Singlespeed & Fixed Gear - Is there any advantage of fg over ss?

Is there any advantage in the fixed gear as opposed to the single speed? does the fixed wheel give some sort of added snowball effect? or is it just random fun?

I may be doing a century fixed, but I will definitely used the ss side when I hit the downhill of the mountains.

if you need to ask, you don't deserve to know. it's like... talking about fight club. :rolleyes:

they're fun, they're good for training, they're good city/commuter bikes as there's the least amount of stuff to steal/break, they're good messenger bikes as you can balance stuff on the bars and still slow down without direct access to brake levers, they're good for winter bikes because they keep you pedaling no matter what help keep you warm/your HR up, so on, so forth.

unless you want to keep flip/flopping every downhill you reach, just pick one and stick with it. or, go fixed, and when it's absolutely necessary switched to ss, and continue that for the rest of the ride.

otherwise, HTFU and just do it. post results when you're done!

You just have to ride them both to feel the difference. I guess fixed you feel more "connected" to the bike, man and machine become one. Also, there's that extra momentum of the wheel to push you up and down hills. And you can track stand without a rear brake of course :P

You just have to ride them both to feel the difference. I guess fixed you feel more "connected" to the bike, man and machine become one. Also, there's that extra momentum of the wheel to push you up and down hills. And you can track stand without a rear brake of course :P

I'm not flipflopping my wheel every time I hit a downhill. I am biking to the oregon coast which has hills that a person on a bike could easily hit 50-70 mph definitely not suited for a fixie unless you have a death wish.

Also good for winter/poor weather bikes because you get direct feedback from the rear wheel as far as traction.

do it single speed.

unless there are major stretches of flats too, on the up-hill, you'll be pedaling constantly. on the downhill, you won't want to be pedaling. hell, even on extended flats, as long as you're determined, you can keep your cadence up.

i don't know how much distance fixed riding you've done, but imo, doing a century on terrain that you know to be intensely hilly sounds like a recipe for having a bad time. don't french fry, when you should pizza (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0MyMjkQ0Gc), or you're gonna have a bad time.

To put it in perspective, at one time, EVERY bicycle was fixed gear. When freewheels first appeared, they were considered a HUGE (and extra-cost) improvement over the then-standard fixed gear bikes.
It was easy to tell who had freewheels and very soon thereafter, coaster BRAKES on their bikes, as they were the ones who passed you going downhill while their feet were motionless.
Riders of the day reported greatly reduced fatigue, and greater distances possible in a day because of the ability to coast.
Even on level ground, the practice of alternately pedaling then coasting is a restful rhythm which I have found to work well for me on centuries.
While I would consider a single-speed bike, I view a fixed gear as a sort of anachronism, with a very small niche in which it has some useful benefits (mentioned in previous posts).
From a practical perspective, I would vastly prefer a single-speed with either hand brakes or (rarely mentioned anymore), a coaster brake.
The coaster brake seems to me to be a mechanically elegant solution, combining the clean lines of a fixed-gear with the ability to both stop better AND to coast when conditions allow.

the only time where a FG is truly advantageous, and not just about preference, is when it's cold enough that the pawls in the freewheel will stick or become frozen.

And that's only during a very cold winter, like -40 degrees, or a very wet and cold winter.

Nope, no particular advantage to Fixed for long distance cruising. I have done 20mph centuries both ways (FG, SS), and (obviously) it is a lot easier if you can coast.

If you are doing a time trial, there is an argument that fixed has an advantage, as your average speed may be higher; coastable bikes tend to have both higher top speed, and lower minimum speed - the lower minimum speed is what kills your average.

don't french fry, when you should pizza (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0MyMjkQ0Gc), or you're gonna have a bad time.

Wisdom.

. And you can track stand without a rear brake of course

you need a rear brake to trackstand a freewheel?

the only time where a FG is truly advantageous, and not just about preference, is when it's cold enough that the pawls in the freewheel will stick or become frozen.

And that's only during a very cold winter, like -40 degrees, or a very wet and cold winter.

This.

Having a freewheel go kaput out in the woods on a cold night is a pain in the butt. Walking sucks.

