Building Cadence.....

[sarahspins]

Honestly... I say go with what your are comfortable with... anything over 60 is pretty "safe" on your joints (at least, that's what my PT has always told me). If you were much under that, then I would worry.. but 65-70 is fine... especially if you really aren't moving very fast - I think a slower cadence puts more stress on your joints at 20mph than it does at 12mph.

I think keeping a steady cadence (>60) and moving at your own pace is more important than trying to hit 85 if your body just can't keep up, KWIM? I think it will come in time.. like I said yesterday, I was surprised mine was as high as it is, because I really thought I was still pedaling much slower (I know I was slower starting out). I definitely notice that I am moving faster in the same gears compared to a few months ago.

As far as I am concerned you build leg strength either way... I think it's the amount of time you're actually out on the bike more than the cadence you maintain.

[OakLeaf]

I think a slower cadence puts more stress on your joints at 20mph than it does at 12mph.

It's the force, not the speed.

Climbing is when cadence is most likely to be very low, and it's also where there's automatically a large amount of force involved. In my actual riding, there's a WHOLE lot more force on my knees driving 65 rpm up a 15% grade at 5 mph than there would be, say, descending a 1% grade at the same cadence at 25 mph.

All other things being equal (grade, wind including whether or not you're drafting, road conditions, bike), then yes, there will be more force at a higher speed than a lower one - but all things are almost never equal, on a bicycle. That's why people spend thousands for power meters.

[sarahspins]

All other things being equal (grade, wind including whether or not you're drafting, road conditions, bike), then yes, there will be more force at a higher speed than a lower one - but all things are almost never equal, on a bicycle. That's why people spend thousands for power meters.

That's what I meant... all things being equal.. I realize that rarely happens, but still.. lol :P

But I do think that with increased fitness comes the ability to maintain a faster cadence... so it should come with time I don't think that 65-70 is dangerous at all.

[BalaRoja]

That's what I meant... all things being equal.. I realize that rarely happens, but still.. lol :P

But I do think that with increased fitness comes the ability to maintain a faster cadence... so it should come with time I don't think that 65-70 is dangerous at all.

Actually, something you can try just for fun, is to put your bike in the smallest/easiest gear combo you have and then spin as fast as you can for several minutes. Moving your entire lower body that quickly is going to stimulate your heart beat - even though you may not be generating very much wattage/power.

I think if you want to ride at higher cadences then you have to practice at it. If you train yourself to pedal at 65rpm's then you get best at doing just that. Kind of like riding in one position all the time on the bars and then switching - you probably need to adjust a bit but then get better at it.

The good thing is you can train yourself to pedal at different cadences but I believe most people will still have a preferred or as some say, 'self-selected' cadence that they fall back into during a typical ride. When I started riding again a few months back, my cadence was typically around 70-80 and now I'm more comfortable in the 90-100 range. I've had my share of knee injuries so I tend to prefer a higher cadence.

Contrary to what some might imagine, a lot of success at the top levels of sprinting on the track is actually being able to apply force at really, really high cadences (think 135+ rpm) which results in huge power outputs rather than using even greater force per pedal stroke at obviously lower rpm's. Watch any of the top women sprinters or the guys, in the 200 meters or the kilo and you'll see they usually get up to 150, sometimes even 200 rpm for substantial periods.

Basically you can pedal quicker, you can pedal with more force, or do both. The combination of these is your equivalent power. That in conjunction with the amount of rolling resistance, wind resistance (which considers your frontal area and drag), and the resistance of gravity you overcome = speed.

The bottom line though is your comfort and staying injury free. So if it works for you and you have no problems, then stick with what is working.

[kimikaw]

Thanks everyone, great advice.

While the 65rpm cadence seems to be my current go to and settle in tempo, I want more speed. And I now know unless I can build cadence, I'm not really going to build speed. Heck on a flat without a significant headwind, I can auto-pilot at 65-70rpm at my highest gear/speed. So pedalling faster my only option.

I think for me it's not only a fitness/ get more aerobically fit for biking, but also a mindset shift. It bothers me (mentally) to be in the easier, spinning gears. Seems wrong, like my legs should be "working" more. I think it's the last 15 or so months focused on strength training, building muscle, making sure I was using high enough resistance on machines to really bring value. One thing forcing myself to ride at that higher cadence/lower strength output did was showed me what kind of opportunity I had to progress my riding. Between the gasping for air, and realizing if I developed both the aerobic capability and greater leg strength, I will go faster, be a better rider.

[246marathon]

Hello everyone. This is my first time replying on this forum (or any forum for that matter!). I started biking in the last month, after spending the last 25 years as a distance runner - anything from the mile to the marathon. Now that I am older (43), I have developed structural foot pain and have chosen to bike since running everyday is painful. Duathlons next summer are my goal and I must say - thanks to my sister in law, I LOVE BIKING!!! It's nice to get excited about something again and look forward to seeing what I can do on a bike. Anyway.....

The cadence issue is something I also struggle with sometimes. Most of my rides are anywhere from 75-90 or more but I often feel like I sacrifice mph in order to keep the cadence at a reasonable level. Most winter training I have researched as said to ride a lot of miles in the 80-90 rpm range to build an aerobic base. But I sometimes don't feel like my heart rate gets very high (may be because of all the running), and I am switching gears often, especially when I come to a long hill, in order to keep the cadence. Am I OK doing this for the winter to build a base, or should I also add more resistance and slow down the cadence some in order to gain power? I have tried both, and when my cadence was lower and I felt like I was giving it everything because the resistance was higher, my legs were spent very quickly. At 80-85 rpm, I can go 20-25 miles very easily, and follow that with a run.

