Cadence vs higher gears

[black'n'yellow]

its the way it works mate, ill try to find a link. your muscles can work for longer at a higher rate but with less power output, i read it and tried it and it works for me

Sorry, but it's not 'the way it works.' The only thing that will make your muscles work for longer is improved fitness. Cadence will have no influence on that.

http://www.bicycling.com/training-n...bicycling-training-tips-climbing-high-cadence

ignore the reference to LA, ha, ha

"The combination of a higher gear with higher pedaling rate will improve your climbing, but you need a training program to adapt."

The bit in bold is possibly the most blindingly obvious statement I have ever read. The other way of putting it (as ayceejay has already pointed out) is 'in order to go up hills quicker, you need to improve your fitness.' Cadence does NOT allow your muscles to 'go for longer' - that is arrant nonsense.

 

[david k]

nope, wrong again, it clearly demonstrates that riding a bike in a lower gear and higher cadence will help your muscles go for longer. This of course does not mean training is not a large part of getting better, but thats obvious or so I thought and the reason I never put that in my reply to a question about cadence.

 

[david k]

The results demonstrated that prolonged pedaling at an intensity of 85% VO2 max at 50 rpm rather than 100 rpm resulted in greater fast-twitch fiber glycogen depletion and an increase in lactic acid. This was attributed to the increase muscle force required per pedal revolution at the lower cadence. Fatigue is delayed when using a high cadence near 100 rpm, compared to a low cadence near 50. http://www.wenzelcoaching.com/Article-CadenceFactors.htm​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

[Rob3rt]

well the opinion seams to be better a good cadence than a higher gear.
so it sounds like if you had an automatic gear changer on the bike that gave you the right gear for your set cadence (say set at 90) as you go up and down hills , you just pedal at the same rate all the time , you would get a better overall speed ?

-does chainline make a difference? I have tried playing around with this since fitting a 52chainring and just using the cassette to keep the same cadence , but I see people saying about a crap chainline
my chainlines set up for middle chainring cassette ring 4 , should I change it so its normal position is outer ring small gear on casette - so best chainline highest speed.

Give it a rest with all this automatic gear changing nonsense! Basing gear selection on cadence alone is a fools pursuit!

 

[Licramite]

"Give it a rest with all this automatic gear changing nonsense! Basing gear selection on cadence alone is a fools pursuit!"
- Fools step in were brave men fear to tread.- so who are really the bravest ?

david K come up with the most constructive comments. - but its self defeating - basically if your fit enough you can spin in a low gear for longer and this will get you up the hill quicker , but if your not fit enough you will burn out first so its probably better to go slow candence higher gear.

or maybe its saying stuff the gears take the pills.

 

[Rob3rt]

"Give it a rest with all this automatic gear changing nonsense! Basing gear selection on cadence alone is a fools pursuit!"
- Fools step in were brave men fear to tread.- so who are really the bravest ?

david K come up with the most constructive comments. - but its self defeating - basically if your fit enough you can spin in a low gear for longer and this will get you up the hill quicker , but if your not fit enough you will burn out first so its probably better to go slow candence higher gear.

or maybe its saying stuff the gears take the pills.

 

[black'n'yellow]

nope, wrong again, it clearly demonstrates that riding a bike in a lower gear and higher cadence will help your muscles go for longer. This of course does not mean training is not a large part of getting better, but thats obvious or so I thought and the reason I never put that in my reply to a question about cadence.

So, using your logic, why don't we all pedal at 180rpm everywhere so we can all ride 10 times longer..? That argument is a complete fallacy and I'm suprised you can't see that. The only thing that matters in performance cycling is sustainable power - your cadence will be a by-product of that. Of course fitter cyclists tend to have slightly higher cadence than untrained riders, but that is a symptom of fitness, nothing more. The only thing you need to manage consciously while riding is your effort level - everything else will take care of itself.

