revs per minute

General
1

Talked to a guy yesterday who flagged me down as I walked by. He wanted to
try my 24-inch Miyata, so I went home and got it. He normally rides that
other kind of wheeled thing that starts with a “b” and rhymes with
“dislike.”

Anyway, we were talking about knees. He said it’s good to do 85 revolutions
a minute while on that thing with the superfluous wheel. Does that sound
right? Has this been discussed here a million times already? If so, sorry.

Would that be the same for uni riders? I tried it and was surprised to find
that I ride at almost exactly 85 revolutions per minute.

Is this supposed to have some impact on the knees – good or bad? Do most
people ride at a much higher rate of revolutions per minute (not racing,
necessarily, just casual riding)?

Just wondering since my knees aren’t getting any younger, and I don’t think
I’ll be learning to coast anytime soon.

Thanks.

Carol
Minnesota

Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

2

Re: revs per minute

“Carol McLean” <cettermclean@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.1020690547.7131.rsu@unicycling.org…
>
> Talked to a guy yesterday who flagged me down as I walked by. He wanted to
> try my 24-inch Miyata, so I went home and got it. He normally rides that
> other kind of wheeled thing that starts with a “b” and rhymes with
> “dislike.”
>
> Anyway, we were talking about knees. He said it’s good to do 85
revolutions
> a minute while on that thing with the superfluous wheel. Does that sound
> right? Has this been discussed here a million times already? If so,
sorry.
>
> Would that be the same for uni riders? I tried it and was surprised to
find
> that I ride at almost exactly 85 revolutions per minute.
>
> Is this supposed to have some impact on the knees – good or bad? Do most
> people ride at a much higher rate of revolutions per minute (not racing,
> necessarily, just casual riding)?
>
> Just wondering since my knees aren’t getting any younger, and I don’t
think
> I’ll be learning to coast anytime soon.

Let’s see: 85 (revolutions per minute) x 3’ (Coker diameter) x pi
(circumference/diameter) x 60 (minutes in an hour) / 5280 (feet in a mile)
equals…

About nine miles an hour on a Coker, six miles an hour on a 24". Sounds
low, by almost a factor of 2.

3

Re: revs per minute

cettermclean@hotmail.com writes:
[snip]
>
>Anyway, we were talking about knees. He said it’s good to do 85
>revolutions
>a minute while on that thing with the superfluous wheel. Does that sound
>right? Has this been discussed here a million times already? If so,
>sorry.
>
>Would that be the same for uni riders? I tried it and was surprised to
>find
>that I ride at almost exactly 85 revolutions per minute.
>
>Is this supposed to have some impact on the knees – good or bad? Do
>most
>people ride at a much higher rate of revolutions per minute (not racing,
>necessarily, just casual riding)?

There is nothing optimal about 85rpm for a unicycle. I tihnk smaller
wheels are typically ridden at slower rpm, but not that slow (if you are
riding for speed, that is). On a Coker, I average about 140rpm (ok, I ride
pretty fast). Sometimes I go as ‘slow’ as 10mph, which is about 100rpm;
other times I go twice as fast (nearly 200rpm). Some riders have actually
gotten a Coker up to 25-30mph, which is nuts, but it’s been done.

On a smaller wheel, I go nearly as ‘fast’ (in terms of rpm). 85 is just
really slow.

David

Co-founder, Unatics of NY
1st Sunday / 3rd Saturday
@ Central Park Bandshell
1:30 start time after 11/1/01

