# overtaken by a fixed rider!



## bonj2 (7 Aug 2008)

was it anybody on here?
I doubt it, 'cos he was a bit of a cock, obviously a serious, strong cyclist, but a bit arrogant with it. Came riding up beside me, giving it all this "bloody 'ell making my legs ache watching you pedal!", "you wanna get on your big ring mate", and generally boasting "oh, this is _only_ my training bike", "see i don't have to think about changing gear", before accelerating off...even though i was going quick-ish...
but his maintenance of a good speed seemed fairly good for a fixed, so ok, while not _completely_ sold over to fixed (_GAY_), i am beginning to be bi-curious....
still can't see the point in normal singlespeeds at all though...


----------



## Sh4rkyBloke (7 Aug 2008)

Did he turn off the main road a hundred yards further on, then jump into a hedge to die of a coronary... or keep up the pace into the distance?


----------



## domtyler (7 Aug 2008)

You're right about single speeds being a crap compromise but climbing aboard a well built fixie and taking off into the distance is one of lifes true pleasures. However, you need to bear in mind that being able to control and ride a fixie at great speeds is something only a true cyclist can do, so I'm not sure whether or not you would be suited to one?


----------



## bonj2 (7 Aug 2008)

Sh4rkyBloke said:


> Did he turn off the main road a hundred yards further on, then jump into a hedge to die of a coronary... or keep up the pace into the distance?


he seemed to keep up the pace, but i suspect MY pace, as he didn't seem to KEEP accelerating. but he did have _massive_ hamstrings.


domtyler said:


> You're right about single speeds being a crap compromise but climbing aboard a well built fixie and taking off into the distance is one of lifes true pleasures. However, you need to bear in mind that being able to control and ride a fixie at great speeds is something only a true cyclist can do, so I'm not sure whether or not you would be suited to one?



single speeds seem the worst of both worlds. The benefit i can see of a fixed is the enforced rhythm, and the momentum of the bike keeping the cranks turning, i can sort of believe how this could be an actual mechanical advantage. But single speed... the only advnatage to that seems to be a saving of a few 100g.

riding it at great speeds? can't see how that's hard. it's the setting off that's the only hard bit, and remembering you're riding a fixed when you're taking a bendy bit that you'd normally coast with your outside foot down that's the hard bit isn't it?

i wouldn't mind trying one really without spending shed loads of cash on one. I wonder if there is any bike shops that would let me have a go on one?


----------



## Pottsy (7 Aug 2008)

Hey bonj, you almost sound like you might become a convert. Honestly, give it a go, it's great.

You'll be getting mudguards next.


----------



## bonj2 (7 Aug 2008)

i saw a thread in beginners that you can get one for £225, but my problem is i don't EVEN want to spend £225 on one without knowing if i'll like it. 'cos if I do like it i'll want to get (or build) a fairly nice one, with a black frame and nice wheels...


----------



## Arch (7 Aug 2008)

Isn't the point of single speeds that they have less to go wrong than a geared bike, will be that bit lighter (but not as light as a fixie, I assume) *and* let you freewheel? Ok, it's a compromise, but a compromise for a point. I sometimes think I fancy a fixie, but I have the problem that unless a frame has a very low bottom bracket, I need to slide off the saddle to out a foot down comfortably when I stop. Which I need to freewheel to do...

I've not got one myself, but I had use of a single speed Giant Halfway for a while and it was a lovely bike, especially for about town in York, where gears are hardly necessary.


----------



## zimzum42 (7 Aug 2008)

Once you get used to it you'll not want to go back to a geared bike, especially around town and in flat areas. Seriously, it's a great feeling. When i get back on a geared bike I hate the feeling that comes with needing to rely on the brakes to control speed, but you'll only get tat feeling after getting used to a fixie

the cornering thing isn't an issue once you're used to it. One of the difficult things is getting used to pedalling through potholes and over speedbumps etc, times when you would normally coast.

It's a great feeling waiting at lights with a guy on a normal racer. He'll set off all quick, ramping through the gears, but as you get up to speed you'll slowly pull back up to him, and when you pass he'll not have anything left with which to catch you and you'll power past

Maybe someone on here will lend you a fixie for a bit, you'd be welcome to mine for a while if you want to come out to Singapore!


