# Proper Cadence for MTB -- 80 rpm?



## wheelbiter (Sep 27, 2005)

I just read in MTB action that they suggested a rpm of 80. It was most efficient, etc.
I have always been told and trained for 90 or a little better.

I also ride a road bike for training. Are the rpm's different for the two sports. I wonder what I should be doing?

Just looking for some more knowledge on the idea of 80 rpms before I see if I should change.

Thanks, in advance


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

I would have to agree with 80 RPM for a mountain bike.

At a bit lower cadence you have use more force, this means that you lift yourself a bit off your seat, smoothing out the ride. Also you have to rember on the road acceleration are key and a higher cadence allows more acceleration, but acceleration isn't a big deal on a MTB.


----------



## Dmytro (Nov 11, 2003)

I don't know if MTB action is the most reliable source of information... but 80 rpm for MTB sounds about right. The other thing I find is that on the MTB the terrain sort of dictates the cadence. I ride a hardtail and typically pause the pedalling when going over roots, etc.


----------



## Some Guy (Mar 27, 2005)

LMN said:


> but acceleration isn't a big deal on a MTB.


It isn't? Here was I thinking it was a huge deal! Accelerating out of corners, around other riders, up steep pinches... acceleration is very important.

The efficiency of 90-120rpm holds true for mountain biking. Often you will have to use a lower cadence for a rough or bumpy section, but on the smoother/open parts of a course you should still be aiming at 90+.


----------



## A-Hol (Dec 31, 2005)

In general a high cadence will keep your legs fresher longer. 80 should be fine, but 90-100 may work better for others. 

Maybe more importantly, working on pedaling in circles at a good cadence will benefit greatly...smooth pedal stroke (instead of mashing).

Good high cadence with a smooth pedal stroke...very hard to master, but very important.


----------



## gumbymark (May 25, 2007)

I ride at 100-110 on the road (I'm a spinner). I ride/race around 90 on the mtb. This is the range where I feel the most comfortable. I didn't find this by reading a magazine or what somebody said on the interwebs. It took me 3 years of riding to find this out.

Ride what you feel is best, not what a magazine says (esp. MTBA).


----------



## Linga115 (Mar 23, 2008)

gumbymark said:


> I ride at 100-110 on the road (I'm a spinner). I ride/race around 90 on the mtb. This is the range where I feel the most comfortable. I didn't find this by reading a magazine or what somebody said on the interwebs. It took me 3 years of riding to find this out.
> 
> Ride what you feel is best, not what a magazine says (esp. MTBA).


agreed. the magazine suggests a good rule of thumb, but it all comes down to what you feel comfortable with. personally i ride at a lower rpm with more force than most people. when im tired ill do high rpm in granny gear tho.


----------



## chwesley (Nov 1, 2006)

For me i just ride at whats comfortable and what can allow me to go the fastest for the longest time. I tend to ride at a high cadence, i dont know cause my computer doesnt measure it, but its pretty fast. more like spinning, but it also depends on the terrain, cause when your going up and going down the cadence just changes always.


----------



## serious (Jan 25, 2005)

For me, cadence means nothing on the mountain bike. And as *Dmytro* mentioned, terrain dictates so much of your cadence. Besides I singlespeed a lot, so spinning steadily become even more elusive.

I pay attention to cadence on the trainer or on the road, where I have the opportunity to really work on specifics.


----------



## kellefson (Mar 12, 2007)

80 is about what I spin, but then again, I am not very fast.


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

I did a lot of experimentation on a trainer about a decade back and discovered that I can produce more power over time (or speed anyways) by spinning around 110 in a smaller gear than any other combination I tried. I tried everything from 70 to 130 in increments of 5. These were timed tests were 30 minutes long. I did the same test for 3 minutes too. In that test, 115 is my optimal cadence.

I don't have very big legs even after 25 years of riding/racing, so I guess I make up for by spinning the pedals more. Your results will certainly vary.


----------



## Dmytro (Nov 11, 2003)

GlazedHam said:


> I did a lot of experimentation on a trainer about a decade back and discovered that I can produce more power over time (or speed anyways) by spinning around 110 in a smaller gear than any other combination I tried. I tried everything from 70 to 130 in increments of 5. These were timed tests were 30 minutes long. I did the same test for 3 minutes too. In that test, 115 is my optimal cadence.
> 
> I don't have very big legs even after 25 years of riding/racing, so I guess I make up for by spinning the pedals more. Your results will certainly vary.


Just out of curiosity, what was the difference in power/speed between the various cadences?


----------



## smithy (Jun 28, 2006)

As said, I find that the terrain dictates the cadence you choose. I'm more of a spinner by nature, but my average cadence is definately lower on mtb vs. road. On a long, fireroad climb for example, I wouldn't be mashing a big gear, but spinning a smaller one.


----------



## cpeterson (Nov 9, 2007)

there is no across the board proper cadence for mtb riding. it depends on how you ride and what you are doing. if you are in too big a gear you will not get any acceleration and get bogged down, if too easy you will get no power and slow down. it depends on the quality and efficency of your pedal stroke and how your muscles function at different speeds. key word is yours not someone elses.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

cpeterson said:


> there is no across the board proper cadence for mtb riding. it depends on how you ride and what you are doing. if you are in too big a gear you will not get any acceleration and get bogged down, if too easy you will get no power and slow down. it depends on the quality and efficency of your pedal stroke and how your muscles function at different speeds. key word is yours not someone elses.


True.

But that doesn't mean that you currently pedal at the correct cadence for you. The trick is to find correct cadence for you.

BTW not to shabby at the short track.


----------



## coryell (Mar 9, 2008)

what about varying your candence by using different gears even when the terrain, or grade, does not change but keep speed the same. This seems to help keep the legs fresh.


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

*speed is the key*



Dmytro said:


> Just out of curiosity, what was the difference in power/speed between the various cadences?


I cannot put my hands on the records at this time, but from memory...for the 30 minute test the differences were about 12% --so I could ride an average of 12% faster at 110 then 70. Anything between 105 and 120 were pretty close though.

The shorter test was really tough to get a measurement on initially because I kept blowing up at the end of the low RPM tests. In the end, the difference was much smaller ..like 2/10ths mph on an average of about 10 tests over a 3 month period.

Also, I had been doing these types of intervals at wildly different RPMs for a few years leading up to this, so I don't think the test was too skewed by specificity of training at one RPM. Actually, I used to do most of my intervals on mild hill climbs, so I would have thought I would be adapted for the low RPM stuff.

Again ...this is a single data point and proves nothing, but 80 won't work for me.


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

One other point: I remember folks commenting on LA's 130 rpm spin. I observed him (on tv) to be more like 110 - 115 on the flats. I've seen him ride off road and it did not look too much slower.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

GlazedHam said:


> I cannot put my hands on the records at this time, but from memory...for the 30 minute test the differences were about 12% --so I could ride an average of 12% faster at 110 then 70. Anything between 105 and 120 were pretty close though.
> 
> The shorter test was really tough to get a measurement on initially because I kept blowing up at the end of the low RPM tests. In the end, the difference was much smaller ..like 2/10ths mph on an average of about 10 tests over a 3 month period.
> 
> ...


