choddo

I think higher cadence tends to stress the cardiovascular system more, lower tends to stress the muscles and glycogen stores more. Generally the latter can’t be maintained for as long (for the same power output) by nost people but everyone is different.

Of course if you were using a power meter you’d be able to compare the cadence, power, HR and speed data to know what was perception and what was reality ;-)

PeteHski

While lower cadence is more efficient in terms of energy consumption, it is not necessarily faster. It is more likely that you are faster at lower cadence because you are inefficient at pedalling with a higher cadence. I think most cyclists tend to increase their preferred cadence with training as their pedalling becomes more efficient and their cardio output increases.

I don’t know if you mentioned it earlier, but what cadence are you actually riding with and how much did you reduce it? Also how much power did you gain and for what duration?

I know you mentioned a focus on TT riding. I read about a rider who fairly recently set a new women’s hour record and she talked about using a lower cadence than was typical. I can’t remember the exact numbers, but I think she used around 90 rpm instead of 100 rpm. So still a relatively high cadence compared to what most mortals would ride for an hour straight.

Trakhak

For indoor riding with a smart trainer, I use workout programs exclusively. Most of those (e.g., Trainer Road, BKool) specify a target cadence range for each workout.

Most of the time, the range specified is around 85 rpm to 95 or 100 rpm. The only exceptions are for shorter-term strength (climbing) intervals, where the wattage is moderately low but the cadence range might go down to 60 rpm, and high-wattage efforts, with ranges around 100 to 120 rpm.

To me, this suggests that the coaches/sports physiology specialists who design the workouts don't buy the notion that some riders have a "naturally" lower efficient cadence range. As you say, those who believe otherwise simply haven't trained enough.

My guess is that plenty of riders who think they're faster at low cadences learn otherwise, and quickly, when they start participating in road or criterium races.

PeteHski

Yes, that's why I was asking how much lower he had gone. I think those target cadence values in training plans are a bit generic, but they do provide a good starting point. It would be interesting to see how much variation there is in cadence across the pro peloton, but I would bet it's not that much in a steady state TT. I would bet nobody is cranking at 60 rpm on a TT, even though it is more energy efficient.

chaadster

My guess is you’re not more efficient— whatever that might mean; some folks are talking about biomechanical efficiency, others energetic efficiency— but rather that you’re simply more comfortable putting out higher watts at lower RPMs, just as you speculated in the OP.

It might be because of your muscle fiber composition that you’re able to engage more powerfully with the pedals at lower RPMs; that’s the whole slow twitch/fast twitch thing.

It may be— and I don’t recall any discussion of what RPM range we’re talking about here— that you’re uncomfortable revving the heartrate and tend to back off the power when your feel your HR getting too high. That’s that feeling winded ting.

It may be that at higher cadences, it’s easier to lose pedal engagement over rolling terrain, dropping torque, and those little low periods conspire to reduce your overall power output. In other words, it’s easier to maintain the torque load on the pedals at slower RPMs.

It could be that your gearing isn’t optimized for high cadence pedaling, and that if you’re up near the top of the cassette, there are bigger gaps (in terms of cog tooth count) which could cause you to ride a given gear too long because the next one up is too easy and the next one down too hard. More and closer gear spacing lets you optimize your output because they give you the option to work as hard as you can or want to.

RChung

Vittoria Bussi, current hour record holder. 50.267 km, surpassing van Dijk's old record by more than a kilometer. There was some unclarity about her gearing but it appears her cadence was in Graeme Obree range (i.e., < 90). She also held the hour record in 2018, at 48.007 km, which was set at more "usual" rpm > 100.

rclouviere

Thanks for the response. I’ve gone from around 85 rpm to around 75 rpm. Ride is about an hour and watt increases around 12 watts.

rclouviere

I think you’re right. Higher cadence is more uncomfortable for me. However, lower cadence heart rate, even though it’s the same, doesn’t feel as bad.

chaadster

Yeah, there are lot of variables which will affect your average cadence, from terrain, wind conditions, urban roads vs. rural, whether you ride in a group, gearing and cassette gaps, and even the reporting method (i.e. are zeros included or excluded).

