Singlespeed & Fixed Gear - Do you really like fixed gear bikes?

I was just reading the "Should I Buy This Frame? (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?607915-Should-I-buy-this-frame)" thread, which is just the latest of many threads I've seen here where there was a large contingent of people expressing the sentiment that really nice frames should be built up with gears. This puzzles me.

Allow me to opine....

It seems to me that there are several possible reasons that a person would want a fixed gear bike:

1. You want a bike for track racing
2. You want a cheap bike
3. You want a simple bike
4. You want a low maintenance bike
5. You want to do tricks
6. You think fixed gear bikes are fun to ride
7. You think it will make a good project to learn basic mechanical skills
8. You want to improve your pedaling form
9. You want to work on your spinning and/or mashing abilities
10. You've heard that a lot of people like them and want to try it to see what the appeal is

I'm sure there are other reasons, but those were the ones I could think of off the top of my head.

Now assuming you more or less accept this list, it seems to me that if a person wants a fixed gear bike because of some combination of 3, 4, 6, 8 and 9 (and arguably even 7), there is no reason that any frame with horizontal dropouts should be deemed as "too nice" to build up as a fixed gear bike.

In my mind, the only difference between a bike "designed to be a fixed gear bike" and a bike that was designed to be a road bike but has horizontal dropouts is geometry, and in many of the cases I listed above road geometry is desirable.

So what's the deal?

Don't get me wrong here, I don't care what you do with your frame (although I always recommend against hacking off cable stops because after a few months when you're not a moron, you might regret having made your bike less functional) but it's worth keeping in mind that a geared road bike is always going to be faster, climb better, descend better, sprint better and generally be better given two identical frames, one set up fixed, one set up geared. So if you have a truly beautiful bike that is going to handle buttery smooth and feel all lively and such, you'll get more out of it by making it into a geared bike.

Now again, I don't care either way, but to me the logic makes sense if you really want to get into it. Fixed gears are less good from a purely performance perspective.

minimalism

Don't get me wrong here, I don't care what you do with your frame (although I always recommend against hacking off cable stops because after a few months when you're not a moron, you might regret having made your bike less functional) but it's worth keeping in mind that a geared road bike is always going to be faster, climb better, descend better, sprint better and generally be better given two identical frames, one set up fixed, one set up geared. So if you have a truly beautiful bike that is going to handle buttery smooth and feel all lively and such, you'll get more out of it by making it into a geared bike.

Sure, but it seems awfully presumptuous to assume that an early 80's Colnago, for instance, is going to be the nicest road bike a given person owns. Say, for instance, I've got a 2010 Trek Madone, and I want to build up a fixed gear bike for training purpose. Will I be better off building up a Surly Steamroller or the 80's Colnago?

I definitely agree about not hacking things off, though.

as long as people are riding bikes...ya know

Don't get me wrong here, I don't care what you do with your frame (although I always recommend against hacking off cable stops because after a few months when you're not a moron, you might regret having made your bike less functional) but it's worth keeping in mind that a geared road bike is always going to be faster, climb better, descend better, sprint better and generally be better given two identical frames, one set up fixed, one set up geared. So if you have a truly beautiful bike that is going to handle buttery smooth and feel all lively and such, you'll get more out of it by making it into a geared bike.

Now again, I don't care either way, but to me the logic makes sense if you really want to get into it. Fixed gears are less good from a purely performance perspective.

Homie's right. As somebody with a pretty good conversion and a couple nice geared road bikes, I have to say that if a frame is really nice, I'd like to see it achieve its full potential by being fast as possible with gears. I mean, if somebody's posting about a frame they're thinking about buying in the fixed forum, it doesn't make much sense to say "GET GEARS!" since they're probably thinking fixed anyway, but it's what I'd be thinking. The thing is, a nice frame is good to ride for many miles at a time, and gears make that a lot easier. If you're buying a nice frame to ride in the city (theft-bait, IMO), then fixed makes sense, I guess. I love riding fixed because it's fun, but it's also nice because a fixie makes a great beater/utility bike. I'd hate to see an old De Rosa, Colnago, or Pinarello turned into a beater. Might as well gear it up and do centuries on it, right?

I was just reading the "Should I Buy This Frame? (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?607915-Should-I-buy-this-frame)" thread, which is just the latest of many threads I've seen here where there was a large contingent of people expressing the sentiment that really nice frames should be built up with gears. This puzzles me.

