Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Is fixed gear more efficient for pedaling?

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Is fixed gear more efficient for pedaling?

Old 12-03-21, 12:56 AM
  #101  
GhenghisKahn
OwainGyndwr
 
GhenghisKahn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Wellington/Porirua, New Zealand
Posts: 122

Bikes: 90 Fisher 3x7 hardtail, 2016 Reid 1x7 commuter, 2017 Viva 46x18 fixed gear, 93 2x8 Avanti Kona

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked 59 Times in 41 Posts
Originally Posted by JohnDThompson View Post
FG also trains you to be comfortable over a broader cadence range. I won't claim that you get higher or even equal efficiency over that whole range, but you learn that you can keep pedaling at cadences where you would be tempted to get off and walk or coast instead of pedaling.
Yeah, point well taken about cadence range. If I'm off the bike for a while when I get back on I ride fixed almost exclusively for a while. No data, but I seem to get form and reserve back much more quickly. Beyond the muscle memory or technical facility I simply enjoy riding fixed more than geared. Which is why mine's set up for utility and commuting rather than recreational. Over the years it's come to be my favorite type of cycling. If I could only keep one bike it would my fixed.
GhenghisKahn is offline  
Old 12-03-21, 02:44 AM
  #102  
50PlusCycling
Senior Member
 
50PlusCycling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 502
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 240 Post(s)
Liked 161 Times in 99 Posts
NO.

Next question.
50PlusCycling is offline  
Old 12-03-21, 08:49 AM
  #103  
joesch
Senior Member
 
joesch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Hotel CA / DFW
Posts: 1,133

Bikes: 83 Colnago Super, 87 50th Daccordi, 79 & 87 Guerciotti's, 90s Colnago Master and Titanio, 96 Serotta Colorado TG, 95/05 Colnago C40/C50, 06 DbyLS TI, 08 Lemond Filmore FG SS, 12 Cervelo R3, 20/15 Surly Stragler & Steamroller

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 362 Post(s)
Liked 321 Times in 217 Posts
Originally Posted by cubewheels View Post
I'm not talking about frictional losses or lighter weight but simply the action of pedaling.

I found that I'm faster on fixed gear. Just to make it fair, I put some bags on the fixed gear to equalize the weight of my gravel bike and indeed I'm faster and I also found it's easier to pedal on fixed gear.

It seems the moving pedals carry the momentum of you legs more efficiently than you can with freehub or singlespeed. The effect is quite pronounced in the flats at high cadence compared to climbs. Mind opener for me.
You ask this question but never define the type of efficiency.
Many responses WRT different types of efficiency.
Regarding RPM / cadence : No as gears allow rider to set optimal RPM for the rider WRT terrain and power, etc.
joesch is offline  
Old 12-03-21, 09:08 AM
  #104  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 11,104

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5821 Post(s)
Liked 5,308 Times in 2,985 Posts
Originally Posted by joesch View Post
You ask this question but never define the type of efficiency.
Many responses WRT different types of efficiency.
Regarding RPM / cadence : No as gears allow rider to set optimal RPM for the rider WRT terrain and power, etc.

I think there's a consensus on this thread that for any practical meaning of the word efficiency, the answer is no, FG is less efficient for the purposes of non-track riding as it does not allow the rider to most efficiently use his/her legs in an optimal manner.. There may be some technical reading of the word "efficiency" where it actually is more efficient at transmitting the energy from the pedals to the hub with less loss than a freewheel hub, but that it can't possibly be enough to make up for the need for "counterproductive" pedaling on downhills problems. As regards to multigear bikes, the inefficiency of suboptimal gearing for variable conditions is really too obvious to merit much discussion.