4

I have a few observations about cadence. Now that i’ve been riding my unicycle for about a year I find that when I go mountain bking, I have a really high cadence. The say for road bking to aim for a cadence of around 65rpm. On a mountain bke to go for as high as you can get. They say that a higher cadence is always more efficient, and is good technique because you can generate the most torque at high cadence. At some point your cadence will get faster than you can pedal and you will begin bouncing in your seat. On a bke you just shift up, on a unicycle, that is simply your top speed for your wheel/crank combination. 85 is pretty good. I don’t know where you are interms of learning pedal technique so I apologize if you have heard all of this: When pedaling it is important to not just step down on the pedals. At the bottom of the stroke you should pull back as hard as friction allows. At the top of the stroke you should be pushing foward. In time a very smooth pedal stroke develops as your feet begin to spin circles instead of just stepping down. It is possible to spin 120 rpm without too much effort or practice, and I have heard of much higher cadence. I guess go check the world record unicycle race speeds, and figure out what cadence they must have turned. I would’t be surprised if it is around 180 or even higher. Final note: shorter cranks allow for a faster cadence. At any rate, I have very bad knees and found that pedaling unicycles and the other thing, really helps strengthen them and keeps them from injury.
-gauss

5

For me, knee pain seems to be a combination of exertion, and angle. I had some problems when starting out on the Coker where on long rides the knee would ache afterward. High foot speed and bad technique combined with bairing down hard on the pedal when the knee was at almost 90 deg and slightly out of plane to made for some unhappy joints.

Now on the Coker, 120 revs a minute doesn’t cause joint pain -and I can’t speak to anything sustained faster than 140, as my feet don’t like to stay on the pedals. Generaly speeking though, as I hit the high end of my cadence, my knees begin to fly out of plane- that is, they don’t align with my hip and foot- and I end up pushing down on a twisted joint: that can’t be good.

So… I’m not sure it’s so much a mater of cadence as it is foot speed. Shorter cranks may help. Or improved technique. I don’t think there is a magic number, though- depends on the rider, the ride, etc. I’m sure I’d be much less comfortable trying to maintain 120 on a 24" wheel, since my technique isn’t that strong and wheel wobble would probably do some bad things…

Just me babeling,

Christopher

6

Re: revs per minute

Carol-

My knees are getting younger, why aren’t yours?

7

Re: revs per minute

in article mailman.1020690547.7131.rsu@unicycling.org, Carol McLean at
cettermclean@hotmail.com wrote on 5/6/02 8:21 AM:

> Anyway, we were talking about knees. He said it’s good to do 85 revolutions
> a minute while on that thing with the superfluous wheel. Does that sound
> right? Has this been discussed here a million times already? If so, sorry.
>
> Would that be the same for uni riders? I tried it and was surprised to find
> that I ride at almost exactly 85 revolutions per minute.
>
> Is this supposed to have some impact on the knees – good or bad? Do most
> people ride at a much higher rate of revolutions per minute (not racing,
> necessarily, just casual riding)?

I also ride one of those “b” beasts, in my case a recumbent one.

Yes, higher RPMs are better - more spin less torque. In fact, my usual
cadence ranges from 90 to 120.

The real issue is how much power you are putting through your knees. Many
people like to use a slow cadence and a higher gear, basically mashing the
pedals (and their knees). This squeezes the cartilage in the knees -
squishing away the natural lubricants and tearing up the knees.

Spinning rather than mashing is much better. Not only does it not damage the
cartilage, it also promotes the generation of lubricants - keeping the knees
working smoothly.

I don’t think the exact RPM matters, it’s really a matter of being nice to
your knees and not “mashing.” I can “mash” on my bike at 85 rpm - and I’ll
feel it later if I do.

Spin faster (85+) if you can, but just take it easy on your knees if you
can’t.

BTW, when I started biking I though 65 rpm was fast, and 90 insane. It just
takes time & practice to raise the cadence.

-Carl

8

RE: revs per minute

> Anyway, we were talking about knees. He said it’s good to do
> 85 revolutions a minute while on that thing with the
> superfluous wheel. Does that sound right?

For a bike, yes. Though different actual numbers work for different people,
85 is somewhere in the middle of the various ranges I’ve heard.

The difference is, on a bike you have a choice. You select a gear to put
your pedaling speed into the optimum range for best power output. On the
less-complicated unicycle, cadence = speed. You want to go faster, you pedal
faster. So the concept of optimum cadence doesn’t apply.

