Do you grind your way up climbs in hard gears? Or are you more of a high-cadence rider? Alex and Ollie are in Mallorca testing out which gearing set-up is faster. Will harder and lower gearing ratios make for a quicker ascent? Or is it as simple as spin to win?
00:00 Intro
01:50 The gears
02:56 Test 1
05:34 Test 2
09:40 The results
Useful Links:
Everything Cycling. All In One Place 👉 www.globalcyclingnetwork.com
GCN+ | Every. Unmissable. Moment. 👉 gcn.eu/9I6
Download the GCN App for free 👉 gcn.eu/app
Visit the GCN Shop 👉 gcn.eu/retro-climbs
Join the GCN Club 👉 gcnclub.com
GCN Training Plans 👉 gcn.eu/gcntp
Do you prefer climbing at high or low cadences?⚙️
Watch more on GCN Tech...
📹 Spinning Vs Grinding 👉 • Spinning Vs Grinding: ...
📹 Watch our Editor’s Choice Playlist 👉 gcntech.co/EditorsChoice
📹 Watch the latest GCN Tech Show 👉 gcntech.co/GCNTechShow
🎵 Music - licensed by Epidemic Sound 🎵
Autumn Haze - West & Zander
Balloon Pop - SFX Producer
Birthday (Instrumental Version) - Nbhd Nick
Blinding - Cushy (1)
Casual Chic - Ava Low
Cold Dead Hands - Tigerblood Jewel
Crushing Hope - Ecobel
Easy Mate - spring gang
Green Cascade - Jobii
Perdidos (Ballpoint And Cushy Remix) (Instrumental Version) - Cushy
Suction Pop - SFX Producer
Updates (Instrumental Version) - Xavy Rusan
Whip Whoosh 4 - SFX Producer
Who You Fighting_ - Cushy
Youll Know Its Me - Tigerblood Jewel
#gcntech #gcn #cycling #roadcycling #roadbike #bike #bikes #bikelife #biketech #gearshifting #bikegears #power
📸 Photos - © Velo Collection (TDW) / Getty Images & © Sprint Cycling Agency
Brought to you by the world’s biggest cycling channel, the Global Cycling Network (GCN), GCN Tech is the only channel you need for all things bike tech - past, present and future.
Simply put, we’re obsessed with tech: we seek out and showcase the best in bikes, components, tech, accessories, upgrades and more from races and events, tech shows and product launches across the globe to bring you the best in road bike technology.
We’ve also got great maintenance videos to help you get the most from your bike; pro-bike tours from all the biggest races; special features and the weekly GCN Tech Show. We also take a deeper look into the future of cycling, apps, smart tech and virtual riding.
Join us on the channel and the GCN App to submit your content, vote on the latest tech and keep abreast of exciting new trends.
Thanks to our sponsors:
Pinarello Bikes: gcn.eu/Pinarello
Zipp Wheels: gcn.eu/Zipp
Topeak Tools: gcn.eu/Topeak
Canyon Bikes: gcn.eu/-Canyon
Pirelli Tyres: gcn.eu/Pirelli
Orbea Bikes: gcn.eu/Orbea
Vision Wheels: gcn.eu/Vision
Wahoo Fitness: gcn.eu/Wahoo-Fitness
Park Tool: gcn.eu/-parktool
Elite Bottles: gcn.eu/EliteBottles
Whoop Fitness: gcn.eu/Whoop
Selle Italia: gcn.eu/SelleItalia
SiS: gcn.eu/ScienceInSport
Zwift: gcn.eu/Zwift
Shimano Wheels: gcn.eu/Shimano
DMT Shoes: gcn.eu/DMT
Silca: gcn.eu/Silca
MET Helmets: gcn.eu/methelmets
Strava: gcn.eu/strava
ShadowStand: gcn.eu/ShadowStand
Watch our sister channels:
Global Cycling Network - / @gcn
GCN Racing - / @gcnracing
Global Triathlon Network - / @gtn
GCN Italia - / @gcnitalia
GCN en Español - / @gcnenespanol
GCN auf Deutsch - / @gcnaufdeutsch
GCN en Français - / @gcnenfrancais
GCN Japan - / @gcnjapan
GCN Training - / @gcntraining
Global Mountain Bike Network - / @gmbn
GMBN Racing - / @gmbnracing
GMBN Tech - / @gmbntech
Electric Mountain Bike Network - / @embn
Do you prefer climbing at high or low cadences? ⚙
Good evening GCN, I would like to ask you an advice for my all round bike. I want to install the ultegra mechanical 11 v complete groupset on my bike: for you as a combination is it better to have a mid-compact 52-36 with 11-34 cassettes or a compact 50-34 with 11-30 cassette? Thank you very much in advance, if you can motivate it, would be even better.
@@edoardoemiliani Definitely go for a compact, unless you're worried of spinning out the hardest gear. Are you doing 80 km/h descents often? Do you ride in fast bunches on the flat? In these cases a bigger chainring might be useful, otherwise a compact gives you these easier gears without the weight penalty. Another thing to consider: in the 11 speed system, the 11-34 cassette has 2 tooth increments straight from the lowest sprocket: 11-13-15-17..., whereas an 11-30 cassette has 11-12-13-14-15-17..., giving you more gear choices on the flat. I recently got a 11-34 cassette and the larger spacing was very noticeable when riding in a group.
That depends on whether in or outside the saddle.
The 11-34 casette is just more for gravel to be fair. Personally i would rather use an more compact crank (48-31 GRX with the 11-32t casette)@@ltu42
My left knee definitely prefers spinning to win with an 11-46 on my gravel bike
I would like this test done with an average cyclist and a hill that is steeper , maybe even beyond the capabilities of the rider. That’s when the expanded gear ratios will make a huge difference.
That's when you need an e-bike... try maybe EMBN??...
Yeah, there's a minimum cadence that's comfortable to put in a sustained effort, and lower gears might allow doing hills that would just be impractical otherwise!
