# Singlespeed with rear brake only



## PdxMark (Feb 3, 2004)

Saw a guy today with a Langster SS with only a rear brake. I asked him why he did it, and he said he liked the simplicity... Wow... I guess Simple is his middle name...


----------



## dobber (Jun 28, 2004)

PdxMark said:


> Saw a guy today with a Langster SS with only a rear brake. I asked him why he did it, and he said he liked the simplicity... Wow... I guess Simple is his middle name...


How would a SingleSpeed with one brake be much different than a Fixed with no brake?


----------



## paipo (Jul 24, 2004)

*fg vs ss*

I have a mecahnical question regarding this topic. I, too, am interested in simplicity and the fg/ss flip-flops, pure fg, or pure ss intrigue me. I want to try this method of bicycling out for alternative spinning and cadence road rides.

I've seen pure fg bikes with no brakes at all and they're primarily for the track where everyone is going in the same direction...so I understand the reason behind it.

But for road riding with all of the variables it presents, wouldn't having at least a front brake be the prudent/wise thing to have?

And if you're spinning along at a decent cadence and some knucklehead inadvertantly decides to ruin your day "because I didn't see you", wouldn't front AND rear brakes on a pure fg or an fg on an fg/ss flip-flop help slow you down faster than your legs and front brakes could alone? And here's the mechanical question: Who would be able to stop quicker from the same forward speed between two riders who have the same spinting speeds on identical pure fg bikes with no brakes...the lighter rider or the heavier rider?

These thoughts I weigh on my mind as I contemplate the pros/cons of fg w/no brakes, fg w/f brake only, fg w/f&r brakes, fg/ss w/f brake, fg/ss w/f&r brakes, and ss w/f&r brakes bikes that's be ridden ON THE ROAD.

I know that these types of bike, especially in fg mode takes another set of skills to master and I want it to be as positive an experience as can be at least during the initial stages of the learning curve. One more thing: Short of rolling your with a roadbike/fg conversion parts, are there complete fg or ss bikes out there from the manufacturers that would be suitable for the long road ride and still be ergonomically comfortable and not so ' race bike twitchy'? I guess I'm looking for an fg or ss roadbike and not a track bike. Your thoughts? Thanks.


----------



## filtersweep (Feb 4, 2004)

paipo said:


> I know that these types of bike, especially in fg mode takes another set of skills to master and I want it to be as positive an experience as can be at least during the initial stages of the learning curve. One more thing: Short of rolling your with a roadbike/fg conversion parts, are there complete fg or ss bikes out there from the manufacturers that would be suitable for the long road ride and still be ergonomically comfortable and not so ' race bike twitchy'? I guess I'm looking for an fg or ss roadbike and not a track bike. Your thoughts? Thanks.


As a recent convert (in both sense of the word) I can say the fixed skill set is very easy to master. You might question your sanity once or twice, but you will get past it and learn to love it. 

I would just take a look at any off-the-shelf setup and look at its geometry. Road geometry is road geometry.

As for single speed, I find it rather useless- a worse of both worlds situation- and getting back to the original thread, running SS without a rear brake is simply stupid. Running a Langster as a SS is double stupid ,)


----------



## PdxMark (Feb 3, 2004)

On any bike the front brake gives about 80% of the stopping power, give or take. 

A fixie can be stopped just by resisting pedal motion, and some folks like the "purity" of that. My opinion is that that's dangerous and probably illegal in places like Oregon that require a bike to have a brake. Either way, resistance of pedal motion is probably at least as effective as a rear brake, give or take... assuming you aren't going too fast. The result is that many fixies use just a front brake. Between that and resistance of the pedals you get pretty good braking.

SS bikes are like regular bikes. You can't resist the pedals. A front brake alone is at best marginal, and probably dangerous, because of the lack of stopping power -- max 80% of a regular bike. A rear brake alone is at least as bad as a brakeless fixie, and probably worse at lower speeds when a fixie could be slowed to the point of skidding.


----------



## PdxMark (Feb 3, 2004)

filtersweep said:


> running SS without a rear brake is simply stupid. Running a Langster as a SS is double stupid ,)


Agreed. He had to remove a front brake that was included as a stock part on the bike.


----------



## czardonic (Jan 11, 2002)

Rear brake only works for countless riders of bikes with coaster brakes.


----------



## timfire (Dec 13, 2001)

PdxMark said:


> A rear brake alone is at least as bad as a brakeless fixie, and probably worse at lower speeds when a fixie could be slowed to the point of skidding.


 ? 

First, you can *easily* lock a rear wheel with a brake, given that they're properly set-up, modern brakes. I would argue that it's even _easier_ to lock a wheel with brakes than it is to skid with a fixie (no need to have to shift your weight and/or use evcessive muscle).

Second, skidding gives you *less* traction than almost locking the wheel with a brake.

So why would a rear brake be worse than back-pedalling/ skidding?


----------



## PdxMark (Feb 3, 2004)

timfire said:


> ?
> 
> First, you can *easily* lock a rear wheel with a brake, given that they're properly set-up, modern brakes. I would argue that it's even _easier_ to lock a wheel with brakes than it is to skid with a fixie (no need to have to shift your weight and/or use evcessive muscle).
> 
> ...


