Singlespeed & Fixed Gear - fixie for toddler > coaster brake to fixie?

My son is close to 4 years old and rides a balance bike well. I'm thinking about the step up to a real bike, and have become convinced that a fixie would be the perfect start for two-wheeled pedaling. It makes a lot of sense to me. It's just like all the trikes. You pedal faster to speed up, you pedal slower to slow down. Very intuitive for kids.

I have a fixie, but I'm not a fanatic or anything like that. I'm not looking for some mini-hipster bike. Just a regular old kid's bike that happens to have a fixed gear.

I happened to have a neighbor who had an awesome children's fixie, which he had bought at Toys R Us about 10 years ago. He has like 8 kids, all of whom learned to ride on the thing at ridiculously young ages. Seeing his kids pick up the bike and learn was awesome. Unfortunately, his youngest kids still ride it, so I had no chance of buying it off him.

I've looked around for a stock fixie, and all I can find is a radio flyer model. The only thing wrong with it is that its overbuilt from steel, making it very heavy. It's built for riding very slowly with training wheels. I think the weight would be prohibitive for actual balance riding, and I know that if my kid can't go fast, he won't bother with it, preferring his razor scooter.

So, does anyone have any advice for how to acquire a usable children's fixie? Part of the problem is that kids bikes wouldn't be marketed as a fixed gear, even if they happened to be one.

It would be ideal if I could do a conversion from a standard kids coaster brake bike. I've been scouring google, but I can't seem to figure out if coaster hubs can be converted to fixies like a freewheel hub can. I sort of doubt it, since the coaster hub has an internal freewheel mechanism, right?

I don't imagine that there are affordable 12" track (or even freewheel) wheels available either. I don't know how to build a wheel, and don't really want to do it for a bike that will only be used for a couple of years.

Thanks for looking!

I learnt to ride on a Fixie at age 2.5-3. Not sure why the bike had no coaster brake or anything. I just remember having to lift my legs when i went down big hills!

yeah, that's what I'm talking about! I've seen lots of people say they learned really early on a fixie. So how can I get one for my kid?

can you please stop saying "fixie" so much?

I would go to your friendly neighborhood X-mart and buy a cheap kid's BMX with a rear coaster brake hub. Then open up the hub, take it apart, remove the coaster fulcrum arm, and fix it with JB Weld.

If you really want to give your kid a nice bike, buy him a mini BMX racing bike...the kind made for little kiddie BMX racing. They are kinda pricey, but you can find them on ebay relatively cheap. Mini BMX bikes are without question the best bikes for little kids who have cycling parents who want their kids to do more than ride around the block. My son is now five but learned to balance when he was four. As soon as he would fit it, I bought him a Redline micromini BMX bike with 18" wheels. Like this....
http://www.brixtoncycles.co.uk/images/bikes/BMX/redline-micromini_sm.jpg


It weighs less than 12 pounds (you can find them much lighter!) and has narrow rims that use high pressure tires, similar to road tires. They roll so well that you can gear it up high enough to really cruise. I've taken my son on 15 mile rides and we cruise near 10mph most of the way.

You could easily convert such a bike into a fixie by rotafixing a cog onto a BMX hub. A 5 year old isn't strong enough to unscrew the cog so a rotafixed suicide hub setup would be fine.

HOWVER, I STRONGLY RECOMMEND AGAINST forcing a 4-5 year old to ride fixed. It may be fine for a tricycle, which is much much simpler to operate, does not require balance, and is less likely to achieve the speeds that bicycles achieve. A bicycle, on the other hand, requires balance and has a potentially dangerous drivetrain. Little kids lack the coordination to ride with foot retention, which is an important safety feature on a fixie. Moreover, kids are not strong enough to pedal a high gear ratio and consequently must ride a much lower gear than an adult. Because of this, there is the potential to spin wildly out of control, sans foot retention (imagine feet and pedals flailing wildly), riding down the shallowest of hills and given the tendency for kids to crash frequently, there is a high possibility of getting hands or feet caught in the spinning drivetrain. Keep if safe, keep it freewheel, at least for a few more years. Don't rush it....focus on your kid learning to ride well. He'll easily adjust to a fixed gear DT when he is a little older.

I think you're right, mihlbach. And thanks for being the voice of parental sanity. And double thanks for posting that Redline. That would make a great Xmas gift for my 5 year old son.

thanks for the advice, mihlbach. What did your son learn to ride on at age 4?

Regarding the safety, those are interesting points. I'm not that committed to getting him to ride a fixie, just am excited about him riding. You know how it is. I figured that it'd be good to learn on, and that he could make up his mind about subsequent bikes after he rides other kids'. Wouldn't most of what you say about pedal retention apply to coaster brakes, too? Though I see your point about the low gear ratio/hill thing. But for a first bike that rarely leaves the apartment complex or park (I wouldn't take him anywhere near the street, since we live on a massive boulevard in LA), he probably wouldnt be going down too many hills. Though Lazarescu seems to have made it.

but yeah, I can be convinced to bag the whole thing. Just an idea I'm kicking around.

