Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
Second, on my velotron, going to the 150mm limited how high I could get the seat raised. But, when I went to a M3 seat, it was much taller so now have things correct.
When I ride the 175's, I am at 840mm. When I ride the 150's now, I have it correct at 865mm. I can sure tell now when the seat is too low? Hope this does not mean it is too high. :(

As far as the bars, I am playing with them. Never had them 100% since for me, it is a back issue. So have been having them higher than most folks have, but I just need to be comfortable. I have been riding at 20mm down. Then this morning at 30mm down. Might try them at 40mm down tomorrow. Trying to see if I can still be comfortable, and produce power for me at 80mm down. But will take it one step at a time and collect the data.


As your seat goes up and your bars go up with it, do you think there is a penalty for this ?
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Wow, over 10000 views, and 600 posts. Wonder how this tread stacks up against the all time views and posts. :)

Thanks to everyone for making this possible.


So, being a Kardashian is something one should aspire to...?

Maybe better in life than being invisible?

But, sure is not my goal. Just passing my info on something, just like SO many others do. Do you attack all of them also when you do not agree?

But I do thank you for the attention, since it is not me asking for it.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm going to re-order your paragraphs here. Maybe that will answer your questions.

h2ofun wrote:
The other question I keep asking myself, if 150's, meaning real short, seem to be with the data a good fit for me, I just ask why do most others not ride equal if not shorter than this? My only answer is most folks do not spend the time, or money, to see if short cranks would help them with a better fit produce more power. Just look at this thread, have many tried much shorter, and then collected repeatable data on them? Not that I have seen.
Most likely, many other riders will also look at their higher effort results and decide that it takes too much pedal force to produce anything above FTP. Looks like you have evidence in that direction as well:

h2ofun wrote:
I still am, for me, amazed that at 150mm cranks, I continue to produce more power on my 5 mile TT loop than on 175's. Mentally I want the 175's to be better, but so far, have not found any test data for me that shows they are better. About the only thing I see is on my ramp to 300 watts. On the 175's I have the leverage to get there. But on the 150''s I tend to die around 270 watts and have to stand up the rest of the way to 300 watts.
Going from 200 mm to 150 mm cranks, and then dropping your target cadence from (say) 90 to 70 RPM , means that you now require 70% greater force on the pedals to produce a given number of watts. Apparently, you have sufficient leg strength and knee joint operation margin to pull that off - but many riders do not, and even you might find that if you ramp up volume at threshold power levels, you're going to find it limiting or else it will start to show up on your run.

h2ofun wrote:
Oh well, I only started this thread to show others what I was doing. Never tried to say it was "right". But as usual, it seems to turn into a mob attack that of course nothing I, or Frank Day does, can maybe have some food for thought for others. :)

The bolded statement conflicts with the first paragraph I quoted. When you question "since this works for me, why does nobody else do this", and present your answer where you presume that your conclusion is in fact valid and put up a straw man, you can expect to have it challenged. Just sayin'.

Less is more.
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Honestly, that's why I was asking the questions I was asking. Because if anyone could learn from what you are doing, it is very difficult because you haven't described in detail what you are actually doing, in a concise manner. Instead, we have to piece it all together, thing change, and apparently you and frank are focused on 2 different things. He's looking at pedal speed as the main thing, you seem to be more focused on crank length and rpm.

Anyway, no biggie, they're your numbers, do with them what you will.


h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Wow, over 10000 views, and 600 posts. Wonder how this tread stacks up against the all time views and posts. :)

Thanks to everyone for making this possible.


So, being a Kardashian is something one should aspire to...?

Maybe better in life than being invisible?

But, sure is not my goal. Just passing my info on something, just like SO many others do. Do you attack all of them also when you do not agree?

But I do thank you for the attention, since it is not me asking for it.

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Big Endian] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Big Endian wrote:
I'm going to re-order your paragraphs here. Maybe that will answer your questions.

h2ofun wrote:
The other question I keep asking myself, if 150's, meaning real short, seem to be with the data a good fit for me, I just ask why do most others not ride equal if not shorter than this? My only answer is most folks do not spend the time, or money, to see if short cranks would help them with a better fit produce more power. Just look at this thread, have many tried much shorter, and then collected repeatable data on them? Not that I have seen.

Most likely, many other riders will also look at their higher effort results and decide that it takes too much pedal force to produce anything above FTP. Looks like you have evidence in that direction as well:

h2ofun wrote:

I still am, for me, amazed that at 150mm cranks, I continue to produce more power on my 5 mile TT loop than on 175's. Mentally I want the 175's to be better, but so far, have not found any test data for me that shows they are better. About the only thing I see is on my ramp to 300 watts. On the 175's I have the leverage to get there. But on the 150''s I tend to die around 270 watts and have to stand up the rest of the way to 300 watts.