I think the conversation has now moved onto why people who know these "disadvantages" to FG enjoy riding FG and get benefit from it . For some reason, some people are trying to cast this into a debate instead of what it is, which is a conversation between people who ride differently for different reasons. Pretty much everyone is in agreement on the facts, no one is really arguing that FG is, in any meaningful way, more efficient for general riding.. As a person who doesn't ride FG, I'm learning stuff from reading the people who do, I don't think I'm going to learn much from people trying to put arguments into their mouths that they aren't making.

Last edited by livedarklions; 12-03-21 at 10:34 AM.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 12-03-21, 09:11 AM
  #105  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 11,104

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5821 Post(s)
Liked 5,308 Times in 2,985 Posts
Originally Posted by 50PlusCycling View Post
NO.

Next question.

This thread moved onto the next question at about post 2 or 3, but thanks for sharing.
livedarklions is offline  
Likes For livedarklions:
Old 12-03-21, 01:25 PM
  #106  
Sy Reene
Advocatus Diaboli
 
Sy Reene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 7,631

Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4108 Post(s)
Liked 1,114 Times in 730 Posts
Originally Posted by 79pmooney View Post

My observation has been that the fix gear is around 25-33% harder for the same distance ridden. It is hard to separate out the muscle wear and tear from the lactic acid build-up and glycogen expenditure so I am never sure exactly what is being depleted or trained, but that 25-33% hit is real. (If you don't believe me, try riding the week of Cycle Oregon on your regular bike, then on the fix gear.)
.
One could just get a heavier bike...
Sy Reene is offline  
Old 12-03-21, 01:36 PM
  #107  
79pmooney
A Roadie Forever
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,921

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Mentioned: 105 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3157 Post(s)
Liked 1,808 Times in 1,187 Posts
Originally Posted by Sy Reene View Post
One could just get a heavier bike...
Quite simply, no! I often ride fix gear to ride fix gear, not for any other reason. My geared bikes get ridden less because they are not fixed. (And yeah, there are times when I am short on time and the fix gear is a better use of it,)
79pmooney is offline  
Likes For 79pmooney:
Old 12-03-21, 01:39 PM
  #108  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 11,104

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5821 Post(s)
Liked 5,308 Times in 2,985 Posts
Originally Posted by 79pmooney View Post
Quite simply, no! I often ride fix gear to ride fix gear, not for any other reason. My geared bikes get ridden less because they are not fixed. (And yeah, there are times when I am short on time and the fix gear is a better use of it,)

The biggest problem with getting them fixed is then you can't breed them.

That joke will not translate.
livedarklions is offline  
Likes For livedarklions:
Old 12-03-21, 06:58 PM
  #109  
ofajen
Cheerfully low end
 
ofajen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,255
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 386 Post(s)
Liked 590 Times in 394 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
As regards to multigear bikes, the inefficiency of suboptimal gearing for variable conditions is really too obvious to merit much discussion.
Widely believed perhaps, and often stated, but all the research Iíve seen would indicate an efficiency loss only when a SS or FG rider would be forced to pedal well over 90 rpm. As a non-racing SS rider, that would be never.

Maximum power declines gradually below the peak in the 80-90 rpm range but I have no indication that actual efficiency does anything but improve with lowering cadence due to lower internal work.

Otto
ofajen is offline  
Old 12-03-21, 11:40 PM
  #110  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 13,577

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 143 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6588 Post(s)
Liked 1,746 Times in 949 Posts
it is reassuring to see that at least some Fixie aficionados are not flat-earthers.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 12-04-21, 02:49 PM
  #111  
indyfabz
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 32,381
Mentioned: 201 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14533 Post(s)
Liked 7,873 Times in 3,927 Posts
Fixed gear. No need wasted energy on the pawls lube issue.
indyfabz is offline  
Likes For indyfabz:
Old 12-04-21, 03:38 PM
  #112  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 11,104

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5821 Post(s)
Liked 5,308 Times in 2,985 Posts
Originally Posted by ofajen View Post
Widely believed perhaps, and often stated, but all the research Iíve seen would indicate an efficiency loss only when a SS or FG rider would be forced to pedal well over 90 rpm. As a non-racing SS rider, that would be never.

