Gears and Cadence
#101
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,080
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3405 Post(s)
Liked 3,535 Times
in
1,778 Posts
I'd say maybe, and here's why —
If: the goal of cadence selection is to avoid muscle fatigue, and muscle fatigue is reduced when pedal force can be exerted exclusively by the type 1 (slow-twitch) muscle fibers, without having to recruit the more quickly fatigued type 2 (fast-twitch) fibers;
Then: cyclists with lots of type 1 fibers can put more force into pedaling without calling upon their type 2 fibers, meaning they can mash a lower cadence without getting tired;
But: at some point, the road turns up or the pace quickens, and even cyclists with lots of type 1 muscle can avoid fatigue longer by lifting their cadence.
__________________
Ride, Rest, Repeat. ROUVY: terrymorse
Ride, Rest, Repeat. ROUVY: terrymorse
Last edited by terrymorse; 08-10-19 at 04:46 PM. Reason: rewrote in "if/then/but" format
Likes For terrymorse:
#102
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
Since you said "I" am flying past people, it sounds like you are doing your mid 20's while riding solo. That's really impressive! Especially since while waiting for your reply to my question about what gear(s) / cadence you use on your mid 20 runs I found this:
Apparently lugging a high gear really does work well for you!
Apparently lugging a high gear really does work well for you!
#103
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
Straw man argument aside, I see an implication that cadence is determined by a person's distribution of muscle fiber types. But is that actually the case?
I'd say maybe, and here's why —
If the goal of cadence selection is to avoid muscle fatigue, and muscle fatigue is avoided when pedal force can be exerted exclusively by the type 1 (slow-twitch) muscle fibers, without having to recruit the more quickly fatigued type 2 (fast-twitch) fibers.
So cyclists with lots of type 1 fibers can put more force into pedaling without calling upon their type 2 fibers, meaning they can mash a lower cadence without getting tired.
But at some point, the road turns up or the pace quickens, and even cyclists with lots of type 1 muscle can avoid fatigue longer by lifting their cadence.
I'd say maybe, and here's why —
If the goal of cadence selection is to avoid muscle fatigue, and muscle fatigue is avoided when pedal force can be exerted exclusively by the type 1 (slow-twitch) muscle fibers, without having to recruit the more quickly fatigued type 2 (fast-twitch) fibers.
So cyclists with lots of type 1 fibers can put more force into pedaling without calling upon their type 2 fibers, meaning they can mash a lower cadence without getting tired.
But at some point, the road turns up or the pace quickens, and even cyclists with lots of type 1 muscle can avoid fatigue longer by lifting their cadence.
It's pretty clear that many if not most people have a different cadence for hills and flats. I generally stay in the high gear in the flat, and when I want to speed up, I just pedal the big gear faster. No question I'm recruiting the fast twitch at that point, but the type 1 muscle doesn't become fatigued as a result. I do gear down a bit for hills, but I don't think I do so as much as most people.
I admit I geared down slightly in the flat between miles 115 and 124 today, but that's because I was dealing with a lot of stop lights, and the repeated acceleration slow down cycle was wearing on me. I recovered and flew through the last 16 miles in the high gear as there were very few stops.
#104
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,080
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3405 Post(s)
Liked 3,535 Times
in
1,778 Posts
#105
Senior Member
#106
Senior Member
Eddy Merckx used a 52-14 gear in his hour record attempt, resulting in an average cadence of around 104rpm. He wasn't a masher.
He often had a very low cadence on mountainous climbs, but this was purely a consequence of racing drivetrains of the day being very narrow-range. If he'd had lower gears, he would have used them.
(Similarly, since his racing bike frequently had a top-end gear of only ~52-13, he sometimes spun very high cadences if someone was drilling the pace on a shallow downhill.
I run into the same thing when I use vintage bikes on modern group rides. Some of my friends get the idea that I'm an extreme spinner because I'll sometimes be doing 140rpm in the 52-14, but it's mostly just me being out of gears.)
#107
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
#108
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
Not that I'd agree with 63rickert's overall argument, but...
Eddy Merckx used a 52-14 gear in his hour record attempt, resulting in an average cadence of around 104rpm. He wasn't a masher.
He often had a very low cadence on mountainous climbs, but this was purely a consequence of racing drivetrains of the day being very narrow-range. If he'd had lower gears, he would have used them.
(Similarly, since his racing bike frequently had a top-end gear of only ~52-13, he sometimes spun very high cadences if someone was drilling the pace on a shallow downhill.
I run into the same thing when I use vintage bikes on modern group rides. Some of my friends get the idea that I'm an extreme spinner because I'll sometimes be doing 140rpm in the 52-14, but it's mostly just me being out of gears.)
