Originally Posted by
cale
Having tried to rescue my first road bike, also steel bought with allowance savings in the 70's, I "lost" mine to a racing accident. I would have been better off not riding it that day.
I moved several times, which makes the accumulation of bikes difficult, but, more importantly, I'm not much of a sentimentalist where bikes are concerned. I have two, a aluminum one and a"plastic" one.
What I am curious about is the fixie and simplicity. I don't think I've ever felt "encumbered" by gears but freely admit to sticking with a single gear combination for the duration of a segment if not the ride. I don't really see how a SS makes a bike simple unless you mean in that very obvious way, IT HAS 1 GEAR. Other than that, it isn't any simpler to ride. If anything, it's more complicated due to the talent required for leg braking.
I am an argumentative cuss, so I apologize in advance (LOL), but the fact you don't need brake advancements is because they wouldn't add to your bike owning pleasure. That, my friend, is what lifestyle riding is all about.
You actually have to have evidence on your side to be argumentative. In your case, you are simply ignorant and defensive.
Still waiting for that "definitive data" in support of disc brakes.
In before: "no data for you, derp!"