The results demonstrated that prolonged pedaling at an intensity of 85% VO2 max at 50 rpm rather than 100 rpm resulted in greater fast-twitch fiber glycogen depletion and an increase in lactic acid. This was attributed to the increase muscle force required per pedal revolution at the lower cadence. Fatigue is delayed when using a high cadence near 100 rpm, compared to a low cadence near 50. http://www.wenzelcoaching.com/Article-CadenceFactors.htm ​

You shouldn't quote stuff if you don't understand it - you need to read it again. Incidentally, how much cycling have you done and how much performance training to you undertake regularly? Edit - I've just seen your sig - am I reading it wrong, or have you really only ridden 815 miles this year..?

 

[black'n'yellow]

david K come up with the most constructive comments. - but its self defeating - basically if your fit enough you can spin in a low gear for longer and this will get you up the hill quicker , but if your not fit enough you will burn out first so its probably better to go slow candence higher gear.

still not getting it..??

 

[Rob3rt]

still not getting it..??

You would have a more productive time rubbing your face on a cheese grater!

 

[black'n'yellow]

You would have a more productive time rubbing your face on a cheese grater!

actually, I haven't shaved this morning...

 

[Boon 51]

As a slant..
Hows the best way to work out your cadence with out a bike computer..

 

[Sittingduck]

Count the number of complete pedal revolutions in your head over a period of 10 seconds and multiply by 6, or 15 seconds and x4?

 

[david k]

So, using your logic, why don't we all pedal at 180rpm everywhere so we can all ride 10 times longer..? That argument is a complete fallacy and I'm suprised you can't see that. The only thing that matters in performance cycling is sustainable power - your cadence will be a by-product of that. Of course fitter cyclists tend to have slightly higher cadence than untrained riders, but that is a symptom of fitness, nothing more. The only thing you need to manage consciously while riding is your effort level - everything else will take care of itself.

You shouldn't quote stuff if you don't understand it - you need to read it again. Incidentally, how much cycling have you done and how much performance training to you undertake regularly? Edit - I've just seen your sig - am I reading it wrong, or have you really only ridden 815 miles this year..?

Not sure what riding 815 miles this year has to do with it, would riding more make me automatically right? You judge people based on their mileage obviously. I've been a professional rugby player in the past and trained full time, does that make me automatically right? Obviously not, so stop trying to be a smart arse and contribute without the pathetic put downs.

If I have misunderstood the quote can you kindly point out what it means if it does not mean fatigue is less with higher cadence? There are people I ride with who share this view, maybe we are all wrong, you claim to have knowledge on this subject so please enlighten us.

 

[black'n'yellow]

Not sure what riding 815 miles this year has to do with it, would riding more make me automatically right?

no, but if you did ride your bike more, you might understand a bit more about cadence as it applies in the real world, as opposed to simply what you read on the internet.

If I have misunderstood the quote can you kindly point out what it means if it does not mean fatigue is less with higher cadence? There are people I ride with who share this view, maybe we are all wrong, you claim to have knowledge on this subject so please enlighten us.

How about we both ride up the same hill..? I'll ride up in 50/18 and you can spin up in 34/16. Leaving aside the question of who would get to the top first, which one of us would actually tire first..?? Answer me that, please....

 

[david k]

no, but if you did ride your bike more, you might understand a bit more about cadence as it applies in the real world, as opposed to simply what you read on the internet.

How about we both ride up the same hill..? I'll ride up in 50/18 and you can spin up in 34/16. Leaving aside the question of who would get to the top first, which one of us would actually tire first..?? Answer me that, please....

ive no idea how fit you are so couldnt answer that question.

however, if i rode up a very long hill with a high cadence low gear and then the same hill low cadence high gear, ensuring i got to the top in the same time which would tire me the most?

In my experience it would tire me less over a period of time using a higher cadence. Its my experience and discussions with friends that formed my opinion of high cadence is better, I only used an internet search to try to find information that supports my thoughts, and as far as I can see it does, however id happily be proved wrong