Did you do these test an MTB off road over rough terrain or did you do it on a road bike?

I watched the world cup MTB early this morning. I noted cadences of various riders, not a single one climbed at anywhere 90rpm, actually I would say few climbed as high as 80. The average was closer to 70.


----------



## used2Bhard (Dec 22, 2005)

*Legs*

I have big legs, that are a high percentage fast twitch muscle. I typically push a low cadence on the flats and rollers so I can adjust for terrain changes easier without spinning out and shifting. On climbs, I'm always a few gears easier than others I ride with and spinning faster. I can maintain power for longer periods, and I find I have traction better that way.

Overall I average 80, but its a combo of 70 and 90 that gets me there...


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

LMN said:


> Did you do these test an MTB off road over rough terrain or did you do it on a road bike?


Road bike on a trainer that was set up to give a slight up hill affect because of my computer at the time. It measured in increments of 1/10 mph up to 20 mph and after that it was increments of 1/2 mph. I wanted to stay below 20 mph the tests.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

GlazedHam said:


> Road bike on a trainer that was set up to give a slight up hill affect because of my computer at the time. It measured in increments of 1/10 mph up to 20 mph and after that it was increments of 1/2 mph. I wanted to stay below 20 mph the tests.


\

Your ideal cadence may be different when on rough terrain. On a trainner I am most confortable at 90-100 rpm. On my MTB off road I am comfortable at 70-80 rpm.

As I said before the low cadence serves to smooth things out.


----------



## angelobryant (Aug 27, 2007)

On the trails, I usually vary my cadence from the low 70 to the high 90 but not over 100. I usually do 70+ when I'm out of breath and 90+ if my legs are fatigued.


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

LMN said:


> \
> 
> Your ideal cadence may be different when on rough terrain. On a trainner I am most confortable at 90-100 rpm. On my MTB off road I am comfortable at 70-80 rpm.
> 
> As I said before the low cadence serves to smooth things out.


Maybe, but I'm so used to the higher cadences that I doubt it dips much. Sometimes I'll drop down to about 50 rmps if I'm planning to stand and pedal through a long rough section.


----------



## MrEconomics (Aug 23, 2004)

I don't use a cadence monitor on my MTB. I do almost all my training on the road. If I'm on my mtb, I'm either pre-riding or racing. During either of these events, looking down at cadence is not an option. I have my computer set for distance and average speed. I know what avg speed I need to maintain to get a certain time so having that displayed really helps with strategy. Of couse MTB racing is 20% planning, 80% improv and 10% death. Yes, that's a 110%, which you need to give to place anywhere near top 10.


----------



## StevenG (Nov 20, 2005)

Guppie58 said:


> Of couse MTB racing is 20% planning, 80% improv and 10% death. Yes, that's a 110%, which you need to give to place anywhere near top 10.


I like that, words to live by!


----------



## cpeterson (Nov 9, 2007)

I sit on a computrainer and perform a spin scan. then vary my cadence, start in the basement and move to the attic in 5 minute intervals holding a constant tempoish wattage. it shows you how efficent you are and where the dead spots are, the difference between legs etc. as the using cadence as the adjusted variable you can get a better idea of where you are best spending your time. you can also figure out how to pedal more smoothly. if you are really worried about what candence you should ride in get access to one of these, about 90 minutes initially, then about 40 minutes every few weeks through the season to see how you are applying the information should be sufficient.


----------



## sprocketjockey9 (Jul 18, 2006)

I'd say in order to find your proper mtb cadence, you would want a power meter with cadence ability. Then you could post ride do a quadrant analysis to determine the most effective cadence for you. The big problem with this is it's all done post processing and there's no ability to review while you are out riding at what works for the situation.

The big difference in cadence between road and mtb is: road often uses high force and high velocity pedal strokes (attacking, sprinting, etc), while mt biking uses high force and low velocity (accelerating, steep climbs ,etc) pedal strokes.


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

*Finding your cadence?*



LMN said:


> True.
> 
> But that doesn't mean that you currently pedal at the correct cadence for you. The trick is to find correct cadence for you.
> 
> BTW not to shabby at the short track.


I also have noticed that at *my* ideal cadence, I can pedal the bike with one leg until I get bored of it. At lower cadences, I usually blow up after a few minutes.


----------



## A-Hol (Dec 31, 2005)

GlazedHam said:


> I also have noticed that at *my* ideal cadence, I can pedal the bike with one leg until I get bored of it. At lower cadences, I usually blow up after a few minutes.


Pedaling w/one leg is a great exercise to help "round out" your pedal stroke...:thumbsup:


----------



## BruceBrown (Jan 16, 2004)

LMN said:


> I would have to agree with 80 RPM for a mountain bike.
> 
> At a bit lower cadence you have use more force, this means that you lift yourself a bit off your seat, smoothing out the ride. Also you have to rember on the road acceleration are key and a higher cadence allows more acceleration, but acceleration isn't a big deal on a MTB.


Yes, I know: this is a really, really _old_ thread. However, the subject remains current for many of us.

This year, I did a 20 minute FTP test to start my base training the first week of January. I didn't attempt to target any particular cadence, but let my body sort of self-select what felt the best and settle in where I could maintain the power for the duration. A review of the file says my average cadence was 77 rpm's during the test.

On the trainer, I actually love a higher cadence when doing Zone 2 and Zone 1 work where my cadence will self-select in the range between 90 - 105 rpm's. That's true out on the road bike for similar longer training rides in Zone 2. However, my body seems to prefer slower cadences on the higher power zones. And, just going on perception, that seems to be what I use 'on average' for mountain biking as well.

I don't recall using something like 105 rmp's at any point in a mountain bike race (but I've never used a power meter in a race to review a file). So I'm just going on perception.

That being said, the guidelines for conducting the FTP test from the coaching plan (XC mountain bike specific) I purchased says this:

_Select a gear that allows you to maintain a cadence between 95 and 100 rpm. Avoid the impulse to mash a big gear at slow rpm - the greater resistance will build more leg-burning lactic acid. The secret is to use the gearing that is most efficient for your personal riding style. Most athletes will respond better to using a slightly lighter gear than what you are accustomed to. Settle into your pace and avoid any power surges or accelerations. Pace at the maximum effort you can sustain at an even pace for 20 minutes - don't blow up halfway!_

Did I do the test wrong by averaging only 77 rpm's?

I've tried doing some Zone 4 intervals in the 95-100+ rpm range this post month and by the time I get to the third or fourth six minute interval spinning that high of a cadence the power is dipping and am clawing with everything I've got to stay in the power zone. If I slow the cadence down, I make the interval fine.

Should I just give up on the higher cadence for these intervals and go with what feels better for me - or what allows me to finish the interval work, or should I hang with the suffering in hopes that I eventually groove that higher cadence in the upper power zones?

