# Front Brake Only....



## real stonie (Mar 30, 2006)

Without posting a Sheldon Brown link....why do most ss/fixies utilize a FBO?


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

Fixies, yes....SS, no.... With a fixie the can apply back pressure to the cranks so the rear wheel acts as a brake..

With single speed, it's not possible so a rear brake is needed


----------



## FatTireFred (Jan 31, 2005)

not quite... ss w/ FBO is kinda idiotic. just think about it for a sec, imagine coasting down a hill and trying to stop real fast


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

Put brakes on front and rear as intended. You like your knees? I like mine. Respect your body or it will make you pay later.


----------



## roadfix (Jun 20, 2006)

In general, over time, if you ride both fixed and SS, you will see the reason why both brakes are essential when running SS, and only a front brake is sufficient (for the most part) when running fixed.

But of course, strictly from a safety standpoint, it's best to run both brakes on both fixed and SS set ups.


----------



## real stonie (Mar 30, 2006)

Works for me...thanks for the tips. I'm building my first ss and hsould be done in a month or so.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

A from Il said:


> Put brakes on front and rear as intended. You like your knees? I like mine. Respect your body or it will make you pay later.


From what I understand it isn't so much having the front brake only that blows knees out as much as going up massive hills without the proper gearing.


----------



## Guest (Oct 25, 2009)

I feel fine on a fixie with only a front brake.


----------



## Balderick (Jul 11, 2006)

kytyree said:


> I feel fine on a fixie with only a front brake.


Me too, but it is really nice to have both the front and rear brakes when a real emergency stop is required. I try to avoid using the hand brakes, but there are times when I need to.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

Balderick said:


> Me too, but it is really nice to have both the front and rear brakes when a real emergency stop is required. I try to avoid using the hand brakes, but there are times when I need to.


Well, the rear brake is pretty much irrelevant in a real emergency stop. But it is useful in dragging on a long descent, and in wet or loose surface situations, where a hard-braked front wheel might skid.

I run a front brake only, and I use it.


----------



## Cygnus (Nov 26, 2004)

waldo425 said:


> From what I understand it isn't so much having the front brake only that blows knees out as much as going up massive hills without the proper gearing.


That would seem intuitive, but it's not always true. i ride almost exclusively SS and fixed with alot of climbing. no real knee problems.


----------



## jmlapoint (Sep 4, 2008)

FG - Front Lever Brake.
SS - Always 2 Brakes.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

Cygnus said:


> That would seem intuitive, but it's not always true. i ride almost exclusively SS and fixed with a lot of climbing. no real knee problems.


Same here. My commuter is a fixed gear and I have to do at least two big climbs each time and a bunch of rollers. I ride with a 44x16 gearing. I haven't had any knee problems. I have a friend that is in PT because of his though. I don't remember what his gearing was but it wasn't working too well for him obviously.

Whats your gearing?


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

waldo425 said:


> From what I understand it isn't so much having the front brake only that blows knees out as much as going up massive hills without the proper gearing.


I ride alot of hills on a single speed as well as some cross riding both single speed and fixed. I have bad knees allready. There is no problem untill I start with that stopping by resisting the cranks business. Even worse is skid stopping. I can do it easy but it kills my knees. 

Believe you me, if you dont have knee problems, you dont want them..


----------



## roadfix (Jun 20, 2006)

Most long distance FG riders run both brakes, and as someone already mentioned the rear being especially useful during long descents.

Once I did a long distance ride with 10k of elevation running just a front brake on the FG. Big mistake. My hand and legs were in constant fatigue from all the braking and back pedaling during long descents.
The following year on the same exact ride I ran two brakes on the FG and that made a huge different in comfort level, and made the ride that much more enjoyable.


