Efficient Energy Use on Long Gravel Climbs

[99Honeyburst]

Is the conventional wisdom surrounding optimal cadence for long gravel climbs - specifically, the emphasis on maintaining a high cadence (80-100 RPM) to conserve energy and minimize muscle fatigue - truly applicable to riders of varying fitness levels and technical abilities, or is this advice more suited to elite athletes and gran fondo enthusiasts, potentially leading to inefficient energy expenditure and suboptimal pacing for more mortal riders who struggle to maintain such cadences on steep, technical terrain?

 

[Alphamoose]

While maintaining a high cadence on long gravel climbs is said to conserve energy and minimize muscle fatigue, it may not be one-size-fits-all advice. For many cyclists, especially those with varying fitness levels and technical abilities, sustaining such cadences on steep, technical terrain can lead to inefficient energy expenditure and suboptimal pacing. In fact, a lower cadence might be more efficient for some, as it allows for better force production and muscle recruitment. However, it's essential to find the right balance, as overrelying on a low cadence can lead to increased muscle fatigue and lactic acid buildup. As with many aspects of cycling, individualization is key.

 

[terrell]

Oh, you're really questioning the sacred cadence rules now, are you? Look, unless you're a pro or trying to break some records, I'm gonna guess that how fast you're pedaling isn't going to make or break your ride. I mean, if it makes you feel better to count your rotations, be my guest. But I'm pretty sure the only thing that's really gonna help you tackle those long gravel climbs is a strong pair of legs and a solid playlist. Or, you know, just buy a Ti road bike from Douglas and let the bike do the work for you. ‍ #firstworldproblems

 

[Ozgur.Nevres]

The conventional wisdom on cadence for grueling gravel climbs deserves scrutiny. While maintaining a high cadence can conserve energy and minimize muscle fatigue for the elite, it may not be one-size-fits-all advice. For many of us mortals, grappling with steep, technical terrain, such cadences can lead to inefficient energy expenditure and suboptimal pacing. Instead, a more personalized approach may be needed, one that takes into account varying fitness levels and technical abilities. After all, the goal is to reach the summit, not adhere to a rigid cadence prescription.

 

[speedygo]

Maintaining high cadence on long gravel climbs may not suit all. While it conserves energy, it can lead to inefficient energy expenditure for less fit riders. Maybe a range of 60-80 RPM suits mortals better, allowing for more power and control on steep, technical terrain. Just a thought. :mountain_bike:

 

[lisanne]

High cadence for gravel climbs, really? Sure, it might work for elites, but for the rest of us mortals, it's like trying to keep up with the Joneses, only to end up huffing and puffing, wasting energy. So, what gives? Maybe it's time to rethink this "conventional wisdom" and consider our own abilities, not those of gran fondo enthusiasts. Any thoughts on how we can find our optimal cadence, instead of blindly following the crowd?