Eddy Merckx used a 52-14 gear in his hour record attempt, resulting in an average cadence of around 104rpm. He wasn't a masher.
He often had a very low cadence on mountainous climbs, but this was purely a consequence of racing drivetrains of the day being very narrow-range. If he'd had lower gears, he would have used them.
(Similarly, since his racing bike frequently had a top-end gear of only ~52-13, he sometimes spun very high cadences if someone was drilling the pace on a shallow downhill.
I run into the same thing when I use vintage bikes on modern group rides. Some of my friends get the idea that I'm an extreme spinner because I'll sometimes be doing 140rpm in the 52-14, but it's mostly just me being out of gears.)
I didn't say he was a masher. I said he used a big gear.
#109
Senior Member
But he didn't. He used fairly ordinary race gearing for the time, which had a much lower top-end than today's road race gearing.
And if we're talking about self-selected cadence, "used a big gear" doesn't mean anything outside of a speed-relative sense. I'm hardly "using a big gear" when I'm descending in a 52-14
And if we're talking about self-selected cadence, "used a big gear" doesn't mean anything outside of a speed-relative sense. I'm hardly "using a big gear" when I'm descending in a 52-14
#110
Senior Member
#111
Senior Member
Sorry, but this is just dumb. I am, by genetics, a big-muscled bulky person. I have a large frame for my height and if I get too skinny, I neither look nor feel good. So are you saying I should somehow shed the large leg muscles that provide huge torque and make spinning a low gear inefficient for me? No thanks.
I just rode 140 solo miles today. Sorry if you think I'm doing it wrong because someone with rickets something something, but when I'm running in the flat doing 25 mph solo for several of those miles, frankly I don't care that it would mess up a group.
As for gear size in the early '70s, are you seriously going to pretend Eddy Merckx didn't, y'know, kind of dominate the sport?
I just rode 140 solo miles today. Sorry if you think I'm doing it wrong because someone with rickets something something, but when I'm running in the flat doing 25 mph solo for several of those miles, frankly I don't care that it would mess up a group.
As for gear size in the early '70s, are you seriously going to pretend Eddy Merckx didn't, y'know, kind of dominate the sport?
Eddy dominated. Eddy mashed. Eddy spun. Eddy had style at all times. With all his power he used a top of 53x13. When you saw him with a 57 that was together with 571 wheels.
The person who does 140 solo was never likely to spin. That has not changed. One big exception would be Lon Haldeman. I remember chatting with Lon while cruising 27mph in a small group in 52x16. Lon was in 42x16 fixed. When he was done chatting he just rocketed away from us, certainly above 30mph. But then Lon was totally exceptional. Any other solo long distance big man I can remember rode much as you say you do.
#112
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
You did 140 miles today, solo. I am impressed. Really. You did it at age 58. Very impressed. This is an internet discussion and that's all it is. Nothing I said or would say takes one thing away from you.
Eddy dominated. Eddy mashed. Eddy spun. Eddy had style at all times. With all his power he used a top of 53x13. When you saw him with a 57 that was together with 571 wheels.
The person who does 140 solo was never likely to spin. That has not changed. One big exception would be Lon Haldeman. I remember chatting with Lon while cruising 27mph in a small group in 52x16. Lon was in 42x16 fixed. When he was done chatting he just rocketed away from us, certainly above 30mph. But then Lon was totally exceptional. Any other solo long distance big man I can remember rode much as you say you do.
Eddy dominated. Eddy mashed. Eddy spun. Eddy had style at all times. With all his power he used a top of 53x13. When you saw him with a 57 that was together with 571 wheels.
The person who does 140 solo was never likely to spin. That has not changed. One big exception would be Lon Haldeman. I remember chatting with Lon while cruising 27mph in a small group in 52x16. Lon was in 42x16 fixed. When he was done chatting he just rocketed away from us, certainly above 30mph. But then Lon was totally exceptional. Any other solo long distance big man I can remember rode much as you say you do.
Also, just to be clear, the OP never mentioned racing and this is not the racing forum. In the context of the OP, 53 x 13 is a big gear. The OP did mention his size and that he wants to build endurance. Telling him to pick a style of riding because it doesn't promote getting big muscles doesn't strike me as good advice. My advice to OP remains the same: different cadences work for different people as do gear preferences, so ignore all the advice that you must do x, and try different cadence/gear combos and see what works for you.
#113
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
But he didn't. He used fairly ordinary race gearing for the time, which had a much lower top-end than today's road race gearing.