----------



## Cygnus (Nov 26, 2004)

waldo425 said:


> Whats your gearing?


same, 44x16. my knees are in far better condition than when i used to competitive court sports. 

as mentioned in another thread, i have another bike set up as a 2x2 SS with a climbing gear for long sustained climbs in mt passes. that's not for me knees, though, i just can't climb over 10% for many miles in my cruising gear, also 44x16.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

A from Il said:


> I ride alot of hills on a single speed as well as some cross riding both single speed and fixed. I have bad knees allready. There is no problem untill I start with that stopping by resisting the cranks business. Even worse is skid stopping. I can do it easy but it kills my knees.
> 
> Believe you me, if you dont have knee problems, you dont want them..


Thats a very good point. Some are more prone to knee problems. If I don't have a good fit, saddle and cleat wise I notice pain very quickly. Normally whenever I'm commuting I will just lightly put resistance to the pedals and the majority of the stopping power comes from the front brake. Most of the stopping force comes from the front brake anyways (I could quote Sheldon Brown here but I wont) and I use the front brake probably 80% to 90% on my road bike.


----------



## FatTireFred (Jan 31, 2005)

A from Il said:


> I ride alot of hills on a single speed as well as some cross riding both single speed and fixed. I have bad knees allready. There is no problem untill I start with that stopping by resisting the cranks business. Even worse is skid stopping. I can do it easy but it kills my knees.
> 
> Believe you me, if you dont have knee problems, you dont want them..




so was ss/fg the initial cause of your knee problems, or an exacerbating factor?


----------



## ukiahb (Jan 26, 2003)

roadfix said:


> Most long distance FG riders run both brakes, and as someone already mentioned the rear being especially useful during long descents.
> 
> Once I did a long distance ride with 10k of elevation running just a front brake on the FG. Big mistake. My hand and legs were in constant fatigue from all the braking and back pedaling during long descents.
> The following year on the same exact ride I ran two brakes on the FG and that made a huge different in comfort level, and made the ride that much more enjoyable.


+1...ran front only for five years and that worked fine most of the time, but had a few scary moments on bumpy descents when the rear wheel got really light...not so bad when riding alone but dangerous when in a group and did not want to be the rider that caused a pileup. Added a rear brake and don't have this problem anymore.


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

FatTireFred said:


> so was ss/fg the initial cause of your knee problems, or an exacerbating factor?


Nope. And I can see where this could go. I just dont want to see anyone having any knee problems from whatever. Thats all. 

My knees dont bother me on the bike unless I push it hard on my FG. I tend not to do it so much if I have a rear brake.


----------



## f3rg (May 11, 2008)

People ride fixies with a front brake only because they read on the internets that it was cool to do so, and they want to feel like they fit in.


----------



## FatTireFred (Jan 31, 2005)

f3rg said:


> People ride fixies with a front brake only because they read on the internets that it was cool to do so, and they want to feel like they fit in.




sorry, FBO fixed gears were around long before the internets


----------



## roadfix (Jun 20, 2006)

f3rg said:


> People ride fixies with a front brake only because they read on the internets that it was cool to do so, and they want to feel like they fit in.


Sorry, I don't agree. 
Running brakeless is the cool thing to do so they feel like they fit in.


----------



## Balderick (Jul 11, 2006)

JCavilia said:


> Well, the rear brake is pretty much irrelevant in a real emergency stop. But it is useful in dragging on a long descent, and in wet or loose surface situations, where a hard-braked front wheel might skid.
> 
> I run a front brake only, and I use it.


Agree the rear brake is useful to drag on long descents, esp when tired - gives the legs a rest. 

I think I get where you are coming from on the "pretty much irrelevant in a real emergency stop", and whilst the rear brake does not contribute a great deal of stopping power in a panic stop I find there is a need to control it. I find the control I get through the hand brake seems to come much more naturally than through the pedals. That may be because I relatively new to fixed gear bikes - every single bike (bar my current track bike) I have had over the past 35 or so years has had a freewheel - but perhaps someone who has spent a lot of time on a fixie would find the opposite to be true.

I try to avoid using either hand brake on my fixie, but I do use them when I need to.


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

If you like riding on the hoods with drop bars, then having both brakes is nice.


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

nightfend said:


> If you like riding on the hoods with drop bars, then having both brakes is nice.


