That’s normal. The lower cadence hurts your legs more and the higher cadence takes pressure of your legs and more on your heart rate.
When I was younger and very quick (and before injury) I used to average cadence over 100 (outdoor rides - before Zwift existed). It was just natural.
Lower cadence can be used to benefit if you want to do long steady intervals at 90% FTP. I use those when I’m training for riding in mountains overseas, I don’t have those mountains near where I live. When I’m then riding at normal cadence then it’s not so hard, even with the altitude difference. I just look at what I’m training for, if it’s a 40min climb, then 4x10min is that - I just make the rest periods in between the intervals shorter as I get used to them or increase the power slightly (or both if things are going well).
These days I usually have around 80-85 cadence.
It’s also good to get used to riding with high cadence as well, especially if you get into riding on the track. In sprints I would be up at 160-170rpm.
In any case, learn as much as you can, if you can ride with some local pro cyclists, try and learn from them as much as you can, try different things and adapt different training methods and find what works for you.
The 20 minute test estimates your ftp by taking 95% of your 20 minute power so if your ramp test was accurate (and the 20 min test is accurate) the you should be able to hold 272/0.95 = 286W for 20 minutes. IMO that’s a good a starting point as any, start out with that and if you’re feeling good at half way then up it.
This is one of the problems with the 20 minute test, you need to have a fairly good idea of your ftp/20 minute power to get a good estimate.
Hi all. Things have happened. I bought the Zwift bike package deal. I have then done about 15-16 hours of riding per week. After a few weeks I did my first 20-min FTP test, and got an FTP of 313. Yesterday I did the ramp test again and got 323. This time I died half way into the 440w minute. When I first did the ramp test, when I was completely new, I died at the beginning of 380, and thought that maybe I could get through that segment in a month, but no way I could get further than that.
One thing though; I still get a lower heart rate compared to running when doing a similar effort. For example, if I do a zone 2 ride I usually get a HR between 120 and 130 (64-69% of max HR) but when I do a run at a similar effort level its between 132 and 138 (70-74%).
When I do threshold sessions on the bike (at my FTP) I struggle to get my HR above 162 (86,6%) but when running Im between 164 and 169 (87,7-90,3%), and those sessions are actually tougher on the bike. What is strange is that my estimated vo2max on Zwift in 65, which is probably the same as I when I run (havent tested it in a lab for while though).
It’s totally normal and expected to have a lower cycling heart rate compared to running because you use far more muscles while running. Sounds like you’re doing fine!
For $1500 you could get a Wahoo Kickr with zwift cog/click AND a legit, decent hardtail mountain bike (or road bike) and be set to go. If you ONLY plan to ride indoor, ever, and you have the cash, I guess spend away if you are trying to be competitive. If you are only using it to train/fitness, I don’t see a point in going expensive. It’s not like you need aero gains indoor. As long as your fit and saddle are dialed, who cares if you’re off a watt or two? Just my $.02 (I am using a dirt jump bike on a wahoo kickr core with the zwift cog as training for mountain biking and it’s totally good to go.)
Well I should have scrolled down before my previous comment. Anyway, those ramp test numbers are really, really good considering you are newish to cycling. They are a lot better than mine and I have been riding mountain bikes for 8 years! (although in mtb a long, sustained effort with no rests is very rare)