Allow me to opine....

It seems to me that there are several possible reasons that a person would want a fixed gear bike:

1. You want a bike for track racing
2. You want a cheap bike
3. You want a simple bike
4. You want a low maintenance bike
5. You want to do tricks
6. You think fixed gear bikes are fun to ride
7. You think it will make a good project to learn basic mechanical skills
8. You want to improve your pedaling form
9. You want to work on your spinning and/or mashing abilities
10. You've heard that a lot of people like them and want to try it to see what the appeal is

I'm sure there are other reasons, but those were the ones I could think of off the top of my head.

Now assuming you more or less accept this list, it seems to me that if a person wants a fixed gear bike because of some combination of 3, 4, 6, 8 and 9 (and arguably even 7), there is no reason that any frame with horizontal dropouts should be deemed as "too nice" to build up as a fixed gear bike.

In my mind, the only difference between a bike "designed to be a fixed gear bike" and a bike that was designed to be a road bike but has horizontal dropouts is geometry, and in many of the cases I listed above road geometry is desirable.

So what's the deal?

this is funny. i read through your list twice (before reading anything else you typed), selected 4, 6,8, and 9 as the numbers that fit me. then read on further an realized YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ME!!

i ride a aluminum road bike with vertical dropputs.

11. Sheldon Brown.

^my reason.

this is funny. i read through your list twice (before reading anything else you typed), selected 4, 6,8, and 9 as the numbers that fit me. then read on further an realized YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ME!!

That is funny.

So, I guess what I'm saying is, maybe the Colnago (for instance) would be better in some abstract sense as a geared bike, but for $400, you're probably not going to find a better frame for fixed gear road riding. If you had posted an old mid-level Schwinn, there would have been a whole bunch of people (hopefully different people) telling you that it wasn't worth converting. :)

That is funny.

So, I guess what I'm saying is, maybe the Colnago (for instance) would be better in some abstract sense as a geared bike, but for $400, you're probably not going to find a better frame for fixed gear road riding. If you had posted an old mid-level Schwinn, there would have been a whole bunch of people (hopefully different people) telling you that it wasn't worth converting. :)

i not the one buying the colnogo, i just fit in the same category.


i hope he gets that thing and builds it up as a ssfg with campy components.

I don't, I just wanted to be cool.

I do genuinely like fixed gear bikes. I also really like cats.

...which is just the latest of many threads I've seen here where there was a large contingent of people expressing the sentiment that really nice frames should be built up with gears. This puzzles me.

There are really nice frames that were meant to be used with derailleurs. I think it is the use of those really nice frames that people are talking about.

There are also really nice frames that were made with no consideration for the use of derailleurs, and it would be stupid to put derailleurs on them.

It's really not that puzzling.

There are really nice frames that were meant to be used with derailleurs. I think it is the use of those really nice frames that people are talking about.

There are also really nice frames that were made with no consideration for the use of derailleurs, and it would be stupid to put derailleurs on them.

It's really not that puzzling.

fixed gear frames dont always have "road bike geometry" witch can be nice for road riding...

i also find a lot of fixed gear frames overpriced. you can get 7000 series aluminum and Reynolds 853 road bike frames much cheaper than a fixed gear versions.

The OP is confusing, what is he trying to understand? Is this a search for a combination of reasons that equates "really like"?

allow me to add one more "reason" to the list:

0. because you want a fixed gear bicycle

this makes my "reason" for riding a fixed gear bicycle more "complete":

8-6-7-5-3-0-9-ee-ah-yee

most horizontal frames also come with braze-ons, etc for brakes, cables, whathaveyou. i don't like these things, and track-type frames made for the 'fixie crowd' don't have these things and tend to try to be as simple as possible.

clearly, with the last couple of threads, like the fgss people being mean, and this one too, that clearly this crowd is a little different than the others. we like design, we like hands-on, and we like our bikes.

i, personally, don't care as much about road bike vs. track bike, but i do like a comfortable bike that has the things i need, and leaves out the things i don't want. that's why i ride fgss, in addition to some of your points.