You don't need two brakes for that -- only two hoods. I have a front brake attached to the left lever, and a dummy hood with the lever removed on the right.


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2009)

nightfend said:


> If you like riding on the hoods with drop bars, then having both brakes is nice.



Or you can use a cable splitter and run the front brake with both levers.


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

FatTireFred said:


> sorry, FBO fixed gears were around long before the internets


Al Gore invented FBO.


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

JCavilia said:


> You don't need two brakes for that -- only two hoods.  I have a front brake attached to the left lever, and a dummy hood with the lever removed on the right.


That's how I've always done it. FWIW, every time I've tried to run a rear brake on a fixie, I end up locking up the rear wheel all the time. Seems that the added braking action of the fixed gear combined with the rear brake was just too hard to modulate (for me, at least).


----------



## Travmizer (Nov 2, 2009)

roadfix said:


> Sorry, I don't agree.
> Running brakeless is the cool thing to do so they feel like they fit in.



The reason people ride brakeless is either a) they want to do bar spins b) they built it themselves and didn't want to spend extra or c) they didn't want to deal with tuning up brake cables and brake pads


----------



## roadfix (Jun 20, 2006)

Travmizer said:


> The reason people ride brakeless is either a) they want to do bar spins b) they built it themselves and didn't want to spend extra or c) they didn't want to deal with tuning up brake cables and brake pads


So where does the cool part come into play? 
Lately I'm seeing all these teen-aged kids in mi barrio whom half of them can't handle bikes running brakeless. They're not running brakeless for reasons you listed.


----------



## serious (May 2, 2006)

Fixed riders cannot constantly scream "LOOK AT ME, I RIDE A FIXED BIKE", so the lack of brakes (of FBO) does the screaming for them.


----------



## jmlapoint (Sep 4, 2008)

Dave Hickey said:


> Fixies, yes....SS, no.... With a fixie the can apply back pressure to the cranks so the rear wheel acts as a brake..
> 
> With single speed, it's not possible so a rear brake is needed


Totally agree with Dave.
FG = FBO
FG: WILL also work fine with 2-Brakes.
SS = ONLY works well with 2-Brakes
John


----------



## filtersweep (Feb 4, 2004)

Have you ever actually ridden with only a front brake? As others have mentioned, riding brakeless is about the coolness factor (and even that won't kill you if you know what you are doing). Really, there is nothing "cool" about using a front brake.

None of my fixed gears have rear brakes--- and I am convinced my road bike has the longest stopping distance.



f3rg said:


> People ride fixies with a front brake only because they read on the internets that it was cool to do so, and they want to feel like they fit in.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

It's the Willy-Factor.

2 Brakes = 3"
FBO = 6"
No Brakes = 12"


----------



## roadfix (Jun 20, 2006)

The bottom line is that I am able to pose on my FG or SS regardless of how many brakes I'm running. I like to pose at coffee houses, and a lot of chicks dig that.


----------



## serious (May 2, 2006)

filtersweep: *None of my fixed gears have rear brakes--- and I am convinced my road bike has the longest stopping distance.*

Are you suggesting that unweighing and skidding the rear stops faster than using a brake that can be modulated?


----------



## roadfix (Jun 20, 2006)

Well, in my case my road bike appears to have the longest stopping distance simply due to the fact that it can pick up more speed and therefore requires more stopping distance.
I can stop efficiently under most circumstances with the combination of my backpedaling and front brake on the FG. But I don't think it's a more efficient stopper than my road bike.


----------



## filtersweep (Feb 4, 2004)

I am suggesting that a road rim is one of the worst ways to stop a bike--- especially wet rims, hot rims, etc. When I descend on my road bike, I literally feel like I am flying out of control. There is a bit of a delay with the braking, then I slow, then the fading begins. Braking feels more designed for slowing, not stopping. 

I generally don't skid as a practice, although I have skidded equally on my road bike in panic situations (like a car cutting me off and slamming on his brakes to mess with me).