----------



## Will1985 (7 Aug 2008)

bonj said:


> he did have _massive_ hamstrings.



I was going to suggest it could have been Chris Hoy, but then we know he is in China....or is he?!?


----------



## bonj2 (7 Aug 2008)

Arch said:


> Isn't the point of single speeds that they have less to go wrong than a geared bike, will be that bit lighter (*but not as light as a fixie, I assume*)



why would a fixed be lighter than a single speed? don't most of them have a "flip flop hub"



Arch said:


> *and* let you freewheel? Ok, it's a compromise, but a compromise for a point. I sometimes think I fancy a fixie, but I have the problem that unless a frame has a very low bottom bracket, I need to slide off the saddle to out a foot down comfortably when I stop. Which I need to freewheel to do...


not sure 'cos i've never rode one, but could you not come to an almost-halt with the left pedal at the top, then while going really slowly
swing your right leg over to the left, then you've got the distance that a half-turn of the cranks gives you to get your right foot over and touch down, and come to a halt? I do that thing of coasting while stood solely on one side of the bike, you could do it on a fixie but only for a short distance otherwise the left pedal will start going up again...

either that or always stop next to a lamp post.


----------



## bonj2 (7 Aug 2008)

zimzum42 said:


> Once you get used to it you'll not want to go back to a geared bike, especially around town and in flat areas. Seriously, it's a great feeling. When i get back on a geared bike I hate the feeling that comes with needing to rely on the brakes to control speed, but you'll only get tat feeling after getting used to a fixie
> 
> the cornering thing isn't an issue once you're used to it. One of the difficult things is *getting used to pedalling through potholes and over speedbumps etc*, times when you would normally coast.
> 
> ...



that's what i want to get used to anyway - which is why i think a fixie would be good for my cycling in general and improve my cycling on my geared bike, and presumably also why people have them as a 'training bike'.
one of the problems i think i've got with my cycling is a tendency to accelerate and slow down too much - i.e. i accelerate up to maximum speed and then slow down when there's a gust of wind, slight climb or obstacle, etc., and then accelerate again, etc. and i think i'm expending too much energy on acceleration. Which is one of the reasons why i think experience aswell as just strength and fitness is important to how good at cycling you are.


----------



## Joe24 (7 Aug 2008)

Bonj, you can always give my fixed a go. Mines fixed/fixed. Its lovely to cruise around on, when theres no rush, weathers warm and sunny and theres little traffic.
Going around a tight courner fast i found slightly harder then going over a bump. I went to coast and i was still nervouse about pedals strike, i really thought i would get it on one courner. Going over a bump i found it easier, i used the pedals to lift me up. What i did have to get used to was when sitting down, when i thought i dont normally coast, i must do as when i went back to sitting down the pedals would whip my legs back to going. So i guess they will stop the jerking when getting out the seat, stop you pushing the bike back.
When i stop, i will either stay on the seat and unclip just before one pedal comes up to lift me off the seat and put a foot down. If the pedals arent in the right place, then i lift the back wheel off the ground and move my foot right, or try and stop and time it right with the pedals. Never been a problem, and i find clipping in is easier on the fixed then my geared.
Go for it Bonj, build one up cheap, mine cost under £150 to build, with a sprey job.


----------



## bonj2 (7 Aug 2008)

cheers joe
£150?  that's cheap 
what, £50 frame, £50 groupset, £50 paintjob?


----------



## Amanda P (7 Aug 2008)

I built a fixie on a frame I got from Ebay for £5. I spent about £100 on the wheels (a bargain for matching wheels with a fixed rear hub), and maybe £50 on tyres, tubes, rim tapes, a chain and a sprocket and lock ring. £10 for brakes. The other parts I already had - not that there are many. 

It's only really light because of all the stuff that's not on it.

I've never had any trouble riding it, but I guess I rarely stop pedalling on any bike anyway.


