![]() |
Also the look on the local LBS guys face when you tell them the kind of miles you ride and occasionally pull a trailer with 1-2 kids in it.
|
Originally Posted by 50voltphantom
(Post 16967437)
Also the look on the local LBS guys face when you tell them the kind of miles you ride and occasionally pull a trailer with 1-2 kids in it.
|
Long time bmxer. I got old enough to be embarrassed about being on "a kids bike" and I got an old well kept raliegh and destroyed it in less than a month. Replaced it with a similar but very light motobecane and toasted it in three weeks. Got an old miyata pista by luck at a charity bike sale in the wealthy part of town and that took five years to break down. Fixed is it for me.
|
it's a simple matter of science
|
The devil made me do it.
|
It's also a great way to exercise, the greater the distance the better workout you're getting. Also I do it because it's so much better than getting stuck in traffic if you also have a car. And I just go out explore and end up finding a lot of new cool places I've never seen before.
|
They always work
|
natural progression from my tricycle
|
Gangster rap.
|
I live in Tampa. Before that, I lived in Panama City, FL. It's flat, you don't need extra gears. If I lived in Boulder, CO or on Nob Hill in Frisco, I would probably ride a roadie with seemingly endless gear options.
|
Simplicity, beauty, efficiency, Sheldon, friends that also ride FG/SS.
Also, short climbs (< 5 min) don't require gears. |
Raisin bran for breakfast.
|
Originally Posted by mitchellp93
(Post 16984433)
It's also a great way to exercise, the greater the distance the better workout you're getting. Also I do it because it's so much better than getting stuck in traffic if you also have a car. And I just go out explore and end up finding a lot of new cool places I've never seen before.
Originally Posted by idc
(Post 16991940)
Also, short climbs (< 5 min) don't require gears.
|
Originally Posted by TMonk
(Post 16993001)
OK, what does require gears than?
Hizoku Cycles ? Single Speed Freewheeled / Fixed Gear Bike History But personally I prefer gears if I'm doing longer climbs, say, 5min+. |
My opinion has been that if you're in shape and reasonably geared, then descending is really the worst part of riding fixed.
|
Originally Posted by TMonk
(Post 16993248)
My opinion has been that if you're in shape and reasonably geared, then descending is really the worst part of riding fixed.
|
Originally Posted by TMonk
(Post 16993248)
My opinion has been that if you're in shape and reasonably geared, then descending is really the worst part of riding fixed.
|
yeah that **** blows
|
i ride a fixed gear for the exercise and because its better than no gears. gears have always really annoyed me, i hate the clicking sound of the chain throwing itself across the sprocket to get in gear. not to mention the time it takes to actually do it, its about 5 seconds of click click click click *now in gear* finally i can go up the hill or whatever. instead with a fixie im already half way up the hill nice and quick. simples :)
|
Originally Posted by TMonk
(Post 16993248)
My opinion has been that if you're in shape and reasonably geared, then descending is really the worst part of riding fixed.
For example. Expressway Hill is about 3.5kms long, averages over 6%, spends most of it at 8% (got a couple of short, false flats) and tops out at 10%. Coming down, my cadences hit 180 on the last, long run, sit around 150+ for the rest (lots of corners) and I get to the bottom with my heart rate monitor having hysterics BUT, it's still a bloody sight better than trying to get up the bugger. Quite frankly, walking selected bits of it makes a lot of sense and those who think walking is a crime should try riding real hills. Riding a geared bike makes more sense going up Expressway Hill and Flaggy Hill (shorter but steeper), but those two are the only bits in all my riding where it does, so I'll get off and walk if needed and enjoy my fixed gear for the other 98% of my riding. |
I'd much rather ride up a 3.5km 8% hill on my fg then down it... but I'm fit and reasonably geared. The point we're trying to make is, the longer the hill, the worse the descent will be. "Reasonably geared" and "fit" are sort of blanket terms, I realize.
Me: 42t/16 or 18t cogs, ride both equally 155lbs 300w FTP competitive cyclist you: fatter and weaker? Nothing personal, but if I was capable of less w/kg I might agree with you. We're young bucks here! |
The thing about fixed descents is that you can't be super aggressive on the turns like you might on a geared bike. Pedal strike sucks but pedal strike at 45 mph off a 100 ft cliff sucks much worse.
|
Originally Posted by TMonk
(Post 16995194)
I'd much rather ride up a 3.5km 8% hill on my fg then down it... but I'm fit and reasonably geared.
300W FTP is pretty impressive. |
Thanks!
That's where I sit when I'm mid race season fitness. Right now I'm about 5lbs heavier and ~10w off, but I've started to become lazy as I am done racing till next year, and won't be "training" until October, just riding around. It puts me at 4.26w/kg, or near the upper end of w/kg at FTP for road racers of my class (cat3): http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/wp-co...rprofiling.jpg Goal for next year: cat2!!!!!!!, possibly cat3 track as well but I may be spreading myself too thin. |
Originally Posted by TMonk
(Post 16993248)
My opinion has been that if you're in shape and reasonably geared, then descending is really the worst part of riding fixed.
Funny how these things work, though - usually you don't get descents like that without climbs like that, and vice versa. ;) |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:38 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.