I ride singlespeed freewheel. The advantages that I get out of having a freewheel are as follows:

1) You can corner fast and hard, without any concern at all about pedal strike. This is very handy in cases where you have to take sudden unexpected evasive maneuvers.
2) Go as fast as you want downhill. I've seen a lot of guys disengage from the pedals and rest their feet on the downtube on downhills, but the problem with that is if you have to brake hard suddenly, you're in a bad position: really hard to get your weight far enough back to brake hard (assuming a front brake), maintain balance and not go ass-over-teakettle.
3) Jumping curbs, giant potholes and other hazards is a lot easier at speed. It's not that you can't do this fixed, it's just way easier with a freewheel.
4) Generally, you can get away with a bit more gain in your drive train if that's your thing.
5) Generally, the ability to coast allows you to maintain a very quiet body in situations that require finesse (hard cornering, precise evasive maneuvering, hopping/landing obstacles, emergency braking where you must shift your weight behind the saddle.)

The disadvantages:

1) track standing at stop lights requires a bit more skill with a freewheel - particularly if you are stopped on a downhill, but you can do it.
2) I hear a lot of fixed riders talk about being more "one with the bike" this bears some water to my mind, but I also think that if you are doing a lot of coasting with a freewheel, you're probably geared way too low.
3) Some of your fixed gear friends will give you crap, although I haven't gotten much guff.

I think some fixed riding will probably result in becoming a better cyclist to some extent, but you can also become a better cyclist just by riding your bike. I have noticed that I tend to ride much faster than most fixed gear riders I see, though not all. I think the advantages of a freewheel open up that door.

As far as a freewheel going kaput goes: I've never had it happen, but I also ride with a White Industries freewheel, which is much higher quality than the average freewheel. I also don't ride dirt, which is harder on freewheels than street riding.

Fixed is more fun and exciting.

I ride strictly for pleasure though, not to actually do things so take my opinion with a grain of salt.

A fixed drivetrain does give you some help on climbs (compared to the same ratio with a freewheel), since the momentum of the wheel keeps your pedals going around. I'd say the same is true on flats, once you start getting tired. For riding long distances, I like the constant rhythm of a fixed gear, but it may just be that I'm used to it. I admittedly haven't done much riding with a SS freewheel, but IMHO it's some of the worst aspects of a geared drivetrain and a fixed drivetrain, without the benefits of either (momentum or variable gearing). Offroad is another story, but I'm assuming you're talking road here.
Incidentally, long, steep descents on a fixed gear don't require a death wish, they just require a front brake (or two brakes even). Same goes for cornering, although if you have a high bottom bracket, short cranks, low q-factor, and low-profile pedals, you can corner harder than most of your geared friends and still avoid a pedal strike.
Personally, I definitely wouldn't want to bother with flipping a wheel during a century. Just ride the ride. If you're talking about switching to a freewheel and switching to a different gear and so on, well, I heard of this cool modern device that can switch between a whole bunch of different sized cogs and even chainrings, too, using a lever so you don't even have to stop riding.... ;)
Yeah, you're probably going to get dropped if there are long straight descents. But you might be surprised; not everyone is comfortable going top speed downhill, so you might still have some company. And if it's a curvy or bumpy descent, that means that everyone else's top speed is reduced, so you might not lose so much ground after all. But you're still just as dropped if you had stopped to flip your wheel and they didn't want to wait up. ;)

I just like to have fun, be it singlespeed or fixed gear.

Is there any advantage in the fixed gear as opposed to the single speed?

I may be doing a century fixed, but I will definitely used the ss side when I hit the downhill of the mountains.

That's why they invented geared (multi-speed derailleur) bikes. Neither SS or FG is optimal for general distance riding under varied conditions (wind and hills). Use the proper tools for the job at hand.

fixed is so much more fun the ss. Like sebster said you just feel connected to the bike. I also run clipless so i feel like im literally connected to the bike. Its a great way to switch up training for the road and i feel like it makes you a better rider. If your doing a hilly century i would go ss, although i love going up hills cranking such a big gear. Going down is a different story i had to get off the bike today because my legs themselves couldn't slow me enough. I only got off once and walked it for about 40 feet. but after that you get used to slowing and anticipating the downhills. you can always just get a flipflop or two separate rear wheels one fixed one coaster.

i also agree that a fixed drivetrain will help on the flats, you can take little brakes and just let the bike spin, and you retain most of your speed as long as your tires aren't crap.

In general, the difference is pretty clear. No, you wont get some magical added inertia that helps you complete the ride.

In the ways of advice, dont do it fixed. There is more reason not to, than for, if any reasons at all to do it fixed. You are going for long distance and coasting will be like heaven. The pro's for fixed riding are almost non-existant in terms of going for long rides, especially with down hills.

A fixed drivetrain does give you some help on climbs (compared to the same ratio with a freewheel), since the momentum of the wheel keeps your pedals going around. I'd say the same is true on flats, once you start getting tired.

