Singlespeed & Fixed Gear - Fixed gear vs cruiser for exercise?

So I currently have 2 bikes:

1. a generic mountain bike with heavy-duty off-road tires. It's only used for trails and in the winter.
2. a Giant Seek 2 - road-oriented hybrid. I put a lot of miles on it riding around my college campus, but it's almost too easy to ride. I can basically cruise 75% of the time.

EDIT: I live in a relatively urban area with a number of suburbs around. So it's a lot of stopping and starting; no long treks down a trail.

Seeing as I love biking and need the exercise, I'm looking into a 3rd bike exclusively for working out. The more difficult it is to pedal, the better - I'm aiming for pure cardio here, so I need to get my heart rate up.

I've decided between two types of bikes: a fixed gear or a cruiser. Keep in mind that this bike is temporary; I'm going abroad next August and will be selling all 3 bikes at that time.

Pros and cons of each:

Fixed gear
+ Bike only moves when you pedal
+ More effective on roads
- More expensive
- Slightly more difficult to find
- Not as good off-road or in bad weather

Cruiser
+ Still pretty difficult to pedal
+ Looks damn cool
+ I can easily buy a decent quality one at Target for ~$130
+ Can ride off-road and in bad weather (at least better than a fixie)
- cruising is still possible (pun intended), so maybe less of a workout?
- could be harder to pedal fast, which may or may not be necessary to increase heart rate (for cardio)


Any thoughts? I'd really like to go for the cruiser, but I am open to be convinced otherwise. Thanks.

I say fixed. Riding a cruiser for exercise is kinda counter-intuitive. Also, fixed gears are great in bad weather. I know plenty of people who prefer them for rain and snow.

stop being lazy if you want a good workout. you don't need a "difficult" bike to get good exercise.

just bike with your rear brake engaged if you want it to be difficult.

If youre working on pure cardio you dont want something hard to pedal. It will spend a lot of energy working your legs musceles, which would take away from your cardio development. What you want is something to spin for long sustained seessions.

Build a fixed gear with a 52/13 gear combo and you'll get your heart rate up plenty...:p

Build a fixed gear with a 52/13 gear combo and you'll get your heart rate up plenty...:p
You'll also mess up your knees in a heart beat. :D

Build a fixed gear with a 52/13 gear combo and you'll get your heart rate up plenty...:p

Make sure to go brakeless and you dont need toe clips.

I bought my Motobecane Track purely for exercise. I run a 46/15 and it makes some of the hills where I live pretty challenging. Riding this bike has really helped with my climbing and endurance when riding my all mountain and DH bike

just bike with your rear brake engaged if you want it to be difficult.
+1. Or ride in the highest gear all the time. Or add weights (to yourself and/or the bike).

Make sure to go brakeless and you dont need toe clips.

Sit on the handlebars and ride backwards...but use a mirror!! Great for balance and strength. And yeah, no brakes for sure.

Sit on the handlebars and ride backwards...but use a mirror!! Great for balance and strength. And yeah, no brakes for sure.
I'm sorry, but I think sitting on the top tube and putting both feet on the drive side pedal is a much better work out.

No bike is harder to pedal than any other bike. Some just allow you to ride faster than others. If your Giant Seek 2 is too easy to ride, shift into a higher gear and go faster

but it's almost too easy to ride. I can basically cruise 75% of the time.

The bike is not to blame, you just aren't working hard enough. Unless you're spinning out in the highest gear (which is very doubtful) you just need to pump those pedals more and work if you want to get in shape.

The more difficult it is to pedal, the better - I'm aiming for pure cardio here, so I need to get my heart rate up.
If I understand this whole gearing thing correctly, this is wrong. I think you are actually wanting a lower gear. Lower gearing (easier to pedal) will cause you to spin faster, therefore getting more cardio benefit. Higher gearing (harder to pedal) is more in line with resistance training. Like Kayce said, but differently.

The only reason why a beach cruiser is harder to pedals it's because of the ridiculously low saddle height, riding at a low saddle height will damage your knees. Also, you exert the most power when your leg is fully extended and you can't extend your leg through a complete crank rotation on a cruiser. You will not be comfortable if you are on a cruiser for a long time.

Fixed gears are better for riding in slippery condition, because you can feel and control how your wheel is reacting to the slippery road. You could just get some studded tires for the snow/ice or cross tires for some trial riding.
Also, the harder to pedal, the worst, it will damage your knees in the long run. If you want to work on your cardio; spin, spin a low gearing for a long duration.

