How much have you ridden? Training, racing? I'm assuming as you are two years into triathlon... that's 2 years into cycling? Since you are new to riding (and assuming that's in the context of triathlon riding) - my personal suggestion would be to ride more. Ride fast. Ride slow. Ride with others. Ride alone. Just ride. A lot. Do that for a few years consistently and you will likely see marked improvement.

Good luck.

After cycling for a few years, I took two years off and started running. After two years of running, I started cycling again.

I had the same issue with just not being able to push hard enough on the pedals to get my hr up. It was like my cardiovascular fitness was too mismatched with my neuromuscular abilities.

With 3-4 months of specific cycling training, though, I was able to get back to prior cycling levels from years before.

In my experience your cycling cadence should be closer to your running cadence. If you are pushing hard on the pedals you are likely to get fatigued muscles. If you spin at the cadence you run at you are putting more stress on your cardio and lungs, Your heart rate will be higher and your legs less fatigued. When running you are using your arms and shoulders when cycling unless you are sprinting or climbing steep gradients your legs are the only thing your working so your heart rate will be lower.

First, it is normal for your heart rate during cycling to be lower than heart rate during running, even if you have the same experience doing both.

Additional reasons it's hard to get HR elevated, and effort elevated, to where it should be on a bike, for folks with more experience running:

1. Leg muscles fail before cardiovascular system fails.
   
   
2. Use a faster cadence. Related to the above, cadence requires intentional action in cycling. In running it just happens naturally. Shift one gear easier. Increase cadence. Maybe two gears. Peak efforts on a bike require higher cadence to really push HR and effort very high, to sustain power when it really starts to suck.
   
   
3. Learn how to hurt on a bike. It's different. Here's how it's different: When you're on a bike, it's easy to slip into "not hurting" when you should be hurting. It's easy to accidentally slack, when you don't notice.
   
   Reason: You can coast. Even further, there's more interaction with traffic, intersections, etc. And there are draft benefits. All reasons to accidentally take it easy for a sec and never get to that place of suffering well.
   
   In running, its very easy to learn to suffer because if you overcook the pace early in a run, and later encounter a hill, if you don't learn to suffer, you're going to be walking, or traveling at an alarmingly (usually termed "embarassingly slow," but I don't think it is, and I don't think other people should either) slow jog.
   
   On a bike, if you overcook your effort a bit, you can take a couple soft pedals and reduce your effort to less than that of even walking. You can't do that when you're not on a bike. SO, to find yourself bleeding through your mouth on a bike, you have to REALLLLLY intentionally overcook an effort or be on a long and unrelentingly steep hill that forces you into max effort. If you don't live in an area that has hills like that, then you have to be absolutely drilling it on the flats, and then settle back into firm aerobic riding and back and forth, etc. etc. That all happens naturally when you run. But the psychological penalty for letting the effort drop on a bike for a few seconds is: you're still rolling almost as fast as you were before. If you stop running, you're standing still and hating yourself for stopping.
   
   Most of the successful runners I've seen on a bike have learned to suffer well by going on group rides that are above their pay grade and clinging for dear life to the wheels in front of them. As a runner, you let the person inch away if they use a silly pace. As a cyclist, you just hang onto the wheel and try to stay in the draft. It'll teach you to hurt to chase excellent riders up big climbs and hang on for dear life to their wheel. But the mindset has to switch. In running, it's a mindset of 'preservation' because the consequences of "blowing up" are that you're survival shuffling home. On a bike, you can still get home at a pretty good pace if you just keep the pedals turning at a walking level effort. The consequences are much less severe for making silly moves in cycling.
   
   So SELL OUT and hold the wheel. Overcook efforts and pay the price. Hang on longer than you think you can or should. Tooth through the lip to just stay on the wheel another second.
   
   Hope you enjoyed all that. I did not edit. :)

(your heart rate may still be lower, but it'll be closer)

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

I agree with all these things, but....

You would think these would be reasons why a cyclist sucks at running (they aren't used to HAVING to suffer, or suffer the shame of walking..since they can't sneak in a soft pedal. Yes, I said SHAME).

As opposed to why a runner has to learn to suffer on a bike.