It sounds like you are suggesting that a fixed-gear drive train works like a perpetual motion machine, a concept that has been overwhelmingly determined as bunk by the scientific community. The purpose of a bicycle, fixed or otherwise is not to turn the cranks, but rather, to move the bicycle forward. If you are relying on the flywheel momentum stored in your wheelset/and forward momentum to move your pedals forward you are using that inertia to turn the cranks ... this will not speed you up or assist in climbs. it will slow you down. The purpose of a bicycle drive train is to deliver power from the cranks to the wheelset—not the other way around, the only exception to this is when you are applying backpedal pressure to slow down on a fixed-gear drivetrain.


Same goes for cornering, although if you have a high bottom bracket, short cranks, low q-factor, and low-profile pedals, you can corner harder than most of your geared friends and still avoid a pedal strike.

Dude, a fixed gear drivetrain increases your risk of pedal strike, period. Pedal strike is a relatively rare occurrence on any drivetrain, but I can assure you that it is an experience you don't ever want to have, particularly at speed. You can ride shorter cranks (increasing gain) and a higher BB to slightly allay that risk and put some more distance between your pedals and the pavement, but that does nothing to solve the fact that you cannot prevent the cranks from turning while you corner. Sure, you can time your turn if it is short enough such that your inside crank is at its highest point during the apex of your turn ... provided you have enough time to control the timing of your maneuver (rarely the case in an emergency). You can also lean into the turn and keep your bike more upright (a-la Moto GP Racing) to prevent pedal strike on a fixie ... but that's much easier if you can control your crank positions (or at least have an undersized frame that you can thow around between your legs more easily).

It sounds like you are suggesting that a fixed-gear drive train works like a perpetual motion machine, a concept that has been overwhelmingly determined as bunk by the scientific community. The purpose of a bicycle, fixed or otherwise is not to turn the cranks, but rather, to move the bicycle forward. If you are relying on the flywheel momentum stored in your wheelset/and forward momentum to move your pedals forward you are using that inertia to turn the cranks ... this will not speed you up or assist in climbs. it will slow you down. The purpose of a bicycle drive train is to deliver power from the cranks to the wheelset—not the other way around, the only exception to this is when you are applying backpedal pressure to slow down on a fixed-gear drivetrain.

Riding fixed uphill is easier because the momentum carries you through a very small portion of the cycle that is hard to pedal through (i.e. the "dead zone" or something). Obviously people aren't suggesting that fixed gear somehow makes you go uphill without any increased pedaling effort because of the momentum.

It sounds like you are suggesting that a fixed-gear drive train works like a perpetual motion machine, a concept that has been overwhelmingly determined as bunk by the scientific community. The purpose of a bicycle, fixed or otherwise is not to turn the cranks, but rather, to move the bicycle forward. If you are relying on the flywheel momentum stored in your wheelset/and forward momentum to move your pedals forward you are using that inertia to turn the cranks ... this will not speed you up or assist in climbs. it will slow you down. The purpose of a bicycle drive train is to deliver power from the cranks to the wheelset—not the other way around, the only exception to this is when you are applying backpedal pressure to slow down on a fixed-gear drivetrain.

Yes, that is true... but on a bicycle, you do not have the same power output throughout the entire circle. The top/bottom of the pedal stroke is almost a "dead" spot, relative to the force you can apply from the 10:00/2:00 position. And at very low RPMs, you have very little leverage to get you over the top. Good climbing technique at higher RPMs means keeping up with the pedals so that back pressure never happens, at which point it's completely irrelevant whether your drivetrain is fixed or not. But at lower RPMs that becomes less feasible, and the fixed drivetrain helps keep the pedals going through the weaker parts of your pedal stroke so that you can apply power as you're able. And even at higher RPMs, it means that you can get sloppier in your technique (read: tired) and still keep the RPMs higher, because you get a split second of recovery time mid-stroke, which keeps your legs feeling fresher. It's a small difference, but it is there and noticeable. Basically, you're not getting perpetual motion machine benefits, but you are still benefitting due to the biomechanics of pedalling.


