# A bit of advice on cadence please



## Father Guzzi Obrian (Jan 31, 2015)

Hi,
I've been riding a spesh Roubaix for a couple of years with too large of frame. I just purchased a Trek Domane 4.5 and got the computer with cadence doodad thrown in. I've read up on appropriate cadence and the benefits, but I have been riding to high of gear for a long time. For a healthy guy nearly 60 what would be a good RPM to start at to work up to 95ish? I was probably doing 30RPM before I read up, and tried 90, but felt like I was pedaling too fast and not making any power. I have read all the posts here, (Thanks for them) I just want to ramp up, any input is appreciated.
Thanks,
FGO


----------



## bikerjulio (Jan 19, 2010)

Take your time.

It may take several years.


----------



## bmach (Apr 13, 2011)

Not feeling like you are making power has your knees saying thank you. Start off trying to stay around 80 then work up from there.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

Don't try to get there all at once. Don't look at the meter too much, either. Just pedal a little faster than you're comfortable, and when that gets to feeling better, ramp it up again. 

Most people are comfortable 90ish eventually. But everybody isn't the same.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Father Guzzi Obrian said:


> I was probably doing 30RPM before I read up, and* tried 90, but felt like I was pedaling too fast and not making any power.* I have read all the posts here, (Thanks for them) I just want to ramp up, any input is appreciated.
> Thanks,
> FGO


Another (of many) counter intuitive aspects of the sport. 

As was stated, it'll take time, but you'll reap many benefits of raising your cadence. Increased endurance, minimizing stress to the knees... just to name two.

But really, it's more about pedaling technique than just cadence. Below are two links that may help you understand the importance of learning _how_ to spin. 

Cycling Cadence

VIDEO: Pedaling Technique


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

If you increase mileage you will increase fitness. When you increase fitness the cadence will increase as well. IMHO of coarse...


----------



## Father Guzzi Obrian (Jan 31, 2015)

Thanks folks, that was what I was looking for
Cheers,
FGO


----------



## ESTrainSmartBlog (Feb 25, 2013)

Father Guzzi Obrian said:


> Hi,
> I've been riding a spesh Roubaix for a couple of years with too large of frame. I just purchased a Trek Domane 4.5 and got the computer with cadence doodad thrown in. I've read up on appropriate cadence and the benefits, but I have been riding to high of gear for a long time. For a healthy guy nearly 60 what would be a good RPM to start at to work up to 95ish? I was probably doing 30RPM before I read up, and tried 90, but felt like I was pedaling too fast and not making any power. I have read all the posts here, (Thanks for them) I just want to ramp up, any input is appreciated.
> Thanks,
> FGO


It's well established in research that crank length determines your natural cadence. If the crank is too long, you'll never sustain a 90 rpm cadence comfortably. If you try every pedaling technique available and you still can't keep the cadence above 90rpm comfortably, then you absolutely need to optimize your crank length. If you need help with determining your optimal crank length, feel free to contact me at [email protected].


----------



## BlueMasi1 (Oct 9, 2002)

ESTrainSmartBlog said:


> It's well established in research that crank length determines your natural cadence.


Could you provide a .url or link to the research?

Thanks


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Another approach if you want to be more proactive with working on your cadence would be to throw in some high-cadence intervals.

Say you're JRA and you're settled in on a stretch of road that's not going to change for a while. Shift down once and try to maintain speed for a minute or so. Then go back to whatever gear you're comfortable in. Do a couple of those every time you go riding and your selected cadence should drift up.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

ESTrainSmartBlog said:


> It's well established in research that crank length determines your natural cadence. If the crank is too long, you'll never sustain a 90 rpm cadence comfortably. If you try every pedaling technique available and you still can't keep the cadence above 90rpm comfortably, then you absolutely need to optimize your crank length. If you need help with determining your optimal crank length, feel free to contact me at [email protected].


this is nonsense. More generally, the whole idea that 90 is some sort of "optimal" cadence is nonsense too. There's lots of forums on this. Find a cadence that you're comfortable with and don't worry about it. Cadence typically increases at low power outputs (like when a rider is cruising along at an endurance pace) but decreases as power goes up - that's why cadence on a hill is lower. But neither one is the "right" cadence - some pros like Tony Martin time trial at 60-80 rpm some over 100.


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

stevesbike said:


> this is nonsense. More generally, the whole idea that 90 is some sort of "optimal" cadence is nonsense too. There's lots of forums on this. Find a cadence that you're comfortable with and don't worry about it. Cadence typically increases at low power outputs (like when a rider is cruising along at an endurance pace) but decreases as power goes up - that's why cadence on a hill is lower. But neither one is the "right" cadence - some pros like Tony Martin time trial at 60-80 rpm some over 100.


Cadence is lower on hills because people run out of gears or that feels right with the reduced inertial load. With power the product of speed and force it may be lower than in other situations even though it feels harder - I've looked at my Garmin and been surprised at my low output climbing out of the saddle.

