Surreal image of a cyclist balancing cadence and power.

Unlock Your Cycling Potential: Is a Lower Cadence the Key to Faster Times?

Samir D’Costa in Health & Wellness December 2025 • 4 min read.

"New research reveals how recreational female cyclists can improve time trial performance by optimizing their pedaling cadence."

For years, cyclists have debated the optimal pedaling cadence—how many revolutions per minute (rpm) they should aim for. While elite cyclists often gravitate towards higher cadences, new research suggests a different approach might be more effective for recreational female cyclists, especially in time trial scenarios.

The conventional wisdom in cycling often emphasizes high cadence for sustained power and efficiency. However, recent studies challenge this notion, particularly for recreational cyclists who may not have the same physiological adaptations as their professional counterparts.

This article dives into a fascinating study that investigated the impact of cadence on time trial performance in recreational female cyclists. The results could change how you approach your next ride, potentially unlocking hidden speed and endurance.

The Cadence Experiment: 60 RPM vs. 100 RPM

Surreal image of a cyclist balancing cadence and power.

A team of researchers set out to determine the effect of cadence on time trial performance in recreational female cyclists. They recruited ten participants and had them perform three exercise sessions: one to assess their peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) and two time trials. The time trials were crucial: subjects cycled at either 60 rpm or 100 rpm, with the order randomized to eliminate bias. During the trials, participants could freely adjust their power output (PO) to maintain the set cadence.

Throughout the time trials, researchers meticulously measured various factors, including:

Time trial time
Heart rate (HR)
Blood lactate levels
Power output (PO)
Oxygen consumption (VO2)
Rate of perceived exertion (RPE)

The major finding? The cyclists performed significantly better (P=0.001) at 60 rpm compared to 100 rpm. The average time trial time at 60 rpm was 34 minutes and 23 seconds (±4 minutes and 21 seconds), while at 100 rpm, it was 37 minutes and 34 seconds (±5 minutes and 53 seconds).

Recreational female cyclists may gain a significant performance benefit from cycling at low versus a high cadence, possibly due to greater metabolic efficiency.

The study's findings suggest that recreational female cyclists may benefit from intentionally using a lower cadence during time trials. This challenges the conventional emphasis on higher cadences and offers a practical adjustment for cyclists looking to improve their performance. Further research is needed to explore the underlying mechanisms and to determine if these findings extend to other cycling disciplines and populations.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

Everything You Need To Know

What does cadence mean in cycling, and why is it important?

Cadence in cycling refers to the number of revolutions per minute (rpm) a cyclist's pedals make. It's a key factor in cycling efficiency and performance. The right cadence can help optimize your power output and reduce fatigue. However, the ideal cadence can vary depending on the rider's fitness level, the type of cycling they're doing, and even the terrain. For example, elite cyclists often use higher cadences, while recreational cyclists might find a lower cadence more effective, especially during time trials. Understanding and adjusting your cadence can lead to significant improvements in your cycling performance.

How did the cadence experiment work, and what were the different cadences tested?

The experiment compared time trial performance at two different cadences: 60 rpm and 100 rpm. Recreational female cyclists were asked to cycle at both cadences while their performance was measured. Key metrics included time trial time, heart rate (HR), blood lactate levels, power output (PO), oxygen consumption (VO2), and rate of perceived exertion (RPE). The study found that cyclists performed significantly better at 60 rpm compared to 100 rpm, suggesting that a lower cadence might be more beneficial for this group of cyclists in time trial scenarios.

What is VO2peak, and how was it used in the experiment?

VO2peak, or peak oxygen consumption, refers to the maximum amount of oxygen your body can use during intense exercise. It's a key indicator of cardiovascular fitness and aerobic endurance. In the context of the experiment, VO2peak was measured to assess the participants' baseline fitness levels. While the experiment focused on cadence and its impact on time trial performance, VO2peak provides a broader understanding of the cyclists' overall aerobic capacity. The results indicated that the lower cadence was more efficient, but VO2peak itself was not the main focus of comparison between the two cadence levels.

What does power output mean, and how did the cyclists adjust their power during the trials?

Power output (PO) is the measure of how much work is being done, and is a key factor in cycling performance, representing the rate at which a cyclist is producing energy. During the experiment, participants were allowed to freely adjust their power output to maintain the set cadence of either 60 rpm or 100 rpm. The cyclists achieved faster times at the lower cadence with similar power output. The interplay between cadence and power output is critical. By understanding how these two factors interact, cyclists can optimize their training and racing strategies to improve efficiency and speed.

Who can benefit from a lower cadence, and are there any limitations to the research findings?

The study specifically focused on recreational female cyclists, and the findings may not be directly applicable to other populations, such as male cyclists, elite athletes, or individuals with different fitness levels. Further research is needed to explore whether these results can be generalized. Additionally, while the study highlighted the benefits of lower cadence for time trial performance, it did not delve into other cycling disciplines, such as road racing or mountain biking, where different cadences might be more advantageous. Future studies could investigate the optimal cadence for various cycling activities and demographic groups to provide more comprehensive guidance.