eric044

Most of my time with cycles has been spent riding or building up old cycles. In my experience so far fixed gear has had an ease I haven't felt with freewheel. My ease may, in large part, be due to room for improvement with regard to the cassettes. Every time I've tried to take a look at a new road bike it appears they are zipping around on freewheel cassettes.

So, is my experience due mostly to the quality of the freewheels I've tried? Is there an ease with fixed gear that carbon users give up so that they can change gears with Ultegra or Dura Ace? Am I wrong to think that if I want to ride single speed fixed will offer a mechanical advantage over free if the fixed and free cog were to have about the same quality material and weight?

RPK79

Okay, I read this twice and have no clue what the question is. How do you define "ease" because the classic definition of the word doesn't fit into your context.

datlas 

I read it three times and am still confused. I am willing to help but don't know what the question is.

seedsbelize 

I believe he's asking if there is a mechanical advantage to single speed fixed, over single speed freewheel.

eric044

Yes, the main thing I am concerned about is mechanical advantage. I do see how the word ease could be difficult. I sense fixed gear may cause stiffer maneuvering but also mechanical advantage - could be wrong. I suppose stiffer maneuvering could be safer but also lead to quicker fatigue.

dabac

Gain ratio is gain ratio.
All other things comparable - tooth counts, crank arm length, wheel/tire size - there’s near enough zero difference in mechanical advantage between a fixed bike and bike that can coast.
Any difference perceived is either imaginary or due to something else. Fit, frame geometry, stiffness etc

datlas 

I am still slightly confused. If you are pedaling, fixed and freewheel should be roughly the same/equal. But with fixed, you can't coast/rest so all things being equal I think freewheel gives an advantage.

Maybe.

LesterOfPuppets

"Kent Road Bike" in bikes list hints towards an answer.

Probably so. If you consider Kent and Spalding road bikes keepers then yeah, you've been riding bikes with the crappiest imaginable freewheels, derailleurs, shifters, etc. Your single speed conversions surely made them much more enjoyable.

caloso

There's an argument that a derailleur bike is less mechanically efficient compared to a fixed gear due to the additional friction in the system. The bike is obviously lighter, all other things being equal. And you could argue that speed modulation is quicker. But a fixed cog can't make a frameset stiffer, if that's what you're saying.

LesterOfPuppets

True dat. My Free Spirit fixed is still whippy as all get out.

JohnDThompson 

I doubt there is a real difference in mechanical advantage between a fixed cog and a freewheel. Back in the early 20th century, there was a feeling that the convolutions a chain undergoes in a derailleur system introduce an unacceptable degree of friction, but that complaint is no longer taken seriously.

The fundamental issue is that human legs produce maximum power over a fairly narrow RPM range, and having multiple gears allows the rider to stay within that range over a variety of riding conditions. That said, fixed gear training in the off season has long been popular, and can broaden the RPM range over which your legs can produce maximum power. Not to mention, riding fixed gear is fun and satisfying on its own for many people.

caloso

Now that's what I'm talking about! Just awesome. Well done.

WhyFi

I would think that differences in chainline, as you move up and down the cassette, might cause some small losses vs a perfectly set-up SS/FG, but I don't think that it would be on the order of magnitude that the butt dyno could accurately detect it. As far as a difference in losses between FG and SS with the same chainline? I don't see it. You sure you're not just getting fooled by your momentum spinning your pedals and making it seem easier?

WalksOn2Wheels

That could be one scenario. A cyclist I used to work with who did local crits and was an ex-bike messenger in Dallas told me that he would prefer his fixed gear for a short uphill TT (there was this stupid steep hill TT in Cedar Hill as a part of a multi-day event). The momentum of the wheel helped him make it over the "dead" spot between where his legs could really work. I could see that.

The only time I've ever ridden a fixed gear was for a day event at a track, but I've been meaning to get one... I don't think I'd want it for a really hilly ride, but fixed gear people are nuts. There is even a local fixed gear touring group. Maybe North Texas is just stranger than even I realize.

eric044

I really like single speed and don't know that I'd use a derailleur except on a racing-style bike, in an area without much to climb. And, if I were to buy a new bike it would be a tough choice between something like a Langster and something like an Emonda. Would like to try to keep up on a Langster before resorting to Emonda.