----------



## Joe24 (8 Aug 2008)

Frame was free, £50 for the sprey(done by a mate), £50 in the LBS(thats BB, wheel build with rim and spokes, chain, bar tape), £20 to someone in the club for parts, got some free aswell then the hub was £39.99 for the front and back. So slightly over £150, but would of been cheaper if i could of got the hub that is sold seperatly to fit. 
Some of the parts are old, chainset could do with replacing really, its not exactly true which creates a slight bit of noise, but its not too bad.
Go fixed Bonj


----------



## Chuffy (10 Aug 2008)

Single speed conversions are God's own transport. All the simplicity but none of the _fiddle_. 

Ah yes, that terrible compromise of having a freewheel. I curse it every time I go down Cheddar Gorge.


----------



## bonj2 (10 Aug 2008)

Chuffy said:


> Single speed conversions are God's own transport. All the simplicity but none of the _fiddle_.
> 
> Ah yes, that terrible compromise of having a freewheel. I curse it every time I go down Cheddar Gorge.



At least if you had gears you could pedal.
how can single speed _possibly_ be an improvement on gears? and don't come all the "simplicity, easy to maintain" bollocks. I want _actual, tangible_ advantages.


----------



## TheDoctor (10 Aug 2008)

@Chuffy - Nail. Head. Hit. Cog + sh1tload of spacers = perfect chainline 

@Bonj - it's just another bike. It's a cheap way to get something that's simple and good. It's not a miracle cure, it's not the answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe and Everything, it's just...nice.


----------



## Amanda P (10 Aug 2008)

Thing is, Bonj, on a fixed, you must keep pedalling, even going downhill.

You have to choose a gear that will get you _up _the hills, and on a fixed, that also limits how fast you can go _down _them.

A single speed allows you to just freewheel and let gravity take over. _That's_ why it might be an improvement. Could this be why freewheels were invented...?


----------



## Chuffy (10 Aug 2008)

Uncle Phil said:


> Thing is, Bonj, on a fixed, you must keep pedalling, even going downhill.
> 
> You have to choose a gear that will get you _up _the hills, and on a fixed, that also limits how fast you can go _down _them.
> 
> _A single speed allows you to just freewheel and let gravity take over. That's why it might be an improvement. Could this be why freewheels were invented...?_


It's why Henri Desgranges was dead against them being used by Tour riders.

And my dear Bonj, if you don't think convenience and simplicity are tangible benefits then what are?


----------



## bonj2 (10 Aug 2008)

Uncle Phil said:


> Thing is, Bonj, on a fixed, you must keep pedalling, even going downhill.
> 
> You have to choose a gear that will get you _up _the hills, and on a fixed, that also limits how fast you can go _down _them.
> 
> A single speed allows you to just freewheel and let gravity take over. _That's_ why it might be an improvement. Could this be why freewheels were invented...?



but there is a tangible advantage to a fixed, being that forward momentum maintains rotational momentum of the cranks. Well, so i've heard. I'm not sure whether it does, i'm going to try it anyhow. But with a singlespeed with a freewheel, you don't even get that - so there is no point to it whatsoever over a geared bike.


----------



## Amanda P (10 Aug 2008)

bonj said:


> i'm going to try it anyhow.



Good man.

_Then_ you'll be in a position to comment.


----------



## bonj2 (10 Aug 2008)

Chuffy said:


> It's why Henri Desgranges was dead against them being used by Tour riders.
> 
> And my dear Bonj, if you don't think convenience and simplicity are tangible benefits then what are?



* _mechanical_ advantage, e.g. the forward momentum of the bike maintains the rotational momentum of the cranks. In other words, if you think of what your body experiences when riding a singlespeed in terms of the energy expended, forces applied, etc., you can recreate that exact same experience on the body by riding a geared bike. In other words, the experience of riding a geared bike is a superset of riding a singlespeed.
In other words, in terms of a venn diagram (understand what venn diagrams are chuffy?)
the experiences would be illustrated as such:


----------



## bonj2 (10 Aug 2008)

Uncle Phil said:


> Good man.
> 
> _Then_ you'll be in a position to comment.



I don't need to ride a singlespeed to be able to comment on the fact that it's pointless.
I've never met the Queen either, but I can decisively say that she's also pointless.