I just built up a bike (geared MTB with street tire) for my daughter and when she rolled it out for the first time she said: "Ah, man it's not fixed" :( Made me so proud. ;)

thanks for the advice, mihlbach. What did your son learn to ride on at age 4?

http://www.kaboodle.com/hi/img/2/0/0/3c/a/AAAAAkK3la8AAAAAADylwQ.jpg

I switched to the mini BMX as soon as it fit.



Wouldn't most of what you say about pedal retention apply to coaster brakes, too?

No because you can coast with a coaster brake. When things get out of control and feet leave the pedals, the pedaling stops. Its no different from a freewheel in that regard. Kids also love coaster brakes because its so easy to skid.


Though I see your point about the low gear ratio/hill thing. But for a first bike that rarely leaves the apartment complex or park (I wouldn't take him anywhere near the street, since we live on a massive boulevard in LA), he probably wouldnt be going down too many hills. Though Lazarescu seems to have made it.

Just wait till he can really ride! Once my son learned how to ride without training wheels, we got off the sidewalk and started on the road...not busy roads, but roads with slow and infrequent traffic. Folks tend to slow way down when they see the kid on the tiny bike and he quickly developed basic instincts for how to deal with traffic, parked cars, etc. Of course, I'm always there to coach him and it goes pretty smoothly. We ride to daycare together several times a week....5 mile round trip. We'll be able to ride to school when he starts since its close. The more we ride the easier it gets. I used to ride to his left to act as a barrier between him and traffic, but now I even let him get ahead and lead the way.

Good Luck!

HOWVER, I STRONGLY RECOMMEND AGAINST forcing a 4-5 year old to ride fixed.

But that's not hipster...

For a childrens bike, you can likely figure out a way to seize the freewheeling mechanism in the rear hub of an off-the-rack SS kids bike. Personally, I'd weld it in place, but pumping it full of epoxy or something should work similarly well if you don't have access to welding equipment. Since a child weighs a lot less, travels at lower speed, and likely won't be doing any skid stopping this solution should hold up just fine.

Man, when I was a kid we learned to ride on a fixed gear. It had solid rubber tires and we called it the "schkreepa bike" because that was the noise it made when you rode it. "Schkreepa...schkreepa...schkreepa" I wish I knew what happened to it, because I've been contemplating the same thing for my five year old. He recently made the transition from tricycle to mini-bmx with training wheels.

Man, I would SO start my kid off on a fixed gear if I had a kid. Seems a great way to get your technique down right early in life.

technique? gross - talk about being an over-bearing parent.

something lets me children and a fixed-gear bicycle isnt the wisest parental choice for the reasons already explained. get them a bmx and be done with it.

My first two-wheel cycling experience was on a bike that belonged to the kid across the street from my babysitter. I specifically remember that it did not coast. Also, I rode the bike after he left it outside when he went in for dinner.

So the first ever bike I rode was not only a fixed gear, but it was stolen as well.

Not really overbearing, it's just if I taught my kid how to do something, I would want them to do it right. Like if my kid wanted to learn how to draw, I would give him/her a book on drawing. Etc.

Anyhow, I don't see how fixed gear is dangerous for a kid. Just make sure they don't put their fingers in the drivetrain, and you're good.

the notion of pushing a child to "do it right" in regards to drawing or having fun on a bike is being over-bearing. that is simply taking the fun and creativity out of an activity - as if they were doing something wrong in the first place. take a child development class - you obviously have little experience with raising children. a child does not care about "proper riding technique" - they just want to have fun on the bike, not be forced to be the next theo boss.

the reason why a fixed-gear drivetrain would be potentially dangerous is explained quite well by mihlbach. re-read what he posted and think about it this time.

So I guess being taught how to write correctly is a waste of time in schools also?

My mom is a second grade teacher and has been since before I was in second grade. Sorry, but I see the value in giving kids the opportunity to do something correctly. It's not like you put them under any *pressure* by simply giving them the knowledge to do something right. You become a crazy parent when you force your kid to do things your way.

P.S. Who needs foot retention when you have brakes, anyhow? As I said before, the only dangerous thing on a fixed gear is the possibility of things getting caught in the drivetrain. This is when you teach your kid proper safety. If the kid is old enough to ride a bike without training wheels, imo, s/he is old enough to ride a fixed gear. Of all the things a kid is exposed on a daily basis, bicycles rank low, if they rank at all.

the notion of pushing a child to "do it right" in regards to drawing or having fun on a bike is being over-bearing. that is simply taking the fun and creativity out of an activity - as if they were doing something wrong in the first place. take a child development class - you obviously have little experience with raising children. a child does not care about "proper riding technique" - they just want to have fun on the bike, not be forced to be the next theo boss.



