RE: [CR]Was 753, now is energy recovered constructively?

(Example: Component Manufacturers)

In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.0.20060718082245.01bc00c8@lexairinc.com>
References: <000401c6a870$7972d490$6501a8c0@maincomputer> <a05210624c0df69c63d35@[192.168.1.33]> <6.2.5.6.0.20060717134440.01bd9178@lexairinc.com> <a05210640c0e1eb559802@[192.168.1.33]>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 09:41:42 -0700
To: George Allen <jgallen@lexairinc.com>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
From: "Jan Heine" <heine94@earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: [CR]Was 753, now is energy recovered constructively?


>On my long ride Friday, 135 miles, I averaged 89 RPM on the Weigle.
>On climbs I'm never below 90 and typically 95 to 115 depending on
>the grade. On the Raleigh, I averaged 78 RPM on a century Memorial
>Day weekend and would typically be at 80 to 95 rpm on the climbs.

It is interesting that your cadence of about 90 rpm matched mine on the Weigle. Unlike you, I did not increase my cadence on the hills, as I found the bike responded well to increased power output at the same or even a slightly lower cadence. However, those hard efforts would be hard to maintain for a long time. It is interesting to compare notes on the very same bike... but I guess it'll soon begin to bore other listmembers who haven't ridden the bike. -- Jan Heine Editor/Publisher Vintage Bicycle Quarterly c/o Il Vecchio Bicycles 140 Lakeside Ave, Ste. C Seattle WA 98122 http://www.vintagebicyclepress.com