It must increase at the highest power outputs to recruit enough muscle fibers









and otherwise tends to be higher with increased output. While I might pedal 80-85 RPM at an all-day pace, I ride threshold intervals around 90-95 RPM, VO2 max intervals 100-110, and am shifting at 120-130 RPM by the time I'm sprinting.

That feels right once your legs are used to it and is less fatiguing.

Training and Racing with a Power Meter has an example where a racer got dropped every time he spent more than 5 minutes at his 1-hour power but a cadence below 70 RPM. Lower gears fixed that.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

Drew Eckhardt said:


> Cadence is lower on hills because people run out of gears or that feels right with the reduced inertial load. With power the product of speed and force it may be lower than in other situations even though it feels harder - I've looked at my Garmin and been surprised at my low output climbing out of the saddle.
> 
> It must increase at the highest power outputs to recruit enough muscle fibers
> 
> ...


your figure is about maximal power (which isn't sustainable) so it irrelevant (the 120 rpm figure is also outdated). 

There's a ton of research demonstrating that lower cadences are more efficient than higher ones. A recent one: The relationship between cadence, pedalling technique and gross efficiency in cycling, European Journal of Applied Physiology December 2011

Also, in race conditions it is not true that maintaining a high cadence is an optimal strategy. Here's a recent paper on that 
Stebbins, C. L., Moore, J. L., & Casazza, G. A. (2014). Effects Of Cadence on Aerobic Capacity Following a Prolonged, Varied Intensity Cycling Trial. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, 13(1), 114–119.

Abstract. We determined if high cadences, during a prolonged cycling protocol with varying intensities (similar to race situations) decrease performance compared to cycling at a lower, more energetically optimal, cadence. Eight healthy, competitive male road cyclists (35 ± 2 yr) cycled for 180 min at either 80 or 100 rpm (randomized) with varying intensities of power outputs corresponding to 50, 65 and 80% of VO2max. At the end of this cycling period, participants completed a ramped exercise test to exhaustion at their preferred cadence (90 ± 7 rpm). There were no cadence differences in blood glucose, respiratory exchange ratio or rate of perceived exertion. Heart Rate, VO2 and blood lactate were higher at 100 rpm vs. 80 rpm. The total energy cost while cycling during the 65% and 80% VO2max intervals at 100 rpm (15.2 ± 2.7 and 19.1 ± 2.5 kcal∙min-1, respectively) were higher than at 80 rpm (14.3 ± 2.7 and 18.3± 2.2 kcal∙min-1, respectively) (p < 0.05). Gross efficiency was higher at 80 rpm vs. 100 rpm during both the 65% (22.8 ± 1.0 vs. 21.3 ± 4.5%) and the 80% (23.1 vs. 22.1 ± 0.9%) exercise intensities (P< 0.05). Maximal power during the performance test (362 ± 38 watts) was greater at 80 rpm than 100 rpm (327 ± 27 watts) (p < 0.05). Findings suggest that in conditions simulating those seen during prolonged competitive cycling, higher cadences (i.e., 100 vs. 80 rpm) are less efficient, resulting in greater energy expenditure and reduced peak power output during maximal performance.

Also, the point is whether there's some important reason to recommend to a beginner to pedal at least at 90 rpm. The answer is that there's no reason and it's actually counter-productive (as lots of studies have also shown for untrained vs. trained cyclists). The conclusion of another study:

"A practical application of these findings is that a cadence of 60 rpm may be advantageous for performance in moderately trained athletes in contrast to higher cadences currently popular among elite cyclists." "The Effect of Cadence on Cycling Efficiency and Local Tissue Oxygenation."


----------



## Jackhammer (Sep 23, 2014)

stevesbike said:


> your figure is about maximal power (which isn't sustainable) so it irrelevant (the 120 rpm figure is also outdated).
> 
> There's a ton of research demonstrating that lower cadences are more efficient than higher ones. A recent one: The relationship between cadence, pedalling technique and gross efficiency in cycling, European Journal of Applied Physiology December 2011
> 
> ...


But...but...Lance said...

Oh shut up...

Thanks!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

The OP mentions pedaling at 30 rpm. That's crazy-low.

It's no skin off my back if he, or anybody else, doesn't like 90. I think it's valuable to develop the technique to use that cadence smoothly. If he ends up being most comfortable at 70 or 60, fine. I think our bodies self-select well, but a rapid cadence is a learned skill - the tool needs to be in the drawer before he can self-select it or not.


----------



## twinkles (Apr 23, 2007)

stevesbike said:


> some pros like Tony Martin time trial at 60-80 rpm some over 100.



I just watched a bunch of youtubes of Tony Martin, with an online metronome set on 92, and I saw his cadence drop below 92 a couple of times, but 90+% of the time, he was spinning at 92 or above.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

In my 30+ years of adult fitness cycling, the only time I suffered a knee injury was when I steadfastly stuck to the (wrong) belief that making it up a climb without downshifting (now referred to as mashing) somehow proved I was becoming stronger/ more fit. All it really proved was that I could tear some knee cartilage. 