TIA


----------



## Cusco (Aug 21, 2011)

BruceBrown said:


> Yes, I know: this is a really, really _old_ thread. However, the subject remains current for many of us.
> 
> This year, I did a 20 minute FTP test to start my base training the first week of January. I didn't attempt to target any particular cadence, but let my body sort of self-select what felt the best and settle in where I could maintain the power for the duration. A review of the file says my average cadence was 77 rpm's during the test.
> 
> ...


I'm certainly not an expert but from what I have read from Joe Friel I would say to stick with it and shoot for a higher cadence. I believe he recommends a cadence range of 85 - 95 for time trialing which should be somewhat similar to a FTP test in that your are trying to maintain a maximum power output over a specified period of time. Given FTP test are usually 20 minutes or so you should probably be on the high range of what Friel recommends ... +90 or so. It is also my understanding that higher cadence places a higher burden on one's aerobic capacity and less on pure leg strength and that it takes time for your body to adapt to the shift in your overall power balance.


----------



## WR304 (Jul 9, 2004)

BruceBrown said:


> "The secret is to use the gearing that is most efficient for your personal riding style."
> 
> Did I do the test wrong by averaging only 77 rpm's?
> 
> ...


The first sentence is the one I'd follow. Cadence recommendations are always fairly broad and generic. If you consistently feel best trying hard at 77rpm then I'd stick with that.

What you tend to see with cadence is that you'll self select a higher cadence when not trying too hard, just tapping through on the flat, but once the effort starts to build, such as riding uphill, then the self selected cadence drops a bit. I'd say that's more or less what you're doing here, dropping your cadence automatically.

So long as your knees aren't exploding I wouldn't worry about it. 77rpm is at the lower end of the scale but it's hardly extreme. I once saw a ride file from someone who'd ridden up the Stelvio Pass in Italy. They did the entire 15 mile climb at a steady speed of about 6mph and a cadence of 50rpm.

http://www.climbbybike.com/climb.asp?qryMountainID=39

One thing I would say about cadence is that it's useful to be able to change it at points. Being able to lift your cadence for accelerations to respond to surges or accelerate towards an obstacle without changing gear. Quite a nice interval session to do are under over intervals with each part set to a different cadence. It gives you a feel for being able to change cadence as needed.

http://forums.mtbr.com/xc-racing-tr...trainer-873535-post10660032.html#post10660032


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

personally I don't really look for my cadence. For me it is something set like seat height.

however, I do remember that Mr. Doping Armstrong changed his cadence for the mountains by training. He trained for higher cadence since this was supposed to be more efficient. Don't know if this holds true without syringe EPO in your blood, though.


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

Just saw this a few days ago, and may give someone a little bit more info on this topic

Effects of Cadence on Aerobic Capacity Following a Prolonged, Varied Intensity 
Cycling Trial


----------



## irishpitbull (Sep 29, 2011)

I think cadence is relative to fitness/strength. As my fitness has progressed, my power has increased and my sweet spot cadence has changed. As I have gotten stronger over the base portion of my training, my Avg cadence per workout has decrease for upper 90's to mid to lower 80's.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

most my sustained power comes from 88-90 rpm

so, I would say 88 is mine. a friend is 70 and he motors like a madman at 70.

but if I was on a TT bike I would ride the rivet, change leg angle, and my power production best cadence goes to 105-107. 
------------
Ima ex-road racer and practice ultra-high cadence, and absolutely do whip out 140rpm on the mountain bike three or four times every ride, usually up some grunts...

a) it gives my legs a rest from <100. changes things up

b) I practice one-legged 170rpm, and two legged 210rpm on a flywheel/leather brake

c) having practice super high cadence indoors, 140 on trail is smooth and efficient to a degree. I can bang 140rpm for about 5 miles with no breaks, and do 120 all day long. though anything >110 burns more calories than practical, so do only >110 for certain terrain or to rest my legs from low rpm torque

everyone is different. I can only suggest that if you do not practice ultra-high cadences then you should, as practicing ugly 170-210rpm opened the door to very smooth bursts >120<140 and I find this is another tool I can use to rest my legs or pop up grunts...also helps to pedal over-the-tops of hills and down the other side in one long pull without having to shift-up too soon.

------------
a good tool is a trainer with watts that can hold you to a specific wattage and adjust the load no matter what RPM's you push. really teaches you to find your best power curve/lactate thresholds....so, 345 watts at 80 rpm, bump it up to 110 rpm, the trainer adjusts load so the actual watts you produce to stay at that rpm stays fixed at 345. some trainers I have seen do not do this and your watts climb as you increase rpm


----------



## BruceBrown (Jan 16, 2004)

Walt Disney's Frozen Head said:


> Just saw this a few days ago, and may give someone a little bit more info on this topic
> 
> Effects of Cadence on Aerobic Capacity Following a Prolonged, Varied Intensity
> Cycling Trial


Thanks for the link. Very interesting indeed.

_The results of this study confirm our hypothesis that during prolonged cycling at varying sub-maximal intensities and power outputs, higher cadences (100 rpm) reduce maximal power output during a subsequent performance test compared to a lower more energetically economical cadence (80 rpm). When a fixed cadence was used throughout this test, final maximal performance was ~35W lower for the 100 vs. 80 rpm condition. _

35W difference? Wow!

and....

_When using our novel prolonged cycling protocol that simulated conditions that occur during competitive cycling (varied intensities and sub-maximal workloads), the selection of a higher freely chosen cadence (100 vs. 80 rpm) resulted in excess energy expenditure (~5-6 % greater) and an attenuation of subsequent maximal performance (i.e., reduced power output). In addition, gross efficiency was lower during both exercise intensities at our higher pedaling frequency. These results suggest that, in competitive cyclists, selection of a high cadence during prolonged, variable, low-moderate submaximal exercise intensities subsequently results in greater energy expenditure and reduced maximal power output when compared to a lower cadence._

Hmmmm.....!

I know LMN posted in this thread about the 80 rpm cadence (albeit years ago), but this certainly makes sense to me as to why/how my body self-selects cadences in the 75-85 range. Even though I do train also using cadences of 90-95 and up to 105+, seems my body likes a slower cadence when it comes to higher wattages.

I've got another FTP test coming up weekend after next. I could try one at a higher cadence, but if my L4 interval experiments the past 3 weeks are any indication - I could venture a guess that my numbers would sag quite a bit if I was shooting for keeping the cadence in the 95-105 rpm recommended range. I guess I plan on using the self-select cadence again like I did on the first FTP test in early January. Not a problem for me, because I can easily set the display to show time and watts without having to view the cadence. It seems my self-select cadence range comes from the previous 8 years of XC racing without using a power meter. It seems my legs, heart, and "rhythm" settle in to a range that is less than the higher spin recommendations I read about.

I'm still curious to learn and broaden my perspective with regard to optimum cadence. I am training on the bike using all sorts of cadences form 55 - 115+ at various power levels and durations because I know my cadence varies non-stop out on the dirt based on the terrain.

Seems to be a topic with multiple answers/opinions and no definitive rule of thumb. Does anybody know of any articles that might link a correlation between biorhythms, height, personality, etc...? Does a laid back, low stress person naturally select a slower cadence over a high strung, high energy, Type A personality, etc....?

