Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Singlespeed & Fixed Gear (http://www.bikeforums.net/singlespeed-fixed-gear/)
-   -   interested in fixed gear (http://www.bikeforums.net/singlespeed-fixed-gear/921956-interested-fixed-gear.html)

IAmSam 11-17-13 06:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by europa (Post 16252963)
I've never used or even seen a KiloTT but they have a solid reputation for being well priced for what you get and for being a reliable bike.

I don't know if that "solid reputation" is 100% deserved. Sure the price is reasonable - but when I first began looking for a fixed bike last fall and noticed the constant refrain "Kilo TT" around here, being the contrarian that I am, I researched it like crazy while considering whether to order one. I found that if one really looks, you can find numerous instances of guys who had problems with their new Kilos. Varying fork dimensions, dropouts out of whack, misplaced brake drillings, interior rust build-up right out of the box, imperfect finishing, etc. But the problems with Kilos seem to get excused and glossed over for some reason as those pushing them grow ever more vociferous.

Not calling it a bad bike, just saying...

GENESTARWIND 11-17-13 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by howeeee (Post 16247562)
bike weighs about 25 pounds not bad at all,,if you look at the reviews of people that HAVE one lol the only complaints are little ones that can be corrected, almost all the reviews were very good.

I watched a video of young guys making a fixie from an old Schwinn lol after weeks of trial and error they went out and bought a fixie rear wheel probably the same quality of my Pure Fix..they had hours and hours into this thing,,and it was adequate but waaaaaaaaaay more time and money than I have in my Pure Fix which I love. I am sure the worked over Schwinn weighs in at about 35 pounds lol.

Like I said I almost built my own outta 531 frame the guy wanted 175 for once done I am sure I was looking at 5 to 8 hundred bucks. I have about 20 bikes from a road bike to a mountain bike to single speed vintage Schwinns to Schwinn Spitfire 5 and cruiser 5 to 3 speed vintage schwinns I was intrigued by the fixie and the Pure Fix is perfect for me. I change bikes depending on the weather and the kind of riding I feel like doing I ride year long in Michigan at least 5 times a week sometimes 7 days a week.

I have experience repairing and refurbishing about 300 American made bikes. The Pure Fix surprised me, i thought it would be junk like a Kent or Magna,,but it is not,,,it was well worth the 160 I paid for it, I couldt be happier. All your crying about how they are junk doesnt change a thing lol

I cant tell if youre a schill or a schmuck. With your allotted "300" american bikes or your choice words concerning pure fix.

a ****ty frame with a ****ty build list consisting a fork that looks horribly offset compared to the frame or the crappy wheels/hubs that come with it. Then there is the sales pitch....


then there is the video of converting a schwinn...christ, schill, schmuck or idiot... Im not quite sure.

stilltooslow 11-17-13 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by howeeee (Post 16241646)
you are right of course there are fitness benefits riding a fixie anyone that says otherwise doesnt know what they are talking about.

That's not what I said. Try actually reading my comment before making a statement like that. I said that there are no significant fitness benefits vs. training on a road bike, aside from adding a little variation to a workout routine.

jlafitte 11-18-13 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IAmSam (Post 16253228)
I don't know if that "solid reputation" is 100% deserved. Sure the price is reasonable - but when I first began looking for a fixed bike last fall and noticed the constant refrain "Kilo TT" around here, being the contrarian that I am, I researched it like crazy while considering whether to order one. I found that if one really looks, you can find numerous instances of guys who had problems with their new Kilos. Varying fork dimensions, dropouts out of whack, misplaced brake drillings, interior rust build-up right out of the box, imperfect finishing, etc. But the problems with Kilos seem to get excused and glossed over for some reason as those pushing them grow ever more vociferous.

Not calling it a bad bike, just saying...

Maybe the reason for the excuses/glossing would be that for every person with a problem Kilo, there are *way* more with no problem. Hundreds, thousands more, who knows. Also you can exchange the problem bike no questions asked. At $400 it's a no brainer for anyone with basic mechanic skills looking for an entry level fixed gear, unless you can get lucky with Craigslist.

europa 11-19-13 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stilltooslow (Post 16254252)
I said that there are no significant fitness benefits vs. training on a road bike, aside from adding a little variation to a workout routine.

Actually, I'd dispute that. Yesterday, I read your comment and while my hackles went up, I thought about my cycling log (I'm a closet nerd and log all sorts of **** that is probably of little more use than to feed my inner nerd). Anyways, I've been aware for some time that the differences between any entry (distance, time speed, max speed, heart rates, cadence, etc) really only came down to the column that lists the bike ridden. Sure, when I started riding fixed gear, it was really intense and I got knackered much more quickly, but once I'd developed the strength, fitness and skills, there doesn't seem to be much difference ... except getting up sodding great hills.

For reasons that are irrelevant to this discussion, I'm currently riding my geared bike rather than my fixed gear bike - six months ago, it was fixed only.