Cruisers aren't practical, sure they may look good, but that's all not much versatility.

You came to a FG/SS forum asking if you should get a fixie or a cruiser...you're probably going to get somewhat biased answers. Either way, I say fixed gear.

+1. Or ride in the highest gear all the time. Or add weights (to yourself and/or the bike).

What this guy said. Biking with 25 lbs extra in my schoolbag(textbooks and miscellaneous items) is much more difficult than biking with not extra weight. Though I doubt its very good for my back.

I say cruiser, if you can add foot retention.

It has never made sense to me for people to ride the lightest, most efficient bikes for 'exercise'. Seems to me you should ride the heaviest, least efficient bike to make the most out of your workout time. I mean, people who lift weights don't do it with tiny little carbon fiber bar-bells, right?

The foot retention caveat is because you work more of your leg muscles when you can pull up as well as push down.

^no, it makes no difference how heavy your bike is. "It never gets easier, you just get faster."

The analogy to weight lifting does not work at all. When lifting weights, add more weight is how you increase resistance. On a bike, shifting gears is how you increase resistance. You can pedal a 100 lb bike at 5mph or you can pedal a 17lb bike at 20mph, you'll be doing the exact same amount of work. (disclaimer: numbers picked at random, I didn't do any actual math)

There's actually this 10+ page argument between sickvermin and umd on this exact topic in Fitness & Training. It ended badly

Get a fixed gear set up with a low ratio (44x17 or 44x19) and spin the hell out of it.

It may or may not be better exercise than riding a cruiser, but it's certainly cooler and way, way more fun.

way more fun.
Not to be discounted.

Most people I know who are fit and ride FG don't ride for exercise, it's just a fringe benefit.

Riding a big, heavy, slow cruiser is boring, so you won't want to do it as often.

yes, don't ride a bike that will turn you off of riding.

And again, cardio won't come from a bike that's harder to pedal, it will come from riding a lot and spinning at a high cadence.

Cruiser vs SS/FG, depends upon how far you ride and how often ? Just around the neighborhood, the cruiser is comfortable and may be the weapon of choice for riding the bike more often. If you do 20+ miles, the SS/FG more often gets you there & back faster, so it'll definitely be a bike you prefer to ride more often. As for getting in shape, I think the mountain bike you already have will do what anyone you have or are considering to get will do. The myb is heavy and has the same rolling resistance and gearing a cruiser will have, so in that regard, pedaling 38 lbs of bike will build leg strength. The gearing will also get the cadence/rpm work you need that both a SS/FG & cruiser will do. I have 3 bikes, a vintage 12 spd road, a SS/FG and atb/mtb. The atb is more comfortable obviously, but it does everything the other 2 do in terms of training and fitness, only slower and longer. And by that, I've ridden the same 30+ mile loop with all 3 bikes, the atb keeps me out riding the same distance longer. My cadence can be identical in certain gears, so cardio workout is actually better on the atb, as I will ride the bike for about 10 minutes longer. As for leg strength, the 38 lbs of bike in a hard gear with fat knobbies with more rolling resistance, no doubt pushing all 3 bikes just as hard, the atb will get me into better shape.

And by that, I've ridden the same 30+ mile loop with all 3 bikes, the atb keeps me out riding the same distance longer ... no doubt pushing all 3 bikes just as hard, the atb will get me into better shape.
This discrepancy is solved by not limiting yourself to riding the same distances.

If you push yourself just at equal efforts on a MTB vs a road FG, the FG will go faster. You're doing the same amount of work, just covering more ground.
If you do either for an hour, you're getting the same workout, you'll just have gone farther on the FG than the MTB.

Pick the one you'll have the most fun riding, because otherwise it's entirely a wash (unless you're interested in singletrack or real MTB type riding, which I'd posit is a better full-body workout than regular road riding).

dsh, since an mtb has higher gi than most SS/FG's, weighs 15+ lbs more and has more rolling resistance, an hour on each regardless of what the final distance is will still be more workload on the mtb. And that translates into getting on a SS/FG or road bike for a ride after training with a mtb. Try it for yourself for a 30 mile loop or even an hour on either. I know after riding the mtb hard for a week or two hard, the next ride I do on either the SS/FG or vintage road bike, feels incredibly easier, almost like a vacation.

the point isn't to have the bike drain your energy. You can get the same workout on the road/FG bike and go faster too

the point isn't to have the bike drain your energy, but for you to push harder.