So I'll disagree with the studies, learned opinions by some 'experts' and continue (as I have since recovering from the injury) to spin at 90+. 

There's no one magic number (more, a range based on pertinent factors - wind, terrain, fitness), it's a learned skill and takes some time/ practice, but IMO/E the benefits from minimizing knee strain and increased endurance can't be overstated.

Need 'real world' proof? Watch the pros spinning at 100+ while cruising, then watch the guy pushing WAY too tall a gear while attempting to climb, red faced and out of breath.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

stevesbike said:


> Also, the point is whether there's some important reason to recommend to a beginner to pedal at least at 90 rpm. The answer is that there's no reason and it's actually counter-productive


Completely agree. It makes no sense to tell a beginner to "watch the pros" since those guys spin a large gear at 90+ rpm while putting out huge amounts of power. Gear, speed and power output of a beginner are much lower, and it's simplistic to assume that a beginner should spin like someone who rides at a completely different level. 

If a beginner wants to know how to eventually win races, the advice to get comfortable with riding at a cadence of 90 and above does make sense.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Father Guzzi Obrian said:


> Hi,
> I've been riding a spesh Roubaix for a couple of years with too large of frame. I just purchased a Trek Domane 4.5 and got the computer with cadence doodad thrown in. I've read up on appropriate cadence and the benefits, but I have been riding to high of gear for a long time. For a healthy guy nearly 60 what would be a good RPM to start at to work up to 95ish? I was probably doing 30RPM before I read up, and tried 90, but felt like I was pedaling too fast and not making any power. I have read all the posts here, (Thanks for them) I just want to ramp up, any input is appreciated.
> Thanks,
> FGO


There's no simple answer on optimal cadence. The answer is the famous "it depends", which is pretty useless until you dig and discover the host of variables involved. The first issue is what is meant by "optimal" - is it some measure of efficiency (gross, biomechanical, force, or other), or is it about maximum power for some specified period of time?

One of the reasons that there is so much debate about cadence is because of the differences tested and considered in various studies, as this review from 2009 indicates.

For more discussion and debate and various viewpoints on cadence check out this thread , focusing on the discussion the ensued earlier this year following the release of a new video from the GCN guys about "most efficient cadence".


----------



## Donn12 (Apr 10, 2012)

OP says he has had a bike too large and has been riding along at roughly 30rpms for a few years. I think some of the technical responses may be lost on him. oP doesn't need a vo2 max test or worry about lactate....he probably just need to try to be around 90rpms


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Donn12 said:


> OP says he has had a bike too large and has been riding along at roughly 30rpms for a few years. I think some of the technical responses may be lost on him. oP doesn't need a vo2 max test or worry about lactate....*he probably just need to try to be around 90rpms*


Why 90 rpm? How did you come up with that number?


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Donn12 said:


> ..he probably just need to try to be around 90rpms


No. As I tried to explain above, he needs to aim for a cadence that matches his general speed (or power output, if you want to use a more technical metric). I understand that "ride at 90" is the current mantra in popular cycling advice. But that bit of copy-and-paste writing doesn't serve beginners very well.

As to the cadence of 30: noodling along at 8 mph on level ground with no wind, a cadence of around 30 is actually very efficient. (You can see this with the cadence self-selected by millions of transportation riders all over the world.) But that's not the kind of riding we're taking about on this forum. So while "ride at 90" makes no sense, suggesting to the OP that he should up his cadence to some degree is good advice.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

wim said:


> Completely agree. *It makes no sense to tell a beginner to "watch the pros" since those guys spin a large gear at 90+ rpm while putting out huge amounts of power*. Gear, speed and power output of a beginner are much lower, and it's simplistic to assume that a beginner should spin like someone who rides at a completely different level.
> 
> If a beginner wants to know how to eventually win races, the advice to get comfortable with riding at a cadence of 90 and above does make sense.


That really wasn't the point of why I offered the advice I did. It was to demonstrate that people who ride bikes for a living (and do it very well) employ a vastly different technique than the guy mashing up a hill, red faced and panting. There's a valuable lesson in that. 

But I do agree with you and others re: the variety of factors, 90+ mantra... I just happen to think it's important to enlighten beginners on the negatives of spinning at "too low" a cadence given the conditions.


----------



## Father Guzzi Obrian (Jan 31, 2015)

Thanks, I've enjoyed reading your responses, my cadence on the flats is usually 80-90 now and I am going faster, easier. Right bike fits makes a difference, and I realize I was pedaling faster than 30 RPM now that I can measure it. Did I say the right fit makes a difference, thought my Roubaix was comfortable, but didn't fit. My Trek is comfortable and fits, and I'm riding faster, easier than I have in my life pushing 60 years old.
Cheers,


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Father Guzzi Obrian said:


> Thanks, I've enjoyed reading your responses, ...


There are some discussions that are best enjoyed with a good stash of popcorn. Now if they would just come in 3-D.


----------