12. To be cool

I can't stand riding fixed gear bikes, but thats just for me, it doesn't bother me that others do like them as thats what cycling is all about, finding the type of bike you like and riding it. =0)

They are fun and low maintenance, great for a commuter bike. I would like to have a nice steel road frame, but I would not remove the cable guides

low... maintenance...?

proper chain slack is high maintenance compared to dealing with stretched cables.

It's just highly unattractive to steal compared to a geared bike.
no expensive shifters or derailers to steal, all the expensive stuff (frame and wheels) are locked together.
even if you do break through the lock, if you're not used to riding FG, especially ones equipped with clipless pedals and no brakes, you're in for one hell of a ride.

Why the hell should I care if my bike climbs better, or goes faster or any of that? All I know is that (sometimes) a fixed gear is more fun to ride. In fact, I think it's more fun to ride precisely because it climbs poorly, goes slower and requires a lot more out of you.

I live somewhere pretty darn flat, with no real variety in terrain for miles and miles. Cycling gets dull. Whenever I go elsewhere, get to ride up a few hills, maybe tackle a real trail or two, my passion gets renewed. Then, returning to my pancake of a home, I turn to fixed gears to make things a little more interesting. Yeah, it's not really a climb, but it's more fun going up those freeway overpasses on a fixed gear than on a geared bike. The path by my house isn't much to a mountain bike, but ride it on a fixed cross bike, and it's a challenge, and it's exciting.

So what if I'm slow, can't climb and all the other faults. I'm having more fun. I don't know about you, but that's why I bike.

my FG bike isn't much slower than my geared bike. Even going up hills. The only time it is noticeably slower is when i go down hills.

Also, what is the point of this thread? Of course i like riding FG.

12. To be cool
^^

I dont think there is such a thing as a bike being too nice to be a singlespeed. There are a lot of handmade track bicycles or keirin frames that are really expensive and nice and are meant to be singlespeeds.

13. for the girls!

I'm not dissing the OP because it's one of the rare civilized threads you'll find on SSFG, but why is it we even need to have this discussion? How many times do you think the roadies need to justify the "why" the chose to ride a geared bike?

It seems like a symptom of a type of cycling that is struggling to find some respect--even among those that are fans. It's fun for lots of reasons. Why is one reason better than any other?


as long as people are riding bikes...ya know
^^ what he said.

low... maintenance...?

proper chain slack is high maintenance compared to dealing with stretched cables.

It's just highly unattractive to steal compared to a geared bike.
no expensive shifters or derailers to steal, all the expensive stuff (frame and wheels) are locked together.
even if you do break through the lock, if you're not used to riding FG, especially ones equipped with clipless pedals and no brakes, you're in for one hell of a ride.

i agree with the maintenance part, i mean it's not that hard to move some adjuster barrels on your brakes and set derailleur limit screws.

but i'm tired of the fixed is hard to ride and it won't be stolen. that one guy who left his by the atm like a dumbass and had it stolen, only to get it back because the thief was dumbfounded by pedals that kept moving was one in a million. not that hard to carry a 15mm wrench and throw it in your car or truck.


I like fixed gear enough, but i wouldn't rely on it as my primay bike. I'd rather have a 3 speed igh if i could only have one bike.

I do genuinely like fixed gear bikes. I also really like cats.

I was expecting that comment to pave the way for another cat thread.

Maybe my actual point was hidden with too much verbiage. What I was reacting to is the number of people on this forum who were saying that a certain frame should NOT be built as ss/fg because it was too nice. If I went to the road forum and saw a bunch of people saying, "Man, that frame is too nice to make into a road bike," I'd have a similar question for them.

Maybe my actual point was hidden with too much verbiage. What I was reacting to is the number of people on this forum who were saying that a certain frame should NOT be built as ss/fg because it was too nice. If I went to the road forum and saw a bunch of people saying, "Man, that frame is too nice to make into a road bike," I'd have a similar question for them.

Andy K,

Your question is fair. You are also getting very fair answers. They are very telling. Ignore anyone who tries to convince you that building the fixed you want is somehow a waste of money. They are just haters. It's your coin, your dream and your bike. Build what you want and let the haters hate. It's all they do well anyway. Do you think they're actually cyclists anyway? Owning a bike and being a cyclist are not the same things. You go out there and live my brother. Never let 'em drag you down. Don't worry - they'll never rise up to meet you.

When I go posing with the FG the bike poses well next to the table with my black coffee.