I couldn't have said it better

reading and writing are not the same as riding a bike. a human needs to read and write correctly in order to function and succeed, but they do not need to having "proper riding technique" -- they do, however, need to have fun. turning a fun activity into the next violin lesson is simply bad parenting. the most important thing to teach a kid in regards to bicycles is how fun they are. pushing "proper riding technique" is on sure way to alienate a child from bicycles.

and I think the idea of even bringing up "proper riding technique" with a child seems like such a downer. do you honestly believe any 3rd grader actually cares about their spin and what muscles they're pedaling with or if they're getting aero enough? I think they're more concerned with going fast down the street, ghostriding their bikes, and jumping off stuff -- as they should be.

as far as foot retention is concerned: they could easily have their foot slip off the pedals from being wet and have the pedal come around and entangle their leg. a crash and/or injury would probably ensue.

a freewheel or coaster-brake seems to be a better and more obvious solution. I see no benefit from a parent forcing a child to ride a fixed-gear other than some weirdo "proper riding technique" obsessed parent or some sort of hipster mini-me thing.

So by giving your kid a fixed gear bike, you are being "overbearing"? Wow.

Being able to read and write is one thing. You can do it, if not "correctly". As an adult, you should know plenty of adults do NOT read OR write correctly. Grammar mistakes are common, even in the professional world and most adults have illegible handwriting.

And yes, in school, you are taught to write "correctly". When I was learning to read and write, we learned the Zaner-Bloser and D'nealian styles of writing although we did not know this at the time. This is what would be considered "correct" writing technique. You don't just hand your kids paper, pencil, and a newspaper and say "make it look like this". In fact, teachers discourage kids from writing cursive at all until they have proper education.

And your argument of entanglement, how are you any less likely to let your foot fall off a bigwheel/trike than you are a fixed gear?

EDIT: And it's not like you start teaching your kid by saying "Son, today you will learn proper pedaling technique.". You just make sure they can ride safely. Being on a fixed gear has the benefit of incidentally encouraging good pedaling technique passively. This has nothing to do with the parent's teaching them.

So by giving your kid a fixed gear bike, you are being "overbearing"? Wow.

by pushing "proper riding technique," as you suggested, you are.

Man, I would SO start my kid off on a fixed gear if I had a kid. Seems a great way to get your technique down right early in life.

^ Actually this is what I suggested. I didn't say, you sit your kid down and have a long talk about proper pedaling technique. I said that fixed gear riding implicitly has the benefit of teaching proper cycling techniques.

Being able to read and write is one thing. You can do it, if not "correctly". As an adult, you should know plenty of adults do NOT read OR write correctly. Grammar mistakes are common, even in the professional world and most adults have illegible handwriting.

And yes, in school, you are taught to write "correctly". When I was learning to read and write, we learned the Zaner-Bloser and D'nealian styles of writing although we did not know this at the time. This is what would be considered "correct" writing technique. You don't just hand your kids paper, pencil, and a newspaper and say "make it look like this". In fact, teachers discourage kids from writing cursive at all until they have proper education.

And that was exactly my point. Reading and writing correctly are essential. Riding a bike "correctly" is not.


And your argument of entanglement, how are you any less likely to let your foot fall off a bigwheel/trike than you are a fixed gear?

Think about it. Think of the different geometries of both types of vehicles and their respective body positioning.


EDIT: And it's not like you start teaching your kid by saying "Son, today you will learn proper pedaling technique.". You just make sure they can ride safely. And being on a fixed gear does have the benefit of incidentally encouraging good pedaling technique passively. This has nothing to do with the parent's teaching them.

Again, I see less benefit and more downsides to a child riding a fixed-gear.

I was making the point that reading and writing "correctly" AREN'T essential. Most adults have mediocre handwriting and grammar. Anyhow, the geometry is different, but the possibility of your foot coming off is no different. And if your foot comes off a big wheel, pretty sure it is going to hit the GROUND actually.

Like I said before, and I will say it again, simply giving them a fixed gear isn't overbearing. Parents make decisions on behalf of their kids all the time. What they wear, where they go to school, what sports they play ... deciding what kind of bike Johnny gets for his birthday is not controlling.

^ Actually this is what I suggested. I didn't say, you sit your kid down and have a long talk about proper pedaling technique. I said that fixed gear riding implicitly has the benefit of teaching proper cycling techniques.

The extent of how a proper riding technique is taught is largely irrelevant, but the core is still there: an insistence that the child is doing something wrong on the bike and this must be corrected in order to please his/her parents and be a better child. What is relevant is fun. Like I said before, turning bicycles into the next violin or piano lesson is one sure way to squash the fun out of riding bikes. How many people were taken to violin or piano lessons as a child and how many people still play violin or piano to this day? How many people rode bikes as a child and how many people still ride bikes today? Or, how many people remember having fun during violin or piano lessons? How many people remember having fun while riding bikes as a child?

