I'm doing the exact opposite thing. Actually, I actually started on a road bike. Then for simplicity's sake, I decided to try SS. Tried it, loved it. Now I've started gaining a real interest for FG and I'm making the switch to try it out.

Haven't noticed this FG to SS trend. I understand that SS is easier and more convenient to ride (especially taking coasting into account), less to worry about, etc, but I don't know if it's really more (or less) functional than FG.

Or maybe it is? Enlighten a noob.

I feel all its good for is training, but thats just from what I've read and seen, I road FG for a while and didn't like it at all so I went back to SS, it's all about the individual.

Same here.

SS is the most pointless thing ever, it doesnt have the advantages of a fixed or the advantages of gears. It just sucks.

if this was a so called "fad" then it was the greatest ever. it put more bicycles on the road then automobiles.

Fixed has advantages? Singlespeed can coast at least...

I does have the advantage of coasting down a hill faster then you can pedal on a fixed.

I think lumping FG & SS together is a big mistake. The only similarity is a single gear ratio. I have some dedicated SS bikes and I have to say they're fun in that they require a different approach to the hilly terrain where I live and generally remind me that I don't need to be as 'twitchy' changing gears all the time as I can be sometimes. But the riding/athletic experience is just like any other bike except with a handicap of a single gear. FG is an entirely different deal in terms of road feel/feedback, anticipation, muscle use and -of course - no resting. I don't understand why you wouldn't ride whatever you want to ride & just enjoy it....I think all bikes are & look cool when they're being ridden - even the dorky looking ones!

Truth! It's like comparing getting a hard on and eating ice cream: both very pleasant but very different experiences.

Haha! Very well said.

Cheap (no initial cost of buying shifty bits, cassettes and double rings)
Reliable (does not come out of adjustment, does not freeze into the wrong gear in the winter time or with mud)
Builds strength at different cadences (similar to a fixed)
The mechanical simplicity is attractive to some.

I have to disagree with you. The only "advantage" you trade off is that you can't skid, and you gain the advantage that you can coast down hills or when traction is sketchy. You can also corner sharper without worrying about pedal strike.

After riding the fixie for a while, I recently switched over to a singlespeed to spice things up. I have to say I like it better.

1. You can coast. You can also stop better. More wear on the tire. Healthier all around.

2. No "cheating". It's a freewheel, so You actually have to pedal, instead of relying on the momentum to carry you on flats.

3. More maneuveraribility in traffic. Brakes+coasting helps turn corners fasters.

4. You can fly down a hill without killing your knees or looking like a doop.

5. You get more athletic working your way up a hill see #2.

6. Simplicity, with the added bonus of not having to worry about lockrings.

7. You don't resemble a hamster in wheel, and your bike looks like a stripped down road bike, not a mutated "tarck" day-glo abortion.

Riding fixed is just starting to get popular here, but there are also SS conversions gaining popularity too, as they are much cheaper to do than a fixed conversion (unless you do a suicide hub).

Since I volunteer at the local bike kitchen, I can also say that i'm seeing that road bikes and coaster brake cruisers are also gaining popularity, so here, which is western Canada (Edmonton), biking is gaining popularity as a whole.

Wouldn't it be the other way around? You stop pedaling with a freewheel, it keeps moving forward on the flats a certain distance due to momentum.

You stop pedaling with a cog, your legs counteract the momentum and you skid or slow down.

Am I missing something?

For the majority of bikes owned by people that post here, the only noteworthy difference from a mechanical standpoint is which way the back wheel is mounted. Yes, they are operated differently, but mechanically, they're essentially the same.

There are definitely more "tarck" riders now. As these low priced bikes became available it has allowed a lot of young people to purchase them. Fixed gear is the new BMX bike for kids.

I think the point is that the FG and SS experiences are very different. For example a FG almost demands good foot retention, but it is pretty much optional on an SS. You need to be constantly alert on a FG when descending hills or cornering or making tight turns, but can be pretty casual on a SS. For me my FG is a much more intense experience than riding my SS. I get a hard workout on my FG, but don't break a sweat on my SS. My FG is a performance machine with a stiff aluminum track frame and clipless pedals, whereas my SS is an old vintage steel road frame with relaxed geometry, fenders, rack, and double-sided pedals w/o clips or straps. FG and SS are similar but not the same.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

living in dayton, i'd have to agree

nm, stupid kevin bacon joke.

I don't think so, just seasonal variation

http://www.google.com/trends?q=fixed+gear

I think you are onto something, here, though I don't necessarily agree with everything you wrote. I definitely believe that a FG bike requires more attention from the rider, and it will appeal to some people. I like the extreme simplicity and relax of riding SS - so I guess there are two distinct categories (at least) of riders, generally speaking. Not that one can't belong to both, of course.

What I sometimes do, when riding one of my SS is, I just go around, for hours, aimlessly and at less than a moderate pace, just enjoying myself, feeling transported as in a dance, and never wanting to go back home, ever more approaching a state of nirvana of some sorts. I love those afternoons a lot. I feel one with my bike and with the world. A FG rider, I imagine (I tried it, this is from my FG experience) would approach nirvana in a state of much higher alertness, one that, for me at least, wouldn't be sustainable for more than 1 hour, two at best, after which I would be mentally exhausted. I am sure a FG rider will feel one with his bike and with the world, too, but coming from a completely different direction.

FG for some (like me) is like riding BMX without the disadvantage of having to look like a ****** on his kid brother's tiny bike. With the introduction of frames like the cutter and the star****ers xenon, those of us who used to have fun riding wheelies and barspinning can do it again on an actual bike that can go places. And that's not a bad thing, IMO.

that makes sense..and the important thing is just riding....

WHen i first built my (first) FG bike, my 'test ride' ended up being a 20 mile excursion along the Gulf coast w/ my wife while we were visiting family in FL. I didn't see..or dont' see, that is....a real limit to time or wearing because of concentration...it just becomes natural. What did happen though was about 4 hours later I went to put on the parking brake on our Suburban and realized that I couldn't lift my leg.....lol....the use of different muscles and the degree that FG riding is a different athletic experience became real clear right then & there!

But how often do you see anything besides gear (as opposed to actual riding) being discussed on the forums? I've seen dozens of "which bars/pedals/frame/bike/seat/cog" threads, but don't really recall any about training, nutrition, or anything to do much with rider performance. And no, "How do I do nutz2bars skidz" doesn't count.

the hipsters are getting into cafe racer motorcycles