HTupolev

When you say "keep up", are you referring to group road riding?

caloso

Our local group ride is pancake flat and occasionally someone will come out and do it on a track bike. A strong rider is a strong rider and if you have the right gearing to keep you at a reasonable cadence, it's totally doable. (Just make sure you put some brakes on it.)

wphamilton

Could be there's an advantage to always keeping your feet moving as opposed to the 2 or 3 stroke then coast thing that some riders do.

FBinNY 

there's no --- ZERO --- mechanical benefit with fixed vs. free wheel. Also keep in mind that a multi gear derailleur system cannot be a fixed gear.

When you ride a freewheel, the unit has no moving parts as you pedal, so for all practical purposes is the same as a fixed wheel. The ONLY difference is that a freewheel allows you to coast if you wish to, while a fixed doesn't.

That said, old timers and coaches do find advantages to fixed gears. It's not mechanical, and is more about helping riders improve cadence and smoothness of their pedaling style, and breaking the habit of coasting, which many do unconsciously. Over the years, I've dealt with riders who couldn't break the habit of coasting over bumps or around curves. I'd put them on a fixed gear bike, and within a short time they'd be cured and could even pedal through hairpin turns without touching then inside pedal.

mcours2006

When I read 'mechanical advantage' I think either multiplying force or multiplying distance. Your fixed gear multiplies distance as does any gear ratio greater than 1. There may be an efficiency advantage to having a the chain go through fewer cogs, but it's not a mechanical advantage.

Seattle Forrest

I've enjoyed loud hubs for the same reason.

tmh657

Indeed. I still ride a a fixed gear and I am old. I know it helps cadence and pedal motion when riding a geared bike. My legs become accustomed to pulling the pedals all the way around the stroke. Last week I changed to a 17t cog and rode some gradual hills on 53 x 17. It was fun.

kbarch

No, there is no mechanical advantage to fixed gear as long as the work is continuous, but fixed gear offers the substantial advantage of maintaining momentum throughout the system even when you stop applying force. With a freewheel, every time you stop pedaling, you have to overcome inertia in your legs and the drivetrain AGAIN. With fixed, this isn't an issue unless you worked against momentum and tried to stop the bike. With a freewheel, the instant you stop working, you loose momentum in your legs and the drivetrain whether you like it or not, and you actually have to work in order to "soft pedal." A fixed does the soft pedaling for you. Also: the sound of a freewheel clicking is the sound of energy being thrown away, and if you don't hear it, it's because that same energy is being used to warm up your hub.

FBinNY 

Sorry, but this last bit was just too much.

The amount of energy lost to friction in the freewheel clutch is so tiny as to be meaningless. In any case it's much less than the amount of energy lost to friction in a chain drive.

If anyone doubts this, I suggest you set up a freewheel bike (single speed or derailleur doesn't matter) and a fixed gear bike as well as possible. Bring both wheels to the same speed, and let go of the cranks. Does anyone want to bet a couple of beers which coasts to a stop first?

This last claim is why I responded, but the first part about momentum in the legs is equally flawed, maybe more so. Our legs are not well oiled machines and it takes considerable energy to work them, even without producing any power. Riders of fixed wheel bike know this because they need to work even on descents, not to power the bike as much as to help keep the cranks turning and not be bouncing around as they turn.

We run into parallel issues which may be instructive in the auto world. Those looking to maximize fuel economy will either clutch or shift to neutral and "coast" down hills. BITD Saabs used to have an overrunning clutch so they could "freewheel" down hills and save fuel. The problem with freewheel descents is that the engine braking is important in that it's drag helps the brakes and prevents brake fade, which is why the practice is reserved for fuel economy contests.

kbarch

I knew someone would react to that last bit about the sound of the hub. It was intended to be rhetorical, but you know it is literally true to some extent. As for your experiment, we might be surprised. I don't have a computer on my FG to check speed, but I tried it just now, and was surprised by how the FG compared to the regular bike I had in the stand and tried first. (BTW, I'm really annoyed by how noisy the new aero wheel is, but it's so sexy looking, I forgive it).

Not sure what your objection is to the notion that it's an advantage of FG to sustain momentum in the legs - an advantage with respect to moving forward and maintaining speed. Yes, the disadvantage of fixed is that one usually has to work to slow down or maintain control on descents, but that's not a flaw of the drivetrain system as such. The purpose of a drivetrain is to propel one forward, not to slow one down, but I will concede that it's usually a good thing if it can help in the latter regard, too. I know this, because the most exhausting ride I ever did was the NYC Century on the FG (and not even the whole thing). Not because there were any challenging inclines - in fact, the little hills were a relief. It was all the STOPPING that killed me.