I agree. You get your maximum braking up to the point of skidding. That's why I said "slowed to the point of skidding." Once the skid starts, braking decreases. 

I was guesstimating, based on my experience, that backpedaling at lower speeds is better than even a dual-pivot rear brake. I've skidded my fixie, but not a rear brake alone. At speeds of 18mph, give or take, I'd say a rear brake is much better than back-pedaling because the initial braking at 100+ RPM cadence is so poor - for me anyway. But we can differ on that. 

The point is that whichever is the stronger rear brake, it's still only about 20% of the stopping power available if you also have a front brake. That's why I think either a brakeless fixie or a SS with rear-only braking is a bad idea.


----------



## paipo (Jul 24, 2004)

I was wondering: If you're clipping along at say 10~15 mph with reasonably high rpm cadence on a BRAKELESS fixie and had to stop NOW or within 20~30 yards or so, wouldn't the stored energy of your spinning fixed rear wheel with the combined forward momentum of your bike/ride mass (not to mention the time it takes for you to get your leg muscles to switch to 'back-pressure' mode) make it very, very difficult to scrub off forward speed no matter how much 'back pressure' you apply to the pedals? I can see where a rider could get all bent out of shape and launch themselves up off of the pedals. I would imagine that 'planning ahead' as far as possible for stopping or riding at a speed that is prudent for conditions is always best...but what about emergencies even at just 10mph? How do you no-brake fixie riders stop and avoid collisions in those situations?

Or do you just say, "AHHHH FAAAAAAAK!!!!!" and hope for the best?

To reiterate: I've never riddien a modern fixie and I really want to try this type of bike and to be reasonably masterful and have pure fun with it. I rode my uncle's fixie ONCE when I was a child before I even knew what they were called and I remember how the cuff on the right leg of my jeans got caught on the front chainring and it yanked me forward on the down-stroke and slammed me to the ground confused and freaked out before I could do anything to correct it. Don't want that to happen again...especially with my 49 year-*older* body


----------



## PdxMark (Feb 3, 2004)

paipo said:


> To reiterate: I've never riddien a modern fixie and I really want to try this type of bike and to be reasonably masterful and have pure fun with it.


I got a fixie a year-and-a-half ago for the sake of trying it out. I've loved it from the start. It's just plain fun. I got a Bianchi Pista and have a front brake. There are more off-the-shelf options now or you can build one up. I now ride fixed gear for commuting and alot of recreational rides. Give it a go and have fun! It just takes a bit to find the gearing that works best for you...


----------



## rwbadley (Apr 13, 2002)

czardonic said:


> Rear brake only works for countless riders of bikes with coaster brakes.


The old coaster bikes have much of the weight over rear wheel. High bars, not all forward. I would bet weight distribution of 30/70 rear. Also the tires on these oldsters are much wider. My oldie stops pretty fair, but I wouldn't want just a rear on any of my current 'modern' bikes.


----------



## timfire (Dec 13, 2001)

paipo said:


> I was wondering: If you're clipping along at say 10~15 mph with reasonably high rpm cadence on a BRAKELESS fixie and had to stop NOW or within 20~30 yards or so...


20 yards is actually ALOT of room to stop. 25-35 FEET is when you get in trouble. Also, 15 mph isn't very fast. 18-20+ is more like it. That said...

Option 1: You dodge, if possible. This is *always* the best option, fixed or free. Most of the time, you don't even need to slow down to dodge. Unfortunately, most people panic instead of dodging. It takes alot of skill/ conditioning/ whatever to do this without panicking.

Option 2: You shift your weight forward, lock your legs and skid. In my experience, this is what most fix'ers do when they need to stop *really* fast. Theorectically, skidding is less effective then slowing to a stop. But when going really fast, it takes ALOT of leg muscle to back-pedal quickly.



> Or do you just say, "AHHHH FAAAAAAAK!!!!!" and hope for the best?


Ha! This probably happens more often then people like to admit!


----------



## paipo (Jul 24, 2004)

thank you all for the feedback...I'm still learning and I'm really excited about getting my first 'fix'  ..maybe a used Langster w/brakes to a Bianchi 'Road' Pista w/brakes to a full-on Surly w/brakes and bottle bosses...or a trick lookin' Felt TK2, Fuji, or Pista Concept...still researchin'...not racin'...just all for FUN the realatively ROAD...


----------



## Dave_Stohler (Jan 22, 2004)

*I think you just met a [email protected]$$*



PdxMark said:


> Saw a guy today with a Langster SS with only a rear brake. I asked him why he did it, and he said he liked the simplicity... Wow... I guess Simple is his middle name...


12345


----------



## TNSquared (Apr 30, 2003)

*single speed*



filtersweep said:


> As for single speed, I find it rather useless- a worse of both worlds situation-


I have a flip-flop on my bike, fixed on one side and SS the other. For one reason - the SS is a bailout if I encounter a climb or descent of unexpected grade, or if fatigue simply sets in so much that I need some coasting to get home. For the same reasons, the SS cog is 2 teeth bigger than the fixed.

I also think SS is a cool option for situations where fixed just would be too dangerous, like cylcocross racing.

However, I agree with you in that general road riding SS is a drag.


----------