Not into e-bikes , but we are much older riders who still do centuries, but when the climbs exceed 15 % for extended periods a 28 tooth just isn’t enough anymore. 15 years ago we rode 25 tooth cassettes , that just isn’t feasible anymore.
Great idea! We might need to find a willing Amateur ...
@@gcntech just get me to the UK and I'm up for it!
I use a 50-34 with a 11-40 It's great having two bail out gears
Sure but i'd hate the spacing between the gears on the flat.
Mountain bikes dont count
Same. Handy for Tre cimi etc.
That’s right, I use 11-34T ten speed and gotta have the 34T for the 10%+ climbs but when doing my sprints, the gap from 13T to 11T feels like a canyon
I ride the same in the mountains. Works great and really saves the legs. The spacing on the flats is still fine. I always see to find a gear I like.
Hi guys. I've been experimenting along these lines for the last couple of months. My take away is that easier gear /more spin is more aerobic so your energy souce is body fat more than mussle glycogen so is more sustainable, even though my over 70 body needs the occasional stop for a "blow up". After a stop the legs are fine which isn't the case when lower cadence caused the stop. So certainly spin is better. Thats why I need the "granny gear"!
@@Stefan_W. Hi, yes my limit used to be about 65 but 80 is achievable, even 95 ubder low load.
When you get stronger and fitter, it becomes more of a preferential choice rather than "which is better". When I was 200w and 90kg, I have to use the lightest gear and still running out of gear as a result. Later when I become much more stronger, I find that I just care less and less about gears...... Remember Power=Force*RPM, with RPM you can only go so far, from 80 RPM to 100 RPM is only 25% and to 90 RPM is only 12.5% (assume that's still within your cardio capability). That is not "next level" improvement, and you can only use it ONCE. So what if you are looking at 30% 50% 100% improvement? You have no choice but to work on your legs. When you chasing more power, let's say 300w, 330w, 350w, 400w, you can't avoid the legs, since you can't raise your RPM forever. Even though probably you'll be more aerobic capacity limited, but that's just another thing needs to addressed separately.
"...My take away is that easier gear /more spin is more aerobic so your energy souce is body fat more than mussle glycogen..." sic ??? Let me see if I have this correct, you think aerobic activity is primarily fat fuelled instead of carb fuelled? You better tell 99% of elite endurance athlete, sports scientist and sports nutritionist that rely on constant carb replenishment to achieve success that they're doing it all wrong. 🤣
@@space.youtube Sorry to be trying to make it too simple. If you just keep on using body fat you will waste away, of course. Thats where refueling comes in. With aerobic effort the blood supply carries oxygen and carb fuel to the mussles. To use fat, the body turns it into carbs. When you are eating you can short circuit that. Maybe I should have said "primarily blood fueled" but then that can be confusing too. I didn't notice Alex eating in his climb, and I'm not eating in my 30 to 60 minute exercise so where do our bodies get the blood energy? I thought I was a pedant, but I'm not alone.
@@xuchenglin6256 I'm sure you're right, thats your zone this and that to train to get better. What the guys seem to be talking about is when you're riding to get somewhere, or to enjoy the scenery or to generally have a ride. Surely not all riding is about training, some of it is about doing the thing you were training for. Isn't that what tgis video is about?
It seems that this test would be more valuable if done at a higher effort. 100 BPM suggests that 16 minutes at 200W for Alex is quite easy. I'd like to see this test done closer to a threshold level.
Yes. Or doing it on a longer climb. Riding at 64 rpm is ok for 15min but what about riding that low cadance for one or 1.5 hours.
This needs a longer or even multiple longer climbs.
Yes i think this needed a steeper climb
@a1white your only 1 right with steeper 😅
So you really want a test to see which system (muscles or lungs/heart) gives up first... might be super hard to test...
A thing you only touched slightly is really steep climbs. The 64 RPM Alex did with the 28T is still somewhat efficient but if you run into really steep climbs and your options are going much too hard and blow or go at a really slow cadence the difference is even bigger I think. Why not do an experiment?
Great idea! We would certainly be keen to jump back into this subject... we'll get searching for a steeper climb 🔎 Are you a fan of the lower climbing gears?
@@gcntech Yes! After over 30 years of MTB, it feels like „the roadies finally got the memo“
I still run triple chainsets (50/39/26) and 11-32 cassettes on my road bikes so I can tackle any hill or distance I want without straining my 55 year old knees or worrying about if I'm not fit/skinny enough. Needed my lowest gears on Dartmoor today, especially on Widecombe Hill.
i have an triple 53/39/30 ultegra with an 11-34 slx cassete has 11-12-13 sequence as i loved for run on flats an 30/34 to climb without fear anything.
I sill have a 10 speed Ultegra triple from 2008 - wide range, small jumps, and so much less shifting the front since I have it set up so the meaty middle of my range puts me most of the time in the middle ring with a near perfect chainline. On a newer bike with a compact double and similar range, never mind the jumps between ratios, the middle of the range is a crosschained compromise of fiddling with both derailleurs. I miss the road triple.
@@packratty people is think too much on weight but i think too much on versatility for my needs, because i like to have one bike able for any type of ride. so long time ago a come to conclusion the old triples are only way to go. i dream to buy an fsa SLK triple or that old simano DA triple 7800
Get gear ratios that suit you and stop trying to impress your mates. I run a 50-34 chain rings and a 11-32 cassette as that is perfect for me as I live near the blackstairs mountain range.
When I built up my bike, I spec’d it with a 52/36 and it quickly became apparent that I wasn’t using the smallest 3-4 cogs so swapped it out for a 50/34 and am much happier. Easier on the hills and am actually using the cassette I paid for
The first real bike I had was a Trek 1000 (rebuilt with mostly Campagnolo parts). It had a 53/39 front and a straight block cassette 13-18. Did a ride that included a 20 mile 4,800 foot vertical increase with 6% average grade. It was a lot of work to keep the cranks moving, but well worth it coming back down.😄😄
Both my Colnagos (Super and Master) have a Regina 13-18 corn cob. Living in a flat city helps.