If the bike is draining your energy, you are pushing it harder. And that is the point of training for strength and endurance, the harder you work your body and the more exhausted you are, your fitness increases and improves. Training for any sport is like that, you're supposed to work your muscles until they fail, lactic acid buildup, "no pain, no gain" ?

If youre working on pure cardio you dont want something hard to pedal. It will spend a lot of energy working your legs musceles, which would take away from your cardio development. What you want is something to spin for long sustained seessions.

+1.

Work on spinning and going fast, not making it "hard to pedal." One will exercise your heart, the other will exercise your legs. It doesn't take a doctor to figure out which.

If the bike is draining your energy, you are pushing it harder. And that is the point of training for strength and endurance, the harder you work your body and the more exhausted you are, your fitness increases and improves. Training for any sport is like that, you're supposed to work your muscles until they fail, lactic acid buildup, "no pain, no gain" ?

I edited my post before you responded. Speed is big part of riding bikes, is it not? You don't need the bike to drain your energy, wind resistance does that pretty well. A heavy laggy bike also makes riding a lot less enjoyable, who the hell wants that?

this is a dumb argument. you can work your ass off on any bike. you'll just cover more distance and do it faster on a better bike.

You can only use these pedals on a cruiser, brah.

http://i639.photobucket.com/albums/uu111/chrislivingston07/image002.jpg

that's going on my brakeless fixie

I think the OP is This guy. Or maybe related to him. (http://www.bikeforums.net/../showthread.php?618706-A-Real-Mans-Bike)

You want a hard to pedal bike, take one of your existing rides and get a bag of shot, or maybe fishing weights (http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=857756) fill seat tube, still too light, fill a couple water bottles up.

Cheapest way to do what it seems like you want to do is get a Heart Rate Monitor. Figure out your max. Do a google search for a good percentage of max you need for a good work out and always keep your heart rate there while riding.

Try intervals too. City riding with lots of stoplights is kinda like poorly executed intervals if you totally hammer it from one light to the next.

Almost every city or suburb has a good place to get in 20 miles or so with limited lights. Keep an eye out for a group of overweight dudes in their 40s on $6000 roadbikes wearing lycra. Follow them and you're bound to find it.

dsh, since an mtb has higher gi than most SS/FG's,
This is the silliest thing I've ever heard. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was a typo.


an hour on each regardless of what the final distance is will still be more workload on the mtb.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/9/a/e/9aeac7ca01e03ffd4b80c513dbeb1b6a.png


I know after riding the mtb hard for a week or two hard, the next ride I do on either the SS/FG or vintage road bike, feels incredibly easier, almost like a vacation.
If riding your FG feels like a vacation, it's because you're not trying hard enough. 85% MHR on a mountainbike is exactly the same workout as 85% MHR on a fg is exactly the same workout as 85% MHR on a tri bike.

On a bike, shifting gears is how you increase resistance.

You know which forum this is, right?

This is the silliest thing I've ever heard. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was a typo.

Silliest thing ? Not really, I happen to have a 1986 Fuji manual right in front of me, The Mt Fuji mtb has a 28/45/50T crank gear and a 14/16/18/21/24/28 rear cassette. How many SS/FG's come with a 50/14T setup ? Even with a wheel size difference that 26 x 2.** vs 700C x **, that mountain bike has more GI. The late 90's Fuji MX-200 I have, 48/14T if I counted it right is the top gear and that calculates to 89.1 GI. From what I've seen on line, you might be able to find a 48/15T for a SS/FG with 700C's, that's 84.5 GI ? Close but still less. Maybe newer MTB's have different gearing/speeds that more closely approximate what SS/FG's have, but the mtb's all pretty much weigh appreciably more than a SS/FG and some by a considerable amount too that will get the mtb to cruiser weight class. Then you factor in the rolling resistance of the different width tires and an mtb allows a cyclist a harder workout to be selected. Granted you can make any bike have a harder GI load, but my statement was a generalization for what many either already have or can get as a standard off the showroom floor purchase, not customizing anything. And if you throw a 12T on the rear of a SS/FG, then customize the mtb just the same to be fair about it ?

A little leg weary after a few miles of a ride, 5 GI into a relatively strong head wind can be enough of a difference, that a cyclist would switch back and forth between gears a few times that are about 5 GI apart to find the optimal cadence and speed. Sometimes, even the geared bikes can leave you in between the optimal selection.