Going from 200 mm to 150 mm cranks, and then dropping your target cadence from (say) 90 to 70 RPM , means that you now require 70% greater force on the pedals to produce a given number of watts. Apparently, you have sufficient leg strength and knee joint operation margin to pull that off - but many riders do not, and even you might find that if you ramp up volume at threshold power levels, you're going to find it limiting or else it will start to show up on your run.

h2ofun wrote:

Oh well, I only started this thread to show others what I was doing. Never tried to say it was "right". But as usual, it seems to turn into a mob attack that of course nothing I, or Frank Day does, can maybe have some food for thought for others. :)

The bolded statement conflicts with the first paragraph I quoted. When you question "since this works for me, why does nobody else do this", and present your answer where you presume that your conclusion is in fact valid and put up a straw man, you can expect to have it challenged. Just sayin'.

You sure? With gearing changes, I do not feel I am putting more force on the pedals. I do "feel', that will lower RPM, I can put force on the pedals, vs with higher RPM, for me it feels more like they are just spinning. For me, I feel I wear out much sooner trying to push higher RPM's, which I see with my HR going up, vs lower RPM.

As I said, this stuff is over my head. But, the power numbers do not lie to me. The HR numbers do not lie. The Martis times does not lie. Maybe my race results will show all this stuff was wrong. But, I sure have nothing to lose trying, for ME.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [JasoninHalifax] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A glass of whisky and a revolver is the only honourable way to deal with this........


Please, someone.......
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Wow, over 10000 views, and 600 posts. Wonder how this tread stacks up against the all time views and posts. :)

Thanks to everyone for making this possible.


So, being a Kardashian is something one should aspire to...?


Maybe better in life than being invisible?

I'm sure the 2 guys with the smashed up cars in the center divider of the 605 that I passed on my way to work this morning would have preferred to have been invisible, instead of getting all those views as everyone else slowed down as they passed...

"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Wow, over 10000 views, and 600 posts. Wonder how this tread stacks up against the all time views and posts. :)

Thanks to everyone for making this possible.


So, being a Kardashian is something one should aspire to...?


Maybe better in life than being invisible?


I'm sure the 2 guys with the smashed up cars in the center divider of the 605 that I passed on my way to work this morning would have preferred to have been invisible, instead of getting all those views as everyone else slowed down as they passed...

Maybe, maybe not, again, you have the right to your opinion

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
For me, I feel I wear out much sooner trying to push higher RPM's, which I see with my HR going up, vs lower RPM.

Something doesn't jive there.

I guess maybe it's a tri vs. roadie difference. I'll do a wattage grinding up a climb at 70rpm or do the same spinning out my turn on the front. It costs me the same amount of kindling in my matchbook. But then again, I train both. That's just me but I ride with power and HR and don't see an appreciable difference.
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [fredly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
fredly wrote:
Quote:
I sure basically only see 175 at races.


Not that you're at all interested in actual data, but we're running in the neighborhood of single digit percentage of 175 or longer cranks on our Custom Studio Tri bike purchases.

My favorite local shop has all the take-offs for sale super cheap. Every single one of them is 172.5 or 175. No one wants them, and no one is taking off 165s or 170s to sell used (or they disappear instantly).

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:

Second, on my velotron, going to the 150mm limited how high I could get the seat raised. But, when I went to a M3 seat, it was much taller so now have things correct.
When I ride the 175's, I am at 840mm. When I ride the 150's now, I have it correct at 865mm. I can sure tell now when the seat is too low? Hope this does not mean it is too high. :(

As far as the bars, I am playing with them. Never had them 100% since for me, it is a back issue. So have been having them higher than most folks have, but I just need to be comfortable. I have been riding at 20mm down. Then this morning at 30mm down. Might try them at 40mm down tomorrow. Trying to see if I can still be comfortable, and produce power for me at 80mm down. But will take it one step at a time and collect the data.



As your seat goes up and your bars go up with it, do you think there is a penalty for this ?
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
burnthesheep wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
For me, I feel I wear out much sooner trying to push higher RPM's, which I see with my HR going up, vs lower RPM.

Something doesn't jive there.

I guess maybe it's a tri vs. roadie difference. I'll do a wattage grinding up a climb at 70rpm or do the same spinning out my turn on the front. It costs me the same amount of kindling in my matchbook. But then again, I train both. That's just me but I ride with power and HR and don't see an appreciable difference.