I use 46-30 with 11-34 casette. I am not PRO to ride 50 or even 53 crank, 46 is enough for nonpro rider :D
Funnily enough. I put in a bike chart which calculates speed at cadence. 46x11 @ 100rpm = 52.5km/h, 50x11 @ 91RPM = 52.7km/h, 52x11 @ 88RPM = 52.4km/h This makes me conclude that most recreational road riders could even use an easier gears, and spin faster and still keep up at a social pace on a road bike. I am definitely a spinner, so it's good food for thought!
@@thenoodlehunter6828 Thanks for the maths 😊
More than cadence, power, heart-rate, the main factor here is VO2 Max. Thinking of your body as an engine, you can have a lot of horsepower or a big tank of fuel but the more efficient it is, the better on the long run. A track cyclist will normally have alot of horsepower but burn through fuel faster while a tour rider can variably have different strengths depending if more of a climber, sprinter, time-trialist, classics rider etc. I argue that there is no "higher/lower cadence is better/worse". Mostly rider fitness dependent.
When the 1 x cranksets became popular with mountain bikes, the cassettes became massive dinnerplates, with as much as a 52 tooth rear cog; I only ride easy trails and while I like the 1 x cranks, I don't need the easy gears provided by the dinnerplate cassettes; when I checked the cogs of my 10 - 51 teeth 12 speed cassette, I noticed that removing the 4 big cogs I never used and the 1 small cog I never used, left me with exactly the same number of cogs and ratio's of a 7 speed cassette, (10-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-33-39-45-51), which is also much lighter, cheaper, better chain-line, than the 12 speed; Shimano Acera 7 speed weighs 225g, Shimano SLX 12 speed weighs 534g; the price differential, 12 speed is 6 times more expensive than 7 speed.
For long distance trips (4 to 10h) easier gears make me less exhausted, but probably through the effect by putting more power out when in higher gears uphill. With higher gears it is often not possible to stay within my FTP range and going above means fatiguing earlier. So easier gears help me a lot to go on longer trips. Actually, I replaced my 11-34 (11s) with a 11-40 (beyond spec) combined with 50/34. Now climbs of 12% aren't that exhausting anymore and I can sustain several of them throughout a day trip.
I was introduced to bigger gears a few years ago and honestly I won't go back, I live in a very hilly country area of northern Ontario Canada and I find this helps
I went through this whole process myself last week. As an MTBer for over 30 years, I recently bought a used road bike with 53/39T Dura Ace x 11-25 cassette (10 speed). After much deliberation, opted for a compact Tiagra 50/34T with a new 11-30 cassette. Still experimenting with both the 50 and 34 rings to find that sweet spot. It really depends where you live and what you ride. I live south of Milan, so there are some nice demanding passes where I ride just 30 kms from here, even though around Milan ii is as flat as a witches....
My mantra has been "downshift and spin" for decades. I agree that different people may have different "natural cadences", but I think most people are grinding too much. the best explanation I've heard is that at low cadence and high power output your body uses more muscle glycogen. Once that's gone, you're done. At a higher cadence your body is using more blood sugar that is easily replenished. I don't know if that's ever been tested, but I think many of us have seen anecdotal evidence for this. There's also the knee stress aspect to consider.
Great video! My husband changed my road bike cassette to a much bigger one and it has been hands down the best improvement ever done to my bike ( other than a bike fit). I live in Ireland and love doing hills, so an easier gear ratio meant that I could go on much longer spins with steeper hills with less fatigue. ❤
Which is why I just upgraded from 11-42 to an 9-46 (E13) cassette and the front ring from 40 -> 38. Climbing is so much easier now and more enjoyable. Yes the steps between the gears are larger now but I'm not driving a race where I need the perfect cadence.
On the gravel bike have i the same Option but only the cassett have i 11/46 im not fast but 45km/h is enogh 4 me
Spinning is the way to go! Do you think the enjoyment has meant you are climbing faster? 💨
@@gcntech 4 me is the way the goal not how fast i am
For me it has enabled me to actually climb steeper roads and ride them at a much more convenient cadence. @@gcntech
The spacing on the Ekar is actually smaller on the top-end then with an 2x set-up. Since you are using an smaller chainring at the front. But on the climbing gears yes the spacing is fairly large.
This is so helpful information guys. This info is also helpful to those using cycling as a fitness starting strategy. We may not have the developed muscle to go fast but building the cardio fitness first, we don't reach 'the bonk' stage too quickly while still enjoying the ride and scenery. Legs give out while the heart shouldn't do so, hopefully.
52 yrs old, living in Switzerland, with multiple heart stents. Lower cadence = lower HR, which is my objective. A higher cadence (70prm+) just feels unnatural and pushes the HR higher. If anything, its slower for me.
while I advocate lower gears, this video has been an eye opener. I mean, the lowest cadence = less strain in your heart. I love to use the lower gears in my MTB but this video is very informative 'cos the idea is to use them at a slower pace. Since I have a 22/30/40 11/34 MTB, after watching this video I might try a nice gravel like, dunno about the model, but it must be 1X with lower gears, something like 38/42, 38/44 or even lowest than that.
53 and just coming off valve repair surgery; I'm not entirely sure that lower cadence equals lower HR even if it is overall correlated with it; there are many other variables. Eight months out from the surgery, there's nothing quite like pushing a high gear up a hill to spike the heart rate and while the onset is marginally slower than with low gear and high cadence, it takes much longer to recover from the high gear with low cadence interval. You recover faster from the high cadence interval because your muscles aren't as fried as they would be from mashing the bigger gear. So I am in general trying to train myself into a higher cadence over time. Overall, I feel like this video is like only half the exercise you need to do to answer the question!