Back to my weight lifting for Monday...


----------



## irishpitbull (Sep 29, 2011)

^ To many words.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

BruceBrown said:


> Thanks for the link. Very interesting indeed.
> 
> I've got another FTP test coming up weekend after next. I could try one at a higher cadence, but if my L4 interval experiments the past 3 weeks are any indication - I could venture a guess that my numbers would sag quite a bit if I was shooting for keeping the cadence in the 95-105 rpm recommended range. I guess I plan on using the self-select cadence again like I did on the first FTP test in early January. Not a problem for me, because I can easily set the display to show time and watts without having to view the cadence. It seems my self-select cadence range comes from the previous 8 years of XC racing without using a power meter. It seems my legs, heart, and "rhythm" settle in to a range that is less than the higher spin recommendations I read about.
> .


Do you do a 5 minute "blow out" before your FTP? Quite often I notice vastly different cadences between a 5 minute maximal effort and a 20 minute maximal effort. For instance I observed 98 and 84 for one athlete.

I think high seated power outputs require a higher cadence. The athletes I work with do their 20 minutes in the 5 to 5.5 watts/kg range. At these power outputs at 80rpm they are having to exert an average force equal to nearly 40% of their weight. I think this near the maximum sustainable force in a seated position.

Observationally I have found that as an athletes FTP improves their cadence rises. I haven't done the math yet but I suspect that improvement comes from leg speed not force.


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

I'm no expert in this by any stretch so take this with the likelihood that I've misinterpreted something...

My coach said (or should I say, "what I think I heard my coach say") basically using the higher cadence does work the aerobic system more but that it's more sustainable over longer periods than say 60 rpm. Something about the different menthods of fueling as you start to change from strictly aerobic to something less than pure aerobic...???

Just before the holidays I did a test during a small window of decent weather (Golden Gate Canyon rd in Golden if any of you are familiar with the Front Range) and in short, once I cleared the foothills there was a wicked wind. The result was I was overgeared on my cx bike going uphill into the wind. My cadence averaged 79 (about 12 rpm lower than normal) and my HR was a whopping 147bpm (about 20 less than what I race at) but the power was consistent with where I ended the cx season.. - n=1 I don't think I could have operated at that low of a cadence for the duration of a typical xxc event. Maybe but I doubt I'll try.

Regarding Leg speed - reading about distance running, the current/common thought on cadence has to do with lower leg mass. I'm not sure that is a huge factor in cycling as the range of motion is considerably smaller.


----------



## BruceBrown (Jan 16, 2004)

LMN said:


> Do you do a 5 minute "blow out" before your FTP? Quite often I notice vastly different cadences between a 5 minute maximal effort and a 20 minute maximal effort. For instance I observed 98 and 84 for one athlete.
> 
> I think high seated power outputs require a higher cadence. The athletes I work with do their 20 minutes in the 5 to 5.5 watts/kg range. At these power outputs at 80rpm they are having to exert an average force equal to nearly 40% of their weight. I think this near the maximum sustainable force in a seated position.
> 
> Observationally I have found that as an athletes FTP improves their cadence rises. I haven't done the math yet but I suspect that improvement comes from leg speed not force.


I followed these directions when I did it in January...

1. 20 minutes easy warm up
2. 3 x 1-minute wind ups with a minute rest between (100 RPM pedal cadence)
3. 5 minutes easy
4. 5 minutes all out (hard at first, but not so hard that you can't complete the effort)
5. 10 minutes easy
6. 20-minute time trial effort (like the previous 5-minute all out effort, keep in control, hard but steady, you don't want to over cook it and die at the end)
7. 10 to 15 minute cool down

According to my file from the actual 20 minute FTP, although my average cadence was 77, the final 6 minutes my cadence was close to 90+. I think I was afraid of blowing up in the early going and once I made it to the 14 minute mark I knew I was going to complete it, so I started cranking it up and getting 'excited' that I was going to complete it and didn't want to leave anything in the tank.

I do recall that the slower cadence that I started off with really had the bike rocking back and forth (was seated the entire duration) as I pushed and pulled with my legs and arms. I tried to up my cadence at 10 minutes - according to my file - and backed it down again at 12 minutes. Cadence was all over the map as I shifted gears and tried to just stay with whatever was working.

I've been doing some high cadence work (in Zone 2) since I made the post in this thread to work on the leg speed. Stuff like doing a minute at 100 rpm, then a minute at 105, a minute at 110, a minute at 115, a minute at 120 - and then back down the ladder while keeping it in a Zone I can tolerate and focus on the leg speed.

I'm hoping to take that to Thursday's L4 session as I noticed the other day that the watts can really go up and feel pretty easy leg/muscle wise once you get things ramped up and going over 100 rpm when I did a couple of shorter intervals to test it. I just don't see myself pedaling along at that kind of a cadence during a mountain bike race except here and there on some flat connector sections.

I suppose one has to do quite a few FTP tests to "groove" the process and get used to it.


----------



## unsavory (May 7, 2013)

Where you are guys riding where you can keep your cadence up that high? I am lucky to be able to hit 40 to 50 RPM on a vast majority of the hills around here in granny gear. Am I really that weak, or is it common to be able to do 90+ RPM on a 30% grade?


----------



## tooclosetosee (Aug 2, 2011)

I think road racing they like to stay in a high cadence to be able to attack or go with an attack and you don't want to be stuck in too hard of a gear and not be able to go along. 

For mountain biking I generally just allow the terrain to dictate my cadence and don't think anything about it. However, if a technical and or short steep section is coming up, I will put in two or three good digs in the gear I am pedaling to build some momentum and then gear down a couple gears and spin a super high gear and just keep spinning that until I am over the tricky section. You definitely don't want to be in too hard of a gear and stall out. 

So I think generally you ride a slower cadence while mtb, but the ability to spin very fast in a short amount of time is extremely beneficial and even more so than in road racing.


----------



## tooclosetosee (Aug 2, 2011)

I also remember reading an article that the more experienced riders have a better sweet spot at a higher cadence than novices do. Likely attributed to being more efficient at high cadence with their muscles and having a cleaner pedal stroke.


----------



## mtb_beginner (Jul 20, 2013)

When I came across a thread advising to go at least 90 rpm cadence, I got confused. My body seems to prefer lower cadence which helps me ride faster and farther with more reserved energy left. 

Thanks for this thread. It helped clarify why I can go faster than my riding buddies especially on climbs, even though they tend to do it the "better way" by doing higher cadence.


----------



## challybert (Sep 5, 2014)

Purchased a cadence sensor for my mountain bike about 2 months ago. Over 15 rides on 3 different trails (typically 10-20 miles up/down flowy/technical single track) my average cadence as fallen in a very tight range of 78-82 RPM. Haven't made any intentional changes, yet. Thus far have just used the gears that my body has directed me to use given how I've felt on any particular day.