I'm belting along on my way to work this morning, mulling over this question of which works you more, when I started thinking about my riding style. I realised that although I use my gears a lot (and in the terrain I ride that's pretty normal for anyone other than a fg rider), my riding style on the geared bike is rather intense. For example, I don't stop pedalling - this is one of the giveaways of someone who rides a lot of fg. I my case, I just don't stop, I keep on pedaling and working the gears to suit. My ave. cadence is usually around 85 on my geared bike which really does suggest I'm not coasting much at all, either that or I'm constantly pedaling at 100+ which I'm not, the mid eighties are around where I like to ride these days (getting older does slow you).

So for starters, I'm pedaling a lot more, hence doing more work which is going to give me more of a workout.

In rolling terrain, with the gears, I get to choose how hard I go up or down a hill - mostly I use the gears to avoid working too hard going up or pedaling too fast going down. You don't have that option on the fg with the result that although my average speeds over my admittedly very lumpy trips are fairly consistent, I wouldn't mind betting that on the fg, I'm maintaining a more even speed (ie, less variation) than on the geared bike, which is why my legs complain less after a hard geared ride than a fixed ride - on the fg, there are situations where you just have to work harder.

All things considered, I think fg DOES give you a harder workout than a geared bike and one might assume from that that it is better for physical training. However, I don't think it works that way. Unless you are a die-hard 'trainer' setting and chasing goals, I think our bodies know how hard we want to work and modulate the effort to suit. To get fit and/or lose weight, you must do significant exercise regularly, and you'll only do that if you love going to your bike and riding it, how that bike is made is irrelevant because if you don't love it, you won't ride it.

stilltooslow 11-19-13 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by europa (Post 16258485)
All things considered, I think fg DOES give you a harder workout than a geared bike and one might assume from that that it is better for physical training. However, I don't think it works that way. Unless you are a die-hard 'trainer' setting and chasing goals, I think our bodies know how hard we want to work and modulate the effort to suit. To get fit and/or lose weight, you must do significant exercise regularly, and you'll only do that if you love going to your bike and riding it, how that bike is made is irrelevant because if you don't love it, you won't ride it.

Good points all (as was your entire discussion), but on a time value basis, I don't see any real difference. A two hour ride on either bike should come out pretty close to even in a measure of watts burned (or any other metric). You'll cover more distance on the road bike at a faster pace. However on a set course, I agree that you'd probably burn a few more calories with a fixed.

bmontgomery87 11-19-13 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stilltooslow (Post 16258893)
Good points all (as was your entire discussion), but on a time value basis, I don't see any real difference. A two hour ride on either bike should come out pretty close to even in a measure of watts burned (or any other metric). You'll cover more distance on the road bike at a faster pace. However on a set course, I agree that you'd probably burn a few more calories with a fixed.

I'd have to disagree.
On a geared bike, I can literally coast for the first 1.5-2 miles of my commute. On my FG I'm pedaling pretty hard.

Even moderately flat routes still allow for a lot of coasting and let you get your HR back down on a geared bike.

JeremyLC 11-19-13 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmontgomery87 (Post 16259069)
Quote:

Originally Posted by stilltooslow (Post 16258893)
Good points all (as was your entire discussion), but on a time value basis, I don't see any real difference. A two hour ride on either bike should come out pretty close to even in a measure of watts burned (or any other metric). You'll cover more distance on the road bike at a faster pace. However on a set course, I agree that you'd probably burn a few more calories with a fixed.

I'd have to disagree.
On a geared bike, I can literally coast for the first 1.5-2 miles of my commute. On my FG I'm pedaling pretty hard.

Even moderately flat routes still allow for a lot of coasting and let you get your HR back down on a geared bike.

Isn't a commute a set course? You seem to be disagreeing with what you're agreeing with.

bmontgomery87 11-19-13 11:41 AM

^^Yeah I guess I got confused when reading stilltooslows post, as he said a two hour ride on either bike would come out the same.
Any route that his some hills would lead to the energy expenditure being drastically different IMO. I just mentioned my commute because of the significant amount of downhill.

hairnet 11-19-13 02:46 PM

erm, just ride. If you're looking for a hard workout then you will be pedaling instead of coasting.

prooftheory 11-19-13 06:39 PM

If we road fixed-gear bikes because it gives us a better workout we would all be advocating for hi-ten steel and extra-wide tires to use on the road.

hairnet 11-19-13 07:05 PM

And I remember we had that debate a long time ago.

prooftheory 11-19-13 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hairnet (Post 16260881)
And I remember we had that debate a long time ago.

Which one? Helmets?

hairnet 11-19-13 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prooftheory (Post 16260821)
Ihi-ten steel and extra-wide tires to use on the road.

It was either this or riding some other POS bike shaped object for the resistance training.

prooftheory 11-19-13 07:35 PM

Someone thought that was a good idea? I only thought is was a counter-example.

hairnet 11-19-13 07:38 PM

The guy was convinced and then I think some others came in to play devil's advocate.

kk42 11-25-13 08:57 AM

I got my kilo tt pro about a week ago and i have to say i think i made the best possible decision for what bike to buy with my budget(which was about $500)


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:35 AM.