Q: Cadence

WibbleWobble said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence

I guess 90 rev/min is about right.... a lot less after 300km and it's
3.00am on a 1:4 though, obviously....

hth,

Tony B

On 01/07/2006 17:30, WibbleWobble said,

Quoted message said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence for non-TdF day touring? ;-)
My (old school) thinking is that the lowest "do-able" cadence = preservation
of muscle energy, but that doesn't seem to square with new-fangled notions
of aerobics and being kind to my dodgy left knee.

I reckon to spin at about 70-80rpm - on both my tourer and MTB. Trying
to push too low a cadence will make your dodgy knee even more dodgy, and
a higher cadence is more aerobically efficient. (Is there such a word
as "aerobically"???)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

WibbleWobble said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence for non-TdF day touring? ;-)
My (old school) thinking is that the lowest "do-able" cadence = preservation
of muscle energy, but that doesn't seem to square with new-fangled notions
of aerobics and being kind to my dodgy left knee.

"Preservation of muscle energy" is pretty spurious IMHO: you've got
to do the same amount of work, and the difference if you do it
aerobically is the fuel flow works better so is more sutainable.

AIUI if you can aim at ~80+ that should keep things aerobic.

I've changed over the years from being a masher to a spinner, the
latter definitely works better for me, and the longer the ride the
bigger the difference. When mashers start running out of steam
they tend to do it Big Time and very quickly. IME it's well worth
giving higher cadences a try: you can always go back, but once your
legs are used to it I think there's a good chance you'll keep with
it, especially if a kness is giving trouble.

Clipless pedals, if you don't already use them, make pedalling at
high revs rather easier.

Quoted message said:

TIA at 30rpm

30? Your transmission will thank you for higher cadences too...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

in message <[email hidden]>, Tony B

(') said:

WibbleWobble said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence

I guess 90 rev/min is about right.... a lot less after 300km and it's
3.00am on a 1:4 though, obviously....

I find I can't sustain 90. However, 80 works for me a lot better than 70.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; MS Windows: A thirty-two bit extension ... to a sixteen bit
;; patch to an eight bit operating system originally coded for a
;; four bit microprocessor and sold by a two-bit company that
;; can't stand one bit of competition -- anonymous

WibbleWobble said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence for non-TdF day
touring? ;-) My (old school) thinking is that the lowest "do-able"
cadence = preservation of muscle energy, but that doesn't seem to
square with new-fangled notions of aerobics and being kind to my
dodgy left knee.
Are there varying schools of thought? Pointers etc appreciated.

TIA at 30rpm
Joe

On the level 90 to 100 feels good to me. On hills it drops. On hills on the
fixie it drops a lot.

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

Following on from WibbleWobble's message. . .

Quoted message said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence for non-TdF day touring? ;-)
My (old school) thinking is that the lowest "do-able" cadence = preservation
of muscle energy, but that doesn't seem to square with new-fangled notions
of aerobics and being kind to my dodgy left knee.

Are there varying schools of thought? Pointers etc appreciated.

Yup. Different schools of thought. I was hoping somebody would start
this thread 'cos I'm a bit poke-n-hope myself.

Here is cadence as I understand it (ie as I've found it pottering around
the lanes of Essex and Suffolk with panniers or back and forth to pubs
in the evening). So all join in and tell me where I'm wrong....

1
As you know CADENCE is the number of times you make the pedal wheel go
round each minute.

2
Two things have been found by 100-odd years of experience::
(a) A /steady, sustainable/ cadence gives the least physical stress on
the body over time.
(b) 80-ish seems to be 'about right', given the wonders of gears, for
normal travel. Lower cadences require more /heave/ which might strain
muscles, while at higher cadences more energy is put into flapping lower
limbs about.[1] That is the 'best' cadence is a compromise.

3
Cadence can be markedly increased by 'scientifically' using all the
muscles in the leg. In practical terms this is down to two completely
different things:
(a) Using the ankle action [which may affect tendons in the knee - it
appears to do so with mine if I over do it] to push down from [ish] 2
o'clock to 7 o'clock. This is often called spinning.[2]
(b) As a result of (a), or perhaps preventing (a), getting a good leg
stretch, allowing the use of the foot as well as the leg to push. That
is enough saddle height[3] (or more accurately downtube distance) to
facilitate the 'ankle' action.

4
Beginners, and otherwise uneducated (perhaps they were brought up with
Sturmey Archer 3-speed) tend to keep to low cadences. I've clued up
people in 5 minutes to the benefits of clicking *down* the gears[4] and
all of a sudden they are whisking along 25% faster with 25% less
effort..

5
Sprinting for short distances doesn't have to be _sustainable_. So (if
like me you don't go out in the naughty wet and cold weather) once
you've got a basic level of muscle power, you size up an aclivity and
work out the most advantageous way of getting up it... possibly by
sprinting (anaerobic metabolism) if it is a 1 minute hill or by other
means (it's nearly half past one!) or by clicking down gears and if that
isn't enough plodding along at a sustainable, lung-wrenching, muscle
aching rate until you get to the top.