----------



## Thustlewhumber (Nov 25, 2011)

Walt Disney's Frozen Head said:


> Just saw this a few days ago, and may give someone a little bit more info on this topic
> 
> Effects of Cadence on Aerobic Capacity Following a Prolonged, Varied Intensity
> Cycling Trial


"...higher cadences are less efficient, resulting in greater energy expenditure and reduced peak power output..."

Yep. Power = torque x rpm. Your bike is a torque multiplier. Less torque and higher rpm doesn't equate to higher power, it just makes you tired quicker.


----------



## supersedona (Dec 17, 2012)

70-90 is all I usually do, sometimes a little sprinting higher. Back in the younger racing days(when I had time for a 20 mi hill commute on mtb), I could climb a solid 90-100 rpm. Too much below 70 rpm gets hard on my knees. 80 rpm is almost indefinitely sustainable in all but rock gardening.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

90-95 is my natural cadence. Lately I've been trying to stay close to 80-85. Seems to be working.


----------



## mtb101 (Jan 7, 2009)

so see those concrete bricks in your back yard try lifting them all at once. Now lift a few, Now lift one at a time. if you had a 1000 bricks which approach would sustain you? of course its the one at a time that uses the least amount of energy over time to move the 1000 bricks.

now translate that to your bike, a higher cadence is easier so you can pedal longer. Not necessarily more power peak, more sustained power. now what's optimal? So where do you get the most power output for the least amount of energy used??????

Watch the Tour De France riders, not many going along at below 80 cadence, so they know something we don't, yep there's an optimal range which is efficient at generating sustained power over time. Its between 85-95. They know this because of power meters which measure power outputs at various cadences. So riders are trained to ride at the most efficient or optimal.

Of course they're exceptions but generally these riders are averaging 80+ cadence for 3.5+watts/per KG. 

Now don't go listening to the 'but on an mtb its different', nope it aren't. Power output over time or consistent watts/kg, ultimately that's the most efficient use of your energy. This is trainable folks, not genetically pre determined. Very high cadence is, 120 etc.

there's also another observation from experienced riders re cadence, and that is their power output has a wider cadence range, so they can range within 70-100 with similar values where the average joe is banging the gears up/down to compensate for load. That's strength/endurance I'd say.


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

Sorry Mtb101 but you already started completely wrong way  If we start with bricks, thing is, when you bend over to pick one brick (or 5 of them), you don't account only for brick weight, but also your body weight. Let's say your upper part weights 40kg, so with each bend you are lifting 40kg+2kg if we think brick weights 2kg. Now think again what would be easier on longer run, lifting 42kg 1000 times, or maybe 44kg 500 times in case if you picked 2 bricks at once instead of one? 
If we continue with road racing, if you saw 2nd last stage of this year's Vuelta, you could see Froome spinning like crazy, and behind him Contador with much lower cadence. On the end, Froome lost 20sec in last kilometer. So obviously your theory doesn't work as you explain  
Thing is, we are all different, and what fits one, doesn't fit the other one. Maybe for one, spinning at 120 or 130rpm is good, while for other spinning at 60-70rpm is just as good. Problem is, people saw Lance spinning at 120rpm and everyone started to spin at 120+rpm, as this would be holly thing and nothing else worked, while at same time Ullrich was just as competitive (and in TT races normally even better) with 20-30rpm lower cadence.
And yes, mtb is different for many many reasons. Top guys in mtb train just as good and with just as much science supporting them as those on on road, but you still normally don't see them spinning at 120+ rpm


----------



## mtb101 (Jan 7, 2009)

no problem don't be sorry, what I mean by saying 85-95 optimal - well ... try it on a trainer (that displays watts output) - and report back to forum. 

do 2 - 30 minute sessions one at say 70-80 cadence and then at 85-95 amazingly the 85-95 feels easier yet you make more watts. so we have a perception that lower cadence = more power. And it does for a short time, ultimately fatigue sees the power numbers drop off. 

mtb cadence, let's remember that most elite mtbers train on the road for 80%+ of their training time. yes I reckon mtb has a sharper profile of cadence variation, still seems to be more similarities than differences and that translates to power on the bike.


----------



## cjcrawford (Jun 2, 2008)

Cadence Digressions: What would be very useful for me to see, and this relates not only to cadence but other tactics as well, which addresses the efficiency question would be:

For a given ride ( in particular a long difficult climb so wind/aerodynamic effects are minimized) what is the total energy consumed (average watts x time) using different cadences and different riding strategies (i.e. different line-picking tactics).

For a given climb/rider/bike, the total potential energy gained for any ride would be a constant across many rides while the total rider output (avg.watts x time) would vary depending on efficiency.

I don't have a power meter though...

Chris


----------



## Circlip (Mar 29, 2004)

I've done it many times, with power on a trainer, with power on road, with power on MTB. Speaking for myself, your generalization that one relatively narrow band of cadence is optimal for generating best average power over extended durations for all these activities is flawed. YMMV, but that's why it's dangerous to make generalizations.



mtb101 said:


> no problem don't be sorry, what I mean by saying 85-95 optimal - well ... try it on a trainer (that displays watts output) - and report back to forum.
> 
> do 2 - 30 minute sessions one at say 70-80 cadence and then at 85-95 amazingly the 85-95 feels easier yet you make more watts. so we have a perception that lower cadence = more power. And it does for a short time, ultimately fatigue sees the power numbers drop off.


----------



## mtb101 (Jan 7, 2009)

good demonstration here.

Cadence for Cycling Power (LESSONS) - YouTube


----------



## Circlip (Mar 29, 2004)

It's a great demonstration for how to use cadence to get more power - on a trainer. However, a trainer is a very controlled environment and observations from a trainer don't always translate to real world conditions. From my many personal power files my highest average power for extended durations (30-60 minutes) breaks down as follows;

MTB/trail ; ~80rpm
Road ; ~90rpm
Trainer ; ~100rpm

Actual results may vary from rider to rider, of course, and these are only my own personal observations from my experiences and data collection.

I'm fairly certain it's related to the amount of variability in resistance on a micro-basis e.g. on a trail, even a generally smooth fireroad, the surface undulates to some degree. The result is that in very quick order, sometimes even switching every fraction of a second, I'm either slightly overgeared or slightly undergeared. An experienced rider can smooth that out to some extent by dynamically adjusting cadence a bit up or down as needed. However, if you spend a lot of time with a power meter on trails and tune up your display settings to show the most granular data, with as little data smoothing as possible, you'll observe quite a significant amplitude in the instant power.

I've found that achieving the highest average power on the trail over an extended measurement period usually results from being on the lower side of my optimal cadence range, meaning ~80rpm average, ensuring that I have enough resistance in my selected gearing to minimize these wattage dropouts experienced in typical trail conditions.



mtb101 said:


> good demonstration here.
> 
> Cadence for Cycling Power (LESSONS) - YouTube


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

I have a Hyper HPR S(Shocker) Carbon Steel 26 inch MTB and even with performance tires, though I don't know my RPM yet, I don't think most 18 speeds are geared for higher than 60 to 80 RPM in High Gear. I think the higher RPM range is more for road bikes.