If you’re looking for a good aerobic workout and aren’t worried about speed,
the value of 85 probably still isn’t true. This number is based on crank
arms that are a lot longer than the average street unicycle, and is also
based on a higher level of resistance in the pedals (from higher speed and
greater wind resistance). So for the equivalent aerobic workout, you’d
probably want to pedal faster.

If you are after exercise, you might as well pedal at the highest speed you
feel comfortable with. You can do intervals, where you alternate a
comfortable pace with the fastest pace you can maintain. Doing this sort of
thing will pay off at the convention, when you go up against the
mostly-untrained fellow racers in your age group.

Many people find, when they try to pedal faster than their “normal” speed,
that they start to oscillate or bounce up and down on the seat. This means
your body isn’t properly compensating for the rotating mass of your legs.
I’m going through this problem currently, as I’m riding a MUni with 170mm
cranks instead of my usual 150. If we were cars, we would attach little
weights to our legs to even out the bounce and “balance our wheels.”
Instead, we just keep practicing, until our bodies learn how to absorb this
oscillation and we adapt to the new pedaling speed. In other words, it may
take some effort, but you should be able to learn to pedal smoothly at any
rpm. Though shorter crank arms make this easier than longer ones.

> I tried it and was surprised to find that I ride at almost
> exactly 85 revolutions per minute.

That’s probably a common speed for a unicycle. “Fast” riders are always
somewhere north of 100rpm. When we race on 24" wheels, most of the shorter
events are well over 200.

> Is this supposed to have some impact on the knees – good or bad?

Since a unicycle puts relatively little strain on the knees compared to a
bike, I don’t know if speed is the main factor. On a bike, it has to do with
lots of quick “pushes” rather than a smaller number of longer, harder ones.
Most average people on bikes tend to pedal much slower than is efficient,
which puts a strain on knees. I am not an expert in this area; that’s just
what I have come to believe based on reading Bicycling Magazine for 15
years.

Stay on top,
John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone
jfoss@unicycling.com

“If people want to truly understand mountain biking, they have to do two
other things: ride a unicycle, and master the trampoline.” – Joe Breeze,
one of the originators of mountain biking, in a conversation with Tim Bustos

9

From experience I know that fast cadences are easier on your knees. However, optimal cadence is between 75 and 95 RPM for most riders under most circumstances. This optimum cadence is of course performed while using optimal crank length depending on your leg length and type of riding. Crank length should be no shorter than 165MM and no longer then 180MM for most people. This is a cadence that is not only most comfortable but most efficient. If you find that most of the time your cadence is at 85RPM then congratulations you have found an ideal wheel and crank combination. In terms of efficiency you are short changing yourself by using short crank small wheel combinations rather than long crank large wheel combinations (or more gear inches)

Those riding Cokers with 5-inch cranks or shorter and maintaining cadences of 130+ would travel much faster with a longer crank larger wheel combination. Acquiring speed by inches of travel per revolution rather than by faster pedaling is what should be the goal.

In short, if optimal efficiency is your desire select the correct wheel and crank combination. Start with your ideal crank length (let me know if you need help in selecting proper crank length). Once proper cranks size is established select a wheel large enough so that 75 to 95RPM be at the intensity or effort you desire.

If you find that after selecting proper crank size that a 36-inch wheel is too small for optimum cadences at your desired intensity then call Greg Harper. He has what you need

dan

10

I used to ride a bicycle and a tandem, regularly doing 100 mile days with my local club. The bicycle technique is to spin the cranks at high revs rather than to push at high torque. I’d say 80 odd rpm would be comfortable on a bicycle. Racers go much higher, but their legs fall to pieces in later life. However, the choice of cadence (rpm) is wider on a geared bicycle as you can select a gear to suit the terrain.

On a uni, there is an optimal speed: the speed you can sustain with a little in reserve to regain your balance if the uni ‘trips over’ an obstacle. Whether that’s 60 rpm or 120 depends on your knees, the wheel diameter, the terrain, and your level of experience and skill. Strikes me we ride these things because we’re not conformists, so we should do it in the way that suits us.

