SS - Do you? Would you?

mac_man

I just don't get this SS thing at all....

Maybe if the terrain is gently undulating, but here in Calderdale "the only way is up" as the song goes. So unless I just wanted to whizz up and down the canal I'll give it a miss thanks.

I rode a traditional single speed 'sit up and beg' old banger on holiday a few weeks back. Just no fun at all... even on the flat roads were riding on.

But hey... whatever floats your boat and all that. If people want to make life more difficult for themselves, who am I to argue?

supersonic

Cps wrote:

supersonic wrote:

Here is a thought - buy a geared bike - and use the hard gears!

Obviously you have never tried SS - cause it just ain't the same!!

I have tried it, and for that reason, I'm out.

The Northern Monkey

supersonic wrote:

Cps wrote:

supersonic wrote:

Here is a thought - buy a geared bike - and use the hard gears!

Obviously you have never tried SS - cause it just ain't the same!!

I have tried it, and for that reason, I'm out.

MTFU :P

supersonic

I like to be faster and more efficient, and have knees that work ;-)

The Northern Monkey

You should try riding a 35lb HT singlespeed around some trails...

My Surge lasted 1 day haha!

adb1006

bomberesque wrote:

adb1006 try it. honestly, it is not the same

• no chainslap (because no spring tensioning the chain)
• completely straight chainline
• quiet drivetrain
• no skipping chain .... EVER. (well OK, if you let the chain stretch too much then it can jump, usually ending up in emergency as it will always happen when you're tonking as hard as your knees will let you)

There are other more psychological effects (like not having the gears there even if you wanted them) kind of like the difference between riding along a white line on the road and riding along a plank the same width

But, those aside, It is physically different.

I must have my chain well tensioned as i don't get any skipping, chainslap or real noise from my drivetrain. I see what you're saying about the chainline being perfectly straight all of the time, but then you're putting excess stress on the chain by going up hills in a gear not intended for going up hills in

Personally, for me, part of being a "skilled" mountain-biker is being good at gear selection. i.e. looking ahead and being in the right gear for whatever is coming up, rather than trying to change down halfway up a short, steep hill.

Like i said though, each to their own. No one can say one is better than the other as, at the end of the day, it's what suits you, and what you're used to/feel comfortable with.

How do SS'ers cope with really rooty/rocky technical sections that require you to go through at very low speed? I couldn't imagine trying a section of one of my local routes in middle and 7th! Likewise, i don't think anyone would fancy getting up some of the steep, rough climbs on our routes in that gear either. It just wouldn't be practical.

boogercj

I ride SS exclusively (I only have 1 bike) and I love it, most of the time

Plus it's very cool, and fashionable at the moment 8) :roll:

bomberesque

adb1006 wrote:

How do SS'ers cope with really rooty/rocky technical sections that require you to go through at very low speed? I couldn't imagine trying a section of one of my local routes in middle and 7th! Likewise, i don't think anyone would fancy getting up some of the steep, rough climbs on our routes in that gear either. It just wouldn't be practical.

32:16 isn't really that high a gear, riding slowly isn't usually a problem although you do (or I did) develop a better sense of where your pedals are so that they're in the right spot to lay the power down at just the right moment. point the trail down and something else happens. Because you spin out so fast you tend to stop bothering with turbo brazzilion RPM mode and instead concentrate on a smooth line, pumping the trail and staying off the brakes. This translates easily back to geared riding

Of course you can learn all of this on a geared bike, but SS tends to focus the mind by removing distractions is all.

It's not for everyone, but it is for me and I got into it, like you may do, out of a need for a low maintenance winter bike and a curiosity about what the fuss was.

I know I sounds like some sort of preacher so let me finish by saying that there's no way in HELL that I would ride SS exclusively. If I could only have one bike it would have gears. Fortunately I am not so restricted.

boogercj

^ +1 to all of that

monkeysm8

I love my rigid ss it's ace I commute 30miles a day on a fixie and I have a geared HT which will be going 1x9 as I never use the granny ring 8) Most folk don't need all the FS gears crap anyway

supersonic

Fixie?!

Nutter!

Daz555

No no and no.