Your comparisons make no sense. How is giving your kid a fixed gear bike vs a bike with a coaster brake somehow "taking the fun out of biking"?

It's a bike. Your kid is going to like it regardless of what kind of bike it is.

Ironically, most people ride fixed gears because they think they are more "fun" than free-wheeled bikes.

I was making the point that reading and writing "correctly" AREN'T essential. Most adults have mediocre handwriting and grammar.

And where are most people in regards to happiness, health, intellectual refinement, and financial success? I rest my case.


Anyhow, the geometry is different, but the possibility of your foot coming off is no different. And if your foot comes off a big wheel, pretty sure it is going to hit the GROUND actually.

If a child's foot comes off a big-wheel, they can pull back their leg to avoid being hit by the oncoming pedal. This is more difficult on a road-style frame.


Like I said before, and I will say it again, simply giving them a fixed gear isn't overbearing. Parents make decisions on behalf of their kids all the time. What they wear, where they go to school, what sports they play ... deciding what kind of bike Johnny gets for his birthday is not controlling.

I think forcing a child to ride a largely unusual and more difficult and more dangerous bike is over-bearing. The benefits seem to be more for the parent than for the child (i.e. a "mini-me" syndrome or a "you're the next star athlete" syndrome). And did you ever notice the kids that had most decisions made by their parents (in regards to clothing, what sports they play, what music they listen to, etc)? They all turn out to be real a33holes or co-dependents because they never learned to make a decision for themselves.

Your comparisons make no sense. How is giving your kid a fixed gear bike vs a bike with a coaster brake somehow "taking the fun out of biking"?

I never said the type of bike in question takes the fun out. I said the pushing of "proper riding technique" would take the fun out. I did say that a freewheeled or coaster-brake enabled bike would be more safe and sensible.


Ironically, most people ride fixed gears because they think they are more "fun" than free-wheeled bikes.

And whats your proof?

I think I can respond by saying riding a fixed gear bicycle is no more unnatural than the act of riding a bicycle in general.

Most kids ASK for bikes for their birthdays before they are given one. At least, that is how it worked for my friends and I growing up, if we were lucky enough to get what we asked for. It's not like the kid is forced to ride the bike. Again, you're comparing apples to oranges. Most kids don't ask for a violin for Christmas.

About the safety issue: I've talked to many older cyclists who have told me their first bike was a fixed gear. If they were able to do it in their youth safely, the kids of tomorrow can do it also.


I never said the type of bike in question takes the fun out. I said the pushing of "proper riding technique" would take the fun out. I did say that a freewheeled or coaster-brake enabled bike would be more safe and sensible.

And whats your proof?

No one said push proper technique verbally on your kid. All I said was that fixed gear bikes INTRINSICALLY encourage this. Again, I quote:


Man, I would SO start my kid off on a fixed gear if I had a kid. Seems a great way to get your technique down right early in life.

I don't have any statistics for you but I guarantee the survey says "Because It's Fun" as a top reason people ride fixed as opposed to free.

Most kids ASK for bikes for their birthdays before they are given one. At least, that is how it worked for my friends and I growing up, if we were lucky enough to get what we asked for. It's not like the kid is forced to ride the bike. Again, you're comparing apples to oranges. Most kids don't ask for a violin for Christmas.

I never asked for a piano. We just had one in the house. I used to have fun just banging around on it and hitting the keys and pedals either in a melody or a random string. Once I was signed up for piano lessons, the piano stopped being fun because I was taught that what I did before was incorrect and there was more pressure to not disappoint. And I believe that once the notion that the child is riding his bike incorrectly, the bike will also stop being fun.


About the safety issue: I've talked to many older cyclists who have told me their first bike was a fixed gear. If they were able to do it in their youth safely, the kids of tomorrow can do it also.I am sure that a fixed-gear drivetain could be safe for some children sometimes, but a coaster-brake or freewheel equipped bicycle would nearly always be safer.


No one said push proper technique verbally on your kid. All I said was that fixed gear bikes INTRINSICALLY encourage this.Where in your quote did you ever say anything about the intrinsic nature of learning proper technique via a fixed gear? You never did -- you mentioned that after the fact.


I don't have any statistics for you but I guarantee the survey says "Because It's Fun" as a top reason people ride fixed as opposed to free.I think it depends on who and where you take your survey. I know some roadies that have way more fun climbing mountains and peeling down these mountain roads. If you'd ask them which is more fun: riding a fixed-gear with all of simplicity but limitations or a road bike with it's complexity but more liberating technology, they would surely answer affirmative to their road bikes. If you were to ask bunch of kids riding bmx, they'd say bmx. So on and so forth.

1) As stated for the 4th or 5th time, no one is saying give your kid a lesson on pedaling technique. I said, give your kid a fixed gear and s/he will learn it passively without the parent saying a damn thing.