So I currently have 2 bikes:

1. a generic mountain bike with heavy-duty off-road tires. It's only used for trails and in the winter.
2. a Giant Seek 2 - road-oriented hybrid. I put a lot of miles on it riding around my college campus, but it's almost too easy to ride. I can basically cruise 75% of the time.

EDIT: I live in a relatively urban area with a number of suburbs around. So it's a lot of stopping and starting; no long treks down a trail.

Seeing as I love biking and need the exercise, I'm looking into a 3rd bike exclusively for working out. The more difficult it is to pedal, the better - I'm aiming for pure cardio here, so I need to get my heart rate up.

I've decided between two types of bikes: a fixed gear or a cruiser. Keep in mind that this bike is temporary; I'm going abroad next August and will be selling all 3 bikes at that time.

Pros and cons of each:

Fixed gear
+ Bike only moves when you pedal
+ More effective on roads
- More expensive
- Slightly more difficult to find
- Not as good off-road or in bad weather

Cruiser
+ Still pretty difficult to pedal
+ Looks damn cool
+ I can easily buy a decent quality one at Target for ~$130
+ Can ride off-road and in bad weather (at least better than a fixie)
- cruising is still possible (pun intended), so maybe less of a workout?
- could be harder to pedal fast, which may or may not be necessary to increase heart rate (for cardio)


Any thoughts? I'd really like to go for the cruiser, but I am open to be convinced otherwise. Thanks.

I've read this whole thread and its entertaining repsonses. I'll offer you my take based on personal experience to seriously answer your question. I say ride an fg bike for fitness and fun. Assuming you're a normal rider without any physical caveats, a road geometry bike in fg will afford you the ergos in the cockpit that could enhance your riding experience/fitness results.

I have one multi-geared road bike, two multi-geard mountian bikes, one drop-tube flat-bar ss road bike, and track-ready-ish bike in fg with a more traditional track-ready geometry and ergos. ALL of my bikes give me a workout when I ride...or not...I always get what I put into it.....or not...its simple logic for me.

However...out of all the bikes at my disposal, I have found that riding my Soho-S in fg and now my Madison in fg has given me the best workouts while out riding. For me, 1-2hrs of trying to maintain 80~90rpms between stoplights and stop signs in fg is harder....but...I find it more fun and satisfying than riding the same routes on my roadbike or mountain bikes. Why? I think its because I'm not allowed to coast, I'm constantly working for it, and I have to ride up hills or walk and destroy my cleats. I always choose ride. Its a challenge at times for sure, but its a worthwhile challenge for me. Let me also say don't be stupid: choose your route with respect toward your gearing in fixed...you want to challenge yourself, not damage your knees.

There's something very satisfying for me about spooling up to 30mph (its all I can do for now...hell maybe ever, but I think I might have more later :D) from a stoplight/stopsign with my heart and lungs feeling like they're about to come out of my mouth as I try to hold that speed for as many seconds/yards as I can...then backing off the pressure but knowing I can never coast and rest my legs like I do on a fw bike....my legs are always working for those 1-2 hr rides. I've been doing this since April 2010 and I've lost about 20lbs so far and have gotten stronger.

Yeah...I say ride in fg...use a sensible gear for your currrent fitness level...spin in the 80s minimum...ride a sensible route...you don't have to go out long...you just have to go out strong for the time your out riding...1hr in fg will feel like 2hr in fw because you can't coast, you can't rest your legs, and you're constantly working.

I think you'll like the results if you're not too lazy ;) Oh yeah...get a good saddle 'cuz you'll be on it lots unless you like to stand from time to time to mash or stretch out a bit while riding. I hope this perspective has helped you decide. Good Luck and Good Riding!!!

You don't need a new bike. You need a long hilly training route. Go join a fast group ride, you'll get your heart rate up.

I don't even know what you're talking about any more, Fuji.

Yeah, you can make bikes hard to pedal, which you're clearly confusing with "a good workout". It's not. You'll be slow, bored, and hurt your knees. And it will be a less effective workout than spinning.

Read up on wattage as a measure of cycling performance. For a cyclist to put X watts into the drivetrain, he or she must produce X watts from their body. This is a pure measurement of energy.

You can generate exactly the same wattage on a MTB or a FG or a geared road bike. The only difference is going to be your speed; the MTB has the most losses, so you get less velocity per watt. This has no impact whatsoever on the wattage produced by the rider, just the speed.

