How about just riding with the cadence that feels right at the time and place?
|
Originally Posted by GhostRider62
(Post 22781290)
What might be instructive for some here would be to analyse the power files of tour racers. [/color]
|
Originally Posted by rydabent
(Post 22781454)
How about just riding with the cadence that feels right at the time and place?
|
Originally Posted by livedarklions
(Post 22781195)
I appreciate your sharing your experience. All the nonsense about who is or isn't qualified to post on a thread like this in GC misses the whole point of GC--getting the perspectives of people who do all kinds of bicycling. Your perspective is very interesting to me because you've done a lot of different kinds of riding.
The biggest problem I see with GC is people who insist on saying some version of "I do X, therefore anyone who does Y is a fake or a fool.". The second biggest problem is people who just assume saying " I do Y" is an attack on people who do X. It'd be interesting to compare this thread to cadence threads of a few years ago. I've only been here since 2018, but my memory of those is there used to be a bunch of people who would post that everyone should maintain a cadence of100 rpm, all gearing choices should be made around preserving that cadence under all circumstances, and anyone who didn't ride that way was wrong. I like this compare our differences approach a whole lot more. Just to be open about it, to the extent that I have an agenda, it's to remind people that the motor on our chosen vehicle is not standard issue, so general rules are really hard to come by. There's too many "experts" and precious little expertise. "This works for me" is great, "what you've doing is wrong" is usually stupid. One area that continues to be a frustration to me is those who insist that a desire for “better” equipment is only valid for people who race, and/or that every additional expense above “adequate” must be justified by a measurable and proportional increase in performance. For me, cycling is a passion. Not just the riding, but also the gear. I’m excited to ride a high-performance machine at the limits of my current abilities, even if I am slower than I used to be. Hell, I enjoy just looking at my bikes, much the same way people enjoy looking at sports cars. I’m also excited to take those same bikes out for an easy cruise, just to enjoy being on a bike on a nice day. The hollow hum of carbon wheels and slick tires rolling fast on pavement, with the distinctive sound of a clean and well-adjusted drivetrain delivering power from pedals to rear wheel, is a happy sound to me. So is the buzz of a high-quality freewheel. I can feel the difference in casing suppleness between a Conti GP5000 and a Pirelli P-Zero, and that matters to me. I enjoy the contrast of experiences between each of my bikes. The variety keeps cycling fresh and exciting for me. |
Originally Posted by GhostRider62
(Post 22781290)
What might be instructive for some here would be to analyse the power files of tour racers.
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...415feddeef.png In the context of pedal force and pedal speed, the plot below shows the "typical" range of pedal force (in lbf), cadence, and power for a 160 lb rider. If riders were cruising along at 170 watts they could be doing so at any point along the 170 watt curve. Some riders will choose slightly lower cadence and commensurately slightly higher pedal force, others will choose the other way 'round. If, starting from 170 watts they decided to increase to 400 watts, they could likewise choose any point along the 400 watt curve, and that would identify a different combination of cadence and pedal force. It's good for riders to be able to generate power at many different combinations because the demands of riding vary. Only if conditions are constant will riders tend to use a constant combo of cadence and pedal force. ln practice, the slope changes, the wind blows, you get tired, so the conditions aren't constant. But, importantly, when we look at the data, we see that although riders often *think* they ride at a fixed cadence, they don't. *If* riders rode at a fixed cadence, then moving from the 170 watt curve up to the 400 watt curve would always look like a vertical movement. What happens is that they take all different paths (sometimes diagonally right, sometimes horizontally right, sometimes diagonally left -- and sometimes they do move vertically). These "power expansion paths" vary with the rider, and they vary with the conditions the rider is facing. https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...8d98758ce3.png |
Originally Posted by Eric F
(Post 22781504)
One thing I’ve learned from some folks of BF is that there are a multitude of ways that people use a bicycle, and each of them are valid in their own way. I’ve had some of my own preconceived ideas challenged, and I’ve adjusted my understanding because of it. As
One area that continues to be a frustration to me is those who insist that a desire for “better” equipment is only valid for people who race, and/or that every additional expense above “adequate” must be justified by a measurable and proportional increase in performance. For me, cycling is a passion. Not just the riding, but also the gear. I’m excited to ride a high-performance machine at the limits of my current abilities, even if I am slower than I used to be. Hell, I enjoy just looking at my bikes, much the same way people enjoy looking at sports cars. I’m also excited to take those same bikes out for an easy cruise, just to enjoy being on a bike on a nice day. The hollow hum of carbon wheels and slick tires rolling fast on pavement, with the distinctive sound of a clean and well-adjusted drivetrain delivering power from pedals to rear wheel, is a happy sound to me. So is the buzz of a high-quality freewheel. I can feel the difference in casing suppleness between a Conti GP5000 and a Pirelli P-Zero, and that matters to me. I enjoy the contrast of experiences between each of my bikes. The variety keeps cycling fresh and exciting for me. I find the fact that people like stuff I don't like or care about interesting, and I like hearing their reasons. I respect their choices and I'm not going to try to convince them otherwise--why should I? I just want the same respect back--I have my reasons for riding as I do, and there are people on this forum who go out of their way to be insulting and patronizing about it.. What I like about your posts is you don't do the snob bit--I like reading the preferences and reasons for liking things from a connoisseur even if I have no desire to become one myself and I don't feel like you're going to talk to me like I'm stupid if I say I like something else. I also get fascinated by watching people ride the hell out of department store bikes, bikes are cool because of the people who make them work. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:54 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.