<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by jonathan r</i>
Regarding cadence and climbing, GONZO said in his post on climbing
"4) Shift into a gear which allows a cadence about 5-10 rpm lower than usual."
I was under impression that a higher cadence on the flat is better because its more energy efficient, I would have thought the principle would be the same on a hill.
If you lower your cadence, are you not going to use more energy whist applying more pressure on the pedals?
Can someone clarify this.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
A higher cadence actually uses more energy from the CV system at the cost of reducing muscle force required - i.e. it is less energy efficient, but causes less fatigue. Dropping the cadence a touch on hills is a bit more energy-efficient if you are getting near to your limits.
There is also the question of being able to spin the gear at the higher cadence while staying within your power limits - on steep hills you need a very low gear to keep it turning at 90+ rpm without going at the sort of speed that needs lots of power. Look here: http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm
to play with power/speed/gradient calculations and then use the sheldon brown gear calculator to see what gearing you need at particular cadences to do that speed. It's pretty revealing.