The dangers of a fixed wheel



Status
Not open for further replies.
Daniel Parry wrote:
>>That probably isn't true. I've just found http://www.rightofway.org/research/cyclists.pdf which
>>rebuts the NYPD claim that 75% of cyclists fatalities are cyclists error.
>
>
> It would also appear from http://www.ahalenia.com/memorial/ that, sadly, there are more dangerous
> places to cycle than NYC[0].
>
>
>>I suspect that this "zooming around on brakeless fixies" is another of the cycling myths of
>>the city.
>
>
> Not a myth. There are people "zooming" around NYC on brakeless fixed. The myth is that they are
> _all_ reckless.

Yes, I was saying they are nutcases, not that they are dangerous or cause accidents. Its just
something you have to be slightly mad to do :)

Anyway as I said I've never been there, but I gather theres quite a fixed gear bike culture there.

--

-Alex

----------------------------------
[email protected]

http://alexpg.ath.cx:3353/cycling.php http://www.westerleycycling.org.uk
----------------------------------
 
Dave Kahn wrote:

> The movie of the Mango is rather impressive. I want one of these!

First thing's first, I'd like to be able to be supple enough to fit inside and still pedal...
It's tiny!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Dave Kahn wrote:

> The movie of the Mango is rather impressive.

Which movie - the one from the Manchester race meeting or the one of Rob decking it at 70 mph?
(http://www.easyracers.com/videos/mango_crash.wmv)

> I want one of these!

Those over 5'8" need not apply. Helps to be narrow too...

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
 
On Tue, 13 May 2003 20:49:15 +0100, John B <[email protected]> wrote:

>Tim Woodall wrote:
>
>>
>> OTOH, AIUI (but I've never ridden on a track) some tracks require competitors NOT to have brakes
>> at all.
>
>Under racing rules the _only brake_ permitted in track racing is the fixed wheel.
>
>When I used to race I rode to the track with a filed down brake on the front wheel, with a short
>cable to a clamped lever, both of which had to be taken off before competing.
>
We used to ride to the track using a centre pull front brake with a toe-strap looped through the
wire and round the bars - press on the strap to slow down. Not strictly legal, but easy to fit
and remove.

Regards! Stephen
 
Daniel Parry <[email protected]> wrote:
>Not a myth. There are people "zooming" around NYC on brakeless fixed.

"brakeless fixed" is an oxymoron; a fixed gear has a brake by virtue of being a fixed gear.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Distortion Field!
 
In article <Err*[email protected]>, David Damerell wrote:
> Daniel Parry <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Not a myth. There are people "zooming" around NYC on brakeless fixed.
>
> "brakeless fixed" is an oxymoron; a fixed gear has a brake by virtue of being a fixed gear.

According to the signalling downhill thread, even you have to admit to ambiguity sometime. ^_^

Though, I guess if you hit >30mph on a descent and the nice yellow nyc taxi cab decides to pull out
you may as well be brakeless for what the back chain pressure is going to achieve[0] ^_-

cheers

daniel

[] Would be one impressive skid, though ^_^ There was a great thread on the fixed gear mailing list
once about extreme stopping measures...
 
In article <uPv*[email protected]>, David Damerell wrote:
> This is a bogus analogy, though; the foot-on-wheel approach is not a sensible braking system

Are you saying foot on wheel is not a brake?

> you would call another combination of chainwheel, chain and rear hub a "coaster brake".

No I would not. When I refer to a coaster brake I refer solely to a type of rear hub which
incorporates a brake. Just as I distinguish between brake handle, brake cable and brake, I also
distinguish between chainwheel, chain and coaster brake.

> So why is one type of rear hub that permits backwards pedalling force to slow the bicycle a
> "coaster brake", but another one "not a brake"?

Please go to your nearest bike shop and ask for a 16 tooth brake. They'll know what you mean.

>>In the context of fixed gear riding, the term "brakeless fixed" is understood by all but
>>(oxy)morons.
>
> You certainly resorted to abuse very quickly there.

No, I merely pointed out that the term brakeless is _obvious_ in the context of fixed gear riding.

> quite recently I had to inform a bunch of cagers
^^^^^^

I beleive they fit my previous categorisation ^_-

> these bikes are not what the word "brakeless" implies.

Yes they are.

cheers

daniel
 
Tim Woodall <[email protected]> wrote:
>Sunday I went out with the CTC for a nice gentle ride and took the oportunity to take my new fixer
>for its first serious ride.
Here in New Zealand there has been a resurgance of popularity with thefixed wheel. We usually either
cut the rear bridge over the rear wheel and replace it with a brake bridge and fit rear brakes as
well as front brakes. Takes some of the stimulation out of a ride but I personally feel it is safer
on the road with all brakes.

Tailwinds and downhills Hop
 
"Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> Which movie - the one from the Manchester race meeting or the one of Rob decking it at 70 mph?
> (http://www.easyracers.com/videos/mango_crash.wmv)

Ouch! Any idea what caused the sudden instability? It's interesting to see how the fairing keeps the
bike and rider together. Does that reduce the road rash or does the nylon melting into the skin at
500 deg. C make it worse?

