What’s your preferred cadence?

[edobici_forza]

I regret Charge it is a Levo with no display (and you don't use a proper bike computer to display the cadence figure). Newer Specialized e-bikes (non-MTB) have a special form of a cadence display to encourage riders to pedal faster. There is a ribbon indicator at the bottom of the display. It would be red if you pedal slower than 70 rpm, turning green above that value. I'm sure you would save a lot of e-bike battery if you just rode in a lower gear, spinning uphill.

Interesting Stefan, The Creo 2 does not have the type of cadence display that you describe. I never look at the top tube display during the ride, other than see the battery level near the end of a ride. But there are only three zones which are customizable. but just numeral - not graphic. But, I like the ribbon indicator graphic idea to maintain a cadence, as a built in feature.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

The colourful display with the ribbon is only available on some flat handlebar Specialized e-bikes such as the full power Vado or Tero or Como.

 

[BEC111]

The colourful display with the ribbon is only available on some flat handlebar Specialized e-bikes such as the full power Vado or Tero or Como.

View attachment 213311

FWIW, though less colorful, the defa display screen on my Vado SL2 is the same.

 

[BEC111]

The responses to my OP have been illuminating. I have a corollary question.
Am I correct in assuming that, like my Specialized Turbo Vado SL2, bikes and their drive trains are designed for best efficiency at certain gear ratios, cadences, and resulting speeds? For example, my SL2 efficient cadences are between 75 and 95 RPM. Other bikes, I’m assuming, based on my research, have similar preferences. Therefore, many bikes and their riders are happiest at certain what I’ll call cruising speeds. For my SL2, those speeds are between 16 and 20 mph.

I regularly ride with other seniors whose preferred cadences seem to be much lower than what would seem to be most efficient for their bikes, often causing them to experience leg or other body strain. I know that they’re uncomfortable riding at speeds as high as that with which I’m comfortable. So, should I be encouraging my friends to try higher cadences? (I’m not suggesting specific numbers, just that whatever their bikes design, there are “ideal” cadences.) Or, am I just being an old man kvetching about other folks?

 

[RunForTheHills]

Factory equipment for recreational bicycles usually comes with a wide gear range to accommodate a variety of terrain. That may not be appropriate for where and how you ride. It is common for people to replace the chainring and/or the cassette to get the gear ratios they are comfortable riding at.

 

[Stefan Mikes]

The responses to my OP have been illuminating. I have a corollary question.
Am I correct in assuming that, like my Specialized Turbo Vado SL2, bikes and their drive trains are designed for best efficiency at certain gear ratios, cadences, and resulting speeds? For example, my SL2 efficient cadences are between 75 and 95 RPM. Other bikes, I’m assuming, based on my research, have similar preferences. Therefore, many bikes and their riders are happiest at certain what I’ll call cruising speeds. For my SL2, those speeds are between 16 and 20 mph.

I regularly ride with other seniors whose preferred cadences seem to be much lower than what would seem to be most efficient for their bikes, often causing them to experience leg or other body strain. I know that they’re uncomfortable riding at speeds as high as that with which I’m comfortable. So, should I be encouraging my friends to try higher cadences? (I’m not suggesting specific numbers, just that whatever their bikes design, there are “ideal” cadences.) Or, am I just being an old man kvetching about other folks?

Try riding in a lower gear at a lower assistance? Your SL 2 has Microtune. You can set the assistance in 10% decrements as you ride to fall back to the speed of the group. Seriously!

 

[BEC111]

Factory equipment for recreational bicycles usually comes with a wide gear range to accommodate a variety of terrain. That may not be appropriate for where and how you ride. It is common for people to replace the chainring and/or the cassette to get the gear ratios they are comfortable riding at.

Not the question I’m asking, but a good point. Remember that most people are uninterested or even able to comprehend the possibilities of changing the drivetrain on their bikes or even shopping for bikes with a drivetrain suitable for their riding conditions. I’m not a member of that group.