That’s the one thing that doesn’t sound too absurd in this whole thread. High cadence can be hard to train and I’m not sure if there is any consensus on which is best for Tris. Pretty sure Sutton had a blog out against it a few weeks ago saying to stop training like a cycling TTist because Tris are not the same and you don’t bike enough to be able to handle the high cadence.

I normally run 90-100ish now but when I was racing more frequently I was probabaly in the 80s. Don’t know if it makes a rats ass of difference it’s just how I ride in training so I end up racing at the same cadence.
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [JasoninHalifax] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Jason wrote: "Honestly, that's why I was asking the questions I was asking. Because if anyone could learn from what you are doing, it is very difficult because you haven't described in detail what you are actually doing, in a concise manner. Instead, we have to piece it all together, thing change, and apparently you and frank are focused on 2 different things. He's looking at pedal speed as the main thing, you seem to be more focused on crank length and rpm.”

Yes, Dave and I are describing different things (at least we were) because when he posted this he had agreed to follow my protocol but he didn’t really understand what it involved. All he knew is it would end up giving him a crank length recommendation (and corresponding RPM - that he didn’t realize at the time). If you want to understand the protocol read my posts and ignore Dave’s. It is why I joined in.

Honestly, my focusing on pedal speed and him on crank length and RPM is a difference without a difference since he is focusing on the rpm that gets him near the optimal pedal speed we have determined. Since riders do not have the ability to record or measure directly pedal speed rpm has to be used as a proxy. I would think that would be obvious but guess I am wrong. We are also focused on crank length because I feel this may also be contributing to his back issues keeping him from getting into an good aero position. We are taking baby steps here because if we flair up the back that is a big set back.

Frank Day

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Is this the M3 saddle you've at some point switched to using in your aero position on your Velotrons? http://www.fizik.com/...mtb/gobi-m3-new.html
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
burnthesheep wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
For me, I feel I wear out much sooner trying to push higher RPM's, which I see with my HR going up, vs lower RPM.


Something doesn't jive there.

I guess maybe it's a tri vs. roadie difference. I'll do a wattage grinding up a climb at 70rpm or do the same spinning out my turn on the front. It costs me the same amount of kindling in my matchbook. But then again, I train both. That's just me but I ride with power and HR and don't see an appreciable difference.

I never noticed, or thought about it, until I did this testing, controlled, and could see the difference in numbers, and how things felt.

Not saying it is right, just what I am seeing and feeling, doing the same testing over and over again.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Toby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Toby wrote:
fredly wrote:
Quote:
I sure basically only see 175 at races.


Not that you're at all interested in actual data, but we're running in the neighborhood of single digit percentage of 175 or longer cranks on our Custom Studio Tri bike purchases.


My favorite local shop has all the take-offs for sale super cheap. Every single one of them is 172.5 or 175. No one wants them, and no one is taking off 165s or 170s to sell used (or they disappear instantly).

Those are still pretty long cranks.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [jazzymusicman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jazzymusicman wrote:
nc452010 wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
Wow, over 10000 views, and 600 posts. Wonder how this tread stacks up against the all time views and posts. :)

Thanks to everyone for making this possible.


I'm not sure 10K views and 600 posts means what you think it does.



oh God, now I feel so dirty for the occasional click on this thread to check out how the train wreck was going. it never occurred to me that this simple innocuous action would only fuel the ego trip

PS: yes, i also see the irony that this post adds to the count. oy vey!

It's like the people who drive Pontiac Aztecs bragging about how many looks they get.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [marcag] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
marcag wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

Second, on my velotron, going to the 150mm limited how high I could get the seat raised. But, when I went to a M3 seat, it was much taller so now have things correct.
When I ride the 175's, I am at 840mm. When I ride the 150's now, I have it correct at 865mm. I can sure tell now when the seat is too low? Hope this does not mean it is too high. :(

As far as the bars, I am playing with them. Never had them 100% since for me, it is a back issue. So have been having them higher than most folks have, but I just need to be comfortable. I have been riding at 20mm down. Then this morning at 30mm down. Might try them at 40mm down tomorrow. Trying to see if I can still be comfortable, and produce power for me at 80mm down. But will take it one step at a time and collect the data.



As your seat goes up and your bars go up with it, do you think there is a penalty for this ?

Fair question. For me, a few data points. I focus on short course. I am old, so the trick is getting off the bike being able to run.