Riding fixed, I have direct control of the rear wheel. It is like slowing in a manual transmission vehicle-- as you are still in gear. It feels very different than pressing the clutch in before hitting the brakes. Of course, I am likely riding at faster speeds descending on my road bike.... but still, there are hills around here where it feels like the brakes barely hold me back.

Regardless, we only have a few square cm of rubber as a contact to brake with anyway. We aren't talking about hydraulic discs and wide tires here.... there isn't much room to modulate braking as it is.

Maybe I just have crappy brakes.... or maybe it just rains too much around here.... but I am not suggesting that skidding stops me faster--- skidding is braking gone wrong 



serious said:


> filtersweep: *None of my fixed gears have rear brakes--- and I am convinced my road bike has the longest stopping distance.*
> 
> Are you suggesting that unweighing and skidding the rear stops faster than using a brake that can be modulated?


----------



## preston811 (Oct 6, 2009)

I could post the Sheldon Brown link but I read somewhere that a FB has 70% of the stopping power of FB+RB. It makes sense that reverse pressure on the pedals can make up for that 30%, and even if it can't, it's gotta be close, and having no rear brake just makes a bike look clean as hell. 

Have you naysayers all ridden fixed? i feel like I can stop from 15mph in about 20meters without brakes or skidding. Foot retention helps.

Brakeless on the other hand is for expert skidders only, who happen to also be a little nuts.


----------



## mushroomking (Sep 26, 2008)

A from Il said:


> Put brakes on front and rear as intended. You like your knees? I like mine. Respect your body or it will make you pay later.


After this post I dont know why there is even the need for further discussion. Everyone has their own opinion when it comes to having brakes on their fixed gear and it makes no sense to me why people argue about it. Some people will quarrel with you day in and day out that they dont need brakes till something stupid happens that could have possibly been avoided by just having one and then they will still feel opinionated. My opinion? Use brakes or dont there need be no discussion its not rocket science .


----------



## oldfixguy (Nov 15, 2009)

While I agree that people argue this particular issue to a degree that boarders on ludicrous I also think it is an important topic. If we do not publicly debate such issues then the extremists take the day through force of opinion. That will not do.


----------



## Balderick (Jul 11, 2006)

filtersweep said:


> I am suggesting that a road rim is one of the worst ways to stop a bike--- especially wet rims, hot rims, etc. When I descend on my road bike, I literally feel like I am flying out of control. There is a bit of a delay with the braking, then I slow, then the fading begins. Braking feels more designed for slowing, not stopping.
> 
> I generally don't skid as a practice, although I have skidded equally on my road bike in panic situations (like a car cutting me off and slamming on his brakes to mess with me).
> 
> ...


Not wanting to offend or flame, but ultimately the questions whether a FBO FG can stop in a shorter distance than a roadbike (all variables like rider, tyres, road surface, efficency of the front braking system etc being equal) comes down to a question of physics - can a rider retard the rear wheel to a greater extent than a similarily skilled rider can retard the rear wheel with a handbrake on a road bike. Without doing a study, but based on my own experiences, I think the answer is the road bike with two hand brakes will win hands down over a FBO FG, especially from high speed, unless the climatic conditions (wet, snow, too hot for fitted pads etc) prejudice the operation of the rear friction brake.

Now, I like stopping my FG with only the pedals as much as I can but I do not for a moment think that my mammoth legs (I look kind of silly in a pair of Budgie Smugglers) can pull the bike up as well as a little block of rubber pressing on the rim.

Fading is not a particular problem for me in my riding either - I weigh 107 kg, and love high speed descents. The only time I had a slight problem with brake fade was down Alpe D'Huez in May this year, and I can tell you I would not be riding down that hill FBO FG! The rental bike I had ran Tiagra brakes (new pads fitted just for me!) and my bikes have Ultegra (bar track bike, which has 105) brakes. The Ultegra brakes may be better than Tiagra - do not know,.

So, not trying to upset anyone, but my experiences, and my sense of logic, means I respectfully disagree with filtersweep.


----------



## BianchiJoe (Jul 22, 2005)

Re: brakes. To me, a rear brake on a FG is like tits on a motor, as my dad used to say. 

