Simple test with some odd results. 60rpm, 90rpm and 120rpm whilst keeping the same wheelspeed. Results threw up some odd behaviours tat I try and understand.
The following companies (that you’ll see in my content) support me either financially or with free stuff, so huge thanks to these guys for helping the channel thrive:
https://c-ams.co.uk/
https://veloforte.com/
https://www.oakley.com/en-us
https://silca.cc/
https://wattbike.com/
https://www.specialized.com/gb/en
📲 SOCIAL MEDIA
📷 https://www.instagram.com/alexdowsett/
🐦 https://twitter.com/alexdowsett
🚴♂️ https://www.strava.com/pros/505408reeees
Marginal Gains, Maximal Losses Cycling & Casual clothing
https://nopinz.com/product-category/club-nopinz/thighs-club-lifestyle/
🚴 Coaching
coaching@thighsclub.com
📞 Get in Touch
hello@thighsclub.com
🔴 Charity
25 Comments
Why do time trialists sit on the tip of the saddle and does it hurt?
Thx for the tests and the video.
These lab tests are confusing. Can you do the same tests in the real world? outdoors?
Finally something good about us low cadence grinders 😂
It's all about top-down decoupling. Practice high cadence drills people.
"No one time trials at 60rpm"………….. Serhiy Gonchar has entered the chat
Would shorter cranks allow you to keep your body in place when doing high cadence and thus lower the cda? the question here is – is the frequency of legs going up and down impacting the cda or is it the movement of the whole body
Maybe not super useful, as you say but certainly super interesting. Really enjoying the series, Alex. I guess the question is, even if the physiology of low cadence isn’t as good, is the aero saving still worth it to encourage riders to push that higher gear 🤔 (maybe a few squats in the gym will make it a no brainer?)
I remember a local pro years ago saying low cadence was better into a strong headwind. But he was a bigger rider and as strong as an ox, so fine for him!
Brilliant Alex, thank you for looking @ the nuts and bolts of "optimal cadence". Illuminating for sure!!!!
Back in the late '80's I was on large chainrings and long cranks 177.5, with slow cadence, shame there was no real thought then re aerodynamics bar a low profile frame, at that time. So much data now, and options, I wonder what my 10 TT PB time of 21.01 would translate to now!
Really interesting though, thanks Alex, shame my knees are shot, maybe the long cranks and slow cadence are to blame! 🤣
If you added resistance at the higher cadence the bounce would go down. Add power and try the ovals, that would be interesting, don't you think?
Pedaling ridge would a very interesting one to do Alex & one I would love to see.
My biggest takeaway from that was potentially being very still and smooth on the bike at all levels of power and cadence (while seated) is the lowest hanging fruit here. I’ve found long indoor and outdoor z2 rides have made me smoother over time…also moving from 175 to 170 to 165mm cranks over past few years has changed the smoothness of my pedal stroke a lot.
HI Alex,which saddle you using?thanks
As a low cadence rider, this makes me very happy 😊
The mid test music gets me going every time
The fact that we haven't seen the Huggs boots test result yet can only mean one thing : Alex discovered that they were incredibly aero and is hiding it.
This confirmed my own suspicions. People were saying that it's such low leg speed that it doesn't matter – they stated 1.5mph max speed. But they fail to consider the upper leg as a lever and combined with the speed it is a big change in momentum.
With the caveat that I'm entirely mediocre, my practical cadence range is 75 to 95. I tend to be content at 75-80 and quite unhappy at 90-95. I would bounce like mad at 120. My point being, 60 vs 120, nobody rides at 60, nor at 120, right? Would have liked to see a more applicable range, say 75 vs 90?
I think the conclusion is always going to be to use whatever cadence feels better, for 99.99pc of riders, but data is fun.
Invest in tech a bit and upgrade your mic game and make the room dryer (sound wise). The echo is really bad. Great vids though.
I have mashed along at 70-74 TTing for twenty years when I am typically 80-82 on my road bike.. Always thought I was an anomaly.
long cranks and low cadence ftw
The question is, if low cadence is really faster. If you save 3% with lower cadence but loose 4% in power, then go higher cadence.
Of course it's like that everywhere in terms of power vs aero
Sort of logical… if you think about it drag is related to the velocity squared… at higher cadence at the same speed your leg is moving forward through the wind faster than at lower cadence… the savings on the recovery phase would not be linear so not fully offsetting the added losses as your leg comes over the top.