With all the recent pro riders taking early retirement due to myocarditis issues I'll stick with the harder gears, lower my heart rate and improve my leg strength thanks! As the old saying goes...Grind, don't get left behind!!! 👌
you are right with the lower cadence. However, easier gears allow for a low but steady cadence too where harder gears can be very difficult to use. The issue of the pros is they sometimes try too much cadence to build up speed regardless the gear, and you pay for that...
Myocarditis could be caused by other factors. And the science is proving it 💉as it’s not just in the cycling world - Covid vaccine.
I use a 53/39 front and 11/28 rear and found training while trying not to use the 39 chainring can be quite effective at getting stronger and overall faster. Of course I’m not hitting double digit, long climbs and don’t cross chain 53-28.
One of the reasons I went with a gravel bike as my first drop bar bike was the gearing. 11 speed 11-34 with 46/30 chainring. I'm 67 and this gearing is awesome.
Thanks for an interesting video. Age of rider though! I'm a 66 year old rider with some long covid complications. My heart rate is now higher on climbs than before, also my breathing less good. I find high cadence riding more difficult than before. I have easy gears (36 / 32) but a lighter bike (6.6kg Emonda) with stiffer wheels (Campag Shamals) has helped me more that swapping cassettes. ''Light bikes are mint'' said OB recently, and I agree. For me getting out of the saddle and using my legs is more efficient, though I'm neither Feather or feather-weight.
Think about the long term consequences for knee joints. Unlike the cardio-vascular system, they do not benefit from a degree of stress. At age 70 I was able to return to distance riding by equiping my old road bike with the lower gearing described in this Video. The improved circulation is purported to slow the deterioration of osteo-arthritis.Think about the long term consequences for knee joints. Unlike the cardio-vascular system, they do not benefit from a degree of stress. At age 70 I was able to return to distance riding by equiping my old road bike with the lower gearing described in this Video. The improved circulation is purported to slow the deterioration of osteo-arthritis.
@@thomasmitchell6609 Joints, too, need some degree of stress. Cartilage is nourished by synovial fluid, and this works best by moving the joint through it's full range of motion against a load that is heavy enough to compress and sort of "sqeeze out" the cartilage, so that the cartilage then can "suck in" fresh synovial fluid when it decompresses. Lack of movement will lead to degradation of the cartilage and eventually ossification of the unused areas, which will then restrict range of movement even further. That's why training OFF THE BIKE, especially strength training and some mobility work (mobility is more than just stretching!), is so important.
There's stress and then there's UNNECESSARY stress. I wouldn't dream of telling you how to deal with your respiratory problems, caused by a communicable disease. But for anyone to omit using lower gears to spare their knees and, in most cases, to improve circulation and respiration would be, to say the least, unwise. I'm guessing that you have yet to struggle with osteo-arthritis in your knees. I hope you never do. But knee pain, from pushing high gears, kept me from cycling for a long time and that was not good for arthritis or respiration and circulation @@turboseize nnecessary
@@thomasmitchell6609 Our opinions probably differ only in nuances. You are of course totally correct that, especially with endurance exercise, to high a load over prolonged time can and often will lead to overuse injuries. My point was that load in itself is not bad for the joint, but rather required for it to stay healthy. Mashing to high a gearing for decades may lead to issues (with joint cartilage, the menisci, even some tendons), while a few sets of heavy deep squats, counterintuitively, might help to prevent them. After all, it's not only about the force, but also the volume. A couple sets of heavy squats will be 50 reps per week. Grinding to heavy gears on a bike, the actual force will be much lower, say about a quarter of that of a heavy squat, but the repetitions per week won't be in the double digits as with the squats, they will be in the tens or even hundreds of thousands.
Nice to see all the comments from riders who switched to gears witch suit their needs. I like to have a “spare cog” when things get tough. Or when I take my bike frim the road to gravel. I myself ride an 50/34 front with a 11/34 or 11/40 rear. Yes an ultegra 8000 long cage rear derailler can take a 11/40.
Loved this vid...made such sense. I ride an 11/25 in a very hilly area, and I would love to make some of my climbs easier on my legs. Thanks guys...you're the best!
On long endurance rides with a lot of climbing the larger cassettes with spinning higher cadence works a treat and saves the legs. This while still providing the option of a slower cadence on a harder gear for the flats and rolling hills. You get the best of both worlds. I don't ride the same cadence on a ride due to the varying road conditions and wind. I like the versatility that a larger cassette offers.
“Spin to win, dance like lance”. DurianRider just exploded
I use 47 -30 at the front and 11 32 at the back . Works for me
That'd be my all-round set-up as well.
@@barneyklingenberg4078 I'm using absolute black chain rings what have you got on your bike . Might need to look for replacements now that they are in hot water with the cops and Hambini
Yey ive been waiting for a video with this topic. Hope you can do in the flats also🔥🔥🔥
As a 220lb rider, essier gears mean lower power zones for climbs which means more time to be able to hold those zones and power for climbs. Sometimes to keep upright its 300-400+W. If i can reduce a previous bailout gear down to do 20-30w less, then it will be faster overall, less fade during the ride snd the ability to hammer at other spots that aren't climbs.
Fascinating. No wonder it can be tough sometimes to get my 36/25 up the big climbs (especially weighing 84 kg).
200 watts = 200 watts. Spinning results in higher heartrate but is better for your knees. You do not allways have to change the cassette, you can change also the innerring (34 to 39) fairly easily for flatter rides. It will shift better too.
On the really flat rides, don't you stay in the big ring?
@@Korkinator17 Yes but I said on relatively ¨flatter rides¨. So there will still be some climbing. And for climbs up 5 percent you do not need propper cycling gears. (if somewhat fit and not overweight).
200 watts OUTPUT = 200 watts output. But the inputs will not be equal. One will use more energy. We know this already with aerobic vs anaerobic energy production.