Since I am new to this whole biking thing, is what I am doing OK, and then in the spring adding some intervals of very high cadence, and some of low cadence and high resistance for strength? Any help anyone has would be great. Having run and coached runners, I am thinking that doing some of the same types of workouts, only geared for the bike, will help increase my overall speed for the sprint duathlons next year.

I want to say that it is very refreshing to see answers/information presented in a way that doesn't make novices like myself, feel like our questions are ridiculous. It is especially nice to link up with so many women who are passionate about the same things. I thank you and look forward to reading more about you all in the future!

"See in yourself not the limits, but the stars"

[OakLeaf]

I sometimes don't feel like my heart rate gets very high (may be because of all the running)

I think you're right - for one thing, any given person's MHR for cycling will be around 5 bpm lower than their MHR for running - and also to me, running is just way more aerobically demanding. I'm running much more now than I ever did, and one thing I found this summer is that I never, not once, ran out of air on the bike. I don't race or push myself terribly hard on the bike, but last year there were definitely hills where I was struggling for breath, and sprints where oxygen was as much a limiting factor as muscle. Since I started running more, that's just not the case.

Still, you can get your HR pretty high on the bike. IME I just have to work at it a lot harder than I do running.

[BalaRoja]

Hello everyone. This is my first time replying on this forum (or any forum for that matter!). I started biking in the last month, after spending the last 25 years as a distance runner - anything from the mile to the marathon. Now that I am older (43), I have developed structural foot pain and have chosen to bike since running everyday is painful. Duathlons next summer are my goal and I must say - thanks to my sister in law, I LOVE BIKING!!! It's nice to get excited about something again and look forward to seeing what I can do on a bike. Anyway.....

The cadence issue is something I also struggle with sometimes. Most of my rides are anywhere from 75-90 or more but I often feel like I sacrifice mph in order to keep the cadence at a reasonable level. Most winter training I have researched as said to ride a lot of miles in the 80-90 rpm range to build an aerobic base. But I sometimes don't feel like my heart rate gets very high (may be because of all the running), and I am switching gears often, especially when I come to a long hill, in order to keep the cadence. Am I OK doing this for the winter to build a base, or should I also add more resistance and slow down the cadence some in order to gain power? I have tried both, and when my cadence was lower and I felt like I was giving it everything because the resistance was higher, my legs were spent very quickly. At 80-85 rpm, I can go 20-25 miles very easily, and follow that with a run.

Since I am new to this whole biking thing, is what I am doing OK, and then in the spring adding some intervals of very high cadence, and some of low cadence and high resistance for strength? Any help anyone has would be great. Having run and coached runners, I am thinking that doing some of the same types of workouts, only geared for the bike, will help increase my overall speed for the sprint duathlons next year.

I want to say that it is very refreshing to see answers/information presented in a way that doesn't make novices like myself, feel like our questions are ridiculous. It is especially nice to link up with so many women who are passionate about the same things. I thank you and look forward to reading more about you all in the future!

"See in yourself not the limits, but the stars"

Good for you on your new goals and for taking up cycling. Sometimes that how it is - you try new things and they can be very rewarding. Sounds like you are in the right place.

You probably generate a higher max heart rate while running because it is clearly a highly weight bearing activity whereas cycling isn't quite as weight bearing. Steep hills on a bike will have you bearing the most weight while on a bike and should get your heart rate fairly high. Most people I've talked to who do triathlons always mention a higher max heart rate on runs than biking so you wouldn't be alone there.

About your cadence question - from everything I've seen, brand new riders are more likely to use a lower cadence, say 60ish. (not without exceptions obviously) Whereas more experienced people tend to use a higher cadence, roughly 90ish.

There are a lot of advantages to a higher cadence. One of the more obvious ones is that it is easier to accelerate if you are spinning comfortably at 85 rpms, than if you are grinding at 55 - assuming you are going the same speed (20 mph at 85rpms & 20 mph at 55 rpms) because each pedal stroke at 85rpms requires less force. Another thing is how it tends to generate less muscle fatigue - a higher cadence - in your legs than if using a bigger gear. It seems like you've noticed that in your own training already when you use a higher cadence and have an easier time running later. It probably is 'saving your legs' a bit. I bet serious triathletes and ladies here who participate in multi-sport competitions can give you a more insightful response on the bike then run angle.

The corollary of all this is that a higher cadence you will feel your heart rate and cardiovascular system be more taxed. As I mentioned in another response, get on your bike and get in the granny gear and spin to 100+ rpms for as long as you can - you can even do this will going downhill - and you'll notice how your heart beat speeds up very quickly, even if you are basically coasting down a hill.

If you are a duathlete, then I assume your bike goals in a race are along the lines of a time trial. Meaning the faster you go, the better your result since it is all about overall time right?

In that case, just use whatever cadence you are more comfortable with. Try different ones for a few weeks to get used to how they feel and I bet you'll soon find your happy cadence spot, whether that's 60, 80 or 110