----------



## Amanda P (10 Aug 2008)

bonj said:


> I don't need to ride a singlespeed to be able to comment on the fact that it's pointless.



Ah, this is more like the Bonj we know and love.

With all due respect, I think you _do_ need to. Or at least, you need some experience of riding a fixed in a hilly area.


----------



## bonj2 (10 Aug 2008)

Uncle Phil said:


> Ah, this is more like the Bonj we know and love.
> 
> With all due respect, I think you _do_ need to. Or at least, you need some experience of riding a fixed in a hilly area.



I have got experience of riding a singlespeed. Just ride my geared bike and don't bother changing gear. Same thing.


----------



## Chuffy (10 Aug 2008)

Uncle Phil said:


> Ah, this is more like the Bonj we know and love.
> 
> With all due respect, I think you _do_ need to. Or at least, you need some experience of riding a fixed in a hilly area.


I've never met Bonj but I can still categorically say that he's a...
...well, you get the idea. 

Bonj, you dear little prune-headed divot. Can you really not see that running a single cog, as opposed to front and rear derailleurs plus shifters gives a massive benefit in simplicity and ease? To the 11th circle of hades with your silly Venn diagrams, you're missing the point completely!


----------



## Chuffy (10 Aug 2008)

bonj said:


> I have got experience of riding a singlespeed. Just ride my geared bike and don't bother changing gear. Same thing.


No. It isn't.


----------



## Amanda P (10 Aug 2008)

He's right; it isn't. No amount of Venn diagrams will change that.

Try it and see for yourself (not hard, as there's an even chance you'll end up with a flip-flop rear hub which will take a freewheel on one side. If you don't like the freewheel, you can always take it off again and stick with the fixed side). It's the only way you'll learn!


----------



## Chuffy (10 Aug 2008)

Uncle Phil said:


> He's right; it isn't. No amount of Venn diagrams will change that.


But they can be quite useful.


----------



## BentMikey (10 Aug 2008)

I must admit I'm terribly disappointed each time I see a bike, and then realise it's single speed and not fixed. I keep thinking "Oh you wimp, do properly or don't bother."


----------



## Joe24 (11 Aug 2008)

BentMikey said:


> I must admit I'm terribly disappointed each time I see a bike, and then realise it's single speed and not fixed. I keep thinking "Oh you wimp, do properly or don't bother."



Yep, when i have see people out on singlespeeds i've thought the same. Especially the guy around here on the Langster, i thought it was fixed untill he stopped pedling to go round a courner. 
There was also a British Langster at the cycle thing in the town square in Nottingham, that was singlespeed, but he dressd it up like those people do in London with their fixed bikes.
Go for a fixed/fixed hub, the system ex hub gives you the choice of fixed/fixed or fixed/single. I guess the other fixe hubs will give you the choice or fixed/fixed aswell.
Fixed/fixed also gives you the option of putting a bigger/smaller sprocket on the other side, and you can still ride it fixed.


----------



## Origamist (11 Aug 2008)

BentMikey said:


> I must admit I'm terribly disappointed each time I see a bike, and then realise it's single speed and not fixed. I keep thinking "Oh you wimp, do properly or don't bother."



Depends on the bike and terrain, single speed MTBs make a lot more sense that fixed MTBs. I've ridden both...


----------



## Fab Foodie (11 Aug 2008)

Origamist said:


> Depends on the bike and terrain, *single speed MTBs* make a lot more sense that fixed MTBs. I've ridden both...



That's a bmx surely...

I'm with Mikey as far as road-bikes arfe concerned, although ss is simple, fixed is better IMO.


----------



## Tharg2007 (11 Aug 2008)

I've been using the brakes allot less last week and today legs felt a bit on the tender side  amazing how it exercises a whole new set of muscles.


