ph4nt0mf1ng3rs

Now I ALWAYS hear people talk about how useless a rear brake is on a fixed-gear bicycle. Someone said on youtube (which I think was pretty ignorant- its up to you what YOU think) that a rear brake actually makes riding worse because it locks up the rear wheel- isn't locking up the rear wheel how you brake on a fixed-gear ANYWAY?

Well in any case, consider this:

Just because your feet are "moving" on the pedals does not mean you are exerting power on the wheels. Thats how I slowed down when my cog/lockring were jacked up. When you do not exert power on the pedals, you are not powering the bike- you are in effect coasting- but the pedals still move because of the nature of the gear being fixed to the wheel.

So you can essentially coast on a fixed gear by simply not exerting power to the pedals, and letting your legs loose- which would by implication mean that a rear brake is not useless at all.

Just my two cents. Any other people wanna put in theirs?

shubonker

The rear brake does not have the stopping power of a front brake. Braking with a rear at moderate speed will lock up your rear wheel and you'll skid. A rear brake is not useless, but it is far less efficient compared to a front brake.

aMull

Most of the stopping power comes from the front brake. On a fixed gear you can already control your rear tire so a rear brake is useless.

cnnrmccloskey

Just like you can not be braking by not squeezing the lever, rear brake is pretty useless, if you want one run it, if you dont, well don't. I've heard estimates for 70-90% of your braking power coming from a front brake, and I feel I can provide adequate back power to completly negate the use of a rear brake

mihlbach

If you have a good front brake, the rear brake (no matter what type) is basically useless for an emergency stop. A rear brake is more useful for modulating speed or when conditions render use the front brake dangerous (loose gravel). I've ridden fixies with a front and rear brake and with only a front brake. I don't find the rear brake to be of much use. Backpedaling on a fixed gear is basically an appropriate surrogate for a rear caliper. I'll use the rear brake from time to time if I'm being lazy and don't feel like backpedaling to modulate speed, but I really don't feel that its necessary.

slimetrail

Having two brakes means you can engage with the bike more. And give your legs a break...

hairnet

if you like it to take forever to come to a stop.

A rear brake is good for redundancy and probably necessary if you're going to be going long descents without over heating your front rim. For normal riding conditions I wouldn't call them useless, just unnecessary as others have said.

Bobby Sixkiller

Front, rear, caliper, disc, coaster or skid - chances are if you're a competent cyclist any/all of the aforementioned devices or methods will get you to a complete stop in the time and distance in which you need to come to a complete stop. Front and rear disc brakes used simultaneously are probably the most effective, and skidding is probably the least effective, but only your personal cycling style and environment can determine what's sufficient for you.

Sixty Fiver

Thanks for playing but... no.

Bobby Sixkiller

You're quite welcome and... yes.

Sixty Fiver

Bobby -

This is essential reading for every ss/ fg newb.

Braking 101

Bobby Sixkiller

Judging by your post count you're clearly the more experienced internet cyclist so I will certainly heed your advice just as soon as I complete my other "ss/fg newb" reading, Intro to Skidding and A Comparative History of Risers v. Drops. When I submit my paper, do you prefer MLA or AP formatting?

PedallingATX

i consider myself a competent cyclist, and skidding is not enough to get me safely to a stop in certain situations. I still ride brakeless, but I'm not gonna sit here and say that skid method is sufficient in all situations. In an emergency situation, ur ****ed unless you can find another path (sidewalk or b/w lanes).

milkcratebasket

The gifu keirin riders that I have seen use only a rear brake when they are road training. However they ride on long country roads not city streets.

Bobby Sixkiller

No braking method is sufficient in all situations. There seems to be a common theme on this sub-forum which is advise people to prepare for certain worst-case scenarios. Of course, those scenarios seem to differ from person to person depending on their own personal preferences. If one prefers to ride a front brake, then the worst case scenario given is one that could be prevented by use of a front brake. If one rides with both brakes, then the worst case scenario is one only mitigated by having both brakes installed, etc...