2) If you are so concerned about drivetrain safety, put a chain guard on it. Many kids bikes (regardless of whether it's free/fixed) have these anyhow.

3) My very first post implied it. I said "[it] seems a great way to get your technique down right early in life". If that does not imply that the bike itself inherently teaches the lesson, you do not comprehend English. The statement above in no way implies that the parent is giving any sort of "proper pedaling" lessons. The parent's role beyond providing the equipment is not discussed in any way.

4) I am talking about people who ALREADY prefer riding fixed gears. I am not saying fixed gear riding is inherently more fun. Obviously that is ENTIRELY subjective. What I am saying - and if you re-read what I said, you will see this is stated lucidly - those people who DO ride fixed gears ... many of them would tell you they do it because "it is fun".

Idea: Instead of bickering about who's a good/bad parent; lets discuss fixed gear bicycles!


I still think some well placed epoxy could be used to seize the freewheel of a standard childrens bike.

1) As stated for the 4th or 5th time, no one is saying give your kid a lesson on pedaling technique. I said, give your kid a fixed gear and s/he will learn it passively without the parent saying a damn thing.

2) If you are so concerned about drivetrain safety, put a chain guard on it. Many kids bikes (regardless of whether it's free/fixed) have these anyhow.

3) My very first post implied it. I said "[it] seems a great way to get your technique down right early in life". If that does not imply that the bike itself inherently teaches the lesson, you do not comprehend English. The statement above in no way implies that the parent is giving any sort of "proper pedaling" lessons. The parent's role beyond providing the equipment is not discussed in any way.

4) I am talking about people who ALREADY prefer riding fixed gears. I am not saying fixed gear riding is inherently more fun. Obviously that is ENTIRELY subjective. What I am saying - and if you re-read what I said, you will see this is stated lucidly - those people who DO ride fixed gears ... many of them would tell you they do it because "it is fun".

1) I know people that ride fixed-gear and they have really poor form. How come the magic of fixed-gear riding does not help them but it would help a child?

2) a chainguard would not stop a child's legs from being entangled in the fast moving pedals.

3) Well, I must not comprehend English. You have attached a separate meaning and value to your earlier statement after the fact. I do believe that is called "back pedaling" -- no pun intended.

4) And people that predominately ride geared bicycles would say they have more fun on their geared bicycle (or they'd say "I ride my bike because it's fun" if a list of reasons were to be complied). If this is the case, then your point is entirely moot because everyone generally has fun on bike and people ride what they consider the most fun. Here is what you said: Ironically, most people ride fixed gears because they think they are more "fun" than free-wheeled bikes.

I still think some well placed epoxy could be used to seize the freewheel of a standard childrens bike.

Sure, it can be done. But why? What exactly is the point? What are the benefits that outweigh the problems?

SB on FG bikes:

"When you descend, you can't coast, but the gear is too low. This forces you to pedal at a faster cadence than you would choose on a multi-speed bicycle. High-cadence pedaling improves the suppleness of you legs. High rpm's force you to learn to pedal in a smooth manner--if you don't, you will bounce up and down in the saddle. Most cyclists coast far too much. Riding a fixed-gear bike will break this pernicious habit. Coasting breaks up your rhythm and allows your legs to stiffen up. Keeping your legs in motion keeps the muscles supple, and promotes good circulation."

Just a few (of many more) benefits of FG that SB mentions. I'm sure we have ALL read this.

2) The chainguard prevents clothing or body parts from being entangled in the drivetrain. That is why I suggested that. I don't see how legs get entangled in the cranks, but if they did, there are brakes. Personally it sounds worse to have your legs trailing against the ground when they come off the pedals, than to have them simply dangling, allowing you to brake.

3) I didn't assign ANY value to a previous statement. READ it, dude. Seriously. It says NOTHING about parents teaching kids proper technique in ANYTHING. This is extremely frustrating that you don't understand this. All it says is that FGs encourage proper riding technique. Do I need to do a sentence diagram for you? Seriously. The subject of the sentence is "fixed gears". The predicate of the sentence is "seem like a great way to learn proper technique". Nowhere is parents or parents teaching kids to ride bikes mentioned.

4) I am talking about "reasons people like to ride fixed gears". For example:

- It's healthy!
- It promotes good cycling technique!
- The bike requires less tuning!
- I feel connected to the road!

I guarantee "it's fun" is on this list near the top for most people. And yes, you quoted me correctly: "Ironically, most people ride fixed gears because they think they are more "fun" than free-wheeled bikes."

Let me break this sentence down for you to understand.

Subject: Why people who ride fixed gears ride fixed gears.
Predicate: Because they feel it is more "fun" than free-wheeled bikes.

Is it all really so hard to understand or are you just being contrary???

I don't get it.

... open up the hub, take it apart, remove the coaster fulcrum arm, and fix it with JB Weld.


