Re: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 62, Issue 11


Example: Racing:Jacques Boyer

Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 20:52:24 -0700
From: "John Wood" <braxton72@gmail.com>
To: "Emily O'Brien" <emilyonwheels@emilysdomain.org>
Subject: Re: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 62, Issue 11
In-Reply-To: <20080203225142.576.qmail@server291.com>
References: <20080203225142.576.qmail@server291.com>
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

On Feb 3, 2008 3:51 PM, Emily O'Brien <emilyonwheels@emilysdomain.org> wrote:
>
> But getting back to the original topic, here's a new question: How has
> cadence changed over the years? Increases in the range of cassettes and
> decreases in the spacing between gears allow modern riders to maintain a
> much more constant cadence than used to be possible, and allow riders to
> climb steeper hills at a higher cadence. Lance Armstrong is famous for
> spinning long cranks at a high cadence (in a high gear, too... good to be
> Lance) and people try to emulate his technique.
> But in addition to the influence of famous riders who have perfected one
> style or another, frame geometry and typical (or easily available, or
> generally preferred) crank length, among other factors, will also have an
> effect on which styles are most efficient for which riders.
>

Another good question, and one I was pondering as I was riding (and not liking) my low trail Trek. At every pedal stroke my front wheel was wandering back and forth. I wondered if this was due to too little weight on the front wheel, or pushing a bigger gear at a lower cadence. Or perhaps a combination of the 2. I typically prefer a cadence between 75 and 90, a bit low by todays standard.

John Wood
Red Lodge, MT