@@BC-wj8fx 👍
Great points! The only issue with changing the small ring can be the jump between the two rings. This can cause shifting issues if the jump is too big 👀
The pedal stroke efficiency curve seems nearly logarithmic to me, taking more and more power to maintain cadence as rpm’s approach maximum. I remember Mark Gorski (1984 Olympic Gold Medalist in the Sprint) talking about attempting to reach 200 rpm with zero resistance to raise that stroke efficiency. I think most of us experienced riders start using more power to maintain the cadence than goes to the wheels around 90 to 100 rpm, but that’s just a guess. Inexperienced riders are probably most efficient (and more limited) at 60 -70 rpm. Practicing the spin to extend that usable cadence is under appreciated and hugely beneficial in my opinion. I don’t know how, but actually measuring those factors might be eye-opening.
Definitely like the video. This video goes with the video about Srams new 10 tooth gear parings. Very helpful.
Whether I go for high cadence or low cadence on a climb depends on how I'm feeling for that particular climb. Sometimes switching between the two in the middle. Just depends on whether I feel like my lungs or legs can take it better at that time.
I've recently been down this road myself. I'm using 9 speed Ultegra with 53-39 on the front, and the cassette that came stock was 11-21. I am old, have never been a pro level rider, and I just can't work with that anymore. Swaped out the rear mech for a 9 speed Deore, and put an 11-36 cassette on. Much better now. Is it a bit of a bodge? Sure. But it works a treat for me.
Since the introduction of full bike luggage on my gravel bike I’ve changed to 48/31 up front and 11/42 at the rear, having many gear options matter when loaded on hilly terrain. I feel there are more options available when you need it the most 😅
My newest Carbon Fiber Road bike has a 53/39 crank and a 11x30 cassette. I typically ride on hilly roads in South Carolina. For that terrain, the gearing works well. I took a cycling trip to the Big Island of Hawaii where the climbs are long and very steep 15% to 20% flattening out to 9% and then back up again, for several miles at a time. For that environment, I used a 50/34 crank and 11x32 cassette (biggest I could go with a short cage) and I was able to get by. For the longer, steeper climbs, the lower gearing is a huge help. Not sure I could have done it with the larger crank and smaller cassette. I've also learned ( and trained) to keep my cadence at a higher pace in general. I target 85 to 95 RPM average with sprints over 100 RPM. Spinning is definitely faster than grinding and can be sustained longer. Great video!
I can definitely confirm the "harder gear is more muscular, easier gear is more cardiovascular" theory, as my tri coach has been preaching that for years. Personally, I always put on the tallest cassette that my rear derailleur can support, if only to make sure I have more options when things get steep -- I can outclimb all my mates when they're grinding at 36/28 but I can remain seated at 34/34!
Absolutely agree. Plus it gets interesting on really long climbs and longer rides with a lot of vertical. The easier gears save your legs for later. I lately used my gravel bike with gp 5000 tires for riding in the Alps. The 40:42 ratio worked amazingly, especially on climbs with up to 23% gradient.
you can confirm something because your tri coach said so? Where do you think muscles get their energy from?
Finally road biking is catching onto what mtb has been doing for a good while .
“So many people could potentially benefit from this “ but only If their cardiovascular fitness is right up There with lance !
I remember 1989 where in an US cycling magazine they reported about a study, that at 50% of your maximum force 90% of the circulation in the muscle is blocked. This reduces the time and blood volume for energy and waste transportation. Ever since then, I try to use lower gear ratios with higher cadences even if it does not look very "cool". But I have the impression, that it was and is good for my training and racing.
46/30 on the front 11-40 on the back Use a road link to extend the reach of the rear mech Epic hilly rides await
This is the way.
Great effort! Finally you guys found your lost power meter and did those tests again with controlled POWER. Your test result in this video is very inline with my experience that it's a load transfer between muscular and cardiovascular systems. And is very inline with the scientific research in this field that shows the most efficient RPM is about 60. I want to add that there's a difference between "max efficiency" and "max sustainability". Though low RPM is more efficient, the time to fatigue could be much shorter than the high RPM, even though the RPE is lower. So for sustained effort a lot of people find that high RPM is actually more easier, even though "feeling harder". I guess another thing is when you want to get really fast, like 50% 100% improvement, you can't avoid the leg force. You can only increase your RPM so much. If you are looking at 20%+ 30%+ 50%+ or 100%+ improvement, you have to work on the legs. (given that cardio is unlimited, that's another topic).
Easier gears did help me. I use 3X9 on my trekking bike. 28-38-48 on the front. I was using 11-28 cassette. Now I use 11-32. A good choice for me. I can acelerate faster and feel less pain in my legs when riding a long trip. I also heve less trouble riding into a strong headwind. Or when I pull my bicycle-trailer.
Easy gears make the day.
When I got my Wilier Rave SLR that had Ultegra 11-30 & 50-34 I changed it to 11-34 and used a GRX 48-31 chainring. Makes hills so much easier and I spend way more time in the 34 cog than I do in the 11 cog...my legs thank me for it!
Depends on your physiology and muscle fiber type. Look at your average cadence, ride after ride after ride. Your natural chosen cadence will obviously present itself. Mine's 77. It's always 77. It might tick up a little on climbs or harder efforts, but whatever I need to use near that cadence on climbs, that's the gearing I want. Some will use lower cadence, some will use higher. If you have a riding buddy who's cadence is higher/lower on climbs, try to match theirs for a time and see what it feels like. It can be shocking how uncomfortable a higher or lower cadence can be from your natural preference.
you can train to be comfortable at a higher cadence, when I started out cycling I was comfortable at 70-75, now 3 years later I'm closer to 85-90. 70-75 feels like a grind now.
You should do some drills to get a higher cadence. First i started around the same cadence like you and now i prefer a cadence around 95
Mine changed drastically. When I started riding, around 75 rpm. Then I developed more cardio and experimented with higher cadence, and began averaging 100 rpm as my natural comfort zone. But now I find myself at 85 rpm.
