Road vs. Track Geometry -- Fixed Commuting
I know that many companies are now making track bikes with more road style geometry. Any thoughts on the benefits of road vs. track geometry for fixed gear (flatland) commuting? Which track frames are more geared toward road style? Would a frame with pure agressive track geometry be a disaster for city commuting?
YOU ARE NOW TUNED IN
Ask ten people, you'll get 20 opinions. The bottom line is that you should ride what's comfortable. Some people enjoy a trackish geometry for tight handling and responsiveness; some people can't be comfortable on a bike with trackish geometry for longer rides and don't feel the need to have trackish geometry on their commute. But, again, ride what you like and what's comfortable.
Originally Posted by voshchev
There are bikes out there with a road geometry but with track ends and a higher BB shell; IRO Mark V (look at my sig), Raliegh Rush Hour, others. They can work as a nice cross between the tracky requirements of a fixie and a more roadbikelike geometry. I commute on mine and it's plenty responsive for me, but then again I've never owned or ridden a real track bike, except on the track, so ya donno.
I ride a Bianchi Pista, which has the most "trackish" geometry of the fixed gear bikes commonly ridden on the street, and I love the agility of this bike.
It literally weaves itself through road hazards without any conscious input on my part.
Granted, I can't ride "hands off," but no loss.
I'll take agility over hands off.
In comparison, my winter "ice bike" has typically stable road geometry, and I don't like it.
It's all about what you are comfortable with, but here's my 2 cents...Kogswell Model G is an awesome frame, very slack, very responsive, very nice lookin. I comute/live on mine and I love it. There's a ton of awesome bikes out there though, but that's my plug for Kogswell.