----------



## Joe24 (11 Aug 2008)

I hardly used the brakes on my fixed on Sunday, did 50/60miles. Used them on one long downhill, would of been well over 40mph if i was on a geared. I'm happy going up to the low 30mph mark, but high 30's and i'm not too happy. Although, i like the way the bike feels at those speeds, seems to get very loose, and feel really really light.
I did about 27miles today, only 20 that i know the speed and time of because i went to LBS on the bike to get a computer. I got a max speed of 27mph, and i was able to compare fixed to geared with a head wid on the same roads. I had road the geared back from the caravan on the same roads i was on the fixed on. On the geared i was around 17.5mph-18mph. On the fixed i was 19mph-19.5mph. Which i liked.  
But then i think it was due to the gear i was in on the Giant, i was probably grinding, but i think that maybe if i had span more like i was doing on the fixed, i would of been faster on the geared


----------



## Tharg2007 (11 Aug 2008)

i think i might need to get a geared bike sometime to make it bike no3, fancy a 80's or 90's as im a tight git and they will be cheap


----------



## Dayvo (11 Aug 2008)

I don't see the problem with a fixed/single wheel! 
Each to their own.
I hope to get a Langster before _too_ long, and I'll try both the fixed and single versions, and will ride either depending on terrain/form/mood etc.


----------



## Chuffy (11 Aug 2008)

BentMikey said:


> I must admit I'm terribly disappointed each time I see a bike, and then realise it's single speed and not fixed. I keep thinking "Oh you wimp, do properly or don't bother."


Ah, so it _is_ a macho thing then....


----------



## MessenJah (11 Aug 2008)

Uncle Phil said:


> Thing is, Bonj, on a fixed, you must keep pedalling, even going downhill.
> 
> You have to choose a gear that will get you _up _the hills, and on a fixed, that also limits how fast you can go _down _them.
> 
> A single speed allows you to just freewheel and let gravity take over. _That's_ why it might be an improvement. Could this be why freewheels were invented...?


This is what I hate about riding a fixed wheel in a fairly hilly city centre.

They're fine in central london, or other flat cities, but not much good for anything else but track cycling.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (11 Aug 2008)

I loved my fixie, back in the days when it wasn't in many pieces in my shed. Great fun to ride, I used to find myself extending my commute by ten or fifteen Km, just because it felt good.


----------



## yenrod (11 Aug 2008)

My Feelings on a fixed (not that anyone will listen but still ): 



I dont feel I'd want one really as I use quite a few of my gears, if not all of them and what they offer.



*I see them as being the cycle fraternity version of the carworlds Robin Reliant fanatics.*


----------



## Rhythm Thief (11 Aug 2008)

The thing is, you have one as well as your geared bikes (unless you're a real fanatic!). It's just another thing to ride, as and when you feel like it.


----------



## yenrod (11 Aug 2008)

And I dont feel they're safe either !


----------



## Rhythm Thief (11 Aug 2008)

That's only true on your first ride. They strike fear into the hearts of those who aren't used to them, but once you've ridden on you wonder what you were so scared about. At least, I did.


----------



## Chuffy (11 Aug 2008)

I think they, or rather some of their more over excited fans, are annoying in the same way that evangelists for Apple Macs are annoying. Yeah, yeah, you've got a great toy, it's better than my toy and you're hipper than I'll ever be. Wooh, I so wish I was as cool as you. 
Happy now, punk?


----------



## yenrod (11 Aug 2008)

Chuffy said:


> I think they, or rather some of their more over excited fans, are annoying in the same way that evangelists for Apple Macs are annoying. Yeah, yeah, you've got a great toy, it's better than my toy and you're hipper than I'll ever be. Wooh, I so wish I was as cool as you.
> Happy now, punk?


----------



## MessenJah (11 Aug 2008)

yenrod said:


> And I dont feel they're safe either !


What exactly is unsafe about a fixed wheel bike compared to a freewheeling bike?

Ok so it might feel unsafe going downhill too fast at a cadence of 100,000 RPM... but there's a brake.

I suppose in comparison to a geared bike you have the increased risk of knee damage too...


----------



## Rhythm Thief (11 Aug 2008)

Chuffy said:


> I think they, or rather some of their more over excited fans, are annoying in the same way that evangelists for Apple Macs are annoying. Yeah, yeah, you've got a great toy, it's better than my toy and you're hipper than I'll ever be. Wooh, I so wish I was as cool as you.
> Happy now, punk?



 But seriously, even though my fixie's in many pieces in the shed, it still makes me a better person than you.


