I think there are 2 things to consider:

Higher cadence increases metabolic demand - i.e. it takes more calories.

Lower cadence creates more muscle fatigue in your legs.

I think you want to find a balance. You don't want to mash because your legs will be destroyed for the run. But you don't want to go too high on the cadence either. The exact answer of course will vary from person to person. For me, it's around 93 rpm.

My preferred indoor cadence is a little lower - just based on feel. More like 86. But I don't do 4-5 hour training rides either...

60 seems way too low no matter what.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

According to brett sutton, this is fine and he even recommends daniela ryf to do this, as it saves your aerobic capacity for the run.

Thanks for the thoughts.

So I’m thinking 60 is too low, but being generally lower in the range is no bad thing, if it works for you.

It makes me wonder what the normal range is.

Another way to look at it might be, what is your limiter?

1) Is your speed limited by the fuel you can consume? i.e. you could go faster, but you just can't eat enough during the race and you bonk if you go too hard (and your nutrition plan is good)
or
2) Your legs get too tired during the run and slow you down.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Looking at my outdoor rides and races my rpms are generally in the mid to upper 80's. Generally the longer the ride or race the cadence gets a little lower. For a sprint or Olympic it's in the upper 80's to near 90, but for an IM it's in the low 80's. Indoors, cadence is generally a bit lower, and sometimes much lower. I do some training based on Matt Dixon's Fast Track Athlete book, and one of the big things he emphasizes is muscular endurance with lots of lower cadence, higher wattage efforts. I've done quite a few longer trainer rides with
5-6x 20-30' at 60-65 cadence. Five minute recoveries are generally with a cadence around 90+ rpms.

I do see that the lower the cadence goes the lower my HR goes, but the legs get tired sooner. It's a balance you need to figure out over time.

---

Blog: http://262toboylstonstreet.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/NateThomasTri
Coaching: https://bybtricoaching.com/ - accepting athletes for 2023

My understanding is that most research suggests using your self-selected "natural" cadence is the most efficient. With a short study period, most studies confirm whatever the subject was doing beforehand.

BUT you can over time train yourself to adjust a different natural cadence. If you are finding your legs are fatiguing, and it is some time before your target event, then it may be worthwhile adapting to a new cadence range.

Whatever is fastest... including the run. 60 is probably not it.

If you've never trained yourself to spin, then do that. When you are comfortable riding at 100rpm for long periods, pick what feels "right". "Self selection" usually works ok, but only if you've done the training beforehand. In other words do both mashing and spinning in training.

Like you said in your original post, it all depends on the person. I rode with a guy a few times last year who was a former pro triathlete and rode below 60 RPM. He is very fast on the bike. He is not built like others-- his legs are massive. So, he uses leg strength and his ability to process the lactic acid. When some very accomplished riders tried to coach him up to spin faster, it was an epic fail. Others use cardio strength to ride with a faster cadence. You do you.

What size cranks are you on?

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

Thanks for the input all.

I’m using 175mm Ultegra cranks.

So interestingly, I did a new FTP test having not completed one for a month (and following a reasonable stint of training) and consciously tried to increase cadence - I ended up with 329 FTP at 73rpm. So significantly better.

I’ll have to play around with it some more and see what works, but interesting to hear there are no hard and fast rules for this.

Top coach Matt Dixon routinely espouses the benefits of low (and ultra-low!) cadence work on the bike. I've found he's right about pretty much everything in tri - his principles are the core of my training.

I used to try and shoot for that 90+ cadence that you often heard about in the past, but I've since gone the total opposite direction and embrace the low-cadence hi-torque work. I do this on a Kickr so I can really grind it out without disturbance.

Def strengthens the legs, making outdoor hills no problem. Dixon also makes a point that this sort of leg-muscular endurance training has x-over to running, and he's trained successful marathoners this way, so I bet he's right on this one too. Limiting run mileage is important to me and many middle-agers due to arthritis, so it's a boon that we can use this for training.

I had no problem getting up to faster cadences on race day, despite all that abnormally low-cadence training.