[QUOTE**
Dude, a fixed gear drivetrain increases your risk of pedal strike, period. Pedal strike is a relatively rare occurrence on any drivetrain, but I can assure you that it is an experience you don't ever want to have, particularly at speed. You can ride shorter cranks (increasing gain) and a higher BB to slightly allay that risk and put some more distance between your pedals and the pavement, but that does nothing to solve the fact that you cannot prevent the cranks from turning while you corner. Sure, you can time your turn if it is short enough such that your inside crank is at its highest point during the apex of your turn ... provided you have enough time to control the timing of your maneuver (rarely the case in an emergency). You can also lean into the turn and keep your bike more upright (a-la Moto GP Racing) to prevent pedal strike on a fixie ... but that's much easier if you can control your crank positions (or at least have an undersized frame that you can thow around between your legs more easily).[/QUOTE]

Yes, all else being equal, you can always avoid a pedal strike if you can coast, and if you can't coast, you might not be able to. However, if you put the pedal at the bottom and lean the bike over until the pedal touches the ground, you'll see how far you can lean and therefore how hard you can corner. If it's at the point where cornering that hard would mean you'd lose traction and wipe out, then a pedal strike is really the least of your worries at that point, isn't it?
The likelihood of pedal strikes has plenty to do with how far down your pedals stick out, even on a bike that can coast. If you're used to being able to pedal through most corners with impunity and you suddenly get on a bike with long cranks and a wide q-factor, you're in just as much trouble if you forget. I've struck my pedals a number of times both on geared bikes and on fixed bikes, but for me at least it happens more when I've been riding a bike with more clearance and switch to one with less. It's never happened just because I couldn't coast. In my experience, emergency maneuvers tend to be swerves or accelerating or slamming on the brakes; most places where unexpected things happen that you need to avoid don't offer enough room to actually make the kind of 90-degree turn that would mean striking your pedal anyway.

In general, the difference is pretty clear. No, you wont get some magical added inertia that helps you complete the ride.

In the ways of advice, dont do it fixed. There is more reason not to, than for, if any reasons at all to do it fixed. You are going for long distance and coasting will be like heaven. The pro's for fixed riding are almost non-existant in terms of going for long rides, especially with down hills.

+1

That is a pretty good summary. I've done it both ways (SS & FG), and it is a lot easier if you can coast. Kinda depends what mood I am in, and the terrain. If you are riding in a pack with any elevation change Fixed is going to have a different rythm and it will be much harder to stay with the pack.

I’ve flipped the wheel at rest brakes – done half fixed, and the next half free (which is obviously a lot easier). Flippin the wheel is no big deal.
Fixie is about feel, not efficiency. People do it because they like it. If you don’t like it, don’t do it (although it does take a while to re-learn biking and begin to appreciate it).

don't french fry, when you should pizza

+1 this made me laugh

To put it in perspective, at one time, EVERY bicycle was fixed gear. When freewheels first appeared, they were considered a HUGE (and extra-cost) improvement over the then-standard fixed gear bikes.
It was easy to tell who had freewheels and very soon thereafter, coaster BRAKES on their bikes, as they were the ones who passed you going downhill while their feet were motionless.
Riders of the day reported greatly reduced fatigue, and greater distances possible in a day because of the ability to coast.
Even on level ground, the practice of alternately pedaling then coasting is a restful rhythm which I have found to work well for me on centuries.
While I would consider a single-speed bike, I view a fixed gear as a sort of anachronism, with a very small niche in which it has some useful benefits (mentioned in previous posts).
From a practical perspective, I would vastly prefer a single-speed with either hand brakes or (rarely mentioned anymore), a coaster brake.
The coaster brake seems to me to be a mechanically elegant solution, combining the clean lines of a fixed-gear with the ability to both stop better AND to coast when conditions allow.

Great post. I've been wondering why "fixed gear" seems to have become synonymous with "single-speed". When, how and why did this happen? And, why is it that you never see coaster brakes except on cruisers (this coming from a cruiser rider and partisan) and nothing really lightweight? That seems to be an obvious combination. Granted, a front brake would be needed for safety (I had the chain jump the ring on a rental cruiser I was riding at a pretty good clip, and that was scary. Fortunately, I was on a flat stretch and not a hill, since no chain on a coaster brake means no brakes), but that's also the case for fixed gear bikes.

A single speed doesn't have the advantages of neither a geared bike nor a fixed gear. In other words it sukcs, unless its a cruiser for cruising around town.

The problem with coaster brakes is that they're relatively heavy, and they act only on the rear wheel. You have the most stopping power in the front, on ANY vehicle, because the more you decelerate, the more of your weight goes to the front. Your maximum rate of deceleration from either wheel is achieved just before the wheel locks up (that's the point of anti-lock brakes); that point occurs much, much sooner in back than in front because the more you decelerate, the less traction it has. In the front, the more you decelerate, the more weight is up there, and you get more traction. It's still useful to have two brakes, but the front is by far the most important of the two. (it's also good to know instinctively which hand operates which brake). And of course, you noticed the problem of what happens if the chain falls off.... :P
Cruisers are good candidates for coaster brakes because they're relatively heavy already; they're generally not ridden as fast; they generally have long wheelbases and more of the weight farther behind the front wheel; coaster brakes need minimal maintenance and cruisers are often ridden by people who don't want to bother with maintenance; and they're often ridden by people who aren't comfortable with hand brakes (there are lots of reasons for that, but that's another story).