----------



## MessenJah (11 Aug 2008)

Chuffy said:


> I think they, or rather some of their more over excited fans, are annoying in the same way that evangelists for Apple Macs are annoying. Yeah, yeah, you've got a great toy, it's better than my toy and you're hipper than I'll ever be. Wooh, I so wish I was as cool as you.
> Happy now, punk?


You probably wouldn't like this 

Just for the record, I can't stand it


----------



## Abitrary (11 Aug 2008)

If someone has cycling as a hobby, and they get an urge to get into fixed or single speed, then they simply need another hobby, before they start throwing bad hobby after good.

Maybe something a bit more intellectual? Art classes maybe?


----------



## BentMikey (12 Aug 2008)

MessenJah said:


> What exactly is unsafe about a fixed wheel bike compared to a freewheeling bike?
> 
> Ok so it might feel unsafe going downhill too fast at a cadence of 100,000 RPM... but there's a brake.
> 
> I suppose in comparison to a geared bike you have the increased risk of knee damage too...



True. Except for the knee damage though - received wisdom seems to be that fixed is neutral or even slightly better for your knees than geared.


----------



## Joe24 (12 Aug 2008)

yenrod said:


> And I dont feel they're safe either !



They are safer then normal bikes, no matter where your hands are, your feet are always on brakes


----------



## MessenJah (12 Aug 2008)

BentMikey said:


> True. Except for the knee damage though - received wisdom seems to be that fixed is neutral or even slightly better for your knees than geared.


Continually starting off in a relatively high gear is definitely not good for your knees.


----------



## BentMikey (12 Aug 2008)

Now this bit doesn't make sense to me. There are lots of situations where your knees can take a huge loading, far more than what they'll get on fixed. Take speedskating, for example, there's a lot of leg force involved in every stride, far more than your own body weight. You don't get knee problems with skating any more than with cycling.

I think the whole urban myth of fixed and knee injuries has mostly come about for a couple of reasons:
* People just starting with fixed. Riding fixed is quite a bit more work than riding geared, so without realising it they are suddenly adding a big increase to their training load, still trying to do the same rides/mileage. No wonder knee problems crop up.
* New bike setup and cleat position. Together with the above, these are the biggest causes of knee problems. Knee issues are common with any new bike, geared or fixed, no wonder people mis-attribute this to fixed.

The consensus mentioned above comes from some pretty serious fixed riders, LEL and PBP finishers no less, so I'm not a believer in fixed equalling knee problems.


----------



## Christopher (12 Aug 2008)

Agree with Bent Mikey - had to give up playing football as my knees were getting damaged. I have _less_ knee pain riding fixed than geared, especially in the cold!


----------



## Chuffy (12 Aug 2008)

BentMikey said:


> The consensus mentioned above comes from some pretty serious fixed riders, LEL and PBP finishers no less, so I'm not a believer in fixed equalling knee problems.


That's a bit like saying that because _x_ number of people managed to climb Everest without oxygen, oxygen isn't a requirement for climbing Everest. People with knee problems wouldn't come anywhere near even qualifying for PBP or LEL. You've got your logic arse about tit dear boy!


----------



## Chuffy (12 Aug 2008)

Frustruck said:


> Agree with Bent Mikey - *had to give up playing football as my knees were getting damaged*. I have _less_ knee pain riding fixed than geared, especially in the cold!


Two words - high impact.


----------



## Greenbank (12 Aug 2008)

When you start riding fixed you aren't used to generating the large amounts of torque required for pulling away quickly or going up steep stuff.

At first this hurts your knees (as well as your calves, thighs, and upper body; my arms and stomach muscles took a hell of a beating when I first started riding fixed, especially in hilly terrain). Then you get used to it.

People assume that because it hurts at first; it must be bad.


----------



## Joe24 (12 Aug 2008)

So does this mean then, that fixed works more of the body/works the body more then if you were riding geared? Or no?


----------



## dodgy (12 Aug 2008)

MessenJah said:


> What exactly is unsafe about a fixed wheel bike compared to a freewheeling bike?
> 
> Ok so it might feel unsafe going downhill too fast at a cadence of 100,000 RPM... but there's a brake.
> 
> I suppose in comparison to a geared bike you have the increased risk of knee damage too...



