# Spinning or Pushing



## moosryan (Aug 19, 2004)

I've for some reason always pushed the pedals in a lower gear. But now I'm learning about cycling and other alternatives. What are the benifits of spinning versus pushing/hammering/pedal mashing. Which do you guys do?

thanks, moos.


----------



## Hardy Cyclamens (Mar 21, 2005)

We spin . . . some faster than others, but we ALL spin. 

If you watch professional riders you'll note that the upper body barely moves -- unless they're in a sprint or hammering the gears to jump into a breakaway. 

When you get your RPM up into a spinning cadence you get a smoother power stroke on the pedals. You're no longer pushing one pedal and then the other but rather you're spinning the cranks in a smooth circular motion with no bumps, holes, flat spots in the application of power. Spinning is the reason pedals have toe clips or other means to secure the foot to the pedal. The feet are spinning in a smooth circle and would come off the pedals if they weren't tied in. 

Spinning is easier on all the joints, puts less strain on muscles and is physically more efficient because you're not "pushing" on the leg, not contracting the muscles to push. The muscle recovers much more efficiently when spinning because it's not contracting at a maximal effort, but rather contracting at an optimal level which is more efficiently sustained. An analogy here . . . You can load 5 lb boxes into a truck all day long, but you're going to wear out loading 100 lb boxes. Spinning is like loading 5 lb boxes. 

Racers spin at about 90 -- 100 RPM. A decent cycle tourist will pedal about 60 RPM, and someone who rarely rides will be pushing on the pedals -- first one and then the other -- at somewhere between 30 and 45 RPM. 

Watch a "non rider" and note how the body moves up and down, first over one pedal, then the other. Racers don't move the upper body much, and the feet fly.


----------



## evs (Feb 18, 2004)

*My outlook on this is that both are good...but*

it depends on your fitness.Last year my lungs where strong so I'd spin up one of our local 1 mile hills at 100+ rmp (or at least try to) in my 42t and my buddy would do 70-80rmp in his big 53 ring.We where pretty evenly matched but using different energy systems. This spring,since I was off my bike for so long ,I did alot of leg presses and calf raisies, stationary bike time with the gears in a couple of notches harder than when I was spinning last year.I've only done a few road rides so far,but notice the strength is there.I'm already pushing a bigger gear than last year,but my lungs are weak.After a 2 hour ride last week it was on the hills that I tried my old routine of trying to spin up the hills and my lungs needed more oygen.I think I put my body in to shock. It hasn't been over 190 in quite sometime.I eased off right before 190bpm's so I know I probably need some lung building Intervals.So , I think I need some high spinning thown in there somewhere.It was funny,a 30 second flush after a climb and I was good to go on the flats.The legs felt good,but I really noticed the lung burn after the ride.It took about 10 minutes at the end and I was fine.
I do think that if you can spin consistently,the stress is less on the knees and if your racing/riding long, if you need to spin up that steep part, your lungs recover faster than if your muscles get in trouble.Once the muscles start cramping,it takeslonger th get them back in shape and going that if your lungs are on fire,they cool down after a few deep breaths.I always thought it was cool that after only a short rest, one can keep on going.

evs(hoping to get a nice ride in tomorow,if it doesn't rain....)


----------



## moosryan (Aug 19, 2004)

hmmm i have no idea what my cadence is. i should add that i'm not really pushing too hard, i'm still on the middle ring of my triple, but close to the bottom of my cassette (i'd give you numbers but it's late at night). I'll try a few different things on my ride tomorrow i suppose.


----------



## bobsmargs (Aug 13, 2004)

moosryan said:


> hmmm i have no idea what my cadence is.


 A cheesy way to figure it out with only a watch or non-cadence computer is to count downstrokes on one leg for 10 seconds and then multiply by six. Not perfect, but close enough.


----------



## Hardy Cyclamens (Mar 21, 2005)

An even cheesier way to estimate cadence . . . 

90 RPM is 1 1/2 turns on the crank in one second. The means the crank goes from top, all the way around and down to the bottom in one second -- "one, one thousand" -- all the way around and back up to the top in two seconds -- "two, one thousand." 

But the numbers are almost meaningless. The key to spinning is to find the gear that allows you to wind up the cranks efficiently and achieve optimal speed. I find when I'm geared too low that I bounce in the saddle and the cadence gets choppy -- uneven. And I lose speed. When I'm geared too high I notice that I'm pushing on the pedals, that there's a resistance to pedaling smoothly in a circle. And I lose speed. 