This is 35 years into cycling. I'm in my sweet spot already. @@kannibal8850
My natural cadence was around 60 rpm - extremely low but that’s how I rode for years. Started working on increasing cadence early this year and it was hard but am now comfortable with 85-90 rpm. It allows me to save the legs for when I really need them at the steeper climbs or for accelerations out of corners etc.
Rim brakes, 1:1 25 mm tires, use 1:1 when it is 15% or plus. Then back down to the 28 or 25 when under the 6%. Or if you are feeling your cheerios put it in the big dog and dance like Contador
Really wants to see a mtb cassette on there but still great video lads keep it up
It's very important that you go to Mallorca if you ever get the innovative idea that changing to a lower gear might help you climb hills. There are no hills anywhere else on the planet and increasing your carbon footprint helps people make more bike parts from carbon-fibre.
Deep into a climby Fondo I was not regretting my switch to accomodate 33-36 instead of 35-33. Used it for a lot of the final climb - 180-200W with a comfy cadence of 80-85 on consistent 7-10% sections
I know we keep advocating “spinning to win” but research has shown (as you’ve mentioned in other videos) that there isn’t a set high cadence that works well for everyone. Some people are more efficient at cadences less than 80rpm. I’m an advocate for cycling at radios and gears that work for you, as an individual
Hello GCN, and thank you for your channel! I'm love your information, I trust you, and I learn so much. Your last sub-scientific research though,... There are a lot of holes in the collection, analysis, and evaluation of data. With that said, it still contains valuable information for me. That you subjectively can state that you with two so drastically different cadences can generate the same power and maintain the same speed, and thereby shift the workload/fatigue between legs and the heart, is a great skill to have. Personally, my technique is to poor to generate any high level of power when cycling with a high cadence. That less resistance doesn't fatigue the muscles as much as high resistance is of course nothing new. Lifting 100 kg once does not has the same impact on your muscles as lifting 20 kg five times. But to generate the same power, you need to do the five reps in the same time as you did the one rep. And that's where the higher-lower cadence equation has a ceiling and a bottom, and those are different for each individual.
I was glad to have an 11-36 for the Zoncolan. Of course, my serpentine paper-boy route added about 1/2 km per km.
I’ve used a 36 tooth for years, here in Wales we’ve got mountains in every direction so you need an emergency gear sometimes
What's interesting is I rarely hear what I feel is the important part of these conversations on gearing (or even brake type) is where do you typically ride? I live in an area that's very hilly so it's nice to have a really wide range because I have lots of opportunities where there is a somewhat decent climb and it's nice to be able to keep the Cadence up, as well as a lot of descents where I'm pedaling in highest gear. If I lived somewhere flattered I would much prefer a much tighter cassette to have more control over the Cadence. And if I lived somewhere like Florida I would like to have a one by on my road bike.
I concur and volunteer my results for the average rider test. I've just bought a carbon gravel bike with hard pack tyres. On tarmac I keep the pressure higher and having the low ratio gearing means that I can climb longer and have legs in reserve to stand up and pump out some extra wattage if required. (Which is a nice feeling when you're 55 and getting your fitness back.)
My new Specialized Roubaix bike build has a Leonardi General Lee 9-50t, 12 speed cassette w/a 32 chainring. I used to spin out w/a 34 chainring, but my local bike shop owner assures me that the setup we went with will get me up these big hills around here. I haven't been able to test this out yet. I think I'm going to need a 34 or 36 chainring in the future after knee replacement surgery, but that remains to be seen. Originally, I wanted 13 speed, but was told the parts would be too hard to source if there was a breakdown.
Yes, I’ve been training this too, light gear, high cadence, no stress on legs and I can conquer the climb better. Then still have the energy to complete long flats.
I already use grx (46/30 11/36) on my road bike. It is amazing especially since I do long rides bordering on ultra distance.
Taking riders trained to push a gear and getting them to go at 87rpm is interesting. Train for 90rpm and it becomes easier and easier, train for 100rpm and that 85ishbrpm becomes so much more natural as your CV system improves. Have both low cadence high leg power and higher cadence and you can switch between them to rest one a little whilst using the other. Has to be a win win.
Interesting, I’m currently debating this between my 2 bikes, and whether to leave my newest bike with the 11-34 compared to the 11-28 on my other bike. 11-34 is a 9 speed, 11-28 is a 10 speed. Currently doing gear calcs to work out what direction to take.
I have always run 9-speed 11-34on the rear and a triple up front. I've never wished for more in-between gears. Early on I discovered switching between leg load and cardio load. Alternate between the two to give the other some recovery. I train at the most extremes, e.g. 5km circuit at 60 rpm, then again at 115 rpm, repeat a few times.
Easier gears can make the difference of a newbie making it up the mountain… or not. Great explanations. I have found myself wishing for an in between gear a few times
Spin To Win 💫
Something I learned mountain biking has also carried over to road biking. If my legs are burning but I’m not breathing very hard (have some HR reserve), I use an easier gear to spin faster. If I’m breathing really hard but my legs feel good, I use a harder gear to slow my cadence down. Of course, if my legs are burning and I am huffing and puffing, I just have to slow down 😂. I like having the big gear in the back just to have the option on steep sections, or to recover on a climb if I go too hard and blow up. I think the optimal cadence is different for every rider, though not as much different as some people think.
This is why I love my Sram AXS 10-36t cassette. 12 speeds, LOTS of options. And the thinner, lighter, but stronger flat top chain keeps the spacing between the gears even smaller.