> Those over 5'8" need not apply.

No problem there. :)

> Helps to be narrow too...

Ah. How narrow exactly? I'm sure I could squeeze in.

--
Dave...
 
Dave Kahn wrote:

> Ouch! Any idea what caused the sudden instability?

It was operating at rather beyond its design parameters for the first time IIRC, and still rather at
"learning process" stage. The Mango was designed for the hour record, where it "only" has to keep up
a little more than 50 mph, but the boys thought they'd give it a try at Battle Mountain for short
bursts at truly insane speeds anyway.

> see how the fairing keeps the bike and rider together. Does that reduce the road rash or does the
> nylon melting into the skin at 500 deg. C make it worse?

Apparently Rob came out with just a few bruises. Shaken, but thankfully not stirred, and damage to
the bike was limited too (mainly caused by the parked car it came to rest against I think). The
movie didn't really bring home how fast it was going *until* the slide! Ulp.

>>Those over 5'8" need not apply.
>
> No problem there. :)

Or here...

>>Helps to be narrow too...
>
> Ah. How narrow exactly? I'm sure I could squeeze in.

Ah. I'm not sure I could :-/ And even then, I'm sure I couldn't do it justice.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
In message <Err*[email protected]>, David Damerell
<[email protected]> writes
>Daniel Parry <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Not a myth. There are people "zooming" around NYC on brakeless fixed.
>
>"brakeless fixed" is an oxymoron; a fixed gear has a brake by virtue of being a fixed gear.

I don't agree. I think you only posted this to show you know the word 'oxymoron'.

Although it is possible to brake by applying backward pressure on the pedals of a fixed gear bike
this does not make the fixed gear a brake in the normal sense of the word. Drivers may resort to
engine braking but they don't use an engine brake. Fixed gear riders might brake by applying
backward pressure but this doesn't mean they're using a fixed gear brake or whatever.
--
Michael MacClancy
 
David Damerell wrote:

> This is a bogus analogy, though; the foot-on-wheel approach is not a sensible braking system, nor
> one that anyone would use other than in an emergency.

I think you missed an important clause from the above, David; it should read "nor one that anyone
with an IQ bigger than his hat size would use". A couple of years ago I followed a bloke on a
mountain bike down the hill outside Holloway Prison. His sole (and I apologise in advance for the
groan-inducing pun) means of retardation was to apply the underside of his boot to his rear tyre.
The bike did, IIRC, have a canti on the back, but the lack of anything to connect it to the brake
lever rendered it superfluous.

Astonishingly, he didn't crash into the back of a bus. Well, not while I was watching.

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
 
Dave Kahn wrote:

> Ouch! Any idea what caused the sudden instability? It's interesting to see how the fairing keeps
> the bike and rider together. Does that reduce the road rash or does the nylon melting into the
> skin at 500 deg. C make it worse?

Pushing very hard on a machine with a titchy wheelbase and very little trail.

>> Helps to be narrow too...
>
> Ah. How narrow exactly? I'm sure I could squeeze in.

Narrower than this geezer: http://www.speedbikebgl.de/eng/jan200me.html He's the right length, but
no way could we get the lid on...

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
 
Peter Clinch wrote:

> Apparently Rob came out with just a few bruises. Shaken, but thankfully not stirred,

Small cut under his eye from the roadside brush - the windscreen popped out early on - and a bruised
ankle from its proximity to the point of impact with the car. He was up and racing his Bike Friday
the next day.

> and damage to the bike was limited too (mainly caused by the parked car it came to rest against
> I think).

Yes. The paint down the right side was scraped off, natch, but no damage to the underlying
structure. The only other damage was caused by the machine becoming wedged under the front bumper of
a minivan - its towing eye punching a hole through the side of the shell. With proper enforcement of
the "parking regulations"... A day or two earlier, Ellen van der Horst had gone end over end into
the scenery at something like 60 mph with only cosmetic damage to the machine and none to herself,
but that was a mile or so from the start of the timed section, so there was nothing to hit.

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
 
Daniel Parry <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Damerell wrote:
>>This is a bogus analogy, though; the foot-on-wheel approach is not a sensible braking system
>Are you saying foot on wheel is not a brake?

Indeed. It is not designed for or intended for that purpose. In contrast, it is an intentional
feature of a fixed-gear hub that it may be used for braking.

>>you would call another combination of chainwheel, chain and rear hub a "coaster brake".
>No I would not. When I refer to a coaster brake I refer solely to a type of rear hub which
>incorporates a brake.

So what is the difference between this rear hub, whose design permits rearwards pedalling force
to slow the bicycle, and a fixed-gear hub, whose design permits rearwards pedalling force to slow
the bicycle?

>>So why is one type of rear hub that permits backwards pedalling force to slow the bicycle a
>>"coaster brake", but another one "not a brake"?
>Please go to your nearest bike shop and ask for a 16 tooth brake.