There is definitely danger associated with riding a fixed around tight corners if you're not prepared, no lifting the left leg around left corners and vice versa. Also if you get too near the kerb for whatever reason.

Dave.


----------



## Greenbank (12 Aug 2008)

Joe24 said:


> So does this mean then, that fixed works more of the body/works the body more then if you were riding geared? Or no?



Not really. To generate more torque you're going to need more of certain muscles.

Before you can do this you end up resorting to lots of honking and straining on the bars. It's a big upper body workout to heave up some slopes at first.

The more torque you can generate from your legs alone the less you have to make up for it with the upper body.

You're putting in the same amount of power, it's just that you don't have the mechanical advantage of gearing to let you put in less torque over greater distance (i.e. higher cadence).

Think of it as lifting a 20kg bag of cement from the floor to a shelf 1m high. Compare that to lifting 20 1kg bags one at a time (spinning), or lifting them in 4 batches of 5kg (an average gear).


----------



## Arch (13 Aug 2008)

bonj said:


> not sure 'cos i've never rode one, but could you not come to an almost-halt with the left pedal at the top, then while going really slowly
> swing your right leg over to the left, then you've got the distance that a half-turn of the cranks gives you to get your right foot over and touch down, and come to a halt? I do that thing of coasting while stood solely on one side of the bike, you could do it on a fixie but only for a short distance otherwise the left pedal will start going up again...
> 
> either that or always stop next to a lamp post.



Ok, it's taken a while to get back to this one...

Setting aside the fact that I've never learned to through my leg over and ride 'one sided' like that - ok, that's my problem - but if I come to the top of the stroke while going slowly, and then put all my weight on one pedal, I'm not going to be able to control the speed am I? OK, if I have brakes I can, but they'll have to be jammed on pretty hard to counteract my entire weight on one pedal aren't they? Or am I missing something?


----------



## Amanda P (13 Aug 2008)

It's quite fun to unclip from one side and swing one leg over so that you're in the position you'd be "scooting" on a regular bike.

Except still travelling at some speed. The momentum carries you up and down on the one pedal like a carousel horse going up and down.

I think that the tendency of the bike to do this to you would make it quite hard for Arch to ride a fixie. Or rather, to stop riding it! You're welcome to try, though - it's not a huge frame.


----------



## Christopher (13 Aug 2008)

MessenJah said:


> You probably wouldn't like this
> 
> Just for the record, I can't stand it


I downloaded that and read it on the PC eating my tea. Quite amusing, but hard to read (way too many graphics as b/g for the text). I especially liked the 'Ten Things You should have done by now' [on your fixed-wheel bike]. Haven't done a single one and didn't know what half of them meant!

For a laugh you can also look at the 'King Kog' website and contemplate buying a rusty 1971 Mercian track frame, for a mere eight hundred dollars (it's been sold), or $350 for an Aerospoke front wheel. Actually that whole 'hipster-fixed' scene is just another form of consurmerism and deep conformity, read bikesnobNYC for a better analysis of what's going on.


----------



## Joe24 (13 Aug 2008)

The best way to get off a fixed is to unclip your noral foot that you would unclip, so the left for me, lock my right leg up and let the pedals lift me up, swing my leg over the saddle then when your right foot comes back down, put your right on the floor and unclip the left foot. 
Easier with straps when you can just pull your foot out and carry on walking


----------



## Arch (13 Aug 2008)

Uncle Phil said:


> It's quite fun to unclip from one side and swing one leg over so that you're in the position you'd be "scooting" on a regular bike.
> 
> Except still travelling at some speed. The momentum carries you up and down on the one pedal like a carousel horse going up and down.
> 
> I think that the tendency of the bike to do this to you would make it quite hard for Arch to ride a fixie. Or rather, to stop riding it! You're welcome to try, though - it's not a huge frame.



No, really, I think I'd hate that! Assuming I ever mastered the swinging one leg over thing, I'm not good at taking on new physical challenges...


I heard a tale from one of the York posse about a guy in Sheffield, tried to nick a fixie, without noticing it was a fixie. Pedalled away, and then tried to freewheel on the first big downhill. Apparently he was still in plaster when his case came to court...