6
[The arrr-um-it-sort-of-works-for-me-bit] I have been finding that my
most comfortable cadence (my rides are not often more than 2 x 12 miles
in an evening in the not very hilly bits of Essex) (NB In the summer!)
is creeping up to about 85. To me an hour's ride between pubs is about
enough - obviously I do more when the wind is favourable --- but you get
the idea. Sprinting up [small] hills at about 100ish and crawling up
long-steep hills about 65 ish.

7
If you have a cadenceometer on your bike then set it to show that as you
go. The figures above are only for a potterer, not a tourer, competitor
or Audaxer. The bottom-line is that you should find that a steady
'pace' will pay dividends over 40 miles. (And also over 4 miles without
you realising it.)

8
To conclude: The determinant is your fitness (lungs and lower limbs)
which determine the rate at which you can do work mile after mile
'without excessive stress'.

(Apologies to athletes here. Also, speaking entirely personally, I
used to think 75 was 'about right' now I'm doing 85-ish. It feels OK
(or I wouldn't be doing it) ...
....Actually _I think I used to think 75 was about right_ and have a
horrible suspicion that the feebleness of 'middle age' is creeping up on
me....
....
....So I'd be really happy to hear from experienced 'country lane on a
summer evening cyclists' that 85 (or whatever) is how they put the miles
away.

Quoted message said:

TIA at 30rpm

33 and a 3rd? (ffrr) [5]

[1] You can soon get puffed out pedalling at 100 rpm 'backwards'
[2] There's another action which is most simply described as 'pushing
horizontally across the top' (as if kicking a football).
[3] In layman's terms.
[4] But it takes lots of repetition to break bad habits
[5] If you know what "ffrr" is then you're older than I thought!
--
PETER FOX Not the same since the statuette business went bust
[email hidden]
www.eminent.demon.co.uk - Lots for cyclists

Paul Boyd said:

I reckon to spin at about 70-80rpm - on both my tourer and MTB. Trying
to push too low a cadence will make your dodgy knee even more dodgy, and
a higher cadence is more aerobically efficient. (Is there such a word
as "aerobically"???)

And I think this is what I do most of the time. Only exception is
when I'm almost coasting, and I only push the pedals a bit to keep the
speed without putting much effort in: I like to do that at a much lower
cadence. Don't think my knees will suffer much there.

Roos

WibbleWobble said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence for non-TdF day touring? ;-)
My (old school) thinking is that the lowest "do-able" cadence = preservation
of muscle energy, but that doesn't seem to square with new-fangled notions
of aerobics and being kind to my dodgy left knee.

FWIW, when I checked this I found I was only comfortable between 80
and 90. Just as well I don't ride a 3-speed any more.

Children with BMXs get used to mashing. Children with mountain bikes
tend to end up in low gear at the front, top at the back. They don't
have to go very fast to get a reasonable cadence.

Colin McKenzie

--
On average in Britain, you're more likely to get a head injury walking
a mile than cycling it.
So why aren't we all exhorted to wear walking helmets?

"Peter Fox" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message

Quoted message said:

[5] If you know what "ffrr" is then you're older than I thought!

lots of the young'uns *do...*

That brand was revived in the late 80s/early 90s by Pete Tong to release
various dance music tunes, Orbital being one of their best known artists
from that time.

Coming back (slightly) on topic that may explain why (on the rare occasions
I listen to music whilst riding [1]) I tend to prefer drum and bass and
hardcore breaks, which have a BPM range of 150-170..

Alex
[1] I would do it more but realise you have to concentrate on the roads!
--
Mr R@T / General Lighting
Ipswich, Suffolk, Untied Kingdom
http://www.partyvibe.com

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

Quoted message said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence for non-TdF day touring?
;-)
My (old school) thinking is that the lowest "do-able" cadence =
preservation of muscle energy, but that doesn't seem to square with
new-fangled notions of aerobics and being kind to my dodgy left knee.

Are there varying schools of thought? Pointers etc appreciated.

TIA at 30rpm
Joe

Okay, tried the higher cadence on a 15 mile trip round Oxford @ 60~65rpm but
find it difficult to sustain above 65, my legs tire out! This is a bit of a
surprise to me :-(
On the positive front, my left knee feels quite good.
Joe @ 60rpm

In article <[email hidden]>

WibbleWobble said:

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

Quoted message said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence for non-TdF day touring?
;-)
My (old school) thinking is that the lowest "do-able" cadence =
preservation of muscle energy, but that doesn't seem to square with
new-fangled notions of aerobics and being kind to my dodgy left knee.

Are there varying schools of thought? Pointers etc appreciated.

TIA at 30rpm
Joe

Okay, tried the higher cadence on a 15 mile trip round Oxford @ 60~65rpm but
find it difficult to sustain above 65, my legs tire out! This is a bit of a
surprise to me :-(

There are different types of muscle fibre that specialise in different
sorts of activity - you've been using predominantly one sort and are now
using the other.

WibbleWobble said:

Okay, tried the higher cadence on a 15 mile trip round Oxford @ 60~65rpm but
find it difficult to sustain above 65, my legs tire out! This is a bit of a
surprise to me :-(
On the positive front, my left knee feels quite good.