If you ride a lot, and ride with others you will develop a smooth cadence just because it's the most efficient way to pedal -- if you're not a beast and dedicated to mashing on the cranks. As you gain skill in riding -- and it's a skill sort of sport -- your spin cadence will smooth out and improve. It just takes miles and miles of riding.


----------



## Americano_a_Roma (Feb 10, 2005)

I also find that the highest comfortable cadence I can spin depends on how hard I'm working, and that i actually spin faster the harder I'm working. That is, trying to go 10mph at a cadence of 100+ has me bouncing in the seat, but I regularly hit 105+ when pulling at the front of a group at 25mph. It's like my legs need something to push against to spin at high cadences...I'm not sure if working on spinning fast and smooth at low speeds would improve my pedal stroke at higher speeds as well...


----------



## CycleBatten (Sep 28, 2004)

Americano_a_Roma said:


> I also find that the highest comfortable cadence I can spin depends on how hard I'm working, and that i actually spin faster the harder I'm working. That is, trying to go 10mph at a cadence of 100+ has me bouncing in the seat, but I regularly hit 105+ when pulling at the front of a group at 25mph. It's like my legs need something to push against to spin at high cadences...I'm not sure if working on spinning fast and smooth at low speeds would improve my pedal stroke at higher speeds as well...


I'm the same way.

I used to have a triple, but only used the top two- a 52t and a 42t. Now I switched to a double 53t and 39t. It's a lot tougher on my lungs to spin a high cadence in the 39t at a low speed, but when I can really get cooking in the flats I can spin a similar or higher cadence in the 53t pretty easily.


----------



## DW4477 (Feb 4, 2005)

moosryan said:


> What are the benifits of spinning versus pushing/hammering/pedal mashing. Which do you guys do?
> 
> thanks, moos.


I think working on spinning helps with smoothness but its the pushing that does most of the work; the pushing muscles are just stronger.


----------



## HAL9000 (May 1, 2002)

*Try:*

to count strokes for 6 seconds then multiply by 10.... stick a 0 on the end of your number.


----------



## sbindra (Oct 18, 2004)

*Different Idea*

I think you need to learn to turn your pedals in anger.


----------



## psycho_on_bianchi (Mar 3, 2004)

*Spinning does it for me*

As the first reply mentioned, spinning helps maintain a smoother transfer of energy throughout the entire pedal stroke. I lowered my seat to accomodate this. When the RPMs are in that "sweet spot" range of 90 to 105 rpms, the momentum from the pull offsets the need to push the larger quad muscles as hard as you are used to. You still use the quads but you preserve them so they still have a little more juice for when the time comes you need them most. The largest muscle group [quads] can generate more concentrated power than the spinning muscles. Tapping them too early can tap you of all your glycogen though. Sort of like a really large car motor, big power, poor economy. 

Because of my lower seat position, [generally about 2 inches lower than the benchmark guideline of just short of full extension at the bottom of the pedal stroke] I would most likely ruin my knees if I use my quads as a my primary power generators. Instead, I used my adductor muscles, my hamstrings, my calves especially while climbing. When the climb gets really tough, being in a position to drop the heels down well below level allows another 2 inches from which to pull helping to generate the upstroke needed to maintain cadence under a heavy load. By not over-using my quads until the needed time, they are now available if needed to bridge any power void that hasn't been covered. They are relatively fresh and ready to do battle. By repositioning on the seat or standing, they can used without causing damage.

By spinning, these muscles remain loose throughout most of my rides and avoid cramping while riding. When I get done though they are tired and tight. That's when you had better stretch or you will find it most uncomfortable.

I'm old and weigh about 190 so my situation may not apply to you but it works wonders for me. It took time to learn and develop but it was time well spent.


----------



## moosryan (Aug 19, 2004)

i should add i'm a scrawny kid who weighs about 120


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

moosryan said:


> i should add i'm a scrawny kid who weighs about 120


Then don't spin over 80 RPM or your legs will detach and fly off. Not enough meat to hold them on.  My Gawd - EAT something, boy!


----------



## moosryan (Aug 19, 2004)

You wouldn't believe how much I eat 
I just excersize 7 days a week, and have a teenagers metabolism (im 15).

i tried spinning yesterday. holy crap! There was one hill that I was doing before at around 16...and I hit 28 on it yesterday! that's faster than I descended it (of course that was into the wind coming home, but what the hey!).

I consciously kept reminding myself to stay above 90 rpms. alright i'm convinced.


----------



## MisterMo (May 31, 2004)

*I mash*

I have seemingly indestructible knees, which helps. My normal high cadence is in the 80's, occasionally faster. I climb in the sixties, sometimes slower on long climbs. 

