I gave a tongue-in-cheek response last weekend, promising a proper response the next day, which never came. Here it is, a week late. Comments interspersed with your text.
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Larry Colen <[email protected]> wrote: > It's a pretty bike, and I've got a lot of respect for anyone who can ride in > those sorts of conditions. Thank you. > > What I don't understand is the functional advantage of riding a fixie. I think Bob W hit the highlights in terms of ease and economy of maintenance and repairs. Given the miles messengers put on their bikes, less maintenance is a big deal, especially in the winter when salt and grit eat brake pads and bearings. Fewer moving parts means fewer things to replace/repair and less down-time. Fixies are superior in bad weather conditions, especially where traction is compromised. No applying of the brakes only to have your wheel spinning for several revolutions before the rims are "squeegied" dry by the brake pads then having them grab, cause a skid (often mid-corner) and fall. In the snow or on ice, the speed of the rear wheel can be precisely moderated and corners can be taken much more safely. I think there's something more than that, though. It's hard to explain if you've not ridden a brakeless fixie. One rides a different way. Since steering out of danger (rather than panic braking) is often the best emergency avoidance measure, one must be aware of what's going on around them. One tends to look farther down the road for imminent danger, assessing possibilities and being aware of escape routes much earlier than on regular bikes. It's been compared to roller blading. On a track bike, one gets more of a sense that rider and bike are a single unit which seems to make a difference zig-zagging through city traffic. Again, it's hard to explain (sort of a zen thing) unless you've ridden one. Do you often have to pedal backwards? I can't pedal backwards. If I do, the bike goes backwards. > And why not have brakes, other than to show that you're too cool to need them? No doubt, that "coolness" factor is part of it, at least for some people, but there are certainly other reasons. I guess it has to do with that "zen" thing, I suppose. It's analogous to those who would say that people actually take more chances if they wear a helmet. If you know you have a brake as a back-up, you'll ride differently, take more chances, knowing that you've got a brake as a bail-out. Riding brakeless is a more pure way to ride - you've always got to be in control. Like walking a tightrope without a net, if you will. > Even if you can pedal backwards hard enough to lock up the rear wheel in an > emergency, that only gives you half the traction for stopping (less actually) > than if you also had a front brake. The idea is to not need to panic-stop, or if you do to steer out of it (see above). > > In the bay area the fixie fad has served to reduce our hipster population as > several times a year, someone on one fails to stop for a red light. I've seen lots of newbies riding fixed gear bikes in ways that scare the hell out of me. They shouldn't be riding them. I always advise anyone considering riding a fixed gear bike to ride a front brake for at least a year before going brakeless - it takes at least that long to really, ~really~ learn how to ride one properly IMHO. Lots of people I know have tried and decided that fixies aren't for them. It's a matter of personal taste, I guess. For me they're great for city riding, but If I go on a long right in the country, freewheels, gears and brakes are a necessity, no doubt about it. Long rides on track bikes are just too tiring. In town, however, they're fun, fast and (yes) cool. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