 

[BEC111]

Try riding in a lower gear at a lower assistance? Your SL 2 has Microtune. You can set the assistance in 10% decrements as you ride to fall back to the speed of the group. Seriously!

You’re making the right point. I ride with someone who prefers to ride at the hardest gears, grinding it out. I think that’s silly, but whatever works for her is fine. Is it appropriate for me to make that point with her or to suggest to my other friend? And, as you imply, should I be suggesting using one’s gears to provide the highest efficiency and comfort for riding conditions.

I am, of course, ignoring single speed and fixies and such for this discussion.

 

[Roamers]

often causing them to experience leg or other body strain. I know that they’re uncomfortable riding at speeds as high as that with which I’m comfortable. So, should I be encouraging my friends to try higher cadences?

Cadence and speed are 2 different things with multi-geared bikes. Without exception, if my wife complains her knees are getting sore, increasing her cadence to 80-90 resolves the pain; no change in ground speed. It is unnatural for many/most to do 90ish; in my younger days we rode long and fast and learned the benefits of higher cadence which became "normal"

 

[BEC111]

Cadence and speed are 2 different things with multi-geared bikes. Without exception, if my wife complains her knees are getting sore, increasing her cadence to 80-90 resolves the pain; no change in ground speed. It is unnatural for many/most to do 90ish; in my younger days we rode long and fast and learned the benefits of higher cadence which became "normal"

Yes. Proper use of gearing can insure the ability to pedal at that 8–9- rpm cadence.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

The responses to my OP have been illuminating. I have a corollary question.
Am I correct in assuming that, like my Specialized Turbo Vado SL2, bikes and their drive trains are designed for best efficiency at certain gear ratios, cadences, and resulting speeds? For example, my SL2 efficient cadences are between 75 and 95 RPM. Other bikes, I’m assuming, based on my research, have similar preferences.

Largely correct. Mid-drive motor efficiency is tied only to cadence, hub motor efficiency only to ground speed. Neither generally knows or cares what gear you used to reach that cadence or speed.

Electric motor efficiency ultimately comes down to motor shaft speed — generally the higher, the better. In the saddle, loss of efficiency is usually perceived as loss of motor power for a given assist setting.

Riders also have their individual preferred or self-selected cadences (SSCs). You can think of your SSC as the balance your own body strikes between the cardiovascular and muscular loads of cycling.

In a mid-drive, motor shaft speed is tied to cadence through an internal gear train. So keeping up motor shaft speed to keep up efficiency necessarily means keeping up cadence. I'm lucky that my SSC falls in my motor's cadence happy place. Even luckier that my bum knees like it, too. Otherwise, cadence compromises would have to be made.

The external gears on a mid-drive allow you to keep a motor-friendly cadence over a wide range of ground speeds — even on slow climbs. That generally makes mid-drives good climbers.

On a hub-drive, motor shaft speed is tied, not to cadence, but to drive wheel speed and therefore to ground speed. Geared hub motors, the usual kind, also have internal gear trains.

To keep a hub motor in its efficiency sweet spot, you have to keep up ground speed, not cadence. The hub motor knows nothing about your cadence and doesn't care.

As you continue to slow on a hub-drive climb, more and more of the electrical power fed to the motor goes to motor heating instead of forward propulsion. Downshifting won't help a hub motor out of this vicious cycle. But it will help the rider finish the climb with diminishing help from the motor.

Therefore, many bikes and their riders are happiest at certain what I’ll call cruising speeds. For my SL2, those speeds are between 16 and 20 mph.

I regularly ride with other seniors whose preferred cadences seem to be much lower than what would seem to be most efficient for their bikes, often causing them to experience leg or other body strain. I know that they’re uncomfortable riding at speeds as high as that with which I’m comfortable. So, should I be encouraging my friends to try higher cadences? (I’m not suggesting specific numbers, just that whatever their bikes design, there are “ideal” cadences.) Or, am I just being an old man kvetching about other folks?

Your friends may prefer slow cadences for a variety of reasons, but only the mid-drive motors among them will care.