This is where you lost me

I just run; mostly every day - some days I'm faster; some days I'm slower ... shit happens (I mis-time the stoplight or RR Xing)

I don't race anyone; although I have few "events" lined up that I'm training for

I don't use tech; I don't Strava

I'm one of those "Old-School Weirdos" I guess???

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

Only TT cyclists like the suffering of running.

Runners can't achieve the suffering they wish for, in cycling.

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

Hmm. I guess. I'm probably more a runner than a "cyclist", but not by much.... I certainly have more of a TTer mindset than a RR/CRIT. But, with 30 years of cycling and 50 of "running" (soccer, track, tri, running).... I don't relate.

I have always been able to suffer as much as I want/need on the bike. Maybe that's just me.

As to the OP, my run LTHR is 176, my bike LTHR is 164. More muscle mass involved in running = more circulation requirements.

I see what you mean. I was definitely speaking in gross generalizations to the point of some inaccuracy in my prior statements.

I’ve just seen so many runners come into cycling and ask similar questions to the op.

Some who learn to transfer the suffering of running to cycling end up being greats.

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

Thanks everyone for your feedback!

I will try a higher cadence, perhaps 95+, during my next FTP test. It looks like I averaged 84rpm during my FTP test. I find it harder to keep a high cadence on the tri bike vs. my road bike; I'm not sure if it's the different positions, different crank lengths (165 vs. 172.5) or both.

I think understand now that my LTHR may be lower for cycling vs running because I'm recruiting fewer muscles. But at 150bpm (or 15% lower) this seems like too big a spread. I aim for 180w or low 140bpm during a 70.3 (I use HR targets in case my power meter fails); it doesn't seem normal to be able to comfortably do 93% of my 20 min HR for 3 hours.

Perhaps another variable is the fact I did this indoors and got quite hot. Maybe with a lower core temperature I could have dug deeper. I think for next test I'll do it outdoors and with a higher cadence. And maybe do a second test with my road bike, to compare.

It's quite common for cycling HR to be lower than running HR at the same effort level. For me personally, my HR during a cycling threshold effort is the same as my HR on my easy long runs. In Oly races, my bike HR is 10 beats higher than my swim HR and the run HR is another 10-15 beats above that. HR vs. effort is not the same across sports.

FWIW, my background is running (HS and University), but biking is my strongest tri leg.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Yes, if you’re overheating it’s not going to be fun to hit those high heart rates (read: effectively impossible).

Closer to 5-8% HR diffs between running and cycling are more typical.

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

Ahem! Facts not in evidence!

This is a big difference. More fans! I have 2x 24" industrial fans. Indoor without proper cooling is huge. Motivation can be huge indoors also. I'm not big on indoor bike training. I need a big carrot indoors on the bike. Zwift or the like helps me a lot indoors with the needed motivation to push hard. That said, I always do LT tests outdoors for this reason.

A good position on the TT should not have much of a delta to road LT Power. If you have a significant difference, that suggests a compromised TT position. Could be good or bad depending on how aero the position is compared to the power drop. But, choices like that should be made carefully using data.

84 rpm is a fine cadence at LT. It's always worth experenting, but I doubt there's a lot to find from 84 rpm up.

I was in a similar situation to you. I was a solid collegiate runner, with a 14:47 5k PR and 25 flat 8k XC. I do not have the standard runners build, ie 6 ft 1 160-165 lbs. I got into triathlons right out of college, and found that my biking ability was not terrible, but was not anywhere close to my running ability. I have my old training diary from my first year of triathlon training where I was doing 5 mile tempos at 5:30-5:40 pace and doing 20-30 minute hard efforts on my computrainer at 250-270 watts. I initially felt like the bike leg of triathlons was easy, as I could not generate the power to challenge my cardiovascular system. What I did is perhaps not the optimal and most time efficient way to turn a fast runner into a fast cyclist, but I was young/single and had lots of training time, so I will detail it anyway. Over around a 2-3 year time period, I put in lots of cycling mileage, much of it at lower intensity. When I was in my standard training blocks, my weekly cycling time was around 7-8 hours indoors and 8-12 hours outdoors. Indoors I did low cadence work and 1 leg cycling drills. My outdoor rides included many 2-3 hour sessions over rolling hills where my HR went from zone1/low zone 2 on flats to high zone2/zone 3 on hills. I did most of my shorter high intensity vo2max/anaerobic power training on steep hills outside. I would also do long tempo efforts of 30-40 minutes, also over rolling terrain. I raced a LOT over those 3 years, and saw my triathlon 40k splits go from 1:02 down to 56-58 minutes. I observed my threshold power rise to around 330-340 watts. I would say that my running and cycling ability at this point are very similar, but my LT HR for cycling is still 10 beats lower than running, and I suspect that is the same for many other athletes as well.

