|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Pedaling rates
I've always understood that it's more efficient to pedal faster for a
given speed and have religiously tried to get my RPM up as much as possible. Just recently there was a study going on at the uni at which I work and they were asking for volunteers who did varying amounts and speeds on cycles. I took part and was amazed to find, after a battery of tests that I had been pedaling *way* too fast and wasting large amounts of energy. It turns out that my optimum rate if trying to go as fast as possible on the flat is 78 RPM. (I had been habitually doing 95RPM). I was told that a lot of keen cyclists pedal much too fast in the mistaken belief that it's more efficient. Apparantly it is believed that this is caused by people trying to ape TDF entrants who are operating at a quite different level to 'normal' cyclists. Since I've cut down on the RPM I've found that I'm getting from a-b faster or with less effort and cycling has become a slightly more pleasant experience. If you have a pulse monitor and a cycle computer you can easily do an experiment yourself. Find a quiet road or track and do a mile or so, back and forth at a fixed speed using different RPM's. Measure your heart rate in each case. The lower the heart rate, the more efficiently you are performing. I don't think this will ever indicate that you should be 'munching' the gears (going very slowly with great strain on the joints), but you may be surprised at how much energy you are wasting spinning the pedals too fast. Ron |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Pedaling rates
Ron Graham said the following on 01/02/2007 13:11:
energy. It turns out that my optimum rate if trying to go as fast as possible on the flat is 78 RPM. (I had been habitually doing 95RPM). By my best guesstimate by counting revs over 15 seconds I pedal at around 75-80rpm... This speed was arrived at by just riding my bike at a cadence that took least effort to maintain a given speed. Scientists. Pah!! -- Paul Boyd http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Pedaling rates
Ron Graham wrote:
I've always understood that it's more efficient to pedal faster for a given speed and have religiously tried to get my RPM up as much as possible. Up to a point... the point of a high cadence is it should be aerobic, while mashing is at least partly anaerobic. As long as you're up to your aerobic threshold then more cadence isn't necessarily better. energy. It turns out that my optimum rate if trying to go as fast as possible on the flat is 78 RPM. (I had been habitually doing 95RPM). I was told that a lot of keen cyclists pedal much too fast in the mistaken belief that it's more efficient. Also the case that different people have different physiologies and work better in different ways. I was told that around 80 is a good aiming point for an aerobic threshold, and 78 isn't far from that. Pete. -- Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Pedaling rates
Ron Graham wrote:
I've always understood that it's more efficient to pedal faster for a given speed and have religiously tried to get my RPM up as much as possible. No; there is an optimum (clearly...). The general advice is based on the observation that most people pedal far too slowly. BugBear |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Pedaling rates
bugbear wrote:
Ron Graham wrote: I've always understood that it's more efficient to pedal faster for a given speed and have religiously tried to get my RPM up as much as possible. No; there is an optimum (clearly...). The general advice is based on the observation that most people pedal far too slowly. The general problem is that general advice is based on the average of what people do and is sometimes the wrong advice if you're not average. Many people aren't. -- Chris Malcolm DoD #205 IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/] |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Pedaling rates
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 14:40:56 +0000 (UTC), Chris Malcolm
wrote: bugbear wrote: Ron Graham wrote: I've always understood that it's more efficient to pedal faster for a given speed and have religiously tried to get my RPM up as much as possible. No; there is an optimum (clearly...). The general advice is based on the observation that most people pedal far too slowly. The general problem is that general advice is based on the average of what people do and is sometimes the wrong advice if you're not average. Many people aren't. Yes, but on average they are, (generally) :-) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Pedaling rates
On Feb 1, 1:11 pm, Ron Graham wrote:
I've always understood that it's more efficient to pedal faster for a given speed and have religiously tried to get my RPM up as much as possible. Just recently there was a study going on at the uni at which I work and they were asking for volunteers who did varying amounts and speeds on cycles. I took part and was amazed to find, after a battery of tests that I had been pedaling *way* too fast and wasting large amounts of energy. It turns out that my optimum rate if trying to go as fast as possible on the flat is 78 RPM. (I had been habitually doing 95RPM). I was told that a lot of keen cyclists pedal much too fast in the mistaken belief that it's more efficient. Apparantly it is believed that this is caused by people trying to ape TDF entrants who are operating at a quite different level to 'normal' cyclists. Since I've cut down on the RPM I've found that I'm getting from a-b faster or with less effort and cycling has become a slightly more pleasant experience. If you have a pulse monitor and a cycle computer you can easily do an experiment yourself. Find a quiet road or track and do a mile or so, back and forth at a fixed speed using different RPM's. Measure your heart rate in each case. The lower the heart rate, the more efficiently you are performing. I don't think this will ever indicate that you should be 'munching' the gears (going very slowly with great strain on the joints), but you may be surprised at how much energy you are wasting spinning the pedals too fast. I'm pretty sure it's never been argued that a high cadence is more efficient - in fact ISTR a study from decades ago that found that 60 was the optimum cadence for efficiency in terms of energy used to energy supplied to the pedals. This is why people tend to pick a cadence of about 60. However, that's not the only efficiency that matters. While a cadence of 60 is most efficient from the viewpoint of how much you need to eat, it causes your muscles to tire more quickly (presumably, although I don't remember for certain, due to lactic acid buildup) and a faster cadence can be sustained for longer. I recall another study, also from decades ago, that found that the cooling airstream from a moving cyclist is absolutely critical for measuring a cyclists performance. Top cyclists who could maintain their effort all day when on the road were failing after about 15 minutes on the exercise bike due to overheating. I would guess that any tests done without a 15+mph wind blowing over you would tend to find that the optimum cadence is the most energy efficient due to there being the least heat to sweat out. Tim. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Pedaling rates
Following on from Ron Graham's message. . .
Since I've cut down on the RPM I've found that I'm getting from a-b faster or with less effort and cycling has become a slightly more pleasant experience. Typical aim-for figures are 80 for steady cycling and 95 for bursts. As you know your body 'learns' and adapts as a result of exercise. A burst can be very 'efficient' as a way to get up a short hill. Try plodding up such a (short) hill and try sprinting at the bottom and maintaining the cadence to the top and you'll find the latter makes you pant but is over in half the time and each such attack in the early part of the season[1] helps later. I don't think this will ever indicate that you should be 'munching' the gears (going very slowly with great strain on the joints), but you may Also beware, or perhaps beware more, of strain on muscles and tendons. [1] For those like me who mainly cycle in the summer we need to start from jelly-muscles and foggy-lungs again each spring. -- PETER FOX Not the same since the bridge building business collapsed 2 Tees Close, Witham, Essex. Gravity beer in Essex http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Pedaling rates
Quoting Ron Graham :
I've always understood that it's more efficient to pedal faster for a given speed and have religiously tried to get my RPM up as much as possible. That's a bit of a misconception. It's generally more efficient to pedal at the cadence that feels comfortable - but if that comfortable speed is higher, it will be again more efficient. Hence you might pedal at an uncomfortable cadence to eventually raise overall efficiency. -- David Damerell Distortion Field! Today is Teleute, February. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
decrease of heart rates | le-sheq | Techniques | 4 | February 28th 06 11:33 PM |
Heart rates. | Simon Mason | UK | 0 | January 21st 06 07:45 PM |
Metabolism of Fat at Elevated Heart Rates | Your name | Techniques | 11 | September 16th 04 07:11 PM |
Hydration and weight loss rates | Chris | Racing | 30 | March 18th 04 04:10 PM |
Discount Motel Rates For Bicyclist | Jerry Schonewille | General | 2 | July 7th 03 01:37 PM |