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

Back from the dead. Candace is person specific not bike specific unless you are on a single speed. If you train 80 you will be happy there if you train 110, you will also be happy there. Spin it to win it. I like 93.141592653 and eat pie after all my races.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

dragracer88 said:


> I have a Hyper HPR S(Shocker) Carbon Steel 26 inch MTB and even with performance tires, though I don't know my RPM yet, I don't think most 18 speeds are geared for higher than 60 to 80 RPM in High Gear. I think the higher RPM range is more for road bikes.


No.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

I know at top end, I was already at highest RPM on my bike downhill earlier today. Tried another crank and my feet flew off. So clearly, like cars and sportbikes, mountain bikes have an RPM limit as well. I tend to call this experience, where you are already at the highest RPM possible and you try for higher, only to have your feet slip or fall off, as dropping the bike. Which is not a fun experience travelling 30 to 40.


----------



## Len Baird (Aug 1, 2017)

I'd try a variety of cadences in different situations.
Spinning (I'd call this 90 or 95+)is good for efficiency when its smooth going. It's also good to be able to spin a gear then lower the cadence like say if you're going through a dip, spin as you go through the bottom, then grind out a lower cadence for the climb out the other side.
It's also nice to mix it up since spinning vs grinding will strain your body in slightly different ways, so you can spread around the effort.
Faster spinning requires some practice. Also if your bike has bad pedal bob it may not be feasible unless you practice and get super smooth.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

dragracer88 said:


> I have a Hyper HPR S(Shocker) Carbon Steel 26 inch MTB and even with performance tires, though I don't know my RPM yet, I don't think most 18 speeds are geared for higher than 60 to 80 RPM in High Gear. I think the higher RPM range is more for road bikes.


Yeah you need at least 21 speeds or skinny tires for 90 rpm 

On smooth ground a higher cadence is optimal for most people, and the more power you develop the more important this is.

Some trails are smooth, some are very rough and most are varied, which is why it's impossible to say what a good cadence for mountain biking is. That's how I see it anyway.


----------



## ironhippy (Nov 21, 2017)

I started paying attention to cadence this winter on the trainer (which has a power and cadence sensor).

My default cadence is low, on the zwift hills I'll average 55-65 RPM if I am not paying attention.

I've been trying to raise my RPM (mainly for the principle that higher RPMs will allow my legs to spin longer, my longest ride being 5 hours+ last summer). 

I find that as soon as I drop a gear to increase my cadence, I really have to focus on form/power to keep the same power, and it's harder to maintain.
I'm hoping it'll get easier over time, but I don't expect to ever be spinning at 90 RPMs naturally.

Mountain biking I don't really worry about it unless I am on a long, smooth flat or uphill section.


----------



## MudSnow (Jun 30, 2013)

Humans make the most power between 80-100 and use the least oxygen (fuel efficiency) between 60-70.


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

I've found on the trainer all my rides average around 95-105 rpm. But when I finish a MTB ride the average sits between 80-90. I've been actively looking at my cadence during rides now and shifting down when I notice my cadence lagging. I feel if my trainer rides all naturally fall around the 100rpm mark then that's where I'm most efficient so I'm trying to build my on trail cadence up.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Very interesting reading though a 10-year old thread.

Reading my posts from 10 years ago I can see how things have changed over time. Way back in 2008, believe it or not, bikes had three chain rings!! And we all tried to keep in our middle ring which was a 32 with (if we were lucky) a 34 in the back. Average cadence was low.

Now, from what I see cadence has gone up. Norm is 80-90. Lots of factors, gearing, bigger tires, FS, ect... But interesting to see the change.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

A friend who puts together race videos added telemetry, and asked if I had a cadence senor on my bike. I never cared before for racing MTB, well, I don't care at all anymore. I self select in all conditions, going for what feels best. But, for his videos, I put a sensor on I had in the garage. So, after the race, I can take a look.

On my last race, at Bonelli (non UCI course, more flat ground) I averaged 88. My average on climbs seemed to be around mid 80's too. Though some climbs were limited by gearing (1x11 XX1 with 32t), I would have spun higher on a couple of cimbs if I could.

Looks like my high was up around 130 or so.


----------



## Len Baird (Aug 1, 2017)

LMN said:


> Very interesting reading though a 10-year old thread.
> 
> Reading my posts from 10 years ago I can see how things have changed over time. Way back in 2008, believe it or not, bikes had three chain rings!! And we all tried to keep in our middle ring which was a 32 with (if we were lucky) a 34 in the back. Average cadence was low.
> 
> Now, from what I see cadence has gone up. Norm is 80-90. Lots of factors, gearing, bigger tires, FS, ect... But interesting to see the change.


For a period of time my goal was to ride all the steepest climbs I knew in the middle ring, a 32. And I did it too lol. I later started road biking and found I could sprint pretty well and I think that the big gear mashing helped me to smash away at a big gear in a sprint lol.
It also occurred to me, something which has been coming up lately. Crank length. Having the default crank length slightly longer than road bikes makes it slightly harder to spin fast, just due to the larger circumference of foot travel. And if you're shorter legged it may cause other fit issues too. Then you have terrain issues, pedal strikes and all of that to worry about with MTB too. Spinners have a tough row to hoe on a MTB :skep:


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

Ok since you all don't race and have no experience with performance, let me be the first to tell you. You don't want to spin. It's not a good thing. You bring RPM too high for the gear and you will just spin your tire. You want the most grip possible. For the most traction. I've only spun twice. Halfway up a hill last year, and more recently, this last Monday due to Ice in 2nd or 3rd gear on flat ground. The only time you want to spin the tire is for a fast exit out of a turn. But that's a racing technique.


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)




----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

dragracer88 said:


> Ok since you all don't race and have no experience with performance, let me be the first to tell you. You don't want to spin. It's not a good thing. You bring RPM too high for the gear and you will just spin your tire. You want the most grip possible. For the most traction. I've only spun twice. Halfway up a hill last year, and more recently, this last Monday due to Ice in 2nd or 3rd gear on flat ground. The only time you want to spin the tire is for a fast exit out of a turn. But that's a racing technique.


There are several pro XC racers here. LMN is the husband on a two time XCO world champion and Olympic bronze medalist.

But thanks for the advice, I guess?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

Never would have guessed that there are racers here. Judging from the fear mongering posts. Like the downhill racing thread where someone posted "It's very dangerous. " Fact. All racing is dangerous. You choose to risk and or face that danger no matter what racing you do.


----------



## Guest (Apr 19, 2018)

wheelbiter said:


> I just read in MTB action that they suggested a rpm of 80. It was most efficient, etc.
> I have always been told and trained for 90 or a little better.
> 
> I also ride a road bike for training. Are the rpm's different for the two sports. I wonder what I should be doing?
> ...


What's a "rpm"?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

dragracer88 said:


> Never would have guessed that there are racers here. Judging from the fear mongering posts. Like the downhill racing thread where someone posted "It's very dangerous. " Fact. All racing is dangerous. You choose to risk and or face that danger no matter what racing you do.


Racers? In the XC Racing & Training thread? They should be banned!