For a childrens bike, you can likely figure out a way to seize the freewheeling mechanism in the rear hub of an off-the-rack SS kids bike. Personally, I'd weld it in place, but pumping it full of epoxy or something should work similarly well if you don't have access to welding equipment...

Aren't the axle and bearings right there in the hub, so that if you just seized it up indiscriminately, it wouldn't rotate at all? I can't really tell how one would do this from the pictures I can find.

SB on FG bikes:

"When you descend, you can't coast, but the gear is too low. This forces you to pedal at a faster cadence than you would choose on a multi-speed bicycle. High-cadence pedaling improves the suppleness of you legs. High rpm's force you to learn to pedal in a smooth manner--if you don't, you will bounce up and down in the saddle. Most cyclists coast far too much. Riding a fixed-gear bike will break this pernicious habit. Coasting breaks up your rhythm and allows your legs to stiffen up. Keeping your legs in motion keeps the muscles supple, and promotes good circulation."

Just a few (of many more) benefits of FG that SB mentions. I'm sure we have ALL read this.

And that does not even come close to answering my question, but thanks.


2) The chainguard prevents clothing or body parts from being entangled in the drivetrain. That is why I suggested that. I don't see how legs get entangled in the cranks, but if they did, there are brakes. Personally it sounds worse to have your legs trailing against the ground when they come off the pedals, than to have them simply dangling, allowing you to brake.Think about it. A foot slips off the pedal. the pedal comes around and smacks the back of the leg. with enough force, the bike will endo. A bike with a coaster-brake/freewheel will allow the child to put their foot back onto the pedal without consequence.

Do you think any big-box retailer would ever consider selling a children's fixed gear bicycle? I am curious to your thoughts why this would never happen (or happen, if you're as dense as you sound).


3) I didn't assign ANY value to a previous statement. READ it, dude. Seriously. It says NOTHING about parents teaching kids proper technique in ANYTHING. This is extremely frustrating that you don't understand this. All it says is that FGs encourage proper riding technique. Do I need to do a sentence diagram for you? Seriously. The subject of the sentence is "fixed gears". The predicate of the sentence is "seem like a great way to learn proper technique". Nowhere is parents or parents teaching kids to ride bikes mentioned.Proper technique is taught via coaching and instruction. If you really believe that a fixed-gear drivetrain can magically produce wonderful results, you spend way to much time online. Sure, as Sheldon Brown noted, a fixed-gear drivetrain can definitely help you train and smooth your spin -- that is, if you know what you're doing. A child would not, thus someone would need to coach the child. And once the notion that he or she is riding their bike wrong and the instruction begins, the sooner the fun fades away.


4) I am talking about "reasons people like to ride fixed gears". For example:

- It's healthy!
- It promotes good cycling technique!
- The bike requires less tuning!
- I feel connected to the road!

I guarantee "it's fun" is on this list near the top for most people. And yes, you quoted me correctly: "Ironically, most people ride fixed gears because they think they are more "fun" than free-wheeled bikes."

Let me break this sentence down for you to understand.

Subject: Why people who ride fixed gears ride fixed gears.
Predicate: Because they feel it is more "fun" than free-wheeled bikes.You know, if you were to carefully rephrase the question to a different audience, you'd probaby receive exactly the same answers. "hey road bike guys, why do you like to ride your road bikes?" I am quite certain that "fun" would be a top answer as well.

Your point is moot. Who cares?


Is it all really so hard to understand or are you just being contrary???

The answer is C: You're wrong and we're on a discussion board.

1) I think SB clearly illustrates that fixed gear riding promotes good cycling technique. If HE can't make that argument to you, certainly I cannot. All you've said is "not all fixed gear cyclists have good technique". Sure. Whatever. That doesn't change the fact that fixed gear riding promotes good cycling technique.

2) "A foot slips off the pedal. the pedal comes around and smacks the back of the leg. with enough force, the bike will endo." - There are about 10000000000000000 ways a kid can fall off a bike, and this is possibly one of the most contrived I've ever heard. You are completely disregarding the fact that at any point the brakes can be engaged. In all my years of cycling, I've never heard of this as a common way of falling off one's bike.

3) You say "proper technique is taught via coaching and instruction". What I said is completely contrary to this. I said that riding fixed gears promote good cycling technique. This is exactly what SB says and in fact YOU agree with. So why are you arguing??? You say a child can't spin right? You are totally underestimating what a kid can and cannot do. The kid is ALREADY riding the bike. Of COURSE they are fully capable of spinning correctly. You have COMPLETELY loaded my statement with outrageous inferences. All I said, for the 10th or 11th time now, was that fixed gears THEMSELVES promote good technique.

4) I disagree. I think many road riders would say it is fun, but not fun specifically because it has a freewheel. MOST bikes have a freewheel. This differs from people who ride fixed gears because of the fixed wheel. I think many of them think it is fun explicitly because it is fixed.