Maximum power declines gradually below the peak in the 80-90 rpm range but I have no indication that actual efficiency does anything but improve with lowering cadence due to lower internal work.

Otto
What,are we defining as efficiency? If you can't actually climb the hill because you can't overcome the resistance on a climb, is that efficient? There's definitely a point for me that if I try to climb a grade in too high a gear, I cannot sustain the effort as the cadence needs to be at least fast enough to maintain enough forward momentum to keep balanced.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 12-04-21, 03:46 PM
  #113  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,328
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 887 Post(s)
Liked 322 Times in 199 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
What,are we defining as efficiency?
The only accepted definition in exercise physiology for efficiency is work produced divided by energy consumed. In this thread, I've seen it used as a synonym for speed, fatigue resistance, some vague, unquantifiable feeling known only to the rider, and probably a few more as well. Since it seems I'm allowed to use my own definitions, I would say that a fixed gear is definitely more efficient than a geared bike while also being less and equally efficient. I just change my definition of efficiency to get the desired result.
asgelle is offline  
Likes For asgelle:
Old 12-04-21, 04:13 PM
  #114  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 11,104

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5821 Post(s)
Liked 5,308 Times in 2,985 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
The only accepted definition in exercise physiology for efficiency is work produced divided by energy consumed. In this thread, I've seen it used as a synonym for speed, fatigue resistance, some vague, unquantifiable feeling known only to the rider, and probably a few more as well. Since it seems I'm allowed to use my own definitions, I would say that a fixed gear is definitely more efficient than a geared bike while also being less and equally efficient. I just change my definition of efficiency to get the desired result.

Well, this is General Cycling, not Exercise Physiology. It really shouldn't come as any surprise to anyone that words often have technical definitions AND common definitions. Seriously, do you not realize that most commonly used English words have more than 1 definition? I think I made the point that we could get different answers depending on what we mean by efficiency about a couple dozen posts ago. Don't forget there's also mechanical efficiency of the actual machine, i.e., transmission of energy without loss from the pedals to the hubs.

In any event, FG is definitely inefficient on steep hill descent by any definition.

As far as ascending, I find the notion that work produced by energy consumed can be considered "efficient" if all that work is insufficient to actually propel the bike bizarre.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 12-04-21, 04:16 PM
  #115  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,328
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 887 Post(s)
Liked 322 Times in 199 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
I find the notion that work produced by energy consumed can be considered "efficient" if all that work is insufficient to actually propel the bike bizarre.
Which is why we have words for what you describe other than efficient, i.e., speed or fast(er).
asgelle is offline  
Old 12-04-21, 04:53 PM
  #116  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 11,104

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5821 Post(s)
Liked 5,308 Times in 2,985 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
Which is why we have words for what you describe other than efficient, i.e., speed or fast(er).

Speed and fast also have multiple meanings. This is a stupid distinction, anyway. This discussion can't be limited to exercise physiology because we're discussing variations in a mechanical device. I also think looking only at cadence and not looking at the comparative amounts of torque necessary to propel the bike is going to give you bizarre results using the definition you're insisting on. This really is analagous to counting the number of weight lift. reps without considering the amount of weight.

Actually, if you cannot produce enough torque to propel the bike uphill, no work is done as work equals force times distance. If the distance is zero, the work is zero no matter how much force is applied.

Last edited by livedarklions; 12-04-21 at 05:14 PM.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 12-04-21, 06:03 PM
  #117  
bbattle
.
 
bbattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Rocket City, No'ala
Posts: 12,747

Bikes: 2014 Trek Domane 5.2, 1985 Pinarello Trevisio, 1990 Gardin Shred, 2006 Bianchi San Jose

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 5 Posts
I think everyone should have a fixed gear bike in their stable if for no other reason than to satisfy the N+1 rule. I ride my FG occasionally for a change of pace and have done some climbing with it, too. I then switch to FW on the way back down; I don't care to scrub speed for 3 miles or take my feet off the pedals as they spin 150+rpm. I do have brakes on my FG.

