Cadence over brute force
A cycling thread is pushing a 90–95 RPM climbing cadence instead of grinding big gears — the angle: build aerobic climbing engines and avoid burnout. Riders argue cadence work sustains performance on long climbs without the stress of constant high torque. (x.com)
ChavezCycling’s accompanying article titled “Best Cycling Cadence: Why 90–100 RPM Makes You a More Efficient Rider” outlines a prescription of ~90–105 RPM for endurance gains and links that guidance to the X thread. (chavezcycling.com) The ChavezCycling piece cites reduced joint stress and a shift of work from peripheral muscle torque to cardiovascular load as the physiological reasons to favour higher cadences for long efforts. (chavezcycling.com) On the other side, rider reports across forums show many cyclists drop into the 65–80 RPM band on steep pitches (examples cited around 10–16% gradients), highlighting a practical ceiling for spinning on severe slopes. (bikeforums.net) National-federation guidance and coaching outlets stress that climbing cadence is individual: USA Cycling notes climbing cadences commonly range from about 65–90 RPM depending on rider and gradient. (usacycling.org) Coaching resources and recent podcasts from TrainerRoad argue the evidence supports both approaches and recommend structured training that includes low-cadence strength work plus high-cadence neuromuscular intervals to change the rider’s comfortable cadence. (trainerroad.com) Practical drill prescriptions circulated with the thread call for short 5–10 minute intervals at a target high cadence to build neuromuscular efficiency, combined with occasional low-cadence efforts to raise muscular torque capacity. (blog.truegeometry.com) Technical summaries linked from the discussion emphasize the trade-off: higher cadence lowers per-stroke torque and local muscular load but increases cardiovascular demand, so adopting 90–95 RPM on long climbs shifts the fatigue profile rather than eliminating it. (gorewear.com)