11

When would that be? Tommy Thompson, a MUnier in Memphis, has been cycling at a competitive level since his early youth; now in his 40’s, I’m having trouble keeping up with him. Maybe the exception to the rule…

Christopher

12

Re: revs per minute

On Mon, 06 May 2002 08:21:30 -0500, “Carol McLean”
<cettermclean@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Would that be the same for uni riders? I tried it and was surprised to find
>that I ride at almost exactly 85 revolutions per minute.
>
>Is this supposed to have some impact on the knees – good or bad? Do most
>people ride at a much higher rate of revolutions per minute (not racing,
>necessarily, just casual riding)?

My preferred cadence for casual street riding on my 24" with 125 mm
cranks is on the order of 85 rpm but it depends on my “mood”.

Klaas Bil

“To trigger/fool/saturate/overload Echelon, the following has been picked automagically from a database:”
“MDA, Internet Underground, $@”

13

RE: revs per minute

> The say for road b*king to aim for a cadence of
> around 65rpm.

I don’t think this is accurate. Racers generally pedal at least 90-100. 65
should be around the minimum “safe” cadence for a bike.

> They say that a higher cadence is always more efficient,
> and is good technique because you can generate the most
> torque at high cadence.

Again I would question this “they”. Faster cadence will get you through a
lot of things, but there’s a limit to how fast you can pedal and still
maintain useful control.

> When pedaling it is important to not just step down on the pedals. At
> the bottom of the stroke you should pull back as hard as friction
> allows. At the top of the stroke you should be pushing
> foward. In time a very smooth pedal stroke develops as your feet
> begin to spin circles instead of just stepping down.

This is good advice. It goes along with the concept of “ankling.” This is
where your toe is pointed upward at the top of the pedal stroke, and
downward at the bottom. Doing this effectively shortens the required range
of motion for your knees, allowing you to do more pedaling with less work.
Ankling combined with a smooth pedal stroke will give you a smooth,
efficient pedaling motion at any speed.

Stay on top,
John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone
jfoss@unicycling.com

“If people want to truly understand mountain biking, they have to do two
other things: ride a unicycle, and master the trampoline.” – Joe Breeze,
one of the originators of mountain biking, in a conversation with Tim Bustos

14

Re: revs per minute

>Carol-
>
>My knees are getting younger, why aren’t yours?
>
>
>–
>harper - Gearhead
>
> -Greg Harper

I don’t know. What’s your secret? I’m afraid this means that your knees are
cuter than mine, too.

Hmmm?

Carol

Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.

15

Re: Re: revs per minute

Yes, I have very charming knees. Well, one of them has a huge scar on it, but that’s character.

16

Re: revs per minute

dan.48ypy@unicyclist.com writes:
>Those riding Cokers with 5-inch cranks or shorter and maintaining
>cadences of 130+ would travel much faster with a longer crank larger
>wheel combination. Acquiring speed by inches of travel per revolution
>rather than by faster pedaling is what should be the goal.
As Roger Davies has already noted, these data are ok for bikes but way off
for unicycles. This misinformation sounds like it’s borne out of lack of
experience. Anyone who has tried different crank lengths on a Coker (or
even on a smaller wheel) knows that there is an optimum achieved with the
correct crank length. Increasing wheel size is not an option, and having
even longer cranks would be hellacious on the knees, tho it would be nice
to have more control of a big wheel. [I actually have a 46" wheel (Godzilla) with 7" cranks, and it’s WAY harder to control than my Coker with 4.3" cranks, tho other factors influence this difference.]

I wonder what Dan thinks would solve the speed issue for Cokerers – the
wheel can only get so large before you need special attachments to reach
the pedals.