It’s probably more instructive for you to look at your pedaling speed during certain periods of the ride, like those stretches where you’ve got open road and you’re putting in a hard effort, rather than the overall average. In my case, for example, I ride out my front door, a few miles through town, then out on the open road before looping back into town. Looking at my overall ride average, it’s typically in the 75rpm range, but if I look at just the open road segments, it’s easily 10-15rpm higher. All the stop lights and intersections in town really drag down the ride average, and so doesn’t reveal anything about how I actually ride when I’m getting after it and riding hard.

choddo

And a PhD in Maths from Oxford. Seriously talented individual.

wheelreason

We need a slow pedaling forum...

Trakhak

a.k.a. the Slow Children At Play forum.

wheelreason

They should let them play with the other children...

Trakhak

TMonk

For some reason, all the indoor riding has seemed to lower my self-selected cadence. I don't have any quantitative data on that, but I see a lot of 80 rpm now vs 90+ when I was riding a higher fraction outdoor. Maybe that will go back up when track season starts (April).

RChung

Self-selected cadence varies much more with the conditions of the load and crank inertial load than most people think. That's partly why I think that chasing cadence is a red herring, and that the cadence you select indoors on a trainer doesn't tell you much about what cadence you'll self-select outdoors, or on a velodrome with a fixed gear, or on a climb, or in a race.

Which isn't to say that I think cadence prescriptions aren't useful. I use them so I can weed out coaches I won't listen to.

Sierra_rider

Yep, I think a lot of the cadence drills are nonsense...especially the low-cadence drills that people think are boosting strength. They likely do nothing for strength and cause additional muscle fatigue that would be better spent on actual strength training. I've got a range of cadences I prefer, but what I pick for a rough climb is not going to be the same for a smooth flat road.

PeteHski

I do low cadence drills every time I need to climb slopes above 15%.

wheelreason

You need to pedal faster in a bigger gear...

Kai Winters

Depends...the effort you are putting in to pedaling at a low cadence...are you just pedaling at a low cadence because it is easier or are you pushing the power to work the muscles?
Generally spinning at a higher cadence works the cardiovascular system harder thus a higher heart rate versus watts.
If your intent is to increase power then pedaling at a lower cadence but with a high exertion of power will result in a higher power output and increased performance over time and effort. But if you are just pedaling along at a lower cadence because it is easier to do so the performance will be decreased because the effort under load isn't there.
Same with a higher cadence. It is harder to ride at a high...over 100rpm...cadence over a period of time because of the exertion on the cardiovascular system. But with training your cardio system becomes adapted and better able to achieve a higher level of power and cadence.
It really depends on what you are trying to achieve and the effort put forth to achieve it.

PeteHski

FIFY

Power = Force x Cadence
So you have 2 equally effective levers with which to produce power i.e. Pedal Force and Cadence. How you combine these 2 levers to produce power depends on all sorts of variables. But it is clear that, for whatever reason, the OP was producing more power (+12 W) at a lower cadence (-10 rpm) over a 1 hour duration. So he must have increased his pedal force quite significantly to achieve this.

choddo

Yeah. 12% reduction in RPM (distance), maybe 5% increase in power (??) would be a 20% increase in force. Significant.

Of course he might have been knocking out 450W before, which would halve that.

PeteHski

Anyone knocking out 450 W for an hour solid wouldn’t be asking questions like this here!

Sierra_rider

Yep, I got my share of involuntary low cadence hills around here. I can up the wattage and spin my preferred cadence on some of them, but that's not really an option on the hour long climbs.

terrymorse 

I can up the wattage on the steep grades, but my preferred cadence there is still not an option. Not even on the short climbs.

Anything above about 13% is survival mode.