Cyclist vs Bus due to ignoring red light

[WalkleyIan]

Speaking from a position of admitted ignorance on the subject of fixed wheel bikes. Why would someone choose to ride on roads, which many threads on here have indicated and many studies have proven, are potentially dangerous to cyclists then choose to ride what seems to be a cycle that is more dangerous than a standard one?

 

Two factors, tradition and fashion.

 

Traditionally cycling club stalwarts would swap to a single speed fixed wheel bike to carry on riding throughout winter. The single speed means you can dispense with the expensive gears that will get trashed in the winter months. Remember we are talking a time when cycling and cycling clubs were a traditional working class pastime (especially time trialling).

 

These were not the sort of people who could afford 3 or 4 bikes or be able to trash components on the bike each year and buy a whole new set the following spring. Some of these riders even rode to events carrying their “best” wheels on adapted fork holders to swap when they took part and safe them from damage.

 

If that’s why the rode single speed, then why fixed? Well if you've ever ridden one it is completely different experience. You don’t realise just how often you freewheel. The fixed wheel allowed the rider to develop a smooth pedalling action and was ideal for winter training, keeping supple and warm, spinning a low gear. It’s also said that the less severe braking that can be applied through the legs only meant the bike was safer if you hit ice or snow. It also means you have to do a lot more thinking about the road ahead to keep that smooth pedalling going

 

So for many years your trad club cyclist would ride fixed during winter and swap to gears when the weather improved.

 

Jump forward to mid-80s and the growth of the bike messenger in cities like New York. The bike messenger rode them because they were cheap, simple, low maintenance and you could track stand them if you had to stop (like bike messengers ever stopped) A whole hipster culture grew up about the bike messenger, it spread rapidly to places like London.

 

Suddenly about 15 years ago it was cool to be riding a messenger bike, and it has to be said in flat cities the simplicity made a lot of sense but the whole hipster thing grew very annoying, and then to prove just how hip they were some would remove the front brake as well and ride track style (illegal of course)

 

So I’d still happliy ride a fixed bike but given that this is Sheffield I’d always have that back brake given how the thing threw me off the first time I tried to ride one years ago.

 

If you want a couple of hours escapism in a half decent thriller try the film “premium rush” about cycle messengers in New York

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premium_Rush

[Cyclone]

Speaking from a position of admitted ignorance on the subject of fixed wheel bikes. Why would someone choose to ride on roads, which many threads on here have indicated and many studies have proven, are potentially dangerous to cyclists then choose to ride what seems to be a cycle that is more dangerous than a standard one?

 

I wouldn't, it seems like a stupid idea.

 

As someone else said, there's a reason for such bikes, and it's to do with racing, not commuting.

[alchemist]

Thanks for the helpful info

[Eater Sundae]

I wouldn't, it seems like a stupid idea.

 

As someone else said, there's a reason for such bikes, and it's to do with racing, not commuting.

 

Can anyone who rides fixed now confirm if their "leg braking" is as good as normal rear brakes.. Earlier posts on here appear to say it isn't.

 

I last rode a fixed gear over 40 years ago. I fitted it to an old bike whose geared back wheel was knackered, mainly to try it out as I'd never ridden fixed before. As a result, I still had the old rear brake fitted. But I tried to ride without using the rear brake, ie just using my legs. From memory, I don't recall braking with my legs as being any less efficient than using a hand operated brake.

[adamf]

I wouldn't, it seems like a stupid idea.

 

As someone else said, there's a reason for such bikes, and it's to do with racing, not commuting.

 

And bike polo, where you need to be able to reverse. (Not that I've tried it.)

[Tommo68]

Can anyone who rides fixed now confirm if their "leg braking" is as good as normal rear brakes.. Earlier posts on here appear to say it isn't.

 

I last rode a fixed gear over 40 years ago. I fitted it to an old bike whose geared back wheel was knackered, mainly to try it out as I'd never ridden fixed before. As a result, I still had the old rear brake fitted. But I tried to ride without using the rear brake, ie just using my legs. From memory, I don't recall braking with my legs as being any less efficient than using a hand operated brake.

 

 

Fine as long as in an emergency you just happen to recall whether your pedal cycle actually has efficient brakes or if you are on the unroadworthy one at the time.

 

Though to quote another pedal cyclist on here, it would not matter as pedal cyclists only hurt themselves when they run into other people......... Right!

 

 

.