On a related note, why does "fixed gear" so often seem to be synonymous with brakeless? Whether or not you have rim brakes, disc brakes, rod brakes, drum brake, or a cinder block on a rope to drop when you want to slow down, has nothing to do with whether your drivetrain has a freewheel or not.

To get back to the original question, it's slightly nutty to go on a long, hilly ride on a bike with only one gear now that modern bikes have so many different ways of getting variable gearing. But it's really only slightly nutty, and it's certainly possible to do it and have a good time whether it's a SS or a fixed gear. Do what you think you'll enjoy more. But please use at least a front brake, whichever way you go.

ya not looking like a ElevenTeen year old girl oh daddy bike.

http://joanharvest.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/squirrel.jpeg

I just switched to fixed, and it's only mildly terrifying. What are you waiting for?

I just switched to fixed, and it's only mildly terrifying. What are you waiting for?

well thats my new signature...hahaha

..

Just try each, see which ride you prefer, then go with that.
I tried FG for 2 months, didn't like it as much as SS, so just went back.

Yes, that is true... but on a bicycle, you do not have the same power output throughout the entire circle. The top/bottom of the pedal stroke is almost a "dead" spot, relative to the force you can apply from the 10:00/2:00 position. And at very low RPMs, you have very little leverage to get you over the top. Good climbing technique at higher RPMs means keeping up with the pedals so that back pressure never happens, at which point it's completely irrelevant whether your drivetrain is fixed or not. But at lower RPMs that becomes less feasible, and the fixed drivetrain helps keep the pedals going through the weaker parts of your pedal stroke so that you can apply power as you're able. And even at higher RPMs, it means that you can get sloppier in your technique (read: tired) and still keep the RPMs higher, because you get a split second of recovery time mid-stroke, which keeps your legs feeling fresher. It's a small difference, but it is there and noticeable. Basically, you're not getting perpetual motion machine benefits, but you are still benefitting due to the biomechanics of pedalling.


If you need a fixed gear to help you through the dead spot at any speed or cadence, then you aren't pedaling properly.

Yes, that is true... but on a bicycle, you do not have the same power output throughout the entire circle. The top/bottom of the pedal stroke is almost a "dead" spot, relative to the force you can apply from the 10:00/2:00 position. And at very low RPMs, you have very little leverage to get you over the top. Good climbing technique at higher RPMs means keeping up with the pedals so that back pressure never happens, at which point it's completely irrelevant whether your drivetrain is fixed or not. But at lower RPMs that becomes less feasible, and the fixed drivetrain helps keep the pedals going through the weaker parts of your pedal stroke so that you can apply power as you're able. And even at higher RPMs, it means that you can get sloppier in your technique (read: tired) and still keep the RPMs higher, because you get a split second of recovery time mid-stroke, which keeps your legs feeling fresher. It's a small difference, but it is there and noticeable. Basically, you're not getting perpetual motion machine benefits, but you are still benefitting due to the biomechanics of pedalling.

This is wrong and actually slightly backwards. The only momentum that matters in this situation is the momentum of the rider and the bike. If you're rolling forward then you're rolling forward, and it takes basically no energy to move your feet through the "dead" spot. If you think about it the difference between a fixed and a freewheeling bike is that the pedals can transmit a decelerating force to the bike. Ergo, when you're slacking off at the top/bottom of the pedal stroke and letting momentum turn the cranks you're effectively backpedaling.

The equivalent on a freewheeling bike is when you get sloppy and you can feel the freewheel re-engaging as you turn the cranks over. The difference is that it's more obvious and you're not wasting the momentum you already have.

Fixed gears don't help you climb, they just let you feel smoother than you are while letting you slow yourself down.

A single speed doesn't have the advantages of neither a geared bike nor a fixed gear. In other words it sukcs, unless its a cruiser for cruising around town.

Care to back that claim up with some evidence?