Works for me; that's the way I've always ridden, though to be fair I haven't really worked at spinning faster very much.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Time will tell*



MisterMo said:


> I have seemingly indestructible knees


History may well prove you wrong. Joint damage tends to be cumulative, not instantaneous. Few mashers make it into middle age without paying the price. Also, by spinning low cadence you sacrifice the ability to accelerate quickly and you have significantly less flexibility in gear selection since you restrict your "pwer bandwidth" by not using the high RPM available. Over 100 years of experience has taught that cadences above 90 rpm are the right answer for performance cycling. Full stop.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Kerry Irons said:


> Over 100 years of experience has taught that cadences above 90 rpm are the right answer for performance cycling. Full stop.


When Gonchar crushes the TT's in this year's Giro once again please let him know that he's doing it all wrong


----------



## AJS (Aug 7, 2003)

Dwayne Barry said:


> When Gonchar crushes the TT's in this year's Giro once again please let him know that he's doing it all wrong


Well OK, but how much are you going to RPM on a TT ring anyway?


----------



## 53T (Jul 20, 2002)

*Reminds me of a story*



moosryan said:


> I've for some reason always pushed the pedals in a lower gear. But now I'm learning about cycling and other alternatives. What are the benifits of spinning versus pushing/hammering/pedal mashing. Which do you guys do?
> 
> thanks, moos.


The great Eddie Mercx was one asked, "Is it better to spin a small gear or to push a big gear?" 
Eddie responded,"Learn to spin a big gear".


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

*Bernard Hinault said the same thing.*



53T said:


> The great Eddie Mercx was one asked, "Is it better to spin a small gear or to push a big gear?"
> Eddie responded,"Learn to spin a big gear".


Don't have the quote, but it comes out in his book, Road Racing, that learning to spin in easy gears over the winter teaches the muscles how to turn the big gears over fast and efficiently during the season. Racers have to get back this circular motion every Fall because the fast twitch power muscles repeatedly come into play during races. They're the big ones that can deliver explosive power, but use glycogen stores and can't metabolise oxygen, therefore have limited endurance.

The oxygen burning slow twitch endurance muscles are longer and skinnier. They aren't as powerful as the fast twitch, but can keep going for hours. They're the ones that get trained spinning at cadences over 90 rpm. At fast cadences, the muscles don't so much flex deliberately, but follow the momentum of the crank around in circles.

Both muscle fibers need to be trained, as they work in unison to provide endurance (slow twitch) and power (fast twitch). Without both well trained, you can't turn a big gear for very long.

Here's some anecdotal evidence I discovered tonight riding for the first time with the B group on the club ride. Over the winter, I could turn a moderate gear 90-100 rpm, burning oxygen at a heartrate of around 145 bpm, going up two really long rises on the W&OD at 15 mph. Any faster and I'd go anaerobic, my heartrate in the low 150s.

I have also been jumping up and down ladders for the past three months inspecting truck loads down at the UPS sorting facility. All those short bursts lifting body weight up three or four steps got the fast twitch trained really well, quads, calves, hamstrings, even waist and lower back, as I use my arms also.

Tonight I could push a bigger gear at the same cadences, going up the same rises at 17 mph, 2 mph faster, this time able to sustain a heartrate of 155 bpm, 10 beats faster than over the winter, without going anaerobic. Legs now trained for pushing down, however, I did have to tell myself to lift my legs up on the upstroke, when feeling excursions into anaerobic. If I lifted up, I could sustain the leg speed and intensity at the higher heartrate, which previously I couldn't.

Hopefully this may shed some light on Eddy's quote above. Cranking 53-13 at 95 rpm requires considerably more power than 42-17 used during the off-season to increase leg speed and develope a good spin. How do you get that power? Push big gears. Train the fast twitch.


----------



## MisterMo (May 31, 2004)

*Actually*



Kerry Irons said:


> History may well prove you wrong. Joint damage tends to be cumulative, not instantaneous. Few mashers make it into middle age without paying the price. Also, by spinning low cadence you sacrifice the ability to accelerate quickly and you have significantly less flexibility in gear selection since you restrict your "pwer bandwidth" by not using the high RPM available. Over 100 years of experience has taught that cadences above 90 rpm are the right answer for performance cycling. Full stop.


As usual you make some excellent points but history is the reason I make my claim.While I've been in and out of cycling over my adult life I've got 40-some years of consistent skiing and heavy/backpacks-steep hills behind me...with no knee issues whatsoever. Health wise, at 53 I think my knees are the very least of my concerns. Hence my claim.