Now in my mid forties I believe in spin to win, my road bike is 50/34-11/34, gravel oval 44-11/34 and MTB 32-10/52. I still take off from the seat for hard effort but cannot keep up for long, maybe age. ✌🏾
I tested riding uphill in lighter gears (by doing so, I wasted al ot of money for getting Campy CT Square taper cranks), just to find out that it does not only not work for me, but I also felt losing power, as I at that time rode with high cadences on the flat. Now I go uphill again with cadences around 50-60 rpm - it is sometimes rather funny passing riders with a cadence twice as high. On my favourite hill (it has only got 6-8%, on the last 3km the road goes uphil at about 10%, that nis when I switch to 21-23 - it's the Feldberg, maybe those presenters that visit the Eurobike in Frankfurt/Germany next year should try that hill), I use mostly (depending on the used bike) 43 or 46 as the small ring, and between 16 and 18 teeth on the back. On a good day, I had 56/21 on the whole route, and the time was still quite remarkable. This kind of grinding helps me building muscles I can use then not only on the flat, but also for fast descents.
Interesting , I agree with your synopsis, my road bike is over 20 years old and the gear ratios are not good for steep hills. I also have a hybrid which is much newer and a darn sight heavier , but find it easier going up steep climbs as I have a better range of gears… so will look at getting a new group set that gives me a better range and open up the rides I can do on my road bike…. . As the winter is on its way , a project for the new year I think….
👍 do it before the bike shops get busy. The mechanics appreciate that 😉
I’ve got a gravel bike, which is perfectly happy on the road too. It’s a 46-30 with 11-36 at the back, just done a local steep climb and it felt good. I’m 60 and 105kg so getting up hills is more difficult that it used to be, but on the 20% gradients I can keep going without killing myself 😀👍
As an old school mountain rider I’ve relied heavily on low gears on road but obviously more so racing in the dirt. I find that the advantages are; some psychological relief on long steep climbs, a lessening of lactic acid in my legs and more oxygen into my lungs. I also find that I have fewer post ride cramps in my legs if I can have a higher cadence when needed. I would find myself using a zig zag accent in order to lighten the extreme steepness of the terrain, thereby imitating a higher gear for added recovery. Great video!
For off-road (or on a rough road) it can be hard to spin efficiently when the bike is being bounced around. If you are pedaling so fast that you get "micro-bucked" going over a root or a bump then you're converting forward momentum into lifting your body weight...not very efficient.
52/42 chainring and 11/34 cassette , i tend to go for the higher cadences and a lower gear than one would use , but there is point of diminishing returns both ways .
The optimal cadence is a function of power output such that overall efficiency is maximized and the load on the aerobic system is balanced with the load on the muscles. For example, every hour record has been set with a cadence of about 105 RPM. Track Sprinters go much higher when delivering 1000+ watts to the pedals. We see climbers like Feather climbing mostly out of the saddle using the slowest possible cadence that allows them to just barely stay on top of the gear. The data from your test suggests that the 28 tooth cog is more efficient than the 34 at 200 watts. Also, transmission losses as wells as 'gear gap' increase significantly with cogs smaller than 13 teeth making them undesirable at best. Lots to consider.
People would laugh at my granny ring, 30 years ago. Now it’s all the rage! Fantastic when you need it. So glad people are no longer blowing out their knees.
The best gearing is user dependent. Pick the gearing that works best for YOU. With the new 11-30 cassette on my 12 speed Dura Ace, I think I'm okay with the stock 52/36. My last bike had 50/34 with 11-28.
You probably don’t see a big difference between the easiest gears on your new vs your old setup. The new setup should be just slightly easier (36/30 < 34/28).
I have a 1 x 11 and I have a 42 tooth on the front and a mountain bike like cassette on the back with a 11-51 tooth. I would love to upgrade my 42 tooth to a 53-39 maybe in the future or I will keep the single speed but either have a 46 or 48 tooth chainring.
I couldn't agree more with the conclusions of this video. Good job Ollie and Alex. I completed my first Century in 1968 and in 2022 rode ahead of the pros during TdF week three. I owe all of this to GEARING. I plan on riding Mt Ventoux and Alp d'Heuz in summer 2024. The joke in the family is that Dad will stop riding when the big gear on his cassette has to be bigger than the wheel itself. Until then...........keep riding.
I have power meter pedals, but I tend to focus on cadence and heart rate to gauge how I'm doing, with a goal of maintaining at least 80 RPM and staying under 170 BPM. This makes riding a my good old 53/39 11-21 9-speed workable, even for a 63-yr-old retiree. When I do encounter a climb, dropping onto the small ring and the big cog gives me a ratio of 1.86 to 1, a pretty hard gear even for a fit young guy, but I rarely need anything close to that where I live. My other favorite road bike is a bit heavier but gives me a low gear of 1.33, so I have that option if hills will be a thing.
Steep gradients are not possible with that fitness and set-up. And i am young wild and free.
@@barneyklingenberg4078 Perhaps not. That's why I have given myself lower gearing on other bikes.
I fitted a big cassette on my bike for the hills around me but it felt horrible, I never seemed to have the right gear, so I went back the the smaller one and climbing feels easier and natural now.
Great video! Would be interesting to see the same test but on tempo rather than endurance load. (Probably >260 for Alex) I find that on harder, longer efforts, sometimes switching between spinning and grinding helps. So always get a shorter gear, so you have the choice!
exactly, the more choices the better! I explained why in a comment in this thread so I don't want to repeat it again. But anyways, good point
In a hilly area like Krušné Hory, where I live, 11-34 is in my opinion almost essential. I´m so used to it, that I don´t even notice the gaps between gears. The main advantage is, that you can go fast with large chainring and smallest cog and then, when you approach a steep hill, you still have the opportunity to shift to the largest cog and smaller chainring, enabling you to conquer it with much less effort, than if you´d have to grind it on 28t, out of the saddle, with aero penalty and weight suboptimally distributed more forward.
I use 50-34 on a front and 12-25 on a rear and for me this is perfect. I like to have a smaller gapes between gears rather than bigger range. With smallest 1,36 ratio I can climb on any hill, even with double digit gradient. And a highest ratio 4,16 is more than enough for me to ride about 48-50 km/h on flat surface.