Advantages of a singlespeed drivetrain over gears:

- No derailleurs to maintain.
- Less weight thanks to no detailers, a single chainring and no cassette.
- A more durable bike.
- A simplified drive train without the additional resistance provided by the upper/lower jockey wheels required by a derailleur system.
- No need for asymmetrical wheel dishing to accommodate a cassette, resulting in more durable wheelsets.
- Can still coast.

Advantages of a singlespeed drivetrain over fixed:

- I can coast down hills as fast as I want.
- I can keep an absolutely silent core while braking hard and shifting my weight back as far as possible (since I can stop my feet while maintaining rear traction at high speed).
- All of my energy goes to moving the the bike forward and none of my bicycle's (forward or wheelspin) momentum ever gets wasted on lifting up my feet.
- I can spin rpms well into the red zone of my body's capabilities, without worrying about having to keep up with the pedals or being knocked off balance by them if I lose steam.
- I am generally more nimble thanks to my ability to stop and start my cranks at any moment I want, in any position I want.

Yeah. Singlespeeds suck. Whatever am I thinking "cruising around" NYC traffic on my singlespeed drive train.

As far as the dead-zone goes: you are still translating your bike's momentum into pedal momentum, which is energy going the wrong way. It is no harder to continue cycling in the dead zone on a singlespeed, you're just much less likely to lose any energy to bad cycling technique when you are tired. If the dead zone is a problem for you on climbs, you are not strong enough for the gain in your drivetrain given the terrain you are riding on.

Care to back that claim up with some evidence?

Advantages of a singlespeed drivetrain over gears:

- No derailleurs to maintain.
- Less weight thanks to no detailers, a single chainring and no cassette.
- A more durable bike.
- A simplified drive train without the additional resistance provided by the upper/lower jockey wheels required by a derailleur system.
- No need for asymmetrical wheel dishing to accommodate a cassette, resulting in more durable wheelsets.
- Can still coast.

Advantages of a singlespeed drivetrain over fixed:

- I can coast down hills as fast as I want.
- I can keep an absolutely silent core while braking hard and shifting my weight back as far as possible (since I can stop my feet while maintaining rear traction at high speed).
- All of my energy goes to moving the the bike forward and none of my bicycle's (forward or wheelspin) momentum ever gets wasted on lifting up my feet.
- I can spin rpms well into the red zone of my body's capabilities, without worrying about having to keep up with the pedals or being knocked off balance by them if I lose steam.
- I am generally more nimble thanks to my ability to stop and start my cranks at any moment I want, in any position I want.

Yeah. Singlespeeds suck. Whatever am I thinking "cruising around" NYC traffic on my singlespeed drive train.

As far as the dead-zone goes: you are still translating your bike's momentum into pedal momentum, which is energy going the wrong way. It is no harder to continue cycling in the dead zone on a singlespeed, you're just much less likely to lose any energy to bad cycling technique when you are tired. If the dead zone is a problem for you on climbs, you are not strong enough for the gain in your drivetrain given the terrain you are riding on.

This.

It just seems that for most people, most of the time, a non-fixed singlespeed makes more sense than fixed. You gain more in practicality and convenience than you lose in simplicity. For that matter and for the same reasons, an IGH probably makes more sense than a dearailleur. I guess that the maximum the possible performance (as measured by mechanical efficiency) is going to be greater with the fixed or derailleur solutions - an advantage that probably shows up only with ideal technique (fixed gear) and optimum adjustment of equipment (derailleur).

Help me out folks; does this make sense?

Singlespeed has more advantages.

But fixed can be more fun.

So it depends on what you're doing.

/thread

If you cant make the summit you havent earned the descent. ...maybe that doesnt apply as well to road bikes as compared to mountain. But, as for me, give me a fixed gear!

That's why they invented geared (multi-speed derailleur) bikes. Neither SS or FG is optimal for general distance riding under varied conditions (wind and hills). Use the proper tools for the job at hand.

That's more things that can break. I commute with my fixed. It has to be reliable.

On flats i see a somewhat snowball effect, momentum gaining you forward. I came from a heavy bmx background.

That's more things that can break. I commute with my fixed. It has to be reliable.

I was responding to the OP who was planning to do a mountainous century. The only time anything has broken on any of my geared bikes has been when I crashed, and this has only occurred in races. I have ridden my geared touring bikes on multi-day camping rides up to 1000 miles through rain and dust w/o any problems beyond flat tires, which can happen with any bike, regardless of the type of gear system. FG bikes are fine for shorter distances and less varied terrain, but my point is that they are not the best choice in this case.

...
On flats i see a somewhat snowball effect, momentum gaining you forward...

Wha...?