I can see a kid messing up his/her hand on a fixed gear bike.

I can see a kid messing up his/her hand on a fixed gear bike.

If anything, I think this is easily the #1 danger a fixed gear poses to a small child.

EDIT: Incidentally, I do think a mini BMX bike would be a great choice. Also incidentally, I think you could probably epoxy a rear cog, like HandsomeRyan said.

I remember when i was young i used to think that turning my bike upside down and pedaling with my hands to get the back tire going really fast and see how long it spins for was the coolest thing to do ever.

anyone else do this?

Me, cept I wouldn't spin it by the pedals, I would spin it by the tire, pretending it was Wheel of Fortune or something. I was strange.

1) I think SB clearly illustrates that fixed gear riding promotes good cycling technique. If HE can't make that argument to you, certainly I cannot. All you've said is "not all fixed gear cyclists have good technique". Sure. Whatever. That doesn't change the fact that fixed gear riding promotes good cycling technique.

Fixed-gear training can promote excellent cycling technique -- if that is a focus. But not everyone is going to benefit and certainly not a child on his or her first bicycle. I doubt a child would even care about such things.


2) "A foot slips off the pedal. the pedal comes around and smacks the back of the leg. with enough force, the bike will endo." - There are about 10000000000000000 ways a kid can fall off a bike, and this is possibly one of the most contrived I've ever heard. You are completely disregarding the fact that at any point the brakes can be engaged. In all my years of cycling, I've never heard of this as a common way of falling off one's bike.Foot-retention is used in fixed-gear riding for more efficient pedaling and for safety. The danger is exactly how I spelled it out. And yes, there are a million ways a child can fall off a bike -- why add to that number when it can be reduced? Again, I see no benefit to giving a child a fixed-gear bicycle (unless he or she wants one) over a coaster-brake or freewheeled bicycle. I only see downsides.


3) You say "proper technique is taught via coaching and instruction". What I said is completely contrary to this. I said that riding fixed gears promote good cycling technique. This is exactly what SB says and in fact YOU agree with. So why are you arguing??? You say a child can't spin right? You are totally underestimating what a kid can and cannot do. The kid is ALREADY riding the bike. Of COURSE they are fully capable of spinning correctly. You have COMPLETELY loaded my statement with outrageous inferences. All I said, for the 10th or 11th time now, was that fixed gears THEMSELVES promote good technique.I think that is all hype, then. And I think you're inflating Sheldon's words to fit your argument.

If a fixed-gear gives a rider good cycling techniques, why are there so many crappy fixed-gear riders? My answer is because they lack decent training and understanding of the method. Without such instruction and practice and pedal-awareness, there is little benefit. They simply ride the bike, just as a child would.

And since when is this kid doing one-legged and dowel drills?


4) I disagree. I think many road riders would say it is fun, but not fun specifically because it has a freewheel. MOST bikes have a freewheel. This differs from people who ride fixed gears because of the fixed wheel. I think many of them think it is fun explicitly because it is fixed.I would counter that and say that roadies would say they have more fun because they can attack hills with ease and go faster.

Face it -- fun is entirely subjective and each rider you sample will say they have more fun on their preferred bicycle. To say that a fixed-gear is objectively "more fun" than a geared/freewheel equipped bicycle is simple-minded conclusion. And the method of fun can vary, but fun is still generally the top outcome no matter what hardware used.

1) Who care if the kid realizes s/he is getting a benefit from riding fixed? It makes zero difference that it is happening. The kid is learning to ride without excessive coasting, like SB states, and keeping his/her legs in motion. These are passive benefits to FG riding. They are unavoidable.

2) Dude, I know what foot retention is. I ride a FG bike after all. But foot retention mainly helps you from losing your pedals when you are spinning really fast. And let's face it. The kid isn't going to be riding THAT fast. And even then, there are brakes. Brake, then put feet back on. It's not even something that has to be taught. It is instinctual. What I am saying is there a gazillion ways to fall off a bike, and I don't think FG riding is one of them.

3) Why are there crappy FG riders? Because there are people who suck at doing anything it is possible to suck at. If they were riding road bikes they'd suck too. Point is, they are probably better than they would be if they were riding freewheels. Riding FG promotes good cycling practices. I don't see how this is debatable. You don't need to get extensive instructions on FG to ride one properly. Same goes for any bike. The idea that the FG is this exotic and dangerous thing is an attitude inexplicably fixated upon by the media. I don't get the fascination.

4) I disagree. Obviously only a statistical analysis would solve this, but frankly, if you read BF enough, you'd realize "because it is fun" is one of the main banalities us FG riders will offer when asked why we ride. You don't really get that in the roadie forum. You hear that phrase tossed around a lot more here. Probably because unlike roadies, FG riders are forced to justify their bike choice in personal ways. Roadies can always explain why their bikes are more versatile, effective, or practical.

