Was that way myself until a about a year ago. Over the past couple years have been on rides with folks riding single speed (or fixed gear) bikes and was jealous, for lack of a better term. Especially on the SoCal Riv Ride back in 2009. Was really yearning for a Quickbeam by the end of the ride. Decided after getting a Cross Check last year to give it a try. Had Jim Thill build a wheel and put it on the bike. And took it for a ride. Then another. Then another. I liked it. A lot.
There are some limitations with my single speed riding - climbing is slower and will often look for alternate route rather than heading for steep hills. Then again can probably get around 90 percent of the Twin Cities metro area without having to do an ugly (to me) climb. And climbing even out of my side street in winter with studded tires was more chore than I'd like. But overall, it's a fun alternative to shifting. Plus, a single speed is a great excuse why I can't keep up with faster riders. Which is just about every body else out there. Eric Platt (Counting down the days until next Monday) On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:32:22 PM UTC-5, Way Rebb wrote: > The last single speed I had was as a kid and his StingRay. Getting a > bike with gears was a revelation. I remember actually riding, not > pushing the bike, up 73rd in Oakland with a big smile on my face. I > doubt, in fact I know, I'd never get a single speed. I can get the > same effect by not changing gears for a while. Maybe if it had all > the braze ons for a Rohloff or something like that. Some people seem > to like them, just not for me. > > On Apr 9, 7:11 pm, ted <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jim writes: "People think "single-speed" and in the same thought they > > > > think "beater" or "winter bike" or "bar bike" or whatever other > > utilitarian, un-romantic category applies." > > > > I figure Jim's dealt with way more folks buying bikes than I have so I > > wouldn't take issue with him about what "people" in the aggregate > > think. But I sure don't think that way. When I got my first ss/fixed > > bike (after grade school that is), I was concerned about winter in the > > midwest. I didn't want rear derailers freezing up packed full of > > slush. I wanted fenders so I wouldn't get covered with slush. I > > thought the 1/8th inch chain would lower the loads and wear better. > > But I wasn't particularly thinking cheep. I got campi track hubs, > > moderate weight tubular rims, suntour superbe cranks, lyotard platform > > pedals (ok they weren't expensive but they were nice), and chinelli > > bar and stem. If I could have afforded a better frame I think I would > > have. > > > > I understand fear of theft driving a desire for cheep. But not fear of > > the elements. I have never hesitated to take a nice bike out into the > > rain or snow because I was afraid it would get wrecked. I also see no > > conflict between utilitarian and aesthetics/elegance/beauty etc. Have > > you ever used snap-on tools? > > > > Clearly not enough people will pay 1k for a dedicated SS frame and > > fork to support the SO/QB in the marketplace. I just find it odd if > > thats not because almost nobody (outside of hipsterdom which, as noted > > previously, has a different aesthetic) really knows they like riding > > em. Of course I think lots of things are odd. > > > > On Apr 9, 3:16 am, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, in reference to Ted's comment about the Cross-check being more > an analog to the Hillborne than to the SO: > > > > > That's definitely true if you're talking about the Cross-check as a > geared bike. In that case, the two bikes have a lot of similarities, except > one looks fancier and costs $600 more (for the frameset only). The price > difference is more profound if you compare the CC stock complete bike to a > similarly equipped Hillborne, which is not available as a mass-market > complete bike. But lots of people, for various reasons, think the price > difference on the Riv is plenty acceptable. Lots of people are willing to > shell out for a special bike. Cool. > > > > > But single-speeds are different. People think "single-speed" and in > the same thought they think "beater" or "winter bike" or "bar bike" or > whatever other utilitarian, un-romantic category applies. In that case, you > look at that $600 price difference and you think about rust and dents, and > that Surly, what it lacks in panache, it makes up in ruggedness and, > ultimately, in the worst case scenario, replaceability. In the case of > single-speeds, the preciousness that many of us assign to Rivendell > bicycles is a drawback. And that's why I say more mundane frames like the > CC make it hard to sell the QB/SO. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/hScuxbQe6RoJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