I fail to see the point of SS without fixed gear. I guess it'll be more reliable without derailleurs, but other than that, why not just buy a road bike?! If they invented a fixed gear casette for multi speeds I would buy it.

SS just looks sleek... you dont get the FG feel or effect, so its rather stupid IMHO. All the kids on campus went out and got SS bikes cuase they wanted to pretend to be cool without having to learn to ride FG.

I fail to see the point of SS without fixed gear. I guess it'll be more reliable without derailleurs, but other than that, why not just buy a road bike?! If they invented a fixed gear casette for multi speeds I would buy it.

SS just looks sleek... you dont get the FG feel or effect, so its rather stupid IMHO. All the kids on campus went out and got SS bikes cuase they wanted to pretend to be cool without having to learn to ride FG.
It's cheap. I live somewhere flat. Road bike would be stolen.

RABBLERABBLERABBLE

I fail to see the point of SS without fixed gear. I guess it'll be more reliable without derailleurs, but other than that, why not just buy a road bike?! If they invented a fixed gear casette for multi speeds I would buy it.

SS just looks sleek... you dont get the FG feel or effect, so its rather stupid IMHO. All the kids on campus went out and got SS bikes cuase they wanted to pretend to be cool without having to learn to ride FG.

I beg to differ. I had two bikes set up as fixed gears, put a freewheel on one last year and I'm building an SS freehub wheel for the other one this winter. A third bike's gone from 5 speed to SS temporarily, and I'll probably make it permanent. I also bought a road bike.

Did you completely miss Cab Chaser's list of advantages of SS over derailleur and fixed gears above?

A fixed gear is just a single speed than can't coast.

All the kids on campus went out and got FG bikes cuase they wanted to pretend to be cool without having to learn to ride a penny farthing.

There. Fixed it for ya.

All the kids on campus most likely went out and got SS bikes, because that made sense to them and they couldn't possibly give less of a **** what the self proclaimed cool kids think of them.

Riding a century, especially a mountainous one, on a single speed bike, is a big challenge. If you're doubtful about keeping up w/ the cadence on the decents, I would just ride the whole thing SS. As already mentioned above, SS has many advantages over fixed gear, just as a geared bike has over a single speed one. The reason behind riding on a single gear is the challenge to yourself. I don't think riding fixed will give you any physical advantage other than remind you that you can't stop pedaling. So in terms of difficulty fixed > SS > gears. So you're already challenging yourself by riding SS instead of a geared bike. If you want even more of a challenge, then ride fixed. Choose the most appropriate one for yourself.

Have ridden a century on both fixed and singlespeed on the same bike over the same mild terrain. 8% was the steepest grade. Was much more depleted at the end of the fixed ride and it took longer. Couldn't freewheel on descends. Worked the brakes front/rear to keep the rims from heating up and causing a blowout. Would I do it again? Yes, as a matter of fact we're doing one this fall. But, I did the singlespeed ride first and I'm glad I did it that way as it, sort of prepared me for the rigors only having one go to gear.

Care to back that claim up with some evidence?

Advantages of a singlespeed drivetrain over gears:

- No derailleurs to maintain.
- Less weight thanks to no detailers, a single chainring and no cassette.
- A more durable bike.
- A simplified drive train without the additional resistance provided by the upper/lower jockey wheels required by a derailleur system.
- No need for asymmetrical wheel dishing to accommodate a cassette, resulting in more durable wheelsets.
- Can still coast.

Advantages of a singlespeed drivetrain over fixed:

- I can coast down hills as fast as I want.
- I can keep an absolutely silent core while braking hard and shifting my weight back as far as possible (since I can stop my feet while maintaining rear traction at high speed).
- All of my energy goes to moving the the bike forward and none of my bicycle's (forward or wheelspin) momentum ever gets wasted on lifting up my feet.
- I can spin rpms well into the red zone of my body's capabilities, without worrying about having to keep up with the pedals or being knocked off balance by them if I lose steam.
- I am generally more nimble thanks to my ability to stop and start my cranks at any moment I want, in any position I want.

Yeah. Singlespeeds suck. Whatever am I thinking "cruising around" NYC traffic on my singlespeed drive train.

As far as the dead-zone goes: you are still translating your bike's momentum into pedal momentum, which is energy going the wrong way. It is no harder to continue cycling in the dead zone on a singlespeed, you're just much less likely to lose any energy to bad cycling technique when you are tired. If the dead zone is a problem for you on climbs, you are not strong enough for the gain in your drivetrain given the terrain you are riding on.