Anyhow, you just want to argue with anything I say. The point is, FG isn't really that dangerous for a kid. I've heard of plenty of kids falling on their bikes. I did when I was little. It is inevitable. It's how we learn. There is nothing prohibitively dangerous about FGs as opposed to freewheels that parents should be concerned about. Especially since trikes and bigwheels are technically FGs. It's probably a more natural transition if anything. Just make sure the kid doesn't put his/her fingers in the drivetrain.

Sure, it can be done. But why? What exactly is the point? What are the benefits that outweigh the problems?

Benefits:
• Not having to buy a new hub, and spokes ($$$).
• Not having to have a custom 12" or 16" wheel built. (it seems 95% of the people who post here cant/dont build their own wheels)
• Cost is only about $2 + a donor bicycle.
• the satisfaction of doing it yourself.

Problems:
• Figuring out how/where to put epoxy so you don't ruin the entire hub.


Feel free to add to either side of this list as I'm sure I have not thought of everything.

1) Who care if the kid realizes s/he is getting a benefit from riding fixed? It makes zero difference that it is happening. The kid is learning to ride without excessive coasting, like SB states, and keeping his/her legs in motion. These are passive benefits to FG riding. They are unavoidable.

Riding without excessive coasting is not a real benefit. One can mash and mash and do so with a fast cadence and still have crappy form.


2) Dude, I know what foot retention is. I ride a FG bike after all. But foot retention mainly helps you from losing your pedals when you are spinning really fast. And let's face it. The kid isn't going to be riding THAT fast. And even then, there are brakes. Brake, then put feet back on. It's not even something that has to be taught. It is instinctual. What I am saying is there a gazillion ways to fall off a bike, and I don't think FG riding is one of them.How do you know the kid isnt going to be riding fast or try to take the bike down a steep hill? I sure did as I kid and I am glad I didnt have to do so with a fixed-drive train and was able to coast and not have to worry about keeping up with / staying on the pedals.

And you obviously have never accidentally unclipped. I have and it is not a matter of "putting your foot back on" -- ask anyone who has unclipped and they'll tell you how a faceplant feels or how long it takes a broken collarbone to heal.

Again, what is the great benefit that outweighs such danger?


3) Why are there crappy FG riders? Because there are people who suck at doing anything it is possible to suck at. If they were riding road bikes they'd suck too. Point is, they are probably better than they would be if they were riding freewheels. Riding FG promotes good cycling practices. I don't see how this is debatable. You don't need to get extensive instructions on FG to ride one properly. Same goes for any bike. The idea that the FG is this exotic and dangerous thing is an attitude inexplicably fixated upon by the media. I don't get the fascination.

By the media? That's hilarious. I do not own a television nor do I follow the mainstream media. I do, however, practice a little common sense. My common sense is there is no benefit to putting a kid on a fixed gear over a coaster-brake/freewheeled bicycle -- there is only downsides.

If anything, you seem to be a fixed-gear ideologue. You seem to propose that a fixed-gear bicycle is the perfect tool for everyone and argue against the sanity that says "use the right tool for particular job." In this case, the right tool for the job would be a freewheeled bmx with a handbrake.

A crappy fixed-gear cyclist will just mash down and let the drive-train pull the pedal back around to be mashed down again. and again. and again. That is no different from a freewheel mechanism. If one were to practice a decent and smooth spin and develop the memory for such efficiency, the benefit of a fixed-gear would be realized. If not, there is no benefit.


4) I disagree. Obviously only a statistical analysis would solve this, but frankly, if you read BF enough, you'd realize "because it is fun" is one of the main banalities us FG riders will offer when asked why we ride. You don't really get that in the roadie forum. You hear that phrased tossed around a lot more here. Probably because unlike roadies, FG riders are forced to justify their bike choice in personal ways. Roadies can always explain why their bikes are more versatile, effective, or practical.Ok, then. Start a survey in all of the subforums (bmx, atb, c & v, etc) that utilize freewheel/geared mechanisms and ask why they ride their bikes. I believe a majority will say "fun" -- just as much as this forum would say.


Anyhow, you just want to argue with anything I say. The point is, FG isn't really that dangerous for a kid. I've heard of plenty of kids falling on their bikes. I did when I was little. It is inevitable. It's how we learn. There is nothing prohibitively dangerous about FGs as opposed to freewheels that parents should be concerned about. Especially since trikes and bigwheels are technically FGs. It's probably a more natural transition if anything. Just make sure the kid doesn't put his/her fingers in the drivetrain.I never said fixed-gear bicycles are inherently dangerous. My point is that a fixed-gear equipped bicycle has more dangers or pitfalls for children than other drivetrains would have and there is little or no benefit to adding more risk to the already risky endeavor of cycling. And when it comes to parenting, a wise choice would be to purchase a bike that is safer for the child than other bikes would be.