp here. For
the flat spot at the bottom of the pedal's rotation you are supposed to
keep your foot flat and drag it back, just like you are wiping a dog turd
from the bottom of your shoe. The top flat spot is the same but you'd
be pushing your foot forward.
Perhaps on each ride, concentrate on this for a minute or two and then
forget it. It all goes out the window at speed anyway..
I'm not even sure that I actually use this is normal riding, it's just that
sometimes I think about it and do it consciously.. it may or may not help?

Quoted message said:

what's right? i guess trackies know more re this stuff?

I'm not really a trackie.. yet.. 🙂
There's certainly no pedaling theory at my level.

hippy

"hippy" wrote <snip>

Quoted message said:

Speaking of cadence, I just fitted my first cadence measuring device
in the form of a Polar sensor.. <snip>

Good luck - I've got a Polar XTrainer plus and the cadence unit is next to
useless. It rarely picks up the signal and has been back to Polar twice
now. I know a few people who have said the same. I've given up. Might try
a Cyclosports HAC4 like Lance. Free altitude data as well (if you call
anything bundled into $500 package free).

John Green said:

So what should I aim for to be beneficial?

As high as you can comfortably manage.
The higher the cadence, the more flywheel effect you get and the less
work (small hills only {:-).

Knees wise, low cadence can cripple you. It gets a lot of tourers.
Usually 60 is minimum.

my cycling literature says anything under 80 rpm cadence is "rubbish
training", assuming you are riding for sport/fitness as opposed to commuting
or getting from A to B. I also read that 85 rpm is about the minimum
acceptable sport/fitness riding cadence (including seated climbing) and at
over >100-105 rpm the efficiency starts to decline i.e. for most people it
is too much to sit on above 105 rpm for long periods..... Almost everyone
has their "comfort zone" in 85-105 rpm range where 90-95 seems to be the
golden middle. This is for sustained road riding not for short sprinting or
standing - all bets seem to be off in those cases.

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

Quoted message said:

John Green said:

So what should I aim for to be beneficial?

As high as you can comfortably manage.
The higher the cadence, the more flywheel effect you get and the less
work (small hills only {:-).

Knees wise, low cadence can cripple you. It gets a lot of tourers.
Usually 60 is minimum.

Yuri Budilov said:

my cycling literature says anything under 80 rpm cadence is "rubbish
training",

So you are saying that you know the OP isn't a member of Joe Public, but
one of those "racing types".

John Green said:

Can someone explain Cadence to me.

I know it means RPM that you are pedalling, but if you are in a low gear
your Cadence will be high, and if you are in a high gear, it will be lower.

So what should I aim for to be beneficial?

You should aim for high Cadence in lower gears, its alot better for
your knees.

--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.

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

Quoted message said:

Yuri Budilov said:

my cycling literature says anything under 80 rpm cadence is "rubbish
training",

So you are saying that you know the OP isn't a member of Joe Public, but
one of those "racing types".

No.. he was quoting his cycling literature, which is
obviously geared towards competitive cyclists..

Strength "training" is done quite a bit lower than
80rpm but, as Yuri pointed out, staying above 80rpm
is the suggestion for sustained road riding..

hippy

hippy said:

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

Quoted message said:

Yuri Budilov said:

my cycling literature says anything under 80 rpm cadence is "rubbish
training",

So you are saying that you know the OP isn't a member of Joe Public, but
one of those "racing types".

No.. he was quoting his cycling literature, which is
obviously geared towards competitive cyclists..

Strength "training" is done quite a bit lower than
80rpm but, as Yuri pointed out, staying above 80rpm
is the suggestion for sustained road riding..

Okay, the point I am making is that I have nothing to guide me that 80
rpm should be the suggestion to make.

If the OP had said "I want to race", then it would be well to advise him
that getting his cadence up to 80 rpm is best if he is serious.

On the other hand, if the OP is a member of Joe Public who has just
heard about "cadence" and wondered what it meant, then I my advice is
cadence 101 to get them to start spinning a little bit, rather than
pushing. Most Joe Public can manage a cadence of 60 with a little bit of
thought. I have met a few people who would find a cadence of 80 very
hard.