Spinning vs Mashing

Lumen

MCOS wrote: »

Ok, I'm beating around the bush here so my question is, how much has leg strength to play in cycling in particular hill climbing? Does Raam beat ye all up the hill because of his power to weight ratio or is he a better technical climber?

Swimmers do drills and resistance training to become better swimmers and of course swim millions of kilimeters... do cyclists just cycle?

This thread is interesting, in particular page 2.

Ric Stern wrote:

I'm sure low cadence hill work increases climbing speed (so does changes in environmental conditions too). Assuming that you mean increases in power, it most likely does, although there's no reason to believe that it would be any more of a change than riding at the same power at a higher cadence (this would probably be more beneficial).

Irrespective of this it's highly unlikely it'll increase your strength. assuming that you ride up a hill at 250 W at 50 revs/min on 170mm cranks, you need a force of ~280 N (~ 28 kg)

That last bit is critical. If you're strong enough to stand up, you're strong enough to cycle up a hill.

Whether you have the sustained power output to cycle up a hill at speed is something else, which is about more than just muscles.

Raam

el tonto wrote: »

I don't know, it's all about power to weight ratio in my book.

Certainly the ratio helps. However, sometime I like to blast up a hill and go into the red big time. I then try keep it going as long as I can. I like to think that this training helps me, although I've no metrics to confirm it.

Chips Lovell

Raam wrote: »

However, sometime I like to blast up a hill and go into the red big time. I then try keep it going as long as I can. I like to think that this training helps me, although I've no metrics to confirm it.

I'm sure it does, by adding more into the power column over time.

MCOS

Lumen wrote: »

This thread is interesting, in particular page 2.



That last bit is critical. If you're strong enough to stand up, you're strong enough to cycle up a hill.

Whether you have the sustained power output to cycle up a hill at speed is something else, which is about more than just muscles.

Thanks Lumen, it is an interesting thread and solid enough debate although a little technical for a new cyclist! I agree that if your are strong enough to get off the saddle you have the reserve strength to get up the hill.

I also agree that to develop strength you have to get into the gym and strength train the legs. The thing you get from low cadence hills is strength endurance which is just the ability to hold your natural strength for longer.

Would someone mind explaining simply what is meant exactly by 'powercranks' ?

BTW how many of you guys just cycle?

ROK ON

MCOS wrote: »

I also agree that to develop strength you have to get into the gym and strength train the legs. The thing you get from low cadence hills is strength endurance which is just the ability to hold your natural strength for longer.

Not sure. I have very strong leg muscles, but can only sustain out of the saddle for so long. I have always had weak lungs, dont know why, just have. I think you need to have reasonably strong legs but a very strong set of heart and lungs to sustain out of saddle on steep incline for any length of time. I am not an expert, just my tuppence worth.

Raam

MCOS wrote: »

BTW how many of you guys just cycle?

Me

Raam

ROK ON wrote: »

Not sure. I have very strong leg muscles, but can only sustain out of the saddle for so long. I have always had weak lungs, dont know why, just have. I think you need to have reasonably strong legs but a very strong set of heart and lungs to sustain out of saddle on steep incline for any length of time. I am not an expert, just my tuppence worth.

Defintely, for me, it's the lungs that help with the steep climbs. Big deep breaths to get all that lovely oxygen in.

blorg

MCOS wrote: »

Would someone mind explaining simply what is meant exactly by 'powercranks' ?

Power cranks are a type of crank with a clutch mechanism so that each crank arm is independent of the other. Some people think they help in training as each leg has to work independently and can't "borrow" pedaling effort from the other.

scottreynolds

Raam wrote: »

Certainly the ratio helps. However, sometime I like to blast up a hill and go into the red big time. I then try keep it going as long as I can. I like to think that this training helps me, although I've no metrics to confirm it.

theoretically -- this type of Training isgoing to help your body adapt to higher stresses on your body and force (train) it to become more efficient.

At the end of the day cycling is simply about producing more power at the same heart rate, and then about drag. For RAAM is he can produce 300w over an hour at 130bpm he going to be able to sustain that longer than my self who might product 300w over an hour at 160bpm.

Now because RAAM had less drag than me (his bean pole profile) his 300w would result in more speed than mine (potato bag profile) assuming his cervelo can keep up with my Scott.


If any one can find a link there's a great website somewhere (amongst the 600 million) talking about drag and bike positions -- that will give you an idea about power and drag working together.

scottreynolds

blorg wrote: »

Power cranks are a type of crank with a clutch mechanism so that each crank arm is independent of the other. Some people think they help in training as each leg has to work independently and can't "borrow" pedaling effort from the other.

http://www.powercranks.com

scottreynolds

el tonto wrote: »

I don't know, it's all about power to weight ratio in my book.

How bout -- it's all about sustained power to weight ratio in my book combined with you drag co-efficient.

Raam

I find it difficult to keep up with some of the bigger guys on the flat as I can't put out as much power. Certainly, into headwinds, the extra power is a huge bonus. I would expect that you can put out a lot more power than I can.

PS: I think my bike is nicer than yours.

Raam

scottreynolds wrote: »

How bout -- it's all about sustained power to weight ratio in my book combined with you drag co-efficient.

The ratio really only applies on the hills.

MCOS

Agree here that better power/weight ratio will do better on hills. A big set of lungs helps too. However between 2 cyclists of the same lung capacity using the same rpm, the power to weight ratio will determine who gets to the top first?

How much resistance training do pro cyclists do?

scottreynolds

MCOS wrote: »

However between 2 cyclists of the same lung capacity using the same rpm, the power to weight ratio will determine who gets to the top first?

Not of course thinking about bike, fitness, motiviation, gearing, drag, tiredness and 100 other factors then I'll half agree.

scottreynolds

Raam wrote: »

PS: I think my bike is nicer than yours.

Oh same, I like your bike but I'm also happy with my knock about starter bike till I can get what I've always wanted since I was 13/14 -- a Colnago.... Although I may be tempted away later by something else.

MCOS

scottreynolds wrote: »

Not of course thinking about bike, fitness, motiviation, gearing, drag, tiredness and 100 other factors then I'll half agree.

Of course