Energy conservation ... sitting vs standing on hill climbs.

[fenlandpsychocyclist]

I can spin a maximum of 100 rpm up a 1 in 20 gradient whilst seated at x mph.
I can spin a maximum of 70 rpm up the same gradient and same speed whilst standing.

Which is most efficient?
Which method conserves the most energy when on a long ride?

 

[PK99]

Sitting. When standing you are using more muscle groups which need feeding.

A friend did a day at the Manchester velodrome with the sky team - his max power standing was double hi max power seated but the coach told him not to stand other than for very short bursts because it is MUCH less efficient.

On a club run, standing to blast over a bump and claim bragging rights is fine (and good interval training on rolling rides) but on an endurance ride sit and spin!

 

[User6179]

I can spin a maximum of 100 rpm up a 1 in 20 gradient whilst seated at x mph.
I can spin a maximum of 70 rpm up the same gradient and same speed whilst standing.

Which is most efficient?
Which method conserves the most energy when on a long ride?

Im maybe wrong but I thought you would use exactly the same amount of energy sitting or standing !?

 

[Garz]

Which is most efficient?

Seated.

Which method conserves the most energy when on a long ride?

Seated.

 

[amaferanga]

Marginally more efficient seated, not much more efficient. When the hills get really steep though and cadence drops there's really nothing in it. But that's taking a single hill in isolation. Over the course of a long ride its probably better to mix things up.

 

[fossyant]

I'd like to see you do 100 rpm up a 1 in 5 ! It's all personal to the rider, and standing does use more energy as you use more muscles, especially core and arms.

Not always less efficient though ! Standing alows you to put more power through by 'pulling' on the bike.

This debate could rage on. If you've got a very long ride, with lots of hills, then it's adviseable to sit where possible, but, your body does need a break, and standing will use different muscles.

TBH this is a 'lab' type question. The roads and hills are real, and rider style and weather conditions can change that, especially gearing. I don't have a road bike that could do 100 rpm up a 1 in 5, more like 40 rpm grind.

 

[amaferanga]

I'd like to see you do 100 rpm up a 1 in 5 ! ....

1 in 20 in the OP, not 1 in 5.

 

[Berties]

i keep in the saddle,standing slows you down,you tend to use calves as well when you stand so more power yes,so a little bit of a rest on the thighs maybe,and gives you a instant push to gain momentum,
its a personal choice that will reflect on ride length and grade etc

 

[fossyant]

1 in 20 in the OP, not 1 in 5.

Oops. 1 in 20 - flippin eck - it's a bump. Just sit and ride. Standing is a waste of time on such a small gradient !

 

[GrasB]

I can spin a maximum of 100 rpm up a 1 in 20 gradient whilst seated at x mph.
I can spin a maximum of 70 rpm up the same gradient and same speed whilst standing.

Which is most efficient?

Sitting

Which method conserves the most energy when on a long ride?

Sitting, however you may well end up more fatigued as you're not spreading the load across all the muscle sets you have available for climbing.

I'd like to see you do 100 rpm up a 1 in 5 !

I've seen people do 85rpm up 1 in 4s... however their gearing inches have been in single figures.

 

[Herr-B]

I haven't done many hills (some around here would say I've done none!), but the slight inclines I've done I'd say seating was the most efficient. If I stand my thighs begin to shout 'no more!'.

 

[pally83]

I haven't done many hills (some around here would say I've done none!), but the slight inclines I've done I'd say seating was the most efficient. If I stand my thighs begin to shout 'no more!'.

Shut up legs!!

I find a mix of sitting and standing works for me. Standing uses more energy but it also uses different muscles.

I tend to sit over lesser gradients, stand on steeper and do a mix of both (complete with a mix of spinning and grinding) on anything over a few hundred metres in length.

I have noticed that i've been doing more standing of late, though.

 

[amaferanga]

More often than not people that claim that climbing out of the saddle is terribly inefficient and/or slow are those that never do it. They maybe try it from time to time and decide it puffs them out so it's no good. But like most things, it requires practice. Do it often and you might find you can climb hills equally quickly either way, which is a nice option to have. And when hills get really steep such that you cadence likely drops <60rpm I believe there's actually nothing in it in efficiency terms and personally I find climbing at low cadence works better for me if I'm out of the saddle.

Of course for a 1 in 20 you should have plenty low enough gears to spin away happily...

 

[Sittingduck]

i keep in the saddle,standing slows you down,

Hmm, I find exactly the opposite to be true
All personal choice, as mentioned... I used to remain seated virtually all the time. Stand up a lot these days and it definitely helps. For me, at least.

 

[fossyant]

Having now been corrected..... a 5% incline is very much like Long Hill, Woodhead etc. It's a long drag, and you'll be far faster sitting down than standing and grinding. If you get a 'bump' on the climb, then it's sometimes advantageous to get out of the saddle and welly it over the bump, then settle back in. You will also be faster sat down on this type of gradient.