And if we're talking about self-selected cadence, "used a big gear" doesn't mean anything outside of a speed-relative sense. I'm hardly "using a big gear" when I'm descending in a 52-14
And if we're talking about self-selected cadence, "used a big gear" doesn't mean anything outside of a speed-relative sense. I'm hardly "using a big gear" when I'm descending in a 52-14
As for your second point, I use it to mean big relative to the other gears on your bike, so pretty much everyone has to use a big gear if they want to pedal down a descent. It's so obvious that the only real choice in a significant descent is spin a big gear or coast, that it doesn't merit discussion.
As far as I am concerned, all the racing stuff is a bit of a thread hijack, OP isn't about racing.
#114
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
I can spin a low gear, and I do so on hills or in a strong headwind, but if I ride like that most of the time, I just get slower with less endurance. I'm quite sure you could train me to ride worse than I do, but that's rather beside the point.
Likes For smontanaro:
#117
Senior Member
Ability to, probably. Results from? You're just wrong. As you say, us big men distance riders use a lower cadence bigger gear. It's because we can apply greater torque per stroke aerobically than average, so this is a very efficient way of getting speed that allows for endurance. Our muscles are heavy, so the up stroke also costs us more energy than less-muscled people so spinning a lower gear doesn't work effeciently-it underuses the power of our muscles while maximizing the costs of lifting them. We're applying the torque over very long periods of time, and fast twitch muscle can't do that. Do the math, I am carrying a lot of slow twitch muscle.
I can spin a low gear, and I do so on hills or in a strong headwind, but if I ride like that most of the time, I just get slower with less endurance. I'm quite sure you could train me to ride worse than I do, but that's rather beside the point.
I can spin a low gear, and I do so on hills or in a strong headwind, but if I ride like that most of the time, I just get slower with less endurance. I'm quite sure you could train me to ride worse than I do, but that's rather beside the point.
Fast twitch fibers are for sprinting. How could anyone who rides at 60 or 70 or 80 rpm know about sprinting? It would be like trying to start a car in fourth gear. Sprinting from 90rpm sorta happens but there's a lot of lag, like starting up a big V8 in third gear. Those who pedal slow have never met their fast twitch fibers. Those who pedal slow have large areas of cycling experience closed off. Some of the conversation here are like trying to explain vision to those who live in a dark cave.
I do appreciate that you read accurately. "Ability to" was chosen, not an accident.
#118
Senior Member
Is that What Would Eddy Say? Have you ever talked with Eddy? When the conversation is not going where he wants, or is plain uninteresting, he does monosyllables. Forgets his English. Grunts. Caveman Eddy. Since the caveman is part of the public persona it all works out.
#121
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 6,016
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1814 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 923 Times
in
569 Posts
There appears to be some confusion about what muscle fibers are. Just riding along at 60 rpm is all slow twitch. Just riding along at 120rpm is all slow twitch. Riding training rollers at 200rpm is all slow twitch. One winter workout I used to do indoors was 60 seconds at 200rpm, cool down 60 seconds, 200 rpm again and repeat ten times. That would be wholly impossible if fast twitch fibers were involved at all.
Fast twitch fibers are for sprinting. How could anyone who rides at 60 or 70 or 80 rpm know about sprinting? It would be like trying to start a car in fourth gear. Sprinting from 90rpm sorta happens but there's a lot of lag, like starting up a big V8 in third gear. Those who pedal slow have never met their fast twitch fibers. Those who pedal slow have large areas of cycling experience closed off. Some of the conversation here are like trying to explain vision to those who live in a dark cave.
I do appreciate that you read accurately. "Ability to" was chosen, not an accident.
Fast twitch fibers are for sprinting. How could anyone who rides at 60 or 70 or 80 rpm know about sprinting? It would be like trying to start a car in fourth gear. Sprinting from 90rpm sorta happens but there's a lot of lag, like starting up a big V8 in third gear. Those who pedal slow have never met their fast twitch fibers. Those who pedal slow have large areas of cycling experience closed off. Some of the conversation here are like trying to explain vision to those who live in a dark cave.
I do appreciate that you read accurately. "Ability to" was chosen, not an accident.
How did you measure the rpm?
#122
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,095 Times
in
5,053 Posts
There appears to be some confusion about what muscle fibers are. Just riding along at 60 rpm is all slow twitch. Just riding along at 120rpm is all slow twitch. Riding training rollers at 200rpm is all slow twitch. One winter workout I used to do indoors was 60 seconds at 200rpm, cool down 60 seconds, 200 rpm again and repeat ten times. That would be wholly impossible if fast twitch fibers were involved at all.