When I borrow a Coker from someone who hasn’t changed from the standard 6"
cranks, it is easier to turn and stop, but it’s slower. In a short time,
it hurts one’s knees, too.
>
>In short, if optimal efficiency is your desire select the correct wheel
>and crank combination. Start with your ideal crank length (let me know
>if you need help in selecting proper crank length). Once proper cranks
>size is established select a wheel large enough so that 75 to 95RPM be
>at the intensity or effort you desire.
No way. Riding a Coker at 75 rpm is actually somewhat tricky for the fact
that when the pedals are vertical, it’s hard to control a unicycle, and if
you are at those points for a greater amount of time, you put yourself at
risk of more UPDs. In any case, you would also be going a lot slower than
many people on their 24" unicycles, and you would never get the feeling of
having the wind blow in you hair unless it actually happened to be windy.

In short, I can’t understand what Dan’s information is based on. None of
it seems accurate.

David
Co-founder, Unatics of NY
1st Sunday / 3rd Saturday
@ Central Park Bandshell
1:30 start time after 11/1/01

17

David

I assume I got your attention because you ride your unicycle at fast speeds. You challenging my logic lets me know that someone is paying attention. I have been waiting patiently for someone such as you to respond to my post, good or bad. Probably not a lot of unicylists are interested in speed like you and I

I would share with you my experiences and achievements on both a bicycle and tandem in order to qualify myself as somewhat of a spokesman on speed and distance but because you see the two sports as different I would be wasting my time. So for now I will stay on the topic of Unicycling

I too ride a Coker with 5-inch cranks. I made the decision to do so after reading one of your post’s sometime ago. Now I ride almost 2 MPH faster at the same intensity before the reduction in crank length. On Sunday I rode 60 miles at 13 MPH average speed. Almost 2 MPH faster than the same course ridden with longer cranks. By the end of this month I am confident that I will complete a local century at around the 8-hour mark (including rests). Based on your riding experience I am sure you could do the same or faster.

If you were to walk into a bicycle store and purchase a high-end bike off the floor the crank size would be 170MM - 175MM. It can be longer but rarely shorter. Years of study and practice have proved this length to be optimum for most people in most situations. Beginning racers will typically start with 170mm-175mm and increase the length in order to gain leverage whereby acquiring the ability to turn bigger gears. A point is reached where speed is lost to inefficient spinning. Finding the “sweet spot” of gear and crank combination is an important component to effective time trailing. The key is by experimenting, a balance between cadence and leverage is discovered for optimum speed.

In short Lance Armstrong and all other riders for that matter select the largest gear they can maintain at 90 to 95 RPM in conjunction with his optimum crank length (which is probably 180MM). They never choose a smaller gear thereby forcing the use of smaller cranks in order to maintain a cadence that would net the same speed. Large gear large crank combinations at slower cadences are far more efficient than short wheel short crank fast cadence combinations.

You can argue that road cycling and road unicyling are different therefore the logic does not apply. However after doing lots of both for many years I conclude that they are very close to the same. With cycling you have handlebars, with unicycles for the most part you don’t. That is the biggest difference.

David-If speed is your desire you are going about it the wrong way. Spinning a 36-inch wheel at 130 RPM+ is not efficient. Like me you need to be turning a larger wheel with larger cranks at a slower cadence. As I said before if this is a combination you are interested in call Greg Harper. If you are satisfied with what you have I’ll be checking you out in my rear view mirror. I am on Greg’s list.

Cheers
dan

18

RE: revs per minute

> The real issue is how much power you are putting through your
> knees. Many people like to use a slow cadence and a higher
> gear, basically mashing the pedals (and their knees). This
> squeezes the cartilage in the knees - squishing away the
> natural lubricants and tearing up the knees.

One of the (other) differences between bikes and unicycles is that we
usually don’t have to pedal as hard. Even on a big wheel, the effective
“gear” is relatively low compared to a road bike. So on level ground, there
is very little “mashing” problem.