But given the choice of FG or MG on the average group ride around my area, I'm taking the MG.

What's next? Another thread about recumbents being faster than DF? Compact cranks not as good as regular cranks? I won't wear a team jersey because I'm not on that team?
Are bib shorts really worth it?
__________________
Bicycle Pictures
bbattle is offline  
Old 12-04-21, 06:46 PM
  #118  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 13,577

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 143 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6588 Post(s)
Liked 1,746 Times in 949 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
.... if you cannot produce enough torque to propel the bike uphill, no work is done as work equals force times distance. If the distance is zero, the work is zero no matter how much force is applied.
Case in point .... I finally got out on the bike again, and one of the better local roads was finally reopened. I managed to labor up a few "climbs" (Flatahoma climbs are generally not considered "climbs" in the rest of the world) and because I was not used to it .... My lungs gave out. my heart and legs were fine so I just kept shifting down and spinning with as much precision as possible and made it up all the climbs.

Had I been on a fixie, I wouldn't have been ... I would have been pushing a fixie.

There is a narrow range in which each rider is at peak physical efficiency .... and if said rider is forced far enough out of that range, said rider becomes a walker. At that point the efficiency of the bike's drivetrain is moot.

No one way is "better" than another but certain tools are better suited to certain jobs when wielded by certain users. I am not suited to riding fixie right now. Having one in my stable would just mean I had a bike which never came down off the rack.

The one absolute positive for fixies though .... no need to consider optimal pawl lubrication.
Maelochs is offline  
Likes For Maelochs:
Old 12-05-21, 06:35 AM
  #119  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 11,104

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5821 Post(s)
Liked 5,308 Times in 2,985 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
Case in point .... I finally got out on the bike again, and one of the better local roads was finally reopened. I managed to labor up a few "climbs" (Flatahoma climbs are generally not considered "climbs" in the rest of the world) and because I was not used to it .... My lungs gave out. my heart and legs were fine so I just kept shifting down and spinning with as much precision as possible and made it up all the climbs.

Had I been on a fixie, I wouldn't have been ... I would have been pushing a fixie.

There is a narrow range in which each rider is at peak physical efficiency .... and if said rider is forced far enough out of that range, said rider becomes a walker. At that point the efficiency of the bike's drivetrain is moot.

No one way is "better" than another but certain tools are better suited to certain jobs when wielded by certain users. I am not suited to riding fixie right now. Having one in my stable would just mean I had a bike which never came down off the rack.

The one absolute positive for fixies though .... no need to consider optimal pawl lubrication.

​​​​​​Right, we're talking about efficiency as if cadence is the only determinant. What you do when you shift down is to allow yourself to climb the hill without relying on heavy use of fast twitch muscles and keeping the slow twitch usage in an aerobic range. Climbing in too high of a gear is like making the effort of sprinting but going really slowly, obviously most of us will not be able to sustain that over a long climb.

BTW, given that our engines are ourselves, I suspect the speeds we maintain on a given vehicle ARE actually pretty good proxy measures of the bike's efficiency.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 12-05-21, 07:28 AM
  #120  
seypat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,454
Mentioned: 65 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2098 Post(s)
Liked 1,139 Times in 749 Posts
Definitely more efficient than broken gears!
seypat is offline  
Likes For seypat:
Old 12-05-21, 08:33 AM
  #121  
joesch
Senior Member
 
joesch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Hotel CA / DFW
Posts: 1,133

Bikes: 83 Colnago Super, 87 50th Daccordi, 79 & 87 Guerciotti's, 90s Colnago Master and Titanio, 96 Serotta Colorado TG, 95/05 Colnago C40/C50, 06 DbyLS TI, 08 Lemond Filmore FG SS, 12 Cervelo R3, 20/15 Surly Stragler & Steamroller

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 362 Post(s)
Liked 321 Times in 217 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
cut ...