When I go posing with the FG the bike poses well next to the table with my black coffee.

Good point. But in another case, whether or not is it not the black coffee that may in fact be well poses next to the FG that which is pretty. am i right? ladies?!? hoywahh.

simple is better plus fixed gears just look clean overall

It's your coin, your dream and your bike.

Actually, it's not my coin or my bike. It's just the general phenomenon that I'm curious about. I guess my interest in this thread is mostly sociological.

But I definitely do agree with your sentiments.

My favorite bike of all the ones I've seen on this forum was the beautiful Eddy Merckx that someone converted. I think I saw it on the sticky picture thread. That one drew a lot of objections.

if you're REALLY into ss/fg, why not have one go as fast as possible (as with a nicer frame)? if you have the money and the enthusiasm for ss, why go, "crap, i forgot i don't have gears. i need to downgrade my frame."?

if you're REALLY into ss/fg, why not have one go as fast as possible (as with a nicer frame)? if you have the money and the enthusiasm for ss, why go, "crap, i forgot i don't have gears. i need to downgrade my frame."?

Exactly!

I think it is all about pedigree. If a nice bike was made for use with gears, it should have gears to fulfill its destiny. To make a really nice bike into fixed, simply so that its ridden, kinda negates the bikes fullest potential. Think of it as a thoroughbred race horse being used to pull a wagon instead of running races. The horse never gets to realize its full potential just like the bike never does. It is the conflict between using something for its intended purpose (with gears) and just using something regardless of its original purpose (fixed).

The underlying perspective of the "it's too nice to fix" comments probably comes from how many of us use our FG bikes: as rain bikes, commuters, knock-around-town bikes. I know I certainly do. If you were going to convert one of Coppi's Bianchi Specialissimas into a rain bike or god help you, a tarck bike, I'd be the first to grab a torch and pitchfork.

But keep in mind that until the last few years, it was difficult to find a purposely built FG frame with road geometry and bosses for fenders/racks/bottle cages. So if you wanted a fixed gear road bike for commuting/training/whatever, you were left with converting an older road frame.

I think it is all about pedigree. If a nice bike was made for use with gears, it should have gears to fulfill its destiny. To make a really nice bike into fixed, simply so that its ridden, kinda negates the bikes fullest potential. Think of it as a thoroughbred race horse being used to pull a wagon instead of running races. The horse never gets to realize its full potential just like the bike never does. It is the conflict between using something for its intended purpose (with gears) and just using something regardless of its original purpose (fixed).


its better to pull a wagon than be stuck in the stable.

I think it is all about pedigree. If a nice bike was made for use with gears, it should have gears to fulfill its destiny. To make a really nice bike into fixed, simply so that its ridden, kinda negates the bikes fullest potential. Think of it as a thoroughbred race horse being used to pull a wagon instead of running races. The horse never gets to realize its full potential just like the bike never does. It is the conflict between using something for its intended purpose (with gears) and just using something regardless of its original purpose (fixed).

I must admit, this argument does have a certain appeal to me. It's a bit reminiscent of the "order of creation" rules in the Mosaic Law (for example, "you shall not put on a garment made of two different materials" - Leviticus 19:19).

When I was building up my Surly Cross Check (pics (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26382505@N08/sets/72157622590361433/)), even though I had bought the frame to build as a fixed gear bike, on seeing how it looked in Interstate Blue, I had to fight off a strong urge to put on Ultegra components and save it for summer. This gave me some insight into one possible reason that Surly chooses such ugly colors. Of course, the Cross Check is meant to be a utility bike, so I resisted the urge and proceeded with the fixed gear, the rack and the fenders. Now only the non-ugly color violates its true nature.

Nevertheless, even thoroughbreds are eventually put to pasture or dedicated to breeding. A 20-year old steel Colnago maybe still be a thing of beauty and better than most new road bikes even, but when you compare it to its modern offspring, you see that it has lost a step over the years.

I think it is all about pedigree. If a nice bike was made for use with gears, it should have gears to fulfill its destiny. To make a really nice bike into fixed, simply so that its ridden, kinda negates the bikes fullest potential. Think of it as a thoroughbred race horse being used to pull a wagon instead of running races. The horse never gets to realize its full potential just like the bike never does. It is the conflict between using something for its intended purpose (with gears) and just using something regardless of its original purpose (fixed).

by this philosophy, wouldn't the only logical way to fulfill a track frames pedigree to be racing it brakeless an on a velodrome, not with taxi cabs in new york?

he will use that colnogo for its intended purpose, the road.