In interested in easier gears on my road bike. I was thinking a 34x50 chainrings and an 11x36 cassette on the back. On my mountain bike. I'd keep the 10x51 cassette and change the chainring from a 32t to a 30t.
On rides with up to 1000m of climbing and under 60km in length, the easier gear is more of a "want" than a "need" on the steep bits. Into the third hour or a ride, though, if we've logged 1500m or more uphill and there are more climbs to come, I'm spinning to save my (soon to be 50 year old) knees since I got all of the muscular work I could want out of hours one and two. It also helps to prevent a cramp on warm days, I find, if you're spinning instead of grinding it out with fatigued muscles.
I run 1X with 42t up front and 10-52t out back. It is a gravel bike, but often goes out on fast group rides. It took me a couple rides to get used to the wider steps coming from my 2x11 road bike with 52/36 and 11-34. I'll take the bigger steps to have my granny gears any day, and have no desire to dust off the road bike.
I'm old and slow now, so I finally have a low gear with a 39x25. 10 years ago, my low gear was a 39x23. 30 years ago, it was a 39x21. I only have one 20% hill in my area. The rest are just rolling glacial moraines. Don't forget, a high cadence results in a higher heart rate. You must be trained to spin fast.
30 years ago I was running 40/26 Shimano 600, but that was in the Seattle area, with lots of hills to climb.
Was riding Monte Zoncolan a month ago and was more then happy about my 34-11 casette. 12speed is making life much more easier😅
We bet that 34 was used a lot 👀 Such a great climb 🙌
@@gcntech yes, just cant imagine how it would be with 39-30 or even 39-25 like some years ago
In the old days I rode 53x41 with either a 7 or 8spd straight block and never had an issue on any terrain, cuz we were all on essentially the same gearing. Nowadays I'm 30ish years older riding a 53x39 and an 11-25 block. I can't say if the modern gearing is easier cuz i'm older (but still fit)... i will say on retro days when i bring out the old steel, I have to get to the front of the group in order to be toward the back of the group at the peak of the climb (when most are not on steel that is), so i think it's relative. I do know that when i moved from my old steel bike with 8spd to carbon 11spd, that first season was insane cuz it took so much less effort to move the carbon bike over any terrain.
Interesting result. I do wonder if the increased RPE in the lower gear might have been due to Alex being well within his comfort zone at 200 watts. In that situation it doesn't feel too bad pushing a high gear/ low cadence because you've got a fair bit in reserve. I wonder, if they had conducted the test at say 300 watts, would the low cadence have had a more detrimental effect and would the higher cadence been more advantageous?
"bigger gears" : larger ratio, more development "bigger cogs": smaller ratio, less development, lower gears I always view it as a tradeoff between torque, creating peak muscle load, and efficiency, since spinning wastes motion (spinning legs in circles). I want to find the balance. So at the same power (measured on the bike) lower gear results in lower HR, but also less static force.
I currently ride a very tight 13/23, 9 speeds in the back and a 52/42/30 in front on a 2000 bike. And although I would love to have a 12 speed in the back with a wider ratio, I like the fine tuning of jumping from only one tooth at the time over 7 gears. It allows me to always have the right cadence.
Yes that triple with the smaller casette, still gives you a pretty decent range with very small gaps. Just lots of gear changes on he front derailleur!
I agree. But they want to sell you what is being sold right now. New 🙂 It’s all a fashion game. 30 years ago, people would laugh at my granny ring, on the club runs. Now it’s all the rage. Whatever! I align with your setup.
Power for Velocity is independent of gearing. Gearing is decided by your individual muscle type and how you have trained. For example, I grew up on 52/42 with 13 to 23 screw-on freewheels. My first geared bike at 12 years old was a 48 chainring to a 14 to 28, 5 speed screw-on block. With 26" wheels, a 45" gear was supposed to be workable for a youth. The result is now at 63 years old, a 10% hill is no problem on a vintage bike with 48 single ring and 28 sprocket. Rode up a couple of 15% conks today. Strava said 236 W.
I'm actually going in the opposite direction. My road bike is 10 speed which I might upgrade to 11, 12 or even 13 someday but not anytime soon. I've been riding a 12-25 for years with a 30-42-53 triple up front, and it's worked well for me other than the steepest of climbs, but I found that I missed having an 18. 17 was sometimes too hard and 19 too easy. So I got a 12-23 but have yet to use it. If I ever did move up to more speeds I'd probably keep the 12-23 and use the extra cogs to add a 28 and 34 if I go for a 12 speed and a 26, 30 and 34 for a 13 speed. I'm never getting rid of the triple as it's not that much more weight and while I don't use the 30 that often I use it often enough to be worth it. Combined with a 28 or 34 cog and I'd be set. And, yes, I prefer to always be at higher cadences whether on the flats of climbing. Feels much better and I find that I'm much more efficient that way.
Am cycling in velodromes preferably. Guess the result would be the same on flat underground. It depends which is better developed ... the power of the legs or the cardiovascular system.
Staying longer in the big ring is my biggest all-day advantage to the new Shimano. And I can ride with 36-34 on road and gravel equally.😊
on my mtb hardtail i use a 40t chain ring and a 9-50t cassete just to get the same top end as my previous drivetrain (48-38-28t and 11-32t) while having a lower climbing gear ratio. i do notice the step gaps between some gears.
A lot of my rides are commutes so being able to spin for an hour, teach on my feet all day then spin for an hour has made the process much better
10 speed 12-28 cassette, with a compact double for me. My old 10 speed Ultegra short cage won’t take anything bigger, but then I rarely go on huge climbs and I’m happier on cadences lower than 80rpm anyway
When I got my first road bike I instantly put a 40t cassette on. It made me a slower rider because I natually would use the easiest gear on climbs and reduce my power to hold 90rpm where a 32t would be perfectly fine. It's a mental thing really, because the 40t has been really helpful for long rides and climbs 10% or higher grade but unfortunately with the easy gear available I have taken on a relaxed climbing style.