I'm not recommending it, only saying that it works for me. I keep meaning to work on spinning faster, I'd prefer to be able to spin or mash at will, but I keep sliding back into my old ways.


----------



## cloudatlas (Apr 30, 2005)

so, i apologize if there was another thread about this (too lazy to search  ), but i'm curious to know just how low your cadence gets when you're climbing? cuz mine can get pretty darn low (below 60), depending on the steepness.


----------



## MisterMo (May 31, 2004)

cloudatlas said:


> so, i apologize if there was another thread about this (too lazy to search  ), but i'm curious to know just how low your cadence gets when you're climbing? cuz mine can get pretty darn low (below 60), depending on the steepness.


I'll go below 60 but not much lower, save of course those times when I'm just dawdling, which don't count. Regarding hills, for me it's a function of their length more than their steepness; on long grades I'll go with lower cadence the better to stay the course & not get too cooked. Short hills I'll buzz right up to get them done with.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

*It's hard to spin up hills.*



cloudatlas said:


> ...i'm curious to know just how low your cadence gets when you're climbing? cuz mine can get pretty darn low (below 60), depending on the steepness.


How fast your legs can turn the crank climbing depends on how steep the grade is, what gear you're using, and how strong your legs and cardiovascular system are. I have to say I've never had to walk up a hill, but I'll admit my cadence sometimes drops pitifully low. I mean, there are some hills in the DC area that I can barely reel in at 40 rpm.

The lowest gear I have is 42-22. But it wouldn't matter if it were a 26 or 28. Once gravity takes over, forget cadence, you just grind it out, one stroke at a time. If your cadence drops below some standard you've set, 90 or 60 or whatever, too bad. The grade demands a certain level of effort, and you give it as much as your legs and heart and lungs can deliver.

All I'm saying is that it's always easier if you turn the crank around in circles, no matter how slow you're turning it, no matter how difficult it is, no matter how much you're suffering. If you use as many muscles in the legs as you can conjure up, the less you'll suffer. Those fast twitch fibers in your quads are working overtime. They need all the help they can get. That's always been my experience. I'm not talking about burning up a short rise in 20 or 30 seconds of anaerobic joy, but a sustained effort over several minutes, long after gravity steals away that initial momentum, and you get down into a rhythm your legs can handle.

So it's hard to spin up hills. Gravity is always stealing your momentum. But keeping your leg speed up, ideally above 90 rpm, is really helpful on the flats, no matter how hard you're working. It has literally saved my right knee from ending my cycling career. I avoided surgery, probably, by ending my days of pushing big gears. The knee, previously in chronic pain, pretty much rehabilitated itself after 15 years of spinning. Now when a steep hill forces me to use it, it can handle the effort, because all the muscles around it are doing the work, not just the pushing ones.

If you watch the pros climb, they're legs are purposefully turning over the crank, even if slowly. They're not rocking back and forth, humping each pedal stroke. They learned that by spinning on the flats.


----------



## MisterMo (May 31, 2004)

*OK but I'm curious here...........*



Fredrico said:


> How fast your legs can turn the crank climbing depends on how steep the grade is, what gear you're using, and how strong your legs and cardiovascular system are. I have to say I've never had to walk up a hill, but I'll admit my cadence sometimes drops pitifully low. I mean, there are some hills in the DC area that I can barely reel in at 40 rpm.
> 
> So it's hard to spin up hills. Gravity is always stealing your momentum. But keeping your leg speed up, ideally above 90 rpm, is really helpful on the flats, no matter how hard you're working. It has literally saved my right knee from ending my cycling career. I avoided surgery, probably, by ending my days of pushing big gears. The knee, previously in chronic pain, pretty much rehabilitated itself after 15 years of spinning. Now when a steep hill forces me to use it, it can handle the effort, because all the muscles around it are doing the work, not just the pushing ones.
> 
> If you watch the pros climb, they're legs are purposefully turning over the crank, even if slowly. They're not rocking back and forth, humping each pedal stroke. They learned that by spinning on the flats.


Regarding knee damage is it force caused or caused by # of reps or ???. My assumption would be that low RPM/high pedal force as in hill climbing would be most likely to cause such damage, in particular a high application of force with the pedal at the top of the stroke. On a true flat you just don't get into that hard of a push, unless maybe you're sprinting. Yet your experience above seems to contradict this.

It also seems maybe you're after technique of distributing work all the way around the stroke rather than purely focusing on RPM.

Can you comment further?