Ah, but did you change to a lower gear so as to not increase your speed
or did you cycle faster in the same gear. If the latter I'm not
surprised your legs tired.

Tony

On 02/07/2006 16:33, WibbleWobble said,

Quoted message said:

Okay, tried the higher cadence on a 15 mile trip round Oxford @ 60~65rpm but
find it difficult to sustain above 65, my legs tire out! This is a bit of a
surprise to me :-(

Whilst out today, I tried 30rpm. How on earth could you do that for
long????

60rpm is a good step in the right direction. I'm no expert, but perhaps
it might be an idea to get used to that cadence for a bit, then
gradually build up to around 70-80 or whatever feels comfortable.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

WibbleWobble said:

Okay, tried the higher cadence on a 15 mile trip round Oxford @ 60~65rpm but
find it difficult to sustain above 65, my legs tire out! This is a bit of a
surprise to me :-(

You're doing something you're not used to yet: you won't just
change overnight with a flick of a switch, it will take a bit of
time and persistence. Took me a bit of work, but I'm very glad I
did it.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

WibbleWobble said:

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

Quoted message said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence for non-TdF day
touring? ;-)
My (old school) thinking is that the lowest "do-able" cadence =
preservation of muscle energy, but that doesn't seem to square with
new-fangled notions of aerobics and being kind to my dodgy left knee.

Are there varying schools of thought? Pointers etc appreciated.

Okay, tried the higher cadence on a 15 mile trip round Oxford @
60~65rpm but find it difficult to sustain above 65, my legs tire out!

Most likely that's a good thing. Probably you ended up going a fair bit
faster, so that's why the tiredness came in. Also, you could have been at
the limit of your leg *strength* (i.e. torque) at 30-35 rpm, so you weren't
expending as much *energy* (i.e. power) as you could have been.

Once you get used to doing high cadences, if you want to take it easy, you
can just let your legs carry on spinning round and you hardly have to think
about it. Honest!

Quoted message said:

This is a bit of a surprise to me :-(
On the positive front, my left knee feels quite good.

Good. Cycling should now be good for your knee, rather than troubling it.
Hopefully.

--
Ambrose

On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 16:33:34 +0100,

WibbleWobble said:

Okay, tried the higher cadence on a 15 mile trip round Oxford @ 60~65rpm but
find it difficult to sustain above 65, my legs tire out! This is a bit of a
surprise to me :-(
On the positive front, my left knee feels quite good.
Joe @ 60rpm

You will, at least initially.

Infact, a cadence of around 60 is the most efficient as far as food
consumed to power to the bicycle (which is why most people will
naturally assume a cadence of about 60)

But, a higher cadence than that actually allows you to sustain a higher
power output for longer (you just have to eat more)

So initially at least, it will feel worse. You are using different
muscle fibers and will need to breathe harder and will get hotter than
at the same speed at a lower cadence.

Once you have got used to it you will find you can keep going for
longer.

Tim.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t,"
and there was light.

http://tjw.hn.org/ http://www.locofungus.btinternet.co.uk/

In article <[email hidden]>
Ambrose Nankivell <[email hidden]> wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

Once you get used to doing high cadences, if you want to take it easy, you
can just let your legs carry on spinning round and you hardly have to think
about it. Honest!

It's true though, isn't it? When I go for a ride with my SO she often
stops pedalling to coast, that's just not natural to me - I keep
spinning but ease off the pressure, unless I'm floating over rough
stuff, hanging off on descents or bracing to brake.

in message <[email hidden]>, WibbleWobble

(') said:

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

Quoted message said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence for non-TdF day
touring? ;-)
My (old school) thinking is that the lowest "do-able" cadence =
preservation of muscle energy, but that doesn't seem to square with
new-fangled notions of aerobics and being kind to my dodgy left knee.

Are there varying schools of thought? Pointers etc appreciated.

Okay, tried the higher cadence on a 15 mile trip round Oxford @
60~65rpm but
find it difficult to sustain above 65, my legs tire out!

This is an adaption thing. Practice pedalling at the top of your
comfortable cadence range, and your comfortable cadence range will
gradually creep upwards.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
.::;===r==\
/ /___||___\____
//==\- ||- | /__\( MS Windows IS an operating environment.
//____\__||___|_// \|: C++ IS an object oriented programming language.
\__/ ~~~~~~~~~ \__/ Citroen 2cv6 IS a four door family saloon.

In article <[email hidden]>, Simon

Brooke said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Can I ask, what is accepted as "ideal" cadence

I guess 90 rev/min is about right.... a lot less after 300km and
it's 3.00am on a 1:4 though, obviously....

Quoted message said:

I find I can't sustain 90. However, 80 works for me a lot better
than 70.

How do you work out the ideal cadence for an individual?

I am 65 years young, 16 stone in old money but I do walk a lot.

I have also just bought myself a new bike and managed 16kms in just
over an hour - it is about 30 years since I tried the same journey.

--
A T (Sandy) Morton
on the Bicycle Island
In the Global Village
http://www.millport.net