Originally Posted by
terrymorse
I don't see very many low-cadence grinders these days. I do see riders using 34/34 on climbs, but they're not spinning high cadences. Maybe 80 rpm or so. One thing I have noticed: I never see them stand (not a good thing--alternating between seated and standing is better).
Personally, my legs are still managing okay with a 34/28 lowest gear. That gear rarely gets used--it's the "bail out" gear when I'm tired, or when the grade is double-digit for more than just a short section.
Pushing a bigger gear isn't the worst thing in the world. It will make your muscles stronger, and it's more aerobically efficient than spinning. FWIW, my best climbing times usually happen when I'm pushing a bigger gear.
My preferred climbing cadence is 65-75 rpm, and my four lowest gears give me several comfortable options in the sub-10 mph speed range:
from bikecalc.com
I have a 34/34 and I'm definitely in it once the gradient goes above 10% unless it's a very short climb that I'm going to power over. I'm usually forced down to 70 rpm or less at that point too. I'm a reasonable climber, but at around 80 kg I'm certainly not going to win any KOMs. I agree on alternating between standing and sitting, but I think that's just a personal preference really. It's not something I think about while riding.
Now I'm interested that you say your preferred climbing cadence is 65-75 rpm. So what is your preferred cadence on the flat at the same power output? I'm assuming it's somewhat higher and in which case why would that be the case? I keep meaning to compare my climbing times on Zwift using ERG vs slope mode to see if I'm actually faster or slower at a higher climbing cadence than my road gearing would actually allow. I'm not talking about spinning as such, just a normal cadence around 80-90 rpm vs a forced 65-75 rpm due to running out of gears. I get the feeling it would be a bit faster overall, especially on a longer climb where muscle fatigue would be a factor at low cadence.