----------



## bikejr (Jul 30, 2004)

*...*

I learned to road ride with a double crank some 15 years ago or so. With back then a 39/23 as my low gear. You just learn to get up some of the steeper hills. For longer sustained climbs like mountain passes and stuff > 10% on longer rides I did often drop down to a 39/26. Now 30 lbs heavier and some 8 years older, I find it a grind to even get up the steeper hills with a 39/25 and the cadence can be pretty pitiful, but I you just keep cranking and get up. I'm gonna try a 27 for some of the steeper stuff, but it will be far from an 80-90 rpm spin up some of this stuff around here.


----------



## Jorge (Sep 23, 2004)

*Compact Crank*



bikejr said:


> I learned to road ride with a double crank some 15 years ago or so. With back then a 39/23 as my low gear. You just learn to get up some of the steeper hills. For longer sustained climbs like mountain passes and stuff > 10% on longer rides I did often drop down to a 39/26. Now 30 lbs heavier and some 8 years older, I find it a grind to even get up the steeper hills with a 39/25 and the cadence can be pretty pitiful, but I you just keep cranking and get up. I'm gonna try a 27 for some of the steeper stuff, but it will be far from an 80-90 rpm spin up some of this stuff around here.


Have you considered one?


----------



## bikejr (Jul 30, 2004)

*...*



Jorge said:


> Have you considered one?


 Well this bike pretty much is what it is, but a compact is something I hadn't really though of. My next bike will most likely just be a triple..


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

*Knee damage is caused by force.*



MisterMo said:


> Regarding knee damage is it force caused or caused by # of reps or ???. My assumption would be that low RPM/high pedal force as in hill climbing would be most likely to cause such damage, in particular a high application of force with the pedal at the top of the stroke. On a true flat you just don't get into that hard of a push, unless maybe you're sprinting. Yet your experience above seems to contradict this.
> 
> It also seems maybe you're after technique of distributing work all the way around the stroke rather than purely focusing on RPM.
> 
> Can you comment further?


You're right.

Climbing forces riders to push on each pedal stroke to overcome gravity. There is no forward momentum to carry your leg to the top of the stroke, as there would be on a flat. You're right that what caused knee damage, at least for me, was excessive force applied on the downstroke. This technique came naturally to me at the beginning, as my legs were really strong from lifting weights. I thought the natural way to go fast would be to push ever bigger gears, expecting to build up more strength in the legs to handle it. But it never happened, because the legs could only deliver so many pedal strokes, and then would have to lighten up to recover. Eventually, I'd settle on the highest gear I could push without "blowing up." That's when my knee problems started.

I see guys riding like that all the time. They're moving fast in a really high gear at about 60 rpm, just going for all they're worth. I always catch them on the next hill, because they're trying to climb in too high a gear. The constant tug of gravity just starts to eat them up. They go into anaerobic, blow up, then have to slow down alot to recover. I pass them pedaling at about 90 rpm--for all I'm worth!--in a lower gear. I make it because my legs can still fire. They're using more of the slow twitch fibers, burning oxygen. I'll still be anaerobic, but my heart and lungs are maxed, not my legs.

Pedaling above 90 rpm, it becomes impossible for the quad muscles to contract long enough to exert a powerful downstroke. Purposeful pushing with maximal contraction of the quads is only possible at lower cadences. Above 90 rpm roughly, the legs simply have to follow the crank around. They learn how to work in an entirely different way than pushing with the big powerful quads. Hinault described it as pedaling in circles. LeMond described it as scraping mud off the bottoms of your feet, following the crank around on the upstroke. The best way to learn how, is to pedal a ridiculously easy gear, like 39-19 on the flats, as fast as you can and keep it up as long as you can. After awhile, you'll be able to deliver some power against some resistance in a moderate gear. That's when you'll be able to go fast by pedaling fast. Then, when you hit a difficult, momentum robbing climb and have to push with the quads, they'll instinctively share the load with the other muscles in the legs, and the effort won't be as hard on the knees.

"Distributing work all the way around the stroke" comes naturally at lower cadences after the legs are conditioned by lots of high rpm spinning.


----------



## dougn (Jun 9, 2004)

i always find this an interesting subject but have more questions than answers. it seems to me that each person probably has an optimum rpm for sustained power output based on:

leg length, muscle anatomy...as in the mechanical attachment points, amount of fast twitch vrs slow twitch, upper leg mass/lower leg mass ratio. we are as different as internal combustion engines...set up to work best at different RPMs.

when i climb say 7% for 45 minutes ...i'm at 55 to 60 rpms. this gives the best results. when i'm on the flats, about 95 rpms is good for sustained high output.

makes me wonder why the different rpms. 

i'm going to make an effort to climb in a lower gear for a while and see what happens to my times


----------