Advantages of a geared bike over SS:
- highest efficiency through gearing for climbing, sprinting, speed
- higher speeds since you don't spin out as readily
- weight is usually a wash since road frames are mostly carbon fiber whereas most SS are aluminum or steel
- can still coast

Advantages of a Fixed over SS:
- can pedal down hills as fast as you want (or can), which will help increase the suppleness of your legs. (disclaimer: not saying it's easy....)
- can brake with a combination of hand brakes and legs, useful if your brakes fail, or your hands slip, or can't grab them in time
- no coasting, which means no wasted energy or momentum while going forward
- no coasting, which will break bad habits of coasting too much
- no coasting, which generally means being more mindful, and more awareness of your riding ability, and technique
- no coasting, which generally means more awareness of your environment and surroundings (eg. traffic, stop signs, etc.)
- the ability to skid
- the ability to ride backwards (hmmm...is this an advantage? lol)
- more challenging

The advantage of a fixed gear drive train is: some people like the way that it feels, it will probably improve pedaling technique if you need help with that (though you can certainly learn how to pedal correctly on just about any bike), and hipsters will think you are cool. Most of the other "advantages" you listed are pretty much bunk.



Advantages of a Fixed over SS:
- can brake with a combination of hand brakes and legs, useful if your brakes fail, or your hands slip, or can't grab them in time


I've never heard of a brake failure, certainly not a double brake failure ... perhaps it happens to people who pay utterly no attention to bike maintenance. But supposing both of my brakes fail on a non-fixed drive train, I could stop myself by jamming my foot between the tire and the seat stays ... which would afford me about the same braking power as a fixed gear bike under the same conditions. If you have problems with your hands slipping while braking ... well ... your drivetrain is probably the least of your concerns.


- no coasting, which means no wasted energy or momentum while going forward


Please explain how coasting wastes energy or momentum while going forward. While coasting, you are not putting more energy into the drive train but neither are you taking any away from it ... as has been exhaustively explained by several people in this thread, one of the primary advantages of a single-speed drivetrain over a fixed is that there is no way to resist your own forward momentum through backpedaling. You are more likely to waste momentum on a fixed gear drivetrain than a singlespeed because a fixed gear permits you to transmit energy from the wheels to the pedals (effectively backpedaling). A singlespeed drive train provides you the CHOICE of coasting or not. If you want to coast, you can if you prefer to always be pedaling you can do that too.

Again: your fixed gear drive train does not magically turn your bike into a perpetual motion machine. There are no perpetual motion machines.



- no coasting, which will break bad habits of coasting too much


As far as bad habits go: a little discipline goes a long way. I'm pretty much pedaling all the time since I like to go fast. the only time I am not pedaling is on very hard turns, while hopping obstacles, and on downhill grades where my speed overtakes my gearing (which is very rare). A singlespeed drive train provides you the CHOICE of coasting or not. If you want to coast, you can if you prefer to always be pedaling you can do that too.




- no coasting, which generally means being more mindful, and more awareness of your riding ability, and technique


This is hogwash: a fixed gear drivetrain will not magically make you more aware of your surroundings, paying attention will. I am in plenty of situations all the time that require utmost care and attentiveness, and I can assure you that a fixed gear drivetrain would not make me any more aware of the consequences of my actions in these or any other situation.



- no coasting, which generally means more awareness of your environment and surroundings (eg. traffic, stop signs, etc.)


Saying it twice doesn't make this claim any less false.



- the ability to skid


Locking up the rear wheel and skidding with a rear brake takes absolutely no effort. In fact ... i'd argue that skidding is WAY easier though caliper braking ... just clamp down on the rear brake and the wheel stops and skids. Whoop-de-do. Most people on singlespeed drivetrains choose not to skid becase: this is the least effective way of stopping on a bike, it damages tires, and it reduces control.



- the ability to ride backwards (hmmm...is this an advantage? lol)


Yes, this is an advantage to riding fixed. Personally, I like seeing where I am going.




- more challenging


Yes, if you consider making cycling a more difficult endeavor a benefit then I suppose that would be a benefit ...

One *real* advantage to riding fixed that you did not mention is that you are able to slow down your bike without having your hands on the handlebars. That is something that cannot be done on a singlespeed drive train. Personally, I like to keep my hands on the bars at all times since the streets are littered with potholes around here and evasive maneuvers are often necessary thanks to careless drivers and spaced-out pedestrians.

Another *real* advantage to riding fixed is that you did not mention is the ability to track stand more easily (related to riding backwards). SS (somewhat) limits your ability to track stand, but you can still do it.