Right now we are trying testing me with different stuff. Frank wants me to try 130mm at 80-85 rpm and see what happens. Could I climb Martis on something like that?
What do the numbers do? Only one way to find out.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Grant.Reuter] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Grant.Reuter wrote:
burnthesheep wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
For me, I feel I wear out much sooner trying to push higher RPM's, which I see with my HR going up, vs lower RPM.


Something doesn't jive there.

I guess maybe it's a tri vs. roadie difference. I'll do a wattage grinding up a climb at 70rpm or do the same spinning out my turn on the front. It costs me the same amount of kindling in my matchbook. But then again, I train both. That's just me but I ride with power and HR and don't see an appreciable difference.


That’s the one thing that doesn’t sound too absurd in this whole thread. High cadence can be hard to train and I’m not sure if there is any consensus on which is best for Tris. Pretty sure Sutton had a blog out against it a few weeks ago saying to stop training like a cycling TTist because Tris are not the same and you don’t bike enough to be able to handle the high cadence.

I normally run 90-100ish now but when I was racing more frequently I was probabaly in the 80s. Don’t know if it makes a rats ass of difference it’s just how I ride in training so I end up racing at the same cadence.

My heart rate is higher when I left myself go to natural cadence of ~95 than when I hold it ~80. Does that mean I'm more efficient (good), or just that I'm using leg muscle instead of aerobic power (bad)? Something I'll have to figure out.

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Grant.Reuter] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Grant.Reuter wrote:
burnthesheep wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
For me, I feel I wear out much sooner trying to push higher RPM's, which I see with my HR going up, vs lower RPM.


Something doesn't jive there.

I guess maybe it's a tri vs. roadie difference. I'll do a wattage grinding up a climb at 70rpm or do the same spinning out my turn on the front. It costs me the same amount of kindling in my matchbook. But then again, I train both. That's just me but I ride with power and HR and don't see an appreciable difference.


That’s the one thing that doesn’t sound too absurd in this whole thread. High cadence can be hard to train and I’m not sure if there is any consensus on which is best for Tris. Pretty sure Sutton had a blog out against it a few weeks ago saying to stop training like a cycling TTist because Tris are not the same and you don’t bike enough to be able to handle the high cadence.

I normally run 90-100ish now but when I was racing more frequently I was probabaly in the 80s. Don’t know if it makes a rats ass of difference it’s just how I ride in training so I end up racing at the same cadence.

That is the why I basically approached the bike in the past. But now that I am testing each day with different RPM's, setups, testing, I can see first hand how the numbers look, and how my body and HR reacts. I am like, at the moment 70-75 rpm. But the crank length seems to impact how things feel.

I still have trying to get my head around I have done a number of 5 mile TT tests, and my power is like 10% higher on the 150 cranks, even in PC mode and in aero,
vs the 175 cranks in aero. If this holds, this is why I am asking for folks who care about power and speed, why have they not tried different crank lengths?

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
marcag wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

Second, on my velotron, going to the 150mm limited how high I could get the seat raised. But, when I went to a M3 seat, it was much taller so now have things correct.
When I ride the 175's, I am at 840mm. When I ride the 150's now, I have it correct at 865mm. I can sure tell now when the seat is too low? Hope this does not mean it is too high. :(

As far as the bars, I am playing with them. Never had them 100% since for me, it is a back issue. So have been having them higher than most folks have, but I just need to be comfortable. I have been riding at 20mm down. Then this morning at 30mm down. Might try them at 40mm down tomorrow. Trying to see if I can still be comfortable, and produce power for me at 80mm down. But will take it one step at a time and collect the data.



As your seat goes up and your bars go up with it, do you think there is a penalty for this ?


Fair question. For me, a few data points. I focus on short course. I am old, so the trick is getting off the bike being able to run.

Right now we are trying testing me with different stuff. Frank wants me to try 130mm at 80-85 rpm and see what happens. Could I climb Martis on something like that?
What do the numbers do? Only one way to find out.

Well I can tell you there is a penalty. So what you are "gaining" in power better be worth it.

I can also tell you that this "lower HR for same power" may be seriously misguiding you and you will make the wrong tradeoffs based on BAD data. They are real but they are probably only showing part of the equation
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [TriFluid] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriFluid wrote:
Is this the M3 saddle you've at some point switched to using in your aero position on your Velotrons? http://www.fizik.com/...mtb/gobi-m3-new.html

I have a couple of different saddles I am using on the trainer. (Mainly since I keep getting saddle sores and changing saddles, which changes contact points, seem to help
spread the paid around. :)

I bought a M3 to try since a friend of mine who usually is one of, if not the top biker in sprint tris uses and said he loves.