----------



## Chuffy (13 Aug 2008)

Arch said:


> I'm not good at taking on new physical challenges...


Oh I'm sure you are...



> I heard a tale from one of the York posse about a guy in Sheffield, tried to nick a fixie, without noticing it was a fixie. Pedalled away, and then tried to freewheel on the first big downhill. Apparently he was still in plaster when his case came to court...


Andy Gates tells a similar tale about sitting outside a pub years ago and watching someone try to nick his fixie....
...and then disentangling the thief from the twisted wreckage about thirty seconds later.


----------



## bonj2 (14 Aug 2008)

Greenbank said:


> Not really. To generate more torque you're going to need more of certain muscles.
> 
> Before you can do this you end up resorting to lots of honking and straining on the bars. It's a big upper body workout to heave up some slopes at first.
> 
> ...


I don't buy that you use your upper body that much when honking up a hill. Certainly not a 'massive upper body workout'.


----------



## Landslide (14 Aug 2008)

Chuffy said:


> ...and then disentangling the thief from the twisted wreckage about thirty seconds later.


With extreme prejudice?


----------



## Greenbank (14 Aug 2008)

bonj said:


> I don't buy that you use your upper body that much when honking up a hill. Certainly not a 'massive upper body workout'.



OK, I'll rephrase it:-

When I first started riding fixed I wasn't able to generate the massive amounts of torque required to get up steep hills (sustained sections of 10%) and relied a lot on honking and wrestling the bike up the hills with lots of pulling/pushing on the bars. It felt like a massive upper body workout. A 100km semi-hilly ride would leave me with aching arms and stomach muscles.

Now I'm used to it I can do the very same climbs faster but remaining seated. My legs are now able to generate the required torque.

Anything over 10% and I'll need to start honking again, and anything over 15% (i.e. White Down) usually has me walking.


----------



## Joe24 (14 Aug 2008)

bonj said:


> I don't buy that you use your upper body that much when honking up a hill. Certainly not a 'massive upper body workout'.



No, you do. I did a club ride and honked up most hills in a big gear, the next day my arms werent as strong and could feel a few aches in them.
Might not be massive, but its still a good workout.


----------



## GrahamG (20 Aug 2008)

MessenJah said:


> You probably wouldn't like this
> 
> Just for the record, I can't stand it



That is just so cringeworthy it's painful.


----------



## llllllll (22 Aug 2008)

MessenJah said:


> You probably wouldn't like this
> 
> Just for the record, I can't stand it



Ha ha, has there ever been a better advert for the derailler?


----------



## stevenb (3 Sep 2008)

Excuse my ignorance but if a fixie had no brakes how do you stop? Back pedal like the old bikes?


----------



## BentMikey (3 Sep 2008)

stevenb said:


> Excuse my ignorance but if a fixie had no brakes how do you stop? Back pedal like the old bikes?



Not quite - I suspect you're thinking of coaster or back pedal brakes.

To slow using the pedals on a fixed wheel, you have no option but for your pedals to keep turning round, but instead of pushing down on the pedal going down, you resist the rising of the pedal 180 degrees earlier.


----------



## Tharg2007 (3 Sep 2008)

BentMikey said:


> Not quite - I suspect you're thinking of coaster or back pedal brakes.
> 
> To slow using the pedals on a fixed wheel, you have no option but for your pedals to keep turning round, but instead of pushing down on the pedal going down, you resist the rising of the pedal 180 degrees earlier.



or lean forward a little and lock your leg so you go into a skid


----------



## Joe24 (3 Sep 2008)

Tharg2007 said:


> or lean forward a little and lock your leg so you go into a skid



Yeeeeh

What you do is resist the pedals on the upward stroke of the pedal. Or lean forward so your balls are on the stem and lock your legs and skid


----------



## BentMikey (3 Sep 2008)

Yes, I was assuming the more genteel version of leg braking with my description.


----------



## MessenJah (3 Sep 2008)

stevenb said:


> Excuse my ignorance but if a fixie had no brakes how do you stop?


The proper question is _do_ you stop?


----------