If you feel more tired after a ride on your MTB, it's because you were bored and wanted to go faster, and in order to do that you had to generate more power by increasing your effort level. If you put out the same effort on your FG, you'd generate the same amount of power, and get the same workout.



I think where you are making your mistake is in trying to calculate power based on a constant speed. If a MTB and a FG are both going 20 mph, then yes, the MTB is working harder.

What you should be saying is "if an MTB and an FG are both being pedaled at 400 watts, the FG will go faster... but speed is irrelevant and the workouts are identical."

dsh, I understand what you're saying too, but the OP wants to train, I would say that pretty much means he wants to get stronger and increase his cardio endurance. I don't know of any leg workout where strength isn't attained by using more weight or resistance, that said, a 20 lb bike isn't going to be as effective as a 30-40 lb bike on weight alone. Take going to the gym and doing a leg workout, the first few times, anyone will hurt after the workout and even see a drop , but as the human body repairs itself, the strength and endurance will increase. Everyone will hit a wall where there is no more to be gained. That was my experience this summer. I rode my road bike, attained a certain level of fitness and strength. Then I bought the SS/FG based on posts like yours and others saying that it would make me stronger and fitter. That never happened, the SS/FG didn't have the GI to torture me like the road bike's top gears, and I could find a bunch of gears that could get cardio work done on the road bike that I could get out of the SS/FG. But after riding both those skinny tired bikes for weeks on end each, I finally decided to get on the mountain bike and see what that experience was going to be like. Pushing myself on it and just trying to get similar times out of it, the mountain bike left me even more drained after the same route. It had nothing to do with being bored or going slower, I was trying to accomplish a time to distance milestone that wasn't attainable by me on the mtb. You'd think after weeks of riding the skinny tired bikes, that I wouldn't be spent ? But the mountain bike was the next level of fitness for me in the order of riding each bike. Even when I swapped back and forth amongst them after riding each for the entire summer. The SS/FG was the easiest of the bikes I have, because it simply doesn't have the GI the road or the mountain bike has, weight and or rolling resistance for that level of training.

As for you stating that a heavier load is less effective than spinning, I disagree there as well. There is only so much you can get from the spinning and cardio. The whole purpose of training is to improve. To me that means you want to be able to take the next level of GI and be powerful/strong enough to get the same cadence/rpms from it. To do that your legs have to be more powerful and your cardio has to improve as well.

All I can say is try training with the 3 types of bikes yourself. I did and I know that each ride I mentally prepared myself to attack the rides, the mountain bike was the most physically exerting ride of the 3 bikes. So much that I got off the bike after 15 miles and not only as others have described, my heart and lungs felt like they were going to explode out of my chest, but I'll add I didn't hold my breakfast down that day. And the key was training on the mountain bike as if it were a road bike.


I think where you are making your mistake is in trying to calculate power based on a constant speed. If a MTB and a FG are both going 20 mph, then yes, the MTB is working harder.I agree with that and depending upon what gearing/speed you're riding the mtb, going 15 mph on it is working harder than going 18-20 mph on a SS/FG. So what exactly is your point as it pertains to training on a cruiser vs SS/FG ?

Generally I don't really care what the pros do for most things bike related, but since a large part of their job is to become as fit as possible, you might want to look it to how they go about it. It isn't by riding big clunky heavy bikes. There are a zillion books (and posts on this board for that matter) on how to get fit riding a bike. Read them and find something that works for you. A lot of people recommend intervals. I am not a racer (except for two sprint triathlons, I have never raced) and so I don't really follow a disciplined training schedule, but I can tell you that regular "fast group" ride participation will definitely get you fitter. It seems to me that buying a heavy bike just to make training harder is a bit like trying to improve your running fitness by wearing hiking boots when you run. There is some logic to it, but ultimately it's not really the way to go.

Get the bike you want and go for it. Any bike will give you exercise, you can use any sort of single-speed for exercise, and I don't think there's anything wrong with doing it on a cruiser. On hills, riding any single-speed is going to be something you really feel. I ride a cruiser and I love trying to spin as quickly as possible. It certainly isn't a track refugee, but I have gotten it up to 23 mph (per Cateye Velo 5) on the flat. I haven't done huge distance on it yet; roughly 36 miles is the biggest chunk to date. Truth in advertising here: The upright position follows my doctor's orders, but I have raised the seat as high as possible.

Question: Why is "single-speed" now synonymous with "fixed-gear"?