base2 

Whoa! Wow! If only...um, Yeah.
I would get so strong if this was near me. We have nothing like this.
Super jealous. You must be strong!

Amt0571

Strong? Quite the opposite at the moment. Having a son is the best I've done in my life, but my wife works on weekends and this means that in the past 3 years I've halved my mileage, divided my total ascent by four, my mountain bike converted to the "pick the kid up at school" bike, I've put on 5kg, my riding HR has gone up 10bpm, my ass hurts after more than 50km...

It's a total fitness disaster in fact hahaha

Recently I've managed to get some time and I want to duplicate my mileage... And when there's more sunlight available I hope to be able to ride some mountain bike too...

rower2cyclist

Yeah, your cadence is not bad at all. The quick answer is high. Higher the better. IMO cadence also changes with fitness. I can climb at higher (than normal) cadence with higher wattage on long climbs when I'm fit. My fitness drops so does my cadence. 30+ in the back helps. A good cardiovascular system immensely helps. I have been working on my cadence past few years. It's not easy to be quite honest. Going from 90 to 92 rpm is not easy. Gains have been very gradual. It seems like there's an optimum cadence that suits your fitness, body composition, gradient etc. All bets are off when the gradient goes around/over mid-teen percentages. 60-65 sounds about right. I have a buddy who lived in Barcelona for a while and he was talking about these climbs the other day. I was like wow you are serious this is awesome. Also was watching 2009 TdF stage 6 where the stage ended in Barcelona a week ago on the trainer. Pretty bad David Millar couldn't make it into the finish line but was super fun to watch the peloton rolling thru the wide streets of the city.

big john

Ever hear the expression "sandbagger"?

You're obviously quite strong/fit if you do those climbs. My point was if you are doing those climbs you already know that when you're on an 18% grade cadence is out the window and it's just a grind it out situation. If you have knee problems then gearing is critical but there isn't much spinning going on at 18%.

Amt0571

Obviously I was not talking about those extreme climbs. At 18% I just use the lower gear and do the best I can... I was talking about cadence on more normal climbs, like 8 or 10% where I still usually have some gears to spare, but don't feel comfortable on lower gears.

Amt0571

I'm not a native English and never heard what a sandbagger is, had to look it up. Always nice to learn something

Trust me, I'm out of shape currently. I was fit when I was able to ride 120km with 3000m climb in a mountain bike in 7.30h and feel well at the end. That was in 2014. I don't think I'd even be able to finish that in any amount of time today...

I have a very low HR, and at that time I had a resting HR of 38bpm. Currently I can't get under 45. While riding I also noticed a higher HR, like 10bpm, and my max bpm is still the same, around 180. I'm way slower than I was. I suppose that my low HR helps when doing such climbs in comparison to people with more normal bpm.

big john

Everyone is different, to a certain extent. One of the fastest climbers I know is a woman who mashes. She climbs at a slow cadence and will drop most recreational riders with ease. She drops cat 2 women with ease and can climb with many fast men. She's been doing it for years and has no problems with it.

If you watch pro racers on a climb you will see different cadences at the same speed. We always say "spin to win" and recommend high cadence but the reality is many of us find our own cadence and it's not always 90 rpm or higher.

big john

I'm way slower than I was, too, but I'm 65 years old. I still have a resting hr in the low 40s. You may feel slow compared to how you were, but you're still fit compared to the average person and you can get it back if you can find some saddle time.

Carbonfiberboy 

It's quite simple. One simply experiments to see at what cadence one climbs faster at a particular heart rate, or breathing rate if lacking a heart rate monitor. That cadence will probably be different on climbs of different lengths, as it takes some time for one's body to load up. The best cadence is different for everyone and can only be determined by this experiment. When one runs our of gears because the climb is steep, of course one just does whatever one can.

Having a power meter and going by that isn't helpful for determining the best cadence because one will always climb at the same speed at the same power, no matter the cadence.

One's best climbing cadence may change over time with fitness.