With a modern 8- to 12-speed drivetrain, cadence and ground speed are largely independent choices on an ebike with variable assist. So if your friends are just poking along, it might have little to do with cadence per se.

 

[BEC111]

Largely correct. Mid-drive motor efficiency is tied only to cadence, hub motor efficiency only to ground speed. Neither generally knows or cares what gear you used to reach that cadence or speed.

Electric motor efficiency ultimately comes down to motor shaft speed — generally the higher, the better. In the saddle, loss of efficiency is usually perceived as loss of motor power for a given assist setting.

Riders also have their individual preferred or self-selected cadences (SSCs). You can think of your SSC as the balance your own body strikes between the cardiovascular and muscular loads of cycling.

In a mid-drive, motor shaft speed is tied to cadence through an internal gear train. So keeping up motor shaft speed to keep up efficiency necessarily means keeping up cadence. I'm lucky that my SSC falls in my motor's cadence happy place. Even luckier that my bum knees like it, too. Otherwise, cadence compromises would have to be made.

The external gears on a mid-drive allow you to keep a motor-friendly cadence over a wide range of ground speeds — even on slow climbs. That generally makes mid-drives good climbers.

On a hub-drive, motor shaft speed is tied, not to cadence, but to drive wheel speed and therefore to ground speed. Geared hub motors, the usual kind, also have internal gear trains.

To keep a hub motor in its efficiency sweet spot, you have to keep up ground speed, not cadence. The hub motor knows nothing about your cadence and doesn't care.

As you continue to slow on a hub-drive climb, more and more of the electrical power fed to the motor goes to motor heating instead of forward propulsion. Downshifting won't help a hub motor out of this vicious cycle. But it will help the rider finish the climb with diminishing help from the motor.



Your friends may prefer slow cadences for a variety of reasons, but only the mid-drive motors among them will care.

With a modern 8- to 12-speed drivetrain, cadence and ground speed are largely independent choices on an ebike with variable assist. So if your friends are just poking along, it might have little to do with cadence per se.

Thanks for the science and engineering insights. Perhaps I wasn’t entirely clear about my friends’ bikes. They range from road bikes, endurance bikes, mountain bikes, cruisers, and hybrids. All of them are analog. I’ve noticed some of them struggling, and I’m curious about the etiquette of discussing cadence and similar topics. I may be a bit older than most of them, but almost all of them have been riding bikes regularly over the years. (We range in age from the late 60s to the early 80s. I’m 78, but I’ve only been riding as an adult for the past seven years, six of which were on an e-bike.)

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

Thanks for the science and engineering insights. Perhaps I wasn’t entirely clear about my friends’ bikes. They range from road bikes, endurance bikes, mountain bikes, cruisers, and hybrids. All of them are analog. I’ve noticed some of them struggling, and I’m curious about the etiquette of discussing cadence and similar topics. I may be a bit older than most of them, but almost all of them have been riding bikes regularly over the years. (We range in age from the late 60s to the early 80s. I’m 78, but I’ve only been riding as an adult for the past seven years, six of which were on an e-bike.)

Not aware that an unmotorized bike has an optimal cadence or ground speed of its own. The smallest cogs on a cassette are generally the least efficient mechanically, but I don't think by much. Gears resulting in excessive chainline angles are also less efficient.

Sounds like your friends are experienced riders. Chances are, they're already riding at or near their own self-selected cadences. Could be 60 or 100 rpm or anything in between. Upping their cadences might or might not make them struggle less.

As for the etiquette, open-ended questions are usually pretty safe. Ask them how they arrived at the cadences you've observed, just out of curiosity, and see where that leads. Ditto for the slow ground speeds they choose.

Earlier in the thread, I mentioned a friend — a lifelong endurance rider — who strongly prefers ~60 rpm. Told me this often leaves him coming in near last in big group centuries.

Not surprising. Suppose 90 rpm gets you X mph on a 12-tooth cog. To match that speed at 60 rpm with the same chainring, you'd need an 8-tooth cog. Never heard of one that small.

But he's OK with coming in last. He just wants to finish. Maybe your friends happen to be like him.