I see you missed the part of my post where I say that you are being confused by the lack of a
convenient piece of terminology for this design of brake. Please reread it.

>>>In the context of fixed gear riding, the term "brakeless fixed" is understood by all but
>>>(oxy)morons.
>>You certainly resorted to abuse very quickly there.
>No,

Gosh, I though I saw the term "moron" up there. I must have been confused.

>>these bikes are not what the word "brakeless" implies.
>Yes they are.

That is simply not true. "Brakeless" implies "no mechanism for slowing down in a
controlled fashion".
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?
 
In article <BdC*[email protected]>, David Damerell wrote:
> an intentional feature of a fixed-gear hub that it may be used for braking.

Yes, but that does not mean I call a fixed gear hub a brake. Hence, a brakeless fixed gear bike
makes perfect sense.

> what is the difference between this rear hub, whose design permits rearwards pedalling force to
> slow the bicycle, and a fixed-gear hub, whose design permits rearwards pedalling force to slow the
> bicycle?

A coaster brake hub consists of two elements:

1) a freewheel "coaster"
2) a brake mechanism.

As with all hub brakes, a _brake_ has been physically incorporated into the hub of a wheel. Fixed
gear wheels have no inherent braking device that you would point to and say _that_ is a brake.

> I see you missed the part of my post where I say that you are being confused by the lack of a
> convenient piece of terminology for this design of brake. Please reread it.

No, _you_ are confused by the fact that a chainwheel, chain and fixed sprocket is not collectively
called a brake. Please reread this sentence repeatedly until you are no longer confused.

> Gosh, I though I saw the term "moron" up there. I must have been confused.

You are ^_-

If you use "cager", I'll happily use "(oxy)moron".

> That is simply not true.

Yes it is.

> "Brakeless" implies "no mechanism for slowing down in a controlled fashion".

In the _context of fixed gear riding_, brakeless implies no means for stopping the bike except use
of back pedalling pressure. Please understand your subject before spouting nonsense.

warmest regards

daniel
 
Daniel Parry <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <BdC*[email protected]>, David Damerell wrote:
>>what is the difference between this rear hub, whose design permits rearwards pedalling force to
>>slow the bicycle, and a fixed-gear hub, whose design permits rearwards pedalling force to slow the
>>bicycle?
>A coaster brake hub consists of two elements:
>1) a freewheel "coaster"
>2) a brake mechanism.

What you're saying, basically, is that you won't call a brake a brake if it happens to be of a very
simple and elegant design. Only a complicated device is worthy of the name. This is absurd.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?
 
In message <BdC*[email protected]>, David Damerell
<[email protected]> writes
>>David Damerell wrote:
>>>This is a bogus analogy, though; the foot-on-wheel approach is not a sensible braking system
>>Are you saying foot on wheel is not a brake?
>
>Indeed. It is not designed for or intended for that purpose. In contrast, it is an intentional
>feature of a fixed-gear hub that it may be used for braking.

I'll defer to anyone's more informed knowledge of bicycle history but I would hazard a guess that
it is not an _intentional_ feature of a fixed-gear hub that it may be used for braking. No one
designed or intended the fixed gear for the purpose of braking. It may be a secondary capability
but I can't imagine the inventor thinking, "I'll design a fixed-gear hub instead of a freewheel
because you can use the fixed-gear hub for braking". I guess the fixed gear came before the
freewheel because it was easier to make or because no one had thought of the freewheel.
Pennyfarthings were fixed, weren't they?

--
Michael MacClancy
 
In article <wiu*[email protected]>, David Damerell wrote:
>>A coaster brake hub consists of two elements:
>>1) a freewheel "coaster"
>>2) a brake mechanism.
>
> What you're saying, basically, is that you won't call a brake a brake if it happens to be of a
> very simple and elegant design.

No, what I am saying is that I will not call a combination of fixed rear hub, sprocket, chain and
chainwheel a brake, though I might conceivably call this simple and elegant combination (along with
pedals, cranks & bb) a _drive train_.

> Only a complicated device is worthy of the name. This is absurd.

If you label a picture of a fixed gear bike you don't draw an arrow to the drive train and write
"brake". The naming conventions go back a long way and _brakeless fixed_ will continue to exist
and be regularly used and understood regardless of whether or not it has the David Damerell seal
of approval.

warmest regards

daniel
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
Cycling- The Dangers
Replies
27
Views
593
UK and Europe
Matt B
M
W
dangers of 'traffic calming'
Replies
40
Views
899
UK and Europe
Geraint Jones
G
?
The dangers of babelfish translation...
Replies
13
Views
522
UK and Europe
Roger Merriman
R
W
dangers of rural roads
Replies
43
Views
1K
UK and Europe
wafflycat
W
J
Cycling dangers in Australia
Replies
8
Views
451
UK and Europe
Ruth & Dave
R
Top Bottom Back