Ever try a rear brake only on a fixed gear?
#1
spinner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 46
Bikes: Kilo WT
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
4 Posts
Ever try a rear brake only on a fixed gear?
Curious if it would offer any tangible benefits. Could slowing the bike with legs+ rear brake be faster than legs only or at the very least lighten the load of the legs to keep them less fatigued? Would definitely be a plus if a broken chain occurred giving you a real braking option. I would think riding downhill, a rear brake would be nice to have when your legs are spinning like mad. Curious of your thoughts/experiences.
#2
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 2,888
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1346 Post(s)
Liked 3,265 Times
in
1,437 Posts
I've only ever used a front brake on a fixed, and it worked so well I wouldn't bother to try anything else. Use your legs to slow and the brake to stop; it's a pretty elegant solution, really.
Likes For Rolla:
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 11,503
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: 119 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3992 Post(s)
Liked 2,879 Times
in
1,872 Posts
Yes, a rear brake will do all of those things. But why leave off the brake that will reliably stop you twice as fast unless either you live in a world where hard braking is never needed or the consequences of not being able to don't matter to you?
I use my rear brake as you suggest. I use my front when I actually want to stop or do it in a hurry. I alternate between the two to keep rim temperatures down on long descents. (And I grab both brake levers as handles when I want to climb.)
It is simple math and physics to show that a front brake will stop you in half the distance that the world's best rear braking can do. Every 10 years or so I break out paper, pencil and calculator and do it from scratch. Same answer every time. (Oh, the numbers vary a little depending on where I locate the center of gravity of the rider, bike weights, etc. But that 2:1 never varies a lot.)
I use my rear brake as you suggest. I use my front when I actually want to stop or do it in a hurry. I alternate between the two to keep rim temperatures down on long descents. (And I grab both brake levers as handles when I want to climb.)
It is simple math and physics to show that a front brake will stop you in half the distance that the world's best rear braking can do. Every 10 years or so I break out paper, pencil and calculator and do it from scratch. Same answer every time. (Oh, the numbers vary a little depending on where I locate the center of gravity of the rider, bike weights, etc. But that 2:1 never varies a lot.)
Likes For 79pmooney:
#4
spinner
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 46
Bikes: Kilo WT
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
4 Posts
Yes, a rear brake will do all of those things. But why leave off the brake that will reliably stop you twice as fast unless either you live in a world where hard braking is never needed or the consequences of not being able to don't matter to you?
I use my rear brake as you suggest. I use my front when I actually want to stop or do it in a hurry. I alternate between the two to keep rim temperatures down on long descents. (And I grab both brake levers as handles when I want to climb.)
It is simple math and physics to show that a front brake will stop you in half the distance that the world's best rear braking can do. Every 10 years or so I break out paper, pencil and calculator and do it from scratch. Same answer every time. (Oh, the numbers vary a little depending on where I locate the center of gravity of the rider, bike weights, etc. But that 2:1 never varies a lot.)
I use my rear brake as you suggest. I use my front when I actually want to stop or do it in a hurry. I alternate between the two to keep rim temperatures down on long descents. (And I grab both brake levers as handles when I want to climb.)
It is simple math and physics to show that a front brake will stop you in half the distance that the world's best rear braking can do. Every 10 years or so I break out paper, pencil and calculator and do it from scratch. Same answer every time. (Oh, the numbers vary a little depending on where I locate the center of gravity of the rider, bike weights, etc. But that 2:1 never varies a lot.)
What handlebar setup are you using? I’m having trouble picturing using brake levers as handles during a climb.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Valley Forge: Birthplace of Freedom
Posts: 1,229
Bikes: Novara Safari, CAAD9, WABI Classic, WABI Thunder
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 341 Post(s)
Liked 407 Times
in
214 Posts
I run front and rear. The rear only would work to help modulate speed as you discussed, such as long downhills. Though the front will work better.
__________________
Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.
Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.
Likes For stevel610:
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 11,503
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: 119 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3992 Post(s)
Liked 2,879 Times
in
1,872 Posts
I understand a front brake will stop you faster than a rear. The point of the topic is more about if a rear brake on a fixed gear is worthwhile or rather, how worthwhile. Like for the people who don’t run brakes at all, how much could they benefit from adding just a rear brake. I think what got me thinking of this question is that I use my rear brake to modulate speed a lot more than I ever use my front. I think if I had to have a bike with just a front or rear I would choose rear. I know that isn’t a choice that needs to be made, more of a hypothetical to just think on.
What handlebar setup are you using? I’m having trouble picturing using brake levers as handles during a climb.
What handlebar setup are you using? I’m having trouble picturing using brake levers as handles during a climb.
The true pista bars (with the levers in active use!)

Semi-pista bars

#7
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,200
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 148 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3244 Post(s)
Liked 2,643 Times
in
1,535 Posts
Why bother? On a fixed gear, you can already brake the rear wheel using your legs, and rear wheel braking efficacy is limited by tire traction (once you start to skid, more braking effort will not slow you any better). Run a front brake and get more/better braking power.
Likes For REDMASTA:
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 3,853
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1551 Post(s)
Liked 1,577 Times
in
920 Posts
I had only a rear brake on my first track bike, acquired in 1964, and also my second, bought in 1982. Since the seatstay bridge wasn't drilled on either bike (nor was the fork, of course), I cobbled together a brake mount using a Pletscher rear rack mounting plate and a Mafac brake both times. That setup didn't work all that well, but it enabled me to ride everywhere I wanted to. It was only decades later that some manufacturers began selling fixed-gear bikes with fork crowns and seatstay bridges drilled for front brakes.
If your fork isn't drilled for a brake, it's a much better idea to replace it with one that is drilled, but, yes, a rear brake is much better than no brake at all. The main advantage is that your stopping power is independent of how big a gear you're using and of the gradient you're riding on.
If your fork isn't drilled for a brake, it's a much better idea to replace it with one that is drilled, but, yes, a rear brake is much better than no brake at all. The main advantage is that your stopping power is independent of how big a gear you're using and of the gradient you're riding on.
#10
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,200
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 148 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3244 Post(s)
Liked 2,643 Times
in
1,535 Posts
If you don't want to drill your frame for a brake caliper, there are a couple options still. First, there are brake mounts that clamp to the fork blades onto which a caliper can be fitted. And there are steer-tube plug mounts that insert into the steer tube below the fork crown to provide a mount point for a caliper. These sometimes have clearance problems with tightly-coupled track frames.

https://www.tracksupermarket.com/hac...no-clamps.html

https://www.tracksupermarket.com/hac...no-clamps.html
#11
Clark W. Griswold
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: ,location, location
Posts: 11,418
Bikes: Foundry Chilkoot Ti W/Ultegra Di2, Salsa Timberjack Ti, Cinelli Mash Work RandoCross Fun Time Machine, 1x9 XT Parts Hybrid, Co-Motion Cascadia, Specialized Langster, Phil Wood Apple VeloXS Frame (w/DA 7400), R+M Supercharger2 Rohloff, Habanero Ti 26
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3531 Post(s)
Liked 2,852 Times
in
1,911 Posts
If you are only going to have one brake always the front. The only reason to go rear brake only is if you are on flat paths by the beach on a beach cruiser or some odd set up for someone who is differently able but even then plenty of options for braking with one lever or alternatively.