3-speed fixed gear

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

05-18-10 | 02:38 PM

#76

tcs

Palmer

Joined: Mar 2007

Posts: 9,151

Likes: 2,261

From: Parts Unknown

Bikes: Mike Melton custom, Alex Moulton AM, Dahon Curl

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtgotsjets

Look at that second top tube!

Actually, third top tube.

tcs

05-18-10 | 03:52 PM

#77

Mike Mills

Senior Member

Joined: Oct 2008

Posts: 2,929

Likes: 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtgotsjets

Look at that second top tube! That bike is all about style.

You've got it all wrong. That bike has THREE top tubes. That makes all the difference in the world! I thought everybody knew that. ;-)

Last edited by Mike Mills; 05-19-10 at 12:50 AM.

05-18-10 | 04:04 PM

#78

Mike Mills

Senior Member

Joined: Oct 2008

Posts: 2,929

Likes: 2

Post deleted by author due to hijack.

Last edited by Mike Mills; 05-19-10 at 12:51 AM.

05-26-10 | 12:44 AM

#79

jmonsw21

jmonsw21

Joined: May 2009

Posts: 102

Likes: 0

From: Miami, Fl

What would happen if you were to put a 26" x 1 3/8 wheel up front to give you that fender clearance? Would the geometry be completely wacko? I've been looking for a nice fixed gear for the rain commuting and fenders and braze-ons are pretty important. The three speed option seems cool but that fenders issue isn't.

05-26-10 | 04:38 AM

#80

mickey85

perpetually frazzled

Joined: Sep 2008

Posts: 2,469

Likes: 9

From: Linton, IN

Bikes: 1977 Bridgestone Kabuki Super Speed; 1979 Raleigh Professional; 1983 Raleigh Rapide mixte; 1974 Peugeot UO-8; 1993 Univega Activa Trail; 1972 Raleigh Sports; 1967 Phillips; 1981 Schwinn World Tourist; 1976 Schwinn LeTour mixte; 1964 Western Flyer

I've been keeping my eye on this bike (and quietly lusting after it over here in my corner). One of the big draws about the bike, as opposed to the other fixed gear bikes is that it actually has the proper mounting points for fenders and, with the skinny tires they've got on it, it looks like there's enough clearance for a set of fenders. I'm OK with track geometry, but I"m not necessarily OK with wet butt.

That said, I'm just now getting ready to hop on my fixed gear for a ride to work. 30% chance of thunderstorms this afternoon. grrr.

05-26-10 | 05:30 AM

#81

noglider

Thread Starter

aka Tom Reingold

Joined: Jan 2009

Posts: 44,123

Likes: 6,340

From: New York, NY, and High Falls, NY, USA

Bikes: 1962 Rudge Sports, 1971 Raleigh Super Course, 1971 Raleigh Pro Track, 1974 Raleigh International, 1975 Viscount Fixie, 1982 McLean, 1996 Lemond (Ti), 2002 Burley Zydeco tandem

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmonsw21

Joe,

I don't expect the geometry to be messed up if you do that, but I wouldn't do it, for different reasons. First, there's the expense. Second, you're running two different tire sizes. Third, it's not necessary. A few people on bikeforums have shown how you can install fenders even when tight fender clearance makes it look impossible.

Tom

__________________
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog

“When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments.” — Elizabeth West, US author

Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.

05-26-10 | 05:54 AM

#82

cobrabyte

one life on two wheels

Joined: Jul 2008

Posts: 2,552

Likes: 24

From: St. Petersburg, FL

Quote:

Originally Posted by noglider

165mm is 5mm shorter than the standard of 170mm, right? 5mm is about a fifth of an inch. How much extra clearance does that give you around the corner?

I think fixies get 165mm cranks because of tradition more than any other reason.

combine the shorter crank length, higher bottom bracket, and track pedals...and pedal strike potential is significantly lowered

new, highly "evolved" track bikes used by pro track racers still are equipped with 165mm cranks. these bikes are built for nothing but speed. I doubt "tradition" has anything to do with it.

05-26-10 | 06:25 AM

#83

noglider

Thread Starter

aka Tom Reingold

Joined: Jan 2009

Posts: 44,123

Likes: 6,340

From: New York, NY, and High Falls, NY, USA

Bikes: 1962 Rudge Sports, 1971 Raleigh Super Course, 1971 Raleigh Pro Track, 1974 Raleigh International, 1975 Viscount Fixie, 1982 McLean, 1996 Lemond (Ti), 2002 Burley Zydeco tandem

cobrabyte, you're right, of course. I stand corrected.

05-26-10 | 08:28 AM

#84

Grand Bois

Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2005

Posts: 17,392

Likes: 40

From: Pinole, CA, USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Mills

The gearing on the five speed version is a bit whacked. It is the equivalent of a 52T chainwheel with the following rear cogs - 28, 23, 17, 14, 11T.

If it is possible to switch to a 40 T chainwheel X 18T cog, theequivalent rear cogs are - 37, 31, 23, 19, 15. I'm sure I would find those a much more useful set of gears.

Are the parts available? Can the hub take the torque?

P.S. - What is up with the Sturmey-Archer 8 speed hub? The lowest internal ratio is 1:1 and it goes up to 3.25:1. That's like a 52 X 5!!! It takes something like a 32 X 24 to get low gear down into the realm of a truly useful low gear.

My SA5 gives me 41.6, 49.3, 62.4, 79.1 and 93.7 gear inches with a 42t ring and 18t cog. If that turns out to be too high, I can switch to a 19t or 20t cog. The five speed simply adds a higher high and a lower low to the AW. It does nothing to address the big jump between 2nd and 3rd.