Thanks. So just looking at the chart for me to be going at roughly the same speed at 80 rpm as I was at 55-60 I’d have to have an 11-46 cassette coupled with a 30t chainring So what I need for future is a 46/30 chainset and a rear mech with a cage that can handle 51 teeth. Not sure that’s doable. Loosing 10 kgs would help of course which is probably doable if not easy
Yeah, I’ve never got that feeling particularly, but I do have weak glutes. A physio previously had me do bridges and clams while they checked my glutes - I have to really concentrate to go from the glute rather than the hamstrings.
Do you use a Roadlink or something similar?. If so I’ll give that a go when I get home.
I’m not advocating low gearing on purpose, however FWIW I’ve upgraded my bikes to better climbing gearing and ridden major climbs on 34-34 (Shimano) and 33-36 (SRAM) and 33-33 (SRAM). Looking at Cat 3 climbs or bigger, and 15 minutes or longer, my top 5 climbs in terms of VAM are 69rpm, 56rpm, 68rpm, 58rpm, and 56rpm. Again not saying you should intentionally undergear, but it is possible to buy a bike, upgrade gearing to something more suitable for 2.5-3W/kg climbing, and still do long 1+ hour climbs undergeared and not blow up. Just like its possible to extend TTE and push threshold out to 50-70 minutes (thats always a fun one too). When I look at similar climbs at ~80rpm (vs the 56-69rpm ones above), the major difference is a much lower % grade. The 56-69rpm ones were 9-11% grades and basically suck it up buttercup. 
Given most of my riding is on the flats, it makes no sense to avoid subcompact gearing or do something special. Train for it if your body can handle it. My humble opinion as a <3W/kg climber.
This is the key in that post. Many people don’t train to grind like that though, which is why they cramp or blow up. No different than anything else, if you ask your body to do something it’s not used to, it may not go very well, at least not the very first time. If I tried to climb for an hour at 55rpm it wouldn’t go well, I’m sure. I’ve never been a grinder.
I’d also submit that just because your best VAM came at low cadence, that doesn’t mean you couldn’t do better at higher cadences given proper training. But as most people self select cadence there’s no one right answer for everyone.
5 Likes
On the flip side, I tend to be more efficient at lower cadences. Maybe my self-selected cadence of 60s and 70s rpms is my best cadence for these bigger climbs. Yes, I do proper training and have a very very wide usable cadence range.
If you’ve determined that’s the best cadence for you, then that’s awesome and that’s all I’m driving at. I’ve had people I talk to who settle into one cadence for whatever reason, sometimes they’ve just not tried something different, and they find that something else works better. The two cases that immediately come to mind were both grinders, and one 20-year-old guy made such a massive improvement in his climbing over 6 weeks, he beat me up a 30min climb (I was doing ~4W/kg) where the prior time we did the climb he was grinding and I beat him by a long way. I joked with him “Why the hell did I tell you that?” He had taken my advice to try spinning more on the climb and practiced several times over the weeks and it was night and day for him.
Again, not talking specifically about your use case. I’m sure you know what’s best for you. Others don’t always experiment enough to find out, and many don’t train in a wide variety of cadence ranges. While I settle in most rides at 90-95rpm and usually prefer spinning faster, I find I climb very well in the 85 range. YMMV.
1 Like
Yeah. Those numbers are almost meaningless for comparison. Cadence is an individual thing.
2 Likes
But. but, Lance said…
2 Likes
@carytb I’m going to throw this in there, but I think you were probably under-fuelling, too, hence the collapse at the end. At a 200W FTP, I’d expect it to take well over 90 minutes, and that assumes you can hold 200W for the whole time. At that rate, you’re burning up 200g/carbs/hour (based on 100W/hour is approximately 100g of carbs), and whilst you can’t actually process enough fuel to match your output, it’s probably on the low side for that length of time.
Secondly, the altitude is 100% going to affect your FTP. I don’t recall the formula, but I think it’s at least 10% decrement at that sort of altitude, so you’re FTP isn’t 200W, it’s 180W.
Chuck in the under-fuelling, lack of experience in long climbs, and the altitude, and I’d say you did incredibly well just making it up that hill!
1 Like
Good points however its likely more simple.
Going back to the original post:
How many people, in training, have tried to push 95% for an hour? Regardless of cadence. Some people don’t think doing FTP for an hour is possible, so I think doing 95% for an hour is really good.
Its one reason I pace my tough climbs at 85% and below - because in training I’ve done similar 1-2 hour tempo efforts and know its completely sustainable.
6 Likes
Yes. Now I know what happens rather than what I hope will happen I’m basically going to do that from now on on longer climbs.
1 Like
For me it depends on the gradient. Anything below 8% and I’m better spinning high cadence. Anything over about 11% and I’m better standing up and grinding a low cadence. Between those it transitions, but I’m not sure where, and I also feel like it depends a bit on the day and how my legs are feeling.
My best every 1 hour power (on the trainer, I don’t have a power meter on my bikes) was done at 62rpm average and standing the entire time. My watts/kg over that duration is significantly higher than what’s being discussed here, but I’m not sure if that’s relevant or not.