Pushing a high gear...

snack_ie

Ok,
I think I may know the answer to this question but here goes...

What is the best way to cycle (time trial in particular)

Is it better to push a high gear with a lower cadence or the other way?
Personally when im cycling whether road/mtb/commute or whatever I prefer to puch a big gear - this is just what feels right to me.

Doesnt pushing a big gear (like 53-15 for examplee) take more effort and consequently energy and than something with a higher cadence, as it requires a higher torque - consequently this will affect your running ability... Isnt this true - so should i get used to spinning my legs more?

Any thoughts,

Zorba

It depends on your own body, some people are more suited to pushing big gears whereas others are more suited to spinning gears.

One way to find out which one u are is to get a heart rate monitor and go find a hill. Go up the hill with a big gear and watch your heart rate, then go up the hill another time spinning a lower gear and see if your heart rate is higher or lower, if it's higher then your more suited to big gears, if it's lower your more suited to spinning even if it does feel weird at first.

Also note that it's not good for your knees if the gear your pushing is too big.

tunney

Zorba wrote: »

It depends on your own body, some people are more suited to pushing big gears whereas others are more suited to spinning gears.

One way to find out which one u are is to get a heart rate monitor and go find a hill. Go up the hill with a big gear and watch your heart rate, then go up the hill another time spinning a lower gear and see if your heart rate is higher or lower, if it's higher then your more suited to big gears, if it's lower your more suited to spinning even if it does feel weird at first.

Also note that it's not good for your knees if the gear your pushing is too big.

You're right with the fact that everyone is differnet. You are wrong with the test to determine which suits a person. HR on its own tells you very little. You need something to keep constant in the test. For example power. Something has to stay the same across the two tests.

Zorba

tunney wrote: »

You're right with the fact that everyone is differnet. You are wrong with the test to determine which suits a person. HR on its own tells you very little. You need something to keep constant in the test. For example power. Something has to stay the same across the two tests.

Hmmm wouldn't go so far as to say i'm wrong, for example if the speed stays the same with a lower gear and the heart rate is lower surely that'd prove that the person is more suited to spinning gears ?

snack_ie

So, if I was to moniter my heart rate over a flat distance, and do it firstly with a high cadence and secondly with a slower cadence, and hold the same speed (average) throughout, a should be able to gauge my exertion for the sustained efforts?
These two should be comparable as the distance covered, speed (the product of my exertion) are constants.
While the only variable is the gear I am using. (which my hr will moniter my exertion).

Is this right?

Obviouly I dont have a power meter, and secondly the above is assuming the same conditions for each test.

tunney

Zorba wrote: »

Hmmm wouldn't go so far as to say i'm wrong, for example if the speed stays the same with a lower gear and the heart rate is lower surely that'd prove that the person is more suited to spinning gears ?

Ah but you never mentioned keeping speed constant.

Zorba

snack_ie wrote: »

So, if I was to moniter my heart rate over a flat distance, and do it firstly with a high cadence and secondly with a slower cadence, and hold the same speed (average) throughout, a should be able to gauge my exertion for the sustained efforts?
These two should be comparable as the distance covered, speed (the product of my exertion) are constants.
While the only variable is the gear I am using. (which my hr will moniter my exertion).

Is this right?

Obviouly I dont have a power meter, and secondly the above is assuming the same conditions for each test.

Yes it'll give u a good idea of which your body is more suited to.

Zorba

tunney wrote: »

Ah but you never mentioned keeping speed constant.

Yes i know i should've mentioned it but was in a wee bit of a hurry while typing !

Mikel

would it be valid to compare your times for the two ways of doing it, see which gets you up the hill faster?
Also, why are the high gears bad for your knees?

tunney

No that is not a valid test.

Who said big gears are bad for your knees? Lots of people push big gears and don't get problems. Its a personal thing.

hunnymonster

+1 to everything Tunney said (now there's a first!)

I'm a big gear grinder. Not had any knee problems. I'm trying to train myself to use smaller gears though. There is quite a bit of evidence that you come off the bike less fatigued spinning on smaller gears(for the same speed & distance) than crunching bigger gears. Then again, surely the answer is to have a higher cadence with the big gears and then I could catch the likes of Tunney!

Mikel

tunney wrote:

Who said big gears are bad for your knees?

Zorba wrote: »

Also note that it's not good for your knees if the gear your pushing is too big.

just asking if it's true

hunnymonster

It depends on the person.

Without getting too technical, Most cyclists are to some degree non-linear i.e. their rotations are not in a perfect 360 planar motion. Most commonly in the middle of the power phase (downstroke) the foot will try to move inwards (pushing the heel outwards) and this torque is transferred to the knee. For some people the torque is more, some feel the effect more. The torque is bigger if you are pushing a high gear ratio (or of the temperatures are low). If you find you have a problem with this, then the first thing to try is to introduce more float into your pedals. This can alleviate the problem in some people. Some people never have problems.

tunney

LeWedge can help make movement more linear as can Spesh BG.