Fast twitch fibers are for sprinting. How could anyone who rides at 60 or 70 or 80 rpm know about sprinting? It would be like trying to start a car in fourth gear. Sprinting from 90rpm sorta happens but there's a lot of lag, like starting up a big V8 in third gear. Those who pedal slow have never met their fast twitch fibers. Those who pedal slow have large areas of cycling experience closed off. Some of the conversation here are like trying to explain vision to those who live in a dark cave.
I do appreciate that you read accurately. "Ability to" was chosen, not an accident.
Fast twitch fibers are for sprinting. How could anyone who rides at 60 or 70 or 80 rpm know about sprinting? It would be like trying to start a car in fourth gear. Sprinting from 90rpm sorta happens but there's a lot of lag, like starting up a big V8 in third gear. Those who pedal slow have never met their fast twitch fibers. Those who pedal slow have large areas of cycling experience closed off. Some of the conversation here are like trying to explain vision to those who live in a dark cave.
I do appreciate that you read accurately. "Ability to" was chosen, not an accident.
I cruise between 20-23 mph using slow twitch, and I can accelerate very fast, exceeding 25 mph and 30 a couple times. I assure you I am very well acquainted with my fast twitch muscle. I also attack hills quite effectively, again fast twitch. I don't race, but I can also go from zero to 20 faster than anyone else I'm seeing on the road. Frankly, your patronizing comments are completely ill-informed.
Guess what, I vary my cadence. You make a fetish out of 100 rpm, but if I pressed you on it, you'll never be able to tell us what is magic about that number.
I'm done with arguing with you. Your posts are getting too silly to bother.
#123
Senior Member
There are a few ways to measure rpm. Most common and obvious is to mount a computer (speedometer) that has that function. Before those devices existed it was necessary to have a watch mounted on handlebars and count. That also worked as a speedometer if you knew what gear you were in and how to convert the numbers. Currently I do neither, but rely on the roadside radar speed signs many local jurisdiction use and convert in the other direction. Or a riding companion will mention the speed on their computer and I'll run that number against my gear ratio. Low accuracy but a useful check from time to time.
For the other person who says he's out of the conversation: Imagine a forum or publication in some other domain. Imagine someone writing for car enthusiasts and claiming he has a magic car that accelerates as well off the line in top gear as in first gear. Imagine the howls of laughter. Yet such claims are made constantly when the topic is cycling. It never ends.
For the other person who says he's out of the conversation: Imagine a forum or publication in some other domain. Imagine someone writing for car enthusiasts and claiming he has a magic car that accelerates as well off the line in top gear as in first gear. Imagine the howls of laughter. Yet such claims are made constantly when the topic is cycling. It never ends.
#124
Senior Member
For the other person who says he's out of the conversation: Imagine a forum or publication in some other domain. Imagine someone writing for car enthusiasts and claiming he has a magic car that accelerates as well off the line in top gear as in first gear. Imagine the howls of laughter. Yet such claims are made constantly when the topic is cycling. It never ends.
Likes For asgelle:
#125
Senior Member
I think the ideal cadence for recreational cyclists depends largely on the load. Whether we are climbing a hill, fighting wind, or just normal cruising. The greater the load, Higher up in our candace range seems best if we want to maintain the same speed.
I consider myself to be of about average fitness for a 62 year old man, And am working on monitoring my cadence, using my speed in gears. It's actually easier then it seems. I just memorize my minimum speeds in my 3 or 4 favorite gears (16, 18, & 20 kph in 4'th, 5'th and 6'th) using 54 rpm as a minimum cadence, and adding about 1/3 for max cruising cadence (54 + 18 = 72) and max speed (18 + 6 = 24 kph @72rpm in 5'th).
Seems to working very well so far. Sometimes I find my cadence too fast or too slow, And during normal cruising, Switching to a better gear really feels good. I think its a good way to protect these old knees, and make biking more pleasurable too with longer, Less fatiguing rides.
I consider myself to be of about average fitness for a 62 year old man, And am working on monitoring my cadence, using my speed in gears. It's actually easier then it seems. I just memorize my minimum speeds in my 3 or 4 favorite gears (16, 18, & 20 kph in 4'th, 5'th and 6'th) using 54 rpm as a minimum cadence, and adding about 1/3 for max cruising cadence (54 + 18 = 72) and max speed (18 + 6 = 24 kph @72rpm in 5'th).
Seems to working very well so far. Sometimes I find my cadence too fast or too slow, And during normal cruising, Switching to a better gear really feels good. I think its a good way to protect these old knees, and make biking more pleasurable too with longer, Less fatiguing rides.
Last edited by xroadcharlie; 08-12-19 at 11:47 AM.