I prefer to think of it like putting the engine of a VW Bug inside the body of a vintage Maserati or Alfa Romeo. Can you do this, yeah (I think). But why would you? Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

I prefer to think of it like putting the engine of a VW Bug inside the body of a vintage Maserati or Alfa Romeo. Can you do this, yeah (I think). But why would you? Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Ferry Porsche put a vw engine in a sports car and created this:

http://www.ridelust.com/wp-content/uploads/porsche_356_speedster_1_8w.jpg

then they used it agian in this:
http://www.classiccar.com/photopost/data/514/medium/Porsche_912.jpg

and again in this:
http://www.p914.com/p914-resources/p914-paint/p914-paint-1971-6-1510-01.jpg

I prefer to think of it like putting the engine of a VW Bug inside the body of a vintage Maserati or Alfa Romeo. Can you do this, yeah (I think). But why would you? Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

I don't get the correlation. The implication is a fixed is somehow less. Less than a geared bike. Um, not even close. The entire mentality is warped. It's always sad to see reduced mentalities. Sad because reduced mentalities belong to reduced people. I mean, if you purchase a frame and the spirit of the frame indicates to you that it wants to be geared then by all means available you should build a geared bicycle. However, if one feels the frame is destined to be fixed then that is exactly what it should be made to be.

I said in a previous post - owning a bicycle and being a cyclist are not the same things.

I don't get the correlation. The implication is a fixed is somehow less. Less than a geared bike. Um, not even close. The entire mentality is warped. It's always sad to see reduced mentalities. Sad because reduced mentalities belong to reduced people. I mean, if you purchase a frame and the spirit of the frame indicates to you that it wants to be geared then by all means available you should build a geared bicycle. However, if one feels the frame is destined to be fixed then that is exactly what it should be made to be.

I said in a previous post - owning a bicycle and being a cyclist are not the same things.

Maybe my analogy was not entirely proper, but if you can't get the gist of my argument, then I'd say you're pretty "warped" with a "reduced mentality". Is it really that hard to grasp?


Ferry Porsche put a vw engine in a sports car and created this:

did any of those cars have the engine of a stock VW Bug in them? I kinda doubt it. But for the sake of my argument, substitute in the engine of Camry.

did any of those cars have the engine of a stock VW Bug in them? I kinda doubt it.

the early 356 had basically stock beetle engines, chassis ,and suspension because money was tight and these parts were available, as time went on (mid-late 50s) vw parts were slowly replaced.

the 912 and 914 used flat fours based off the vw mill, again, for economic reasons.

I got your point, i was just playin

Because it is fun and in Tokyo, there are very few hills, so gears aren't really necessary, Also when i first started riding fixed, i noticed that my spin and stroke were getting better so I stuck with it.

Now it's all I ride.

With regard to the nice frame conversion question.

There are plenty of horizontal dropout frames with a good quality out there, so the need to convert a road frame is not so much. If they are doing it as a temporary thing, (i.e. using an eno hub and not planning on cutting off the cable stops) then more power to you. Often there are people who get their hands on a really nice old bike with good old components and want in on the cool FG hipster thing, and want to butcher the frame. That is usually when we complain and say no!!!!!!

But for the sake of my argument, substitute in the engine of Camry.

2007 toyota concept, engine, out of a camry:
http://www.diseno-art.com/images_2/Toyota_FT-HS_Hybrid_Sports_Concept.jpg

I prefer to think of it like putting the engine of a VW Bug inside the body of a vintage Maserati or Alfa Romeo. Can you do this, yeah (I think). But why would you? Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

It's probably more akin to putting a flat 6 3.2L Porsche 911 turbo Engine in a VW camper van....

I have no problem with that!!! It's very fun actually!

It's probably more akin to putting a flat 6 3.2L Porsche 911 turbo Engine in a VW camper van....

I have no problem with that!!! It's very fun actually!

haha your the man

i also agree with you. i started ridding ss and that alone made me stronger. now all i ride is fixed on a frame with vertical dropouts. (white ind hub and all the hangers in tact)