I misread your original post and also thought it was cadence, but 87 is not low cadence, so I don't think that is the issue. Going 95+ I think will only hurt you much faster, I don't think its sustainable cadence.
You definitely can do a better FTP test: a. 50 minutes is too long a warmup and will take some toll on your legs, b. you started way too hard if you finished almost 100w lower.
Also keep in mind that sport-specific fitness takes years to build, you clearly have the cardiovascular fitness from running, but it doesn't translate 100% to the bike right away. You just have to keep at it.

totally following this thread :-) I'm a runner and swimmer
I really need to ride w other people

---

maybe she's born with it, maybe it's chlorine
If you're injured and need some sympathy, PM me and I'm very happy to write back.
disclaimer: PhD not MD

As someone who had a strong running background I found I just hit a muscular limit quicker than my cardio limit. I’ve found over time that I’ve gotten stronge and things have come a bit closer to equal, albeit cardio is still superior.

You should try being a good cyclist trying to be a runner. Huge aerobic engine and weak bones! Truth is triathlon is hard because you have to be good at three sports not one, and it takes time to adapt in new areas.

---

My Strava | My Instagram | Summerville, SC | 35-39 AG | 4:41 (70.3), 10:05 (140.6) | 3x70.3, 1x140.6 | Cat 2 Cyclist

Thanks again, everyone. I will redo the test outdoors in the next week or two and report back, aiming for a natural cadence.

After reading some replies, I'm also rethinking my indoor setup and indoor training in general. I live in a small apartment with my family and have my bike on a trainer in a corner with one 8 inch fan. I've been doing lots of indoor training lately and haven't done an outdoor FTP test since 2021, so I'm really curious to see if there is any improvement.

I was a competitive runner for 30 years when I took up Triathlon. My running threshold HR was 161 BPM and my Cycling threshold HR was around 133. I could do a 15K run in under an hour (6:11 LTHR) and my 40K on the bike was about 1:18:30 (19.0 MPH). I was 37 years old when I took up Triathlon (yes, I started USATF Jr Track and Field when I was 7 years old).

So...your HR should be lower on the bike than it is running. You are sitting down after all. There is no way you are going to be engaging as many muscles on the bike as you do running. When you have been standing up all day and get to sit down how do you feel? It is a huge load off of you. Same thing when you are cycling. You are working your quads really hard but it is not the same as when you are running and are using every muscle from your pinky toe to the muscles in your neck when you push off and when you land on every stride. Running is an impact sport that is really hard on the body. Cycling is not an impact sports and is much less stress. So, fewer muscles are working so your HR will not be as high. I guess work on your pedal efficiency so that you are engaging more muscles as your feet travel around the circle. That is supposed to keep your quads from burning out as fast but it might help get your HR up too. I know that increasing your bike cadence increases your HR so that is another area you could focus, but I personally like to focus on a specific Watt/Power and see how low I can get my HR while I hold it steady. The higher my HR is the less efficient/economical I am. I want to keep my HR down, not increase it. ;-)

I has zero competitive cycling experience when I starting cycling. My running coach in college was a pretty smart guy and he told me on more than one occasion that he saw it take an average of about three years for people to peak in endurance sports. He would get college runners, work with them and as soon as they started to peak their eligibility would be done. He said he/they all wished they had another year of two to compete. So...when I started cycling I wasn't worried about the results (or lack thereof) that I saw in the first three years. I was consistent in my training. I was doing 70.3 races and had a goal to get under 3 hrs on the bike leg in every race (18.67 MPH). I trained 8 months for my first 70.3 and was in the best shape of my life (much better than at any point in my running career) but was not able to break 3 hrs on the bike leg. I trained 10 months for my 2nd 70.3 with a bike focus and still couldn't break 3 hours. I wasn't discouraged though. I was building my base and that was what I knew I needed to develop as an endurance athlete in the first few years. In my 3rd year in the sport, like clockwork, I started to peak. I got down to 2hr 38min for my bike split and have progressed ever since. First the goal was to break 22 MPH in a race (sprint because I haven't done a 70.3 is a few years), then the goal was to break 23 MPH, then 24 MPH. I hit 24.3 MPH average in my last race so the next race I will try to go faster. It didn't come in the first year. It didn't come in the 2nd year. When it finally hit I saw a big jump and have continue to PR in almost every year in the 5 year since then. So runners can be good cyclists but they can't expect for their running fitness to transfer to cycling fitness over night. They have to develop it over years of training just like the cyclists did and just like the swimmer have to do.