Re: knees. I'll be 50 in January, and I've been riding nothing but singlespeed and fixed gears for the last 12 years. I ride a minimum of 100 miles a week in hilly central Texas. My knees have never felt better, and in fact, I credit the lack of gears and coasting with my increased leg strength and overall knee health.


----------



## eddie m (Jul 6, 2002)

Balderick said:


> Not wanting to offend or flame, but ultimately the questions whether a FBO FG can stop in a shorter distance than a roadbike (all variables like rider, tyres, road surface, efficency of the front braking system etc being equal) comes down to a question of physics - can a rider retard the rear wheel to a greater extent than a similarily skilled rider can retard the rear wheel with a handbrake on a road bike. Without doing a study, but based on my own experiences, I think the answer is the road bike with two hand brakes will win hands down over a FBO FG, especially from high speed, unless the climatic conditions (wet, snow, too hot for fitted pads etc) prejudice the operation of the rear friction brake.
> 
> Now, I like stopping my FG with only the pedals as much as I can but I do not for a moment think that my mammoth legs (I look kind of silly in a pair of Budgie Smugglers) can pull the bike up as well as a little block of rubber pressing on the rim.
> 
> So, not trying to upset anyone, but my experiences, and my sense of logic, means I respectfully disagree with filtersweep.


+1
I hardly ever use the rear brake on my freewheel bike, but I use the rear brake on the fixie all the time. The freewheel bike stops as well without the rear brake as with it, but the fixie needs the rear brake to overcome the momentum of your legs. On downhills, a rear brake is the only thing that will bring you back under control if you get spinning to the point where the bike becomes unstable.
The fixies don't need brakes theory is just something made up by guys who know nothing about physics.

em


----------



## serious (May 2, 2006)

BianchiJoe: * I credit the lack of gears and coasting with my increased leg strength and overall knee health.*

I doubt gears specifically affect knee health, but I can tell you without a doubt that coasting (i.e. not moving you legs at all) DOES NOT affect knee health.


----------



## BianchiJoe (Jul 22, 2005)

serious said:


> BianchiJoe: * I credit the lack of gears and coasting with my increased leg strength and overall knee health.*
> 
> I doubt gears specifically affect knee health, but I can tell you without a doubt that coasting (i.e. not moving you legs at all) DOES NOT affect knee health.



I meant the lack of gears and the lack of coasting.


----------



## serious (May 2, 2006)

I know you meant *lack of coasting*, but why do you think coasting affects knee health.


----------



## Balderick (Jul 11, 2006)

I think he means that having to spin your legs on a FG when you would coast on a FW bike means your legs are moving more, and slightly differently, and that tends to both increase leg strength (more work and slightly different work) and knee health (perhaps more flexing and different flexing, coupled to stronger and better developed muscles).


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

Balderick said:


> I think he means that having to spin your legs on a FG when you would coast on a FW bike means your legs are moving more, and slightly differently, and that tends to both increase leg strength (more work and slightly different work) and knee health (perhaps more flexing and different flexing, coupled to stronger and better developed muscles).


Your legs don't exactly move differently, except that they're often either moving much faster or much slower than they would be on a geared bike. The comment re: knee health probably had to do with the concern (often misplaced) about fixed gears being bad for your knees. While they may not be bad for your knees, I can't imagine a scenario that they'd be 'good' for your knees, at least not any more so than riding in general is good for your knees.


----------



## roadfix (Jun 20, 2006)

Just let your legs go noodly if you want to "coast" on the FG.


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

roadfix said:


> Just let your legs go noodly if you want to "coast" on the FG.


Noodly is good, but you have to either unweight the leg as the cranks come 'round so you're not actually braking a little bit. One benefit to shorter cranks on a fixie is that it makes it easier to "float" the pedals with extensive ankling instead of using noodly legs. If your ankles are fixed, or even somewhat fixed, the motion of the cranks moves the entire leg, whereas if your ankles are "floppy" (love those technical terms!) you can minimize the movement of the thighs and therefore minimize braking effect.


----------