Sy Reene

The heart rate is a valid indicator.. the trick is coming up with methodology to do this though. Doing the same climb on different days could yield different HR results even using the same cadence. Doing repeats of the same climb on the same day obviously could yield diffferences as one tires. Maybe doing 4-6 repeats, changing cadence every other run and then averaging results?

Amt0571

Usually at higher cadences I am faster, but I also feel more tired at the end.

BTW, I also noticed that temperature affects performance quite a bit. At 5°C I'm noticiably slower than at 15.

rutan74

Not much else to add here except for a couple of things. As everyone has basically said, it is a personal thing and comes down to what is comfortable to you.

The 90 cadence thing for climbing was not invented by Lance, but he sure popularized it. He would 'spin' up those huge climbs at 90rpm plus. Ulrich, his main competitor at the time was more of a grinder and would tend to grind it out as we would say. In today's pro peleton, Froome is the main spinner. He too spins up these climbs at 90rpm plus. Kind of weird seeing him spin like crazy up these climbs while others around him seem to be pedaling a more normal cadence but it has worked well for him.

What I have been told is that you really have to work on this and that it does not come naturally. You have to teach yourself to do this because your natural inclination is slow your cadence down while climbing. Just goes to figure that the slower you are going, the slower your cadence is. Spinning up climbs does though put less pressure on the knees but again, you have to train yourself to do this since it is not a natural pedal stroke.

Like others have said, experiment around and see what works best. I'm more a grinder, but that works for me. I'm not racing or anything so I tend to do what feels best.

john

rubiksoval

The latter repeats will almost certainly yield a higher hr if performed at the same effort level, regardless of cadence. A big limiter of doing anything with hr.

rubiksoval

Figuring out the cadence at which you can sustain the highest power is pretty helpful. That's a lot more important than hr which is going to be different depending on a dozen different things.

Dean V

I think you have this backwards.
Power is the best measurement to see what cadence works for you.
Another more basic way is to do some climbing with riders that are faster than you.
Play around with gears/cadence and see what seems to work best for keeping up with the others.

Carbonfiberboy 

But that's effect, not cause. How do you know when you are sustaining the highest power? That's what HR and breathing information tells one. That how one figures it out. And you don't need a power meter to do it. Just watch your speed. It's the same thing. The PM is nice once one figures it out because it helps with holding that steady effort through changes in terrain - during which cadence will of course vary since we don't have infinitely variable gearing. That's nice but one still has to find that power/cadence relationship through physiological symptoms.

And yes, those physiological symptoms are going to vary, depending a few things, mostly hydration, feeding, and training status. For those same reasons, max sustainable power will also vary according to those markers. And of course max sustainable power will also vary with the length of the effort. There's not one number. Interestingly, on my big event this past summer, I sustained a higher power on my last climb of 2500' than I did on earlier climbs and at a slightly lower average cadence. Probably I was simply giving it up. It was 20° hotter, too. I was going by breathing and holding power steady. Yes, steady power, but what steady power?

My cadence was 75-79 on the big climbs, just like it's been for the past 20 years. Lower gears now of course.

Carbonfiberboy 

IME it's much quicker than that. On any particular day, any particular climb, one notices very quickly whether one can go faster in one gear than another. Maybe only a minute or two at most.

The main thing is length of climb. On short climbs, I'm much faster at 95-100 cadence because power = force * cadence (more or less). I'd blow up if I kept that up. On long climbs, I'm much faster at 78. Higher cadence slows me down. But I'm an average guy. Talented people will climb at higher cadences. That's one of the ways you know you're talented.

Carbonfiberboy 

Yes, but how do you know what "works best?" Why in some gears you can keep up and others not? Of course power, But why does power vary when you have a meter to look at? Just keep it the same no matter the cadence, right? So why can't you do that? Physiological signals, that's why.

Whether one realizes it or not, one does an FTP test not by power, but by physiology. An FTP number is the result, not the input. If one isn't doing it that way, one is either dogging it or one blows up.

