Do you think that people go to sports car forums and ask if they have a practical advantage over non-sports cars? There is a speed limit so sports cars can't actually go any faster than non-sports cars. The use more gas and have much less space for transporting people and things. They cost way more in upfront cost and insurance. But . . . they look cool and feel faster and are fun.

Parades, man.

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...?itok=17LxLueC

The only way an old geezer can score a hot babe? Maybe applicable to fixed gears as well? :lol:

Think about this for a second. I'm sure there are idiots out there who do just that.

I like the feel of the direct drive, more control over the bike, less maintenance, more aware of everything(You'll know what I mean when you ride one).
These are my opinion.

Meh. Why even bother riding fixed if you're one to just flake out and coast.

Mainly to avoid pedal strike and still have a fixed gear. And a little extra for steep hills. To me that's analogous to wanting to have brakes when you could just pedal slower.

To me, part of riding a fixed gear is understanding and committing to what it is, not something you can switch on and off. If you want to coast then stick to a freewheel. As for you analogy, I have no idea what you're talking about. Feeling like you screwed yourself by heading out brakeless? Kidding aside, I get it but I don't agree. Brakes are one thing, fixed/free is something else.

Exactly. When you ride fixed, you must adjust your riding style to the constraints of the drivetrain. I corner differently fixed than free. I don't counter-steer as much, which leans the bike more, and take a different line. I've never yet crashed from pedal strike on a fixed bike, but I have running geared when I tried to pedal through a turn leaned over too far.

Brake analogy: a safety feature that isn't fully in the spirit of fixed gear.

This, and the post above, are the first examples in this thread alluding to possible pedal strike in corners as an advantage for fixed gears. Before this, it was cited as a potential problem of fixed gear vs single speed. For those who don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater (who would like all the other fixed gear advantages and experiences but won't because they'll cut a corner like on a regular road bike) it seems like a viable idea. If it's even safe - I don't know what would happen if you were coasting downhill at 35 or 40 and the clutch popped out. I imagine instant rear wheel skid or the pedals throwing your feet off and flailing about the legs. Maybe that's the real idea-killer?

Wat?

Just skip it.

Um, no.

+1

Or maybe we're just not "zen" enough.

I ride fixed all over London. I also ride a road bike, and I live centrally so to get out to the country side I have to ride through traffic. I feel infinitely more confident in traffic on my fixed gear. I have much more balance and control. I can get through the tiniest gaps on my fixie, places I wouldn't dare go on my road bike.

I think it is because I have the option to back pedal and stand on my pedals. I can literally stand still, pop my front wheel around, and manoeuvre through traffic quickly. You just can't do that with a free wheel bike. It's hard to explain, but if you really ride your fixie, you get it.

Where I live, it's lots of traffic and lots of flats. If I ever move out of London, it will be less traffic and more hills and I'll flip the wheel to free. All of the advantages of fixed go out the window if you don't ride in traffic, and spinning crazy fast on long downhills gets kind of old.

^^ I think that's true. Maneuverability in tight traffic was one of the main reasons I preferred riding fixed in the city when I lived in Philly. The traffic dynamic in LA is totally different though, and I prefer my road bike most of the time over here.

elaborate

It is more hilly on your side of town and some of those hills are long

The hills are one thing, and most of the roads I ride on are pretty wide and fast. If there's no bike lane, I'm typically just sticking to the right lane and letting traffic pass me. Philly, on the other hand, was full of narrow one-way streets with lots of tight squeezes and slow traffic. So if you could squeeze through tight spaces and ride between cars, you'd make it through the city much faster than a car could. I guess you get that in parts of LA too, but it doesn't seem as widespread in my experience.

Nah, the only one way streets are in DTLA and they're still all at least two lanes wide.

Plus DTLA has crazy nonsense like Bunker Hill. First time I saw that thing I was like...

http://arve.in/wat.jpg

Which "no", that brakes aren't a safety feature, that clutch could be safer, or that the two couldn't be comparable? Or that there's only one way a fixie should be, and anything else is wrong?

No, seriously. It's on topic of fixed gear vs ss and it's not clear exactly what you're dismissing.

Oh boy.

... which is exactly what you imply when stating that using brakes isn't in the "spirit" of fixed gear. Singularity.

if u meant that a fixie should be brakless, that's just stupid. if not, u shud clarify,

Have you taken Alvarado around Echo Park? gawd

Isn't "fully" in the spirit, which is simply what I've seen written. As in "not 100% in the pure spirit of a fixie", and optional but recommended as I've read here. Not to mention Premium Rush :lol:

I personally wouldn't ride one without a front brake - no slur intended. I don't think it at all implies "one right way".