I ignore cadence during a race and look at it after. If I'm riding something with gears, I'll keep a closer eye on it as I'm used to riding between 30-160rpm and with gears I keep forgetting to change down when I get near 80 or up when near 105.


----------



## ccm (Jan 14, 2004)

dragracer88 said:


> Ok since you all don't race and have no experience with performance, let me be the first to tell you... I've only spun twice. Halfway up a hill last year, and more recently, this last Monday due to Ice in 2nd or 3rd gear on flat ground. The only time you want to spin the tire is for a fast exit out of a turn. But that's a racing technique.


I think you are mistakenly in the wrong forum. This is a "pedal powered/push bike" XC race forum, not MX race forum
"2nd and 3rd gear" would be something like 32/45, 26/35 or 22/30 on a mountain bike, so that would mean you are in much too low of a gear for flat ground
PS if you have only spun out twice you need to train more to increase your power and/or try technical rooty climbs


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I thought drag guy was satire...maybe I was wrong...


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

dragracer88 said:


> Ok since you all don't race and have no experience with performance, let me be the first to tell you. You don't want to spin. It's not a good thing. You bring RPM too high for the gear and you will just spin your tire. You want the most grip possible. For the most traction.


I can't tell if you are trolling or just not very bright.

I don't have a problem with people sharing their different opinions, I do however have a problem with people sharing stupid opinions while demeaning others and claiming themselves experts.

About your advice, its exactly the opposite, you are more likely to spin with a high hear, seriously go try it anywhere, I bet you will be amazed.


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

Unless any of you are brave enough to meet me at the dirt bike style track this weekend at Rocky Knob MTB park, I think I know what I'm talking about. Mx racing techniques are not just for Dirtbikes. The ABA BMX racers do it as well.


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

And ccm, it's called riding cautiously. Why would I be in 4th or higher when snow drifts and ice is on the road as it was Monday night.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

dragracer88 said:


> Unless any of you are brave enough to meet me at the dirt bike style track


Alright guys, drop your pants! I brought my measuring tape!

I think you may be underestimating who is here. Some of us have backgrounds that expand BEYOND wearing lycra on short travel MTB. Which, yes, will include racing motorcycles. It is actually my former pro motorcycle racer who got me into MTB to begin with.

That said, you are welcome to join me at any of my local races. You can act like an asshole, or be cool, your choice. I'm not whipping out my dick to show you how big I am.

And I'll add you to my block list after you have had the chance to read this.


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

I'm just going by what I've seen. For over a week, I've seen insults about racing and race enthusiasts. Not until a day or two ago did I see any real mention that there are actually any real racers on this forum. In another thread, like 3 to 4 days ago, I saw someone post most of us are recreational riders.


----------



## Len Baird (Aug 1, 2017)

One time due to my awesome spinning I gave it too much gas and spun it right out, threw a giant roost and slid off the trail sideways.


----------



## MudSnow (Jun 30, 2013)

dragracer88 said:


> ok since you all don't race and have no experience with performance, let me be the first to tell you. You don't want to spin. It's not a good thing. You bring rpm too high for the gear and you will just spin your tire. You want the most grip possible. For the most traction. I've only spun twice. Halfway up a hill last year, and more recently, this last monday due to ice in 2nd or 3rd gear on flat ground. The only time you want to spin the tire is for a fast exit out of a turn. But that's a racing technique.


haaaaaaa ha haaaaaaaaaaaaah haaaaaaaaa haaaaaaaaaaa haaaaaaaaaaa
heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

dragracer88 said:


> I'm just going by what I've seen. For over a week, I've seen insults about racing and race enthusiasts. Not until a day or two ago did I see any real mention that there are actually any real racers on this forum. In another thread, like 3 to 4 days ago, I saw someone post most of us are recreational riders.


Do you realize that you're posting this in a forum specifically dedicated to XC Racing and Training?

That everyone here races?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

Well; sounds more like an endurance race. I just to drag races; downhill gravity races and dirtbike style racing on my mtb. Nice to know there are racers here though.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

What's the proper cadence for drag racing?


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

As high of a rpm as your 5/6/7/8 gears can handle without spinning. With the highest RPM being focused for the last 2 or 3 gears in High Gear.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

So about 220? I like to use my 11 gear.


----------



## RonSonic (Jan 8, 2005)

dragracer88 said:


> Well; sounds more like an endurance race. I just to drag races; downhill gravity races and dirtbike style racing on my mtb. Nice to know there are racers here though.


So ... why are you here? This is XC stuff, races that last over an hour and also go uphill, that you pretty clearly have no interest in or knowledge of.

Have you considered posting on pinkbike instead?


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)




----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

Doesn't sound like the "professional cross country racers" are really prepared. With mtb racing, you want the highest degree of protection. I've been to Colorado. The grades of the Rockies and tetons are not a joke. A lycra suit and cheap bell bike helmet isn't giving you much protection. You want and need an Icon riding jacket, dirt bike helmet or full face drag race helmet, neck brace restraint and reinforced knee pants. The proper mtb racing gear will cost you 350 dollars at minimum roughly. But if you don't value your life and safety, and want to risk being in the ER or even dead, you can learn the hard way.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

dragracer88 said:


> Unless any of you are brave enough to meet me at the dirt bike style track this weekend at Rocky Knob MTB park, I think I know what I'm talking about. Mx racing techniques are not just for Dirtbikes. The ABA BMX racers do it as well.


I'll see you there Saturday at 10 AM. I am in the lifted Tacoma with Bikes in bed.

I will warn you that I am the Super D state champion. I have no MX experience. just MTB and Drag racing.


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

Make it around 2 pm.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

I ride in the mornings and drink in the afternoons.


----------



## rallymaniac (Oct 12, 2011)

these last 20 posts have been a good refreshing for a Friday


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

Snoozer. Will see what I can do tommorrow or Sunday. You know the mtb park is in nc?


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> I ride in the mornings and drink in the afternoons.


I usually do it the other way around myself. What ever floats your boat...


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

LMN said:


> I usually do it the other way around myself. What ever floats your boat...


That's weird, I thought you were Canadian not Australian...


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

Snoozer. You have 2 hours max. Preferably an hour to get to Rocky Knob MTB park. If I don't see a Tacoma, I will be leaving shortly after. And I will not hesitate to tell everyone how you didn't show. I'll be there. Just hope the race track is open Saturday. It wasn't Wednesday.


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

Pictures or it didn't happen


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

I arrived at exactly 9.59 am. Waited for 50 minutes. No Toyota Tacoma. Went up to try PBJ and some trails, came back down....still No Tacoma. Left at 12:40 pm. Someone is a coward. I won by reason of no show and did not finish, by default due to snoozer never being at the MTB park.


----------



## rallymaniac (Oct 12, 2011)

dragracer88 said:


> I arrived at exactly 9.59 am. Waited for 50 minutes. No Toyota Tacoma. Went up to try PBJ and some trails, came back down....still No Tacoma. Left at 12:40 pm. Someone is a coward. I won by reason of no show and did not finish, by default due to snoozer never being at the MTB park.