In any event, FG is definitely inefficient on steep hill descent by any definition.

... cut.
You seem to argue many different posters and put out this statement.
Dont you think a FG can be created to be more efficient than most all road bikes "on steep hill descent" ?
joesch is offline  
Old 12-05-21, 12:33 PM
  #122  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 11,104

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5821 Post(s)
Liked 5,308 Times in 2,985 Posts
Originally Posted by joesch View Post
You seem to argue many different posters and put out this statement.
Dont you think a FG can be created to be more efficient than most all road bikes "on steep hill descent" ?

Absolutely not. It's impossible to beat the efficiency of coasting, and freewheels can be pedaled where it's appropriate. FG can't coast when it's advantageous to do so. If you think that's wrong, tell us how it's possible.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 12-05-21, 01:32 PM
  #123  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 13,577

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 143 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6588 Post(s)
Liked 1,746 Times in 949 Posts
Again----The only time a fixie might be very slightly more mechanically efficient is on terrain where the ratio keeps the rider exactly in his/her optimal physical performance window.

The increased mechanical efficiency is based on the drag created by two jockey wheels---smaller than minuscule, in other words. And any time fatigue, wind, road surface, or incline take a rider out of that optimal combination of pedal pressure, cadence, breathing, and heart rate. the FG is a hindrance. A challenge, for some a joy, but in every reasonable machine-related meaning of the word, less efficient.

The only way a fixie could be "created to be more efficient than most all road bikes 'on steep hill descent'?" would be to have a tiny rear cog so that the rider was pedaling at optimal cadence and power. However, the rider could only maintain that pace for a short time---just as a sprinter on a fixie might be more efficient over 300 meters but would be trash over a kilometer compared to his/her performance on a geared bike. For the brief time that the rider was able to pedal at exactly his/her optimal pace, the FG might be more efficient because if the direct drive. However, no one can pedal efficiently at 18-0 or 220 revs for very long while using pressure .... the rider will just be spinning to keep his/her feet on the pedals ..... no real force would be being applied.

If the fixie rider climbed in say, a 42-23 of something .... and flipped the wheel to use a 42-11 for the descent .... still the fixie rider wouldn't be as mechanically efficient as the geared-bike rider who could choose any ration up to max-ring--min-cog (50-11, 53-11, whatever) and then coast when the speed exceeded pedaling ability.

If anyone thinks otherwise, I suggest that person posts videos, equations, whatnot .... because "mechanical efficiency" is a well-defined term, and spinning madly at 220 rpm just to keep your feet on the pedals is not going to transmit as much power to the ground as spinning a 53x11 at 120 rpm .... nor generate as much speed ..... and while people talk about how their legs 'rest" on the downhill, i'd say that defies physics and physiology. There is no way ti takes more energy to Not move ones legs than to move them. And the rider on the geared bike still has the option of spinning because of the freewheel, if that rider decides to flush the legs with a little low-stress exercise.

That's how I see it.
Maelochs is offline  
Likes For Maelochs:
Old 12-05-21, 04:57 PM
  #124  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 11,104

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5821 Post(s)
Liked 5,308 Times in 2,985 Posts
Totally unrelated fixie question--because of my bad ankles I cannot ride with any type of foot restraint. Does anybody ride fixies on platforms without cages? Is it practical?
livedarklions is offline  
Old 12-05-21, 05:08 PM
  #125  
smashndash
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,325

Bikes: 2017 Specialized Allez Sprint Comp

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 795 Post(s)
Liked 310 Times in 222 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
Totally unrelated fixie question--because of my bad ankles I cannot ride with any type of foot restraint. Does anybody ride fixies on platforms without cages? Is it practical?
I did it. You need a brake though, obviously.
smashndash is offline  
Likes For smashndash:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.