Now and then on hills I'll just get off and walk, which I like doing actually, it is relaxing. Not that the ride isn't- it is relaxing too.
On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 9:03:05 PM UTC-4, EricP wrote: > > Was that way myself until a about a year ago. Over the past couple years > have been on rides with folks riding single speed (or fixed gear) bikes and > was jealous, for lack of a better term. Especially on the SoCal Riv Ride > back in 2009. Was really yearning for a Quickbeam by the end of the ride. > Decided after getting a Cross Check last year to give it a try. Had Jim > Thill build a wheel and put it on the bike. And took it for a ride. Then > another. Then another. I liked it. A lot. > > There are some limitations with my single speed riding - climbing is > slower and will often look for alternate route rather than heading for > steep hills. Then again can probably get around 90 percent of the Twin > Cities metro area without having to do an ugly (to me) climb. And climbing > even out of my side street in winter with studded tires was more chore than > I'd like. But overall, it's a fun alternative to shifting. > > Plus, a single speed is a great excuse why I can't keep up with faster > riders. Which is just about every body else out there. > > Eric Platt > (Counting down the days until next Monday) > > On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 12:32:22 PM UTC-5, Way Rebb wrote: > >> The last single speed I had was as a kid and his StingRay. Getting a >> bike with gears was a revelation. I remember actually riding, not >> pushing the bike, up 73rd in Oakland with a big smile on my face. I >> doubt, in fact I know, I'd never get a single speed. I can get the >> same effect by not changing gears for a while. Maybe if it had all >> the braze ons for a Rohloff or something like that. Some people seem >> to like them, just not for me. >> >> On Apr 9, 7:11 pm, ted <ted.ke...@comcast.net> wrote: >> > Jim writes: "People think "single-speed" and in the same thought they >> > >> > think "beater" or "winter bike" or "bar bike" or whatever other >> > utilitarian, un-romantic category applies." >> > >> > I figure Jim's dealt with way more folks buying bikes than I have so I >> > wouldn't take issue with him about what "people" in the aggregate >> > think. But I sure don't think that way. When I got my first ss/fixed >> > bike (after grade school that is), I was concerned about winter in the >> > midwest. I didn't want rear derailers freezing up packed full of >> > slush. I wanted fenders so I wouldn't get covered with slush. I >> > thought the 1/8th inch chain would lower the loads and wear better. >> > But I wasn't particularly thinking cheep. I got campi track hubs, >> > moderate weight tubular rims, suntour superbe cranks, lyotard platform >> > pedals (ok they weren't expensive but they were nice), and chinelli >> > bar and stem. If I could have afforded a better frame I think I would >> > have. >> > >> > I understand fear of theft driving a desire for cheep. But not fear of >> > the elements. I have never hesitated to take a nice bike out into the >> > rain or snow because I was afraid it would get wrecked. I also see no >> > conflict between utilitarian and aesthetics/elegance/beauty etc. Have >> > you ever used snap-on tools? >> > >> > Clearly not enough people will pay 1k for a dedicated SS frame and >> > fork to support the SO/QB in the marketplace. I just find it odd if >> > thats not because almost nobody (outside of hipsterdom which, as noted >> > previously, has a different aesthetic) really knows they like riding >> > em. Of course I think lots of things are odd. >> > >> > On Apr 9, 3:16 am, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery <thill....@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Also, in reference to Ted's comment about the Cross-check being more >> an analog to the Hillborne than to the SO: >> > >> > > That's definitely true if you're talking about the Cross-check as a >> geared bike. In that case, the two bikes have a lot of similarities, except >> one looks fancier and costs $600 more (for the frameset only). The price >> difference is more profound if you compare the CC stock complete bike to a >> similarly equipped Hillborne, which is not available as a mass-market >> complete bike. But lots of people, for various reasons, think the price >> difference on the Riv is plenty acceptable. Lots of people are willing to >> shell out for a special bike. Cool. >> > >> > > But single-speeds are different. People think "single-speed" and in >> the same thought they think "beater" or "winter bike" or "bar bike" or >> whatever other utilitarian, un-romantic category applies. In that case, you >> look at that $600 price difference and you think about rust and dents, and >> that Surly, what it lacks in panache, it makes up in ruggedness and, >> ultimately, in the worst case scenario, replaceability. In the case of >> single-speeds, the preciousness that many of us assign to Rivendell >> bicycles is a drawback. And that's why I say more mundane frames like the >> CC make it hard to sell the QB/SO. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/Hn9hYsjl5MQJ. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