I'm hoping that 88 in your name is not your birth year. No one at 30 should be this dumb... :madman:


----------



## DeadGrandpa (Aug 17, 2016)

I'm not a drag, mx, mtb or any other kind of racer, but I have been laughing like a mental patient at the very ernest posts by dragracer. I didn't realize anyone could take themselves so seriously. What a hoot!


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

Haha, alright to steer this thread back on track. I raced yesterday (50km | 900m) and my data is saying 87rpm average with a max of 137rpm. I try not to grind with some previous knee issues so I'll always consciously shift down when I feel I'm starting to mash.


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

How exactly is a race challenge that was accepted and that snoozer even set the time and date for, dumb? Not my fault he didn't show. You don't see grudge racers or mx racers not showing for a challenge. I bet if I challenged Mat Hoffman or even Ricky Carmichael, they would show.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Who did Matt Hoffman race for?

And who stole your meds?


----------



## dragracer88 (Apr 13, 2018)

You know. If you all don't want to race and instead put along in 2nd gear on trails....that's your choice. But I'm not tolerating being called mental or any attack on reputation. Which is a civil rights violation. So slaphead, shut up.


----------



## DeadGrandpa (Aug 17, 2016)

A civil rights violation? If you were being civil, there would be no negative comments to you in the first place. It's your pompous, arrogant attitude that is uncivil. Clear enough, mentalracer?


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

dragracer88 said:


> Which is a civil rights violation.


You should race over to your lawyer's office and start putting a suit together.
Maybe try to get a check-up from the neck-up while your at it...

ut:ut:ut:ut:ut:ut:ut:ut:ut:ut:ut:ut:ut:


----------



## ccm (Jan 14, 2004)

dragracer88 said:


> You know. If you all don't want to race and instead put along in 2nd gear on trails....that's your choice. But I'm not tolerating being called mental or any attack on reputation. Which is a civil rights violation. So slaphead, shut up.


You were PRANKED by Snoozer (insert Nelson from the Simpsons HA HA)
either that or you never left your keyboard and are one creative troll and joke on me


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

ccm said:


> You were PRANKED by Snoozer (insert Nelson from the Simpsons HA HA)


and dragracer's pranking all of you


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

dragracer88 said:


> I arrived at exactly 9.59 am. Waited for 50 minutes. No Toyota Tacoma. Went up to try PBJ and some trails, came back down....still No Tacoma. Left at 12:40 pm. Someone is a coward. I won by reason of no show and did not finish, by default due to snoozer never being at the MTB park.


Sorry, dude. That was a classic drag racing move we pulled on overzealous Noobs who came on the forum talking trash and wanting to street race. I hope you had fun riding your bike a little earlier than usual.

I'll be at some real MTB races this weekend... In Texas...where I live.

Ride on! :thumbsup:


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Anybody else think it's kinda ironic that a thread about pedaling cadence ends up with some jamoke trying to get a pump track race going? Anybody think he even knows why it's ironic? 



Hey draggy, once you're teaching Matt Hoffman how to ride, I'd be down for a pumptrack race; we do 'em chainless to keep everybody honest, so you won't have to worry about cadence.

Say when!


----------



## DeadGrandpa (Aug 17, 2016)

That's just funny. Really funny.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Stop feeding the troll.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Second ride/race (race bike only) with a cadence sensor. I did a few things differently on this race, mainly I tossed pacing out the window and basically went as hard as I could, only backing off when I had nothing else and then returning to pushing with all I had. Raced on RPE only, I had my watch on recording HR, cadence, etc. But it was out of sight, out of mind. My best performance ever.

Anyway, looking back at the cadence is VERY interesting. All self selecting, I never put effort into cadence work. I haven't for years (when I first started triathlon and read somewhere about 83 being ideal). AND, my roadie has been over geared for a while now, forcing me to grind climbs I wish I could spin up.

My average cadence for the race was 94! Average! There were only two fireroad sections, one about 500 meters, the other about 1k, both about 4% (the longer one into the wind). On both of them my average was about 100 RPM!

On top of that, there were several times I was seeing upwards of 130+ RPM! I was surprised as I thought that they were just times my pedal was flat with the sensor causing a spike, but I don't think that's the case. I think it was when I was sprinting in to downhills.

Also looks like the times when I was standing and mashing, I was still pushing over 80 RPM!

This has no impact on how I am going to train, or change anything I am going to do. Although, it does convince me that I really need to go with a smaller chainring in endurance races.

But, it seemed informative and related to the discussion. I don't know if any of you are interested in that info.

On a side note, it was the first time I got to lead a pro lap, when the lead group missed a turn which added time to their first lap, dropping them back behind me. Just a reminder, don't blindly follow the people ahead of you! 

https://www.strava.com/activities/1540168883/overview


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Sidewalk said:


> But it was out of sight, out of mind. My best performance ever.
> 
> My average cadence for the race was 94! Average!
> 
> ...


This is really interesting. Did you have a power meter by chance (I know you've been considering one for the mtb) and if so how did the power files compare to other efforts with lower cadence? Really great info, thanks for this....


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

winters.benjamin said:


> This is really interesting. Did you have a power meter by chance


No, sorry, no power. It'll be a while before I put one on the MTB.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Sidewalk said:


> No, sorry, no power. It'll be a while before I put one on the MTB.


Since it was your best performance ever I'm guessing it was a lot for you, interesting because I've heard that the higher the power the more important a higher cadence is. Good ride!


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

J.B. Weld said:


> Since it was your best performance ever I'm guessing it was a lot for you, interesting because I've heard that the higher the power the more important a higher cadence is. Good ride!


Thanks

It is definitely interesting to look at data wise, from a more laymans perspective. We always talk about what the "Pro's" are doing, but very few of us compare to Cathrine or Nino (obviously, I don't).

Though, it was a small boost to my confidence when I saw that 1st and 3rd are guys are pretty legit fast in Mexico (not lead lap national pro race fast, but close). 2nd is a local fast guy. And also, all half my age


----------



## Len Baird (Aug 1, 2017)

ironhippy said:


> I started paying attention to cadence this winter on the trainer (which has a power and cadence sensor). My default cadence is low, on the zwift hills I'll average 55-65 RPM if I am not paying attention. I've been trying to raise my RPM (mainly for the principle that higher RPMs will allow my legs to spin longer, my longest ride being 5 hours+ last summer). I find that as soon as I drop a gear to increase my cadence, I really have to focus on form/power to keep the same power, and it's harder to maintain. I'm hoping it'll get easier over time, but I don't expect to ever be spinning at 90 RPMs naturally. Mountain biking I don't really worry about it unless I am on a long, smooth flat or uphill section.


 A good way to do it is to increase your cadence until you start to feel wonky and not smooth. Back it off just enough to be smooth and ride at that cadence for a while. Try it again in a few rides or a week later and push it slightly higher. A little at a time cemented in with practice at the highest comfortable cadence. A trainer or a road bike-or even just riding your mtb on a flat or flattish road- is helpful for this.


----------