So I have a cut nose, the M3, and an infinity. I have used all three in my testing, sitting up and in aero. So far for me I do not need any of the different seats has impacted my ability to get in aero. Going to shorter cranks I think was the big change, and having the seat height better.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
H2Ofun wrote: "You sure? With gearing changes, I do not feel I am putting more force on the pedals. I do "feel', that will lower RPM, I can put force on the pedals, vs with higher RPM, for me it feels more like they are just spinning. For me, I feel I wear out much sooner trying to push higher RPM's, which I see with my HR going up, vs lower RPM.

As I said, this stuff is over my head. But, the power numbers do not lie to me. The HR numbers do not lie. The Martis times does not lie. Maybe my race results will show all this stuff was wrong. But, I sure have nothing to lose trying, for ME.”

I could just write this to you but I suspect others would be interested in this explanation. While it may not feel like you are putting more force on the pedals the physics dictates that you must for the same power at a lower pedal speed (power=forceXspeed). The reason it dpesn’t feel like more force may be because the muscles really aren't doing any more work despite the higher force on the pedals. We know this because your HR isn’t any higher. The reason your muscles are not doing any more work is that before the muscles can put any force on the pedal they must first accelerate the foot up to pedal speed. This takes less muscle work to do at slow pedal speeds than fast leaving more muscle left to apply force. The other issue is that muscles contract more efficiently when moving slowly than fast, fewer bonds to make and break per unit time.

So, there is lots going on that in your case work to make you a lot more efficient and powerful at these slower pedal speeds. That is why I wanted to do the testing and the results have exceeded my expectations. Now, lets see what we can do back comfort and aero wise.

Frank Day

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [Toby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Toby wrote:
Grant.Reuter wrote:
burnthesheep wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
For me, I feel I wear out much sooner trying to push higher RPM's, which I see with my HR going up, vs lower RPM.


Something doesn't jive there.

I guess maybe it's a tri vs. roadie difference. I'll do a wattage grinding up a climb at 70rpm or do the same spinning out my turn on the front. It costs me the same amount of kindling in my matchbook. But then again, I train both. That's just me but I ride with power and HR and don't see an appreciable difference.


That’s the one thing that doesn’t sound too absurd in this whole thread. High cadence can be hard to train and I’m not sure if there is any consensus on which is best for Tris. Pretty sure Sutton had a blog out against it a few weeks ago saying to stop training like a cycling TTist because Tris are not the same and you don’t bike enough to be able to handle the high cadence.

I normally run 90-100ish now but when I was racing more frequently I was probabaly in the 80s. Don’t know if it makes a rats ass of difference it’s just how I ride in training so I end up racing at the same cadence.


My heart rate is higher when I left myself go to natural cadence of ~95 than when I hold it ~80. Does that mean I'm more efficient (good), or just that I'm using leg muscle instead of aerobic power (bad)? Something I'll have to figure out.

Great question. I want to also push a higher cadence, it just feels better. But when I see my HR lower, and seem to be able to push more with the lower RPM, well, who knows.
Still working on trying to figure this out, for me.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: My testing to try and find best crank length with my Velotron [marcag] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
marcag wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
marcag wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

Second, on my velotron, going to the 150mm limited how high I could get the seat raised. But, when I went to a M3 seat, it was much taller so now have things correct.
When I ride the 175's, I am at 840mm. When I ride the 150's now, I have it correct at 865mm. I can sure tell now when the seat is too low? Hope this does not mean it is too high. :(

As far as the bars, I am playing with them. Never had them 100% since for me, it is a back issue. So have been having them higher than most folks have, but I just need to be comfortable. I have been riding at 20mm down. Then this morning at 30mm down. Might try them at 40mm down tomorrow. Trying to see if I can still be comfortable, and produce power for me at 80mm down. But will take it one step at a time and collect the data.



As your seat goes up and your bars go up with it, do you think there is a penalty for this ?


Fair question. For me, a few data points. I focus on short course. I am old, so the trick is getting off the bike being able to run.

Right now we are trying testing me with different stuff. Frank wants me to try 130mm at 80-85 rpm and see what happens. Could I climb Martis on something like that?
What do the numbers do? Only one way to find out.


Well I can tell you there is a penalty. So what you are "gaining" in power better be worth it.

I can also tell you that this "lower HR for same power" may be seriously misguiding you and you will make the wrong tradeoffs based on BAD data. They are real but they are probably only showing part of the equation

So, what is the penalty?

What is the wrong tradeoffs?

And I ask questions since I am totally listening to inputs. Just wish some would look at my data, rather than just attack it since they have nothing to show.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply

Prev Next