I hate to break it to you (pun intended) but using skids to stop is no less silly than using a track bike to ride around town.

mrvile

This isn't necessarily true. To keep your legs moving at the exact same rate as the wheels is close to impossible, and in practice you'll notice that you'll always either be putting pressure forward or backward, but never no pressure at all. If you just relax your legs, the wheels/pedals will carry them, but you have to remember that your legs are very heavy. Relaxing your legs is closer to resisting than coasting.

Say you are riding fixed with clipless pedals and are bombing down a hill. You relax your legs, and your feet are carried by the pedals and you will continue to accelerate. However, there will always be a point at which you can't accelerate anymore because your legs just cannot keep up with the pedals (this threshold is different for everyone). At that point you are resisting and probably bouncing all over the saddle, but you are at your maximum speed. However, if you could coast, you would just continue to accelerate until outside factors, such as the hub, tires, wind, etc., hold you at a maximum.

Anyway I have no idea what this has to do with braking so I'll stop here.

Sixty Fiver

My post count now reflects how many miles I used to ride in a year.

Cool huh ?

TejanoTrackie 

Hey Bobby, Sixty Fiver is not an internet cyclist, he's a real world been there done that cyclist, and doesn't need or deserve your snarky attitude. Are you really interested in intelligent give and take, or are you just someone trying to stir up trouble here?

Bobby Sixkiller

Yes it is actually (sincerely, no sarcasm meant.)

Bobby Sixkiller

I assure you that my comment was in jest. I thought that was obvious. Then again, I thought I had just made up the idea of an "internet cyclist" but you seem to know what I'm talking about, so I'm not sure what to think now.

Six jours

I use two brakes on my FG. The front sees most use and is obviously capable of more power than the rear one. I also use the rear brake and I have never -- never -- locked up the rear wheel. If a person cannot apply a rear brake on a bicycle -- fixed or geared -- without locking up the wheel, I hope that person never ends up anywhere near me on a bike.

I am generally in the habit of applying both brakes. They both need to be modulated in order to prevent locking up the wheels and/or flipping yourself. The way to do this cannot be adequately described on the internet and I am profoundly disappointed that anyone could possibly need it to be. Seriously: if you can't figure this out immediately, intuitively, then you need to take up golf or something.

And whoever said that it is wrong to say one particular style of braking is correct for all situations is absolutely correct. The "Only the front brake!" folks are going to end up on their asses if they try it on sand or ice. But rear braking only -- whether with a handbrake, coaster brake, or pedal brake -- is a very slow way to stop. In smooth dry conditions fastest stops occur with both brakes applied to nearly the point of lock-up, and the body weight held as far back as possible. In less than smooth dry conditions the back brake becomes more important and the front becomes more dangerous. Experience and a functioning brain stem are required for best results.

Short version: the OP is essentially correct.

ph4nt0mf1ng3rs

Well it was not exactly an issue of debate for me and I never really researched why exactly certain circles flame a rear brake or find it unncessary- because it is still a brake...

In any case, yeah. No offense, but i kinda figured (as did anyone who knows anything about brakes on any moving vehicle) that front brakes > rear brakes.

I ride brakeless atm, but I jacked up my hub by not tighetinig my lockring- ima go SS for a while when i install BOTH brakes.

XD

Thanks for all the input guys.....btw. Arguing on the internet is kinda dumb lol.

AEO

well, if they're training for track situations, then it would make sense to ride a bike that would be similar to the one actually used at races.
not that it's a good idea or anything, but keirin is obviously full of pea brained individuals who only know one thing, which is to negotiate banked left turns.

muckymucky

just get a front brake for safety please. (not sarcasm)
i just set a bad example.

also helmet please. one of our guys just got 45 stiches above his eye for not having neither~

LupinIII

when you're not looking, i'm stealing your rear brake and burning so you cut this seatpost mounted lever garbage out.

watch out