Where unicycling gets inefficient as transportation is in the fact that once
you’re pedaling beyond a certain rpm, you’re using more energy to lift your
legs up & down than to push yourself forward. This is where the bike has one
of its (few) advantages, in that it’s far more efficient for converting the
human body’s energy into forward movement. With a choice of gears, riders
can choose which ones to use for which speeds, and avoid mashing.

As with most things related to the human body, there is a range of
preference. Some of the most famous bike racers are known for mashing very
high gears up mountains, but it works for them. Those of us who are not
racers are mostly looking for what is the most healthy, or the most
efficient.

Back to pedaling speed, again it’s basically irrelevant for unicycles
because we have no gears. You have to pedal at whatever speed you want your
wheel to go. If you’re looking for a good fitness cadence, I’m not sure what
to recommend. I think good advice for someone like Carol McLean is to work
on an efficient spin, and gradually up the rpm to see how fast you can go
with a smooth, consistent pedal stroke. Again, if you do this you should be
able to smoke most of your competition, at NAUCC anyway (UNICON is always a
tougher field).

I’m not a high-mileage rider, so I try not to offer advice in areas where I
have limited experience. I used to ride every year in the New York 5-Boro
Bike Tour. When I started entering it in 1985, it was a 36 mile route
through all five Boros, including over the 59th St. Bridge (as seen in
Spiderman) and the Verrazano Narrows Bridge (these days the ride is longer).
I’d ride my 45" big wheel, and usually have knee pain toward the end. This
is probably because it was my longest ride of the year. It would always
happen in my right knee first, and one year I almost couldn’t finish the
last few miles through Staten Island, and my friends had to wait for me.

What does that mean? That you have to prepare for the rides you’re going to
do. If you normally never ride over 10 miles, don’t expect a 36 mile ride to
only take 3.6 times as long!

So while we don’t have much problem with mashing the pedals (even on a big
wheel), we do pedal a lot more revolutions per hour than a bicyclist. This
combination (low pressure and lots of revs) can be very good for people with
knee problems. Just be aware of going way beyond what you’re used to.

Stay on top,
John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone
jfoss@unicycling.com

“If people want to truly understand mountain biking, they have to do two
other things: ride a unicycle, and master the trampoline.” – Joe Breeze,
one of the originators of mountain biking, in a conversation with Tim Bustos

19

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by rhysling

When would that be? [ Mikefule’s reference to legs dropping off in later life] Tommy Thompson, a MUnier in Memphis, has been cycling at a competitive level since his early youth; now in his 40’s,

>> Time will come, all too soon, when you don’t regard 40s as ‘later life’.

20

I have received several E-mails asking who the hell Greg Harper is, and what is it he has to offer. I apologize to those who haven’t heard about his hub yet. Greg has designed an internally geared hub with a ratio of 1 to 1.5. It is being shipped all over the country for trials in the form of " UNI5". UNI5 is a 24-inch wheel geared up by Greg’s hub to effectively net the same inches of travel per revaluation as the Coker. I, and many others have shared out observations about the characteristics of UNI5 compared to the Coker. Simply perform a search on the site for “UNI5”. You will find plenty of good information.

In short, for the first time in the history of the sport we will now be able to utilize high-end bicycle componentry to achieve speed by increasing inches of travel per revolution (with the Harper Hub) without sacrificing efficiency and comfort. For example combining a 700C with Harpers hub you are effectively turning a 42-inch wheel all while realizing the benefits of a high-end bicycle wheel. It will be light, fast, and true. Much faster speeds will be realized with this combination (possibly bigger 1: to 1.6) than with a Coker.

This will prove to be a major milestone in the history of speed and distance unicycling.

Also I left out the reason I and many others are utilizing short cranks with our Coker to increase speed rather than choosing a larger wheel and bigger cranks. Prior to the advent of Greg’s hub, larger wheels were heavy cumbersome and did not accommodate a pneumatic tire. Greg simply took the focus off the wheel/ tire and found a way to utilize already existing technology by use of his hub. Before this hub, all we could do was find ways to spin a Coker as fast as we could.

dan