Sure you go into the test at what you think your FTP is and that's a nice feature. But after than, you're winging it. Same thing with cadence.

colnago62

It seems like heavier riders tend to climb at lower rpms. I have always wondered if that is because the need to produce much more wattage to ride at the same speed as riders who are much lighter.

rubiksoval

When I can't hold higher power.

The rest of your paragraph is fairly nonsensical. The notion that you can just look at speed is a bit bizarre. I've never done a climb that I can simply look at speed to determine whether or not I'm maxing it out.

To compare speed to power is just wrong.

rubiksoval

Where are you coming up with this notion that you can't maintain a given power output with different cadences? I do it on every single climb I want to do it on. Doesn't matter if it's 5% or 15%, 1 minute or 30 minutes. It's precisely how I do workouts. I think most anyone else that routinely rides with power can as well.

Carbonfiberboy 

Try using a calculator.

BengalCat

I'm 74 and 230 pounds. My power has declined almost 25 percent the past four years due to aging and neurological condition in my calves. My maximum HR is 165-168. Here's my cadence personally tailored to my combo of HR, power, and power to weight ratio these days.

A five-mile Cat 3 climb at best effort for time: Avg HR 150 with a max of 165-168 and the average cadence is 82. I switch from the 50 crank to the 34 after about the first mile. The hill starts out gradually and generally slowly gets steeper from start to finish. It goes from 2 percent to start to 12 percent at the very end. During the past 4 years, I've lost at least 65 watts of sustainable power or FTP. I am now on average 6-7 minutes slower up the hill.

On the flats, an endurance rate or pace is 95 cadence and HR is 115. If I am pushing hard for three or four miles my HR is 145 and cadence is usually about 105 average.

Going for a maximum effort of three-quarter of a mile on the flats my cadence remains at 105 but at the lowest gear, I can maintain for that distance at full power. HR runs steadily at between 150-156.

With the loss of power and low power to weight ratio I have as of about 18 months ago gone from and 11 speed 11-32 to an 11-40. The steepest I can climb for about one mile is at a near steady 14-15 percent and average cadence is 54. On a cat 3 or cat 2 climb, the steepest portion I climb is 18-19 percent and it takes a 100 percent max power effort for me to do that.

The above demonstrates that my cadence remains the same over four years despite the 25 percent loss in power. All that has changed is what gear I use for a particular grade at any particular spot on a one to 10-mile climb. The bottom line is for climbs cat 3 and 2 the optimal cadence for me has stayed the same on most at about 86 average. That 86 with the right gear beats for me as an individual a 90 or low 90 in an easier gear as far overall best time of a good climb like those I've described.

RedBullFiXX

It would seem that by the time heart rate ramps up, it would be difficult to know if caused by cadence. or simply going to hard
Always a lag with heart rate, and a significant amount of variance due to many factors

Carbonfiberboy 

You, I believe, are a Cat 1. I am not, nor AFAIK is anyone else in this thread. Maybe that's the difference? You might compare yourself to Lance instead of to us duffers. Lance TTed at 110 or so, even though he could maintain the same power at 80 for the same distance? I mean really . . I don't think that's true. You're saying that cadence doesn't matter to physiological stress. Lance didn't think so. But you can ride your FTP for an hour at any cadence. Wow!

Or perhaps you simply left the word "maximum", or better, the phrase "maximum power output for the length of the climb" out of your first sentence? Yes, it's true, I can maintain zone 1 power for a long time at almost any cadence. Well, not any. 10 is too slow and 120 is too fast. For most folks, that 10-120 range gets smaller and smaller as the power goes up. But not for you! Does anyone here train in erg mode?

More to the point, are you saying that the OP's question is nonsensical? I thought that "best cadence to produce maximum power output for the length of the climb" would be a good way to put it. And IIRC it was you who pointed me to the article about the fellow training to win the Mt. Washington climb and how he found a 95 cadence worked best for him. That was very informative.