Note: I went Bike focused for the first 2 years. I neglected my running but I was crushing everyone on the run so I justified that I didn't need as much time on the run training. At one point I just wanted to get back into my run training. I went run focused and when I cut back on cycling and increased my running is when my bike times started dropping. I don't know if I was just set to peak on the bike or if the increased run volume is what made the difference but I was doing about a 75%:25% time split from cycling to running. When I went run focused it was more like 55% running 45% cycling. I have stuck with about a 50/50 time split. I know that doesn't follow the schools of thought but that is what I do and both my cycling and running have taken off. I have taken 17 minutes off my Open Marathon PR in the past 5 years, 5 minutes off my open half marathon PR. And while not a PR I have done my fastest 5K since high school by about 45 seconds in that time too (and am working towards breaking that High school PR now). Not bad for a M45-49 Ager Grouper. So put the training in. Be consistent and it will come.

Note 2: I did redshirt for a Div I Cross Country and Track team my freshman year of college but was never a top tier runner. I dropped out of track/cross country because I didn't earn a scholarship. So you probably have more potential than I did/do. I am 180 lbs. I would die to get down to 147. That was my wrestling weight my junior year of high school.

I will respectfully disagree - try a cadence between 95 and 105 and see if that makes a difference. When I'm doing threshold (or higher) efforts that is where I normally settle in and I also come from a running background so I can relate to some of these struggles. Mid 80's feels quite low cadence-wise for me. To echo what others have said though, it's just going to take some months of pushing on the bike to really make some adaptations.

As someone coming from a balanced background, ie I wasn't a good runner before I started tri (wasn't good at anything), I think cycling is just simply more painful than running. Running is more of an aerobic, all encompassing pain, whereas cycling is very specific to the legs, and the associated burn/pain with cycling isn't like anything I experience while running. I am also quicker to get queasy on the bike than while running. Once I hit my LTHR on the bike it won't take long for me staying above it before my stomach starts to turn a bit. I think this is because of the amount of lactate being produced by my legs and my lack of ability to clear it. It's definitely become more manageable since I started training on the bike, but its a much different "I am gonna yack" type of feeling than with running. As I've progressed in my training I've found I can hold those higher HR's on the bike longer, but it's a lot like swimming in that it's taken a long time to get there.

Also, riding outside I can hit those high bike heart rates a little easier and not feel as bad as I do indoors for the same efforts. Indoors there's just too much to think about pain wise, outdoors you've got a bunch of distractions like not hitting that pothole, or a turn coming up.

How much have you ridden? Training, racing? I'm assuming as you are two years into triathlon... that's 2 years into cycling? Since you are new to riding (and assuming that's in the context of triathlon riding) - my personal suggestion would be to ride more. Ride fast. Ride slow. Ride with others. Ride alone. Just ride. A lot. Do that for a few years consistently and you will likely see marked improvement.


THIS!

I see this over and over and over. My wife sees it to with new and newer triathletes and cyclists she coaches. The newbies get it from their friends - this obsession in the early going in their time riding about the numbers and the data. When really - they just need to ride, more. But ride with good people who will be patient with you - and teach you about what it's all about. Sit on the wheel of a REALLY good rider and watch them as you ride. Try and match their cadence and what they are doing on the bike. If you are REALLY brave, but you want to put your cycling and pedaling skills on steroids - you'll get a set of basic rollers and learn to ride them - NOTHING will improve your pedaling form and fitness faster than riding on rollers!

Come back here in two years and Thank me! :-)

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Skinny quads...

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project