For a start my local loop starts with a big climb - for those that know Bristol, it goes from the art college entrance at the bottom, all the way up to the golf course. No way am I considering that with a SS. My old knees would crumble.

daniel_owen_uk

Hills round here are too big, if I lived somewhere flat I would.

spongtastic

SS when the essex clay and suffolk sand gets really bad usually in December/Jan/Feb
I went through wet quarried sand on the FSR a couple of weeks back and the chain just shifted itself all over the place.
Plus as I don't get time to clean everything every time I ride there's no great worry about things going rusty.

angrymeerkat

Yep. I love the simplicity of it; there are only 2 settings, "go" and "stop"!

jay12

i would on a commuter bike to build up muscle

off-one

I had a few singlespeed bikes over the last few years, live in Sheffield and have enjoyed it.
However the novelty has worn off for me now and the ss is destined to be used only in the crappiest of winter weather, or might even be sold.

But strangely since riding mostly geared this year my knees have been killing me!

RealMan

Lots of people use the old "too many hills" excuse to not SS. But I've got loads of mates who SS all the time on the south downs, and fast. I've even seen a few SSers in the Alps, which as long as you've got a fairly low ratio, could work, and be very enjoyable.

The main advantage of SS is not the maintenance, or the simplicity, or the satisfaction of blowing up guys on geared bikes, or the lack of chain slap. Its the direct feel of it. You push the pedals, and you go. You lose a lot of power and efficiency to mechs and such. And also its lighter, one of my mates has got a steel SS hardtail, that weighs 17lbs. Wouldn't be anywhere near that with gears.


Also, the knees excuse is meant to be a myth as well - on a SS you climb standing up, which is better for your knees, and the rest of the time you're spinning. Not so sure about all that though.

SSers are bloody fit though. Don't know about you guys, but I've never seen a fat SSer.

Anonymous

i dont undertand how a ss feels more direct than a normal ht?

supersonic

RealMan wrote:

Lots of people use the old "too many hills" excuse to not SS. But I've got loads of mates who SS all the time on the south downs, and fast. I've even seen a few SSers in the Alps, which as long as you've got a fairly low ratio, could work, and be very enjoyable.

The main advantage of SS is not the maintenance, or the simplicity, or the satisfaction of blowing up guys on geared bikes, or the lack of chain slap. Its the direct feel of it. You push the pedals, and you go. You lose a lot of power and efficiency to mechs and such. And also its lighter, one of my mates has got a steel SS hardtail, that weighs 17lbs. Wouldn't be anywhere near that with gears.


Also, the knees excuse is meant to be a myth as well - on a SS you climb standing up, which is better for your knees, and the rest of the time you're spinning. Not so sure about all that though.


SSers are bloody fit though. Don't know about you guys, but I've never seen a fat SSer.

But if I want to outclimb them in a hard gear and power up, I can select an even HARDER one they they have! And I will always drop them on speedy descents as you will simply spin out before me.

Lightness is a good reason. But then the 'get fit' argument falls down. Heavier bikes are harder work ;-)

bomberesque

hmm, I'll agree that it feels more efficient, but I recall that someone tested it with a power tap and found there wasn't much difference. In the winter mud a straight chainline is certainly better, if only because all the crunching and skipping stops

In the end, most of the differences are psychological, IMO but no less real for that

one directly measurable difference is that, through singlespeeding, I have gone from one of the slowest in my club (or at least down there somewhere) to above average, so to speak. I then took up regular commuting a year ago and am now one of the fastest. I still have my off days (of course) and there will always be people in my club faster than me (one guy in particular who is just embarrassingly fast) but by my own yardstick of measurement (my speed relative to the group I ride with regularly) is conclusive. It's worked for me

I think the biggest single thing about it, speed wise, is the fact that at 32:16 you can't winch up anything significant sitting down, you have to climb out of the saddle and attack. That makes for great training. Of course you can do this on a geared bike by insisting on pushing bigger gears, as SS points out, but watch people... they tend not to. I know I didn't and I'm fairly sure that's what made the difference to me.

anyway. Pub

supersonic

I do understand SSing, and of course fun is subjective!

Lighter weight and less maintenance cannot be argued with. Efficiency and all out top speed - this can be countered. Which makes geared bikes more fun for me too!

So as ever, try it - if you like it, keep it!

blister pus

RealMan wrote:

Lots of people use the old "too many hills" excuse to not SS.

If you live in the hills, ride in the hills, travel from town to town in the hills, travel to a ride / loop through hills on a daily basis, do more than 15 miles of hill work 4 times a week, you'll have a vague idea as to why that's just laughable crap. And why I've yet to see a single SS on my travels in the dark / white peak ....and when I do (and I'm sure I will eventually) I'll know there's a car not too far off.

John Moore

supersonic wrote:

I like to be faster and more efficient, and have knees that work ;-)

Points one & two - I'm faster round my nearest trail centre (Llandegla) on my SS than my geared bike (Same bike but with gears added for the summer) by a good 5 minutes.Now if I'm doing 3 laps the gears would be faster, but SS's are great at 1 hour sprints or 2 hour night rides, but I agree that over a days full ride gears might be a bit quicker as you do change down when knackered.

Also the stronger chain lets you put on more pressure because in the back of your mind you do know that the lighter geared chains will snap easier and that hurts.

Point three- my knees are fine

supersonic

Pity I'm not faster. No XC racer rides singlespeed because geared bikes (when ridden) are faster and more efficient unless the terrain happens to always be at your optimum cadence.

The actual drivetrain of a SS is more efficient, but the odd cadences can cause the whole package to be less so. This is why track bikes have one gear - one gradient - and that gear is optimized. And in some cases all out efficiency is not needed ie short burts of power ie sprints.

If it works for you though, go for it! If it worked for me, I would too!

Chinley Churner

blister pus wrote:

RealMan wrote:

Lots of people use the old "too many hills" excuse to not SS.

If you live in the hills, ride in the hills, travel from town to town in the hills, travel to a ride / loop through hills on a daily basis, do more than 15 miles of hill work 4 times a week, you'll have a vague idea as to why that's just laughable crap. And why I've yet to see a single SS on my travels in the dark / white peak ....and when I do (and I'm sure I will eventually) I'll know there's a car not too far off.

Bunch of Balls!!! I live in glorious Chinley and ride almost exclusively on a single-speed all around the area including Chinley Churn, Kinder, Middle Moor, Lantern Pike, Hollins Cross etc. I regularly do 5-6 hour rides and usually find myself overtaking groups of geared riders. I also recently took my SS to Coed-Y-Brenin and rode all of the trails there comfortably.

I agree each to their own, but to say that SS'ing is not for hilly areas is complete rot. It's in the hills that they shine. Assuming you're reasonably strong, you'll get up most climbs quicker than geared riders as you're lighter and don't have the option to twiddle up slowly. Even if you end up having to push, chances are you'll still be going as fast as geared riders as they'll be down on some ridiculously low ratio by that stage. The downhills round my way are mostly steep and technical so not a whole lot of pedaling is done anyway.... no speed lost there. It's only on flat, non-technical bits of trail or roads that you lose out but most riders take those sections as a breather anyway.

x-isle

It's all about "Willy Waving" if you ask me.

It won't make you fitter, fitness is all about stamina, this not achieved by pushing a single gear. It may make you stronger, but not fitter. Ask a body builder to run a Marathon....!

Stamina comes from pushing a good cadence.

pypdjl

x-isle wrote:

Stamina comes from pushing a good cadence.

Try riding a SS on the flat then!

MrChuck

I converted my commuter to SS a few months ago and I've found that, like most things, there's something in it but there are obviously disadvantages and I sure won't be going SS for MTB or 'proper' road riding.

I think there's something in the claims about getting stronger- makes you realise how much you're resting a bit with gears. Although of course some days this doesn't seem like a plus at all! There's less to maintain, and the gears/shifters add up to a surprisingly noticeable weight once they're gone. I've not been SS-ing longe enough to confirm longer drivetrain lifetime/cheapness, but I'm happy to accept that both are true.

The biggest downside for me though is the fact that most of the time you're simply in the wrong gear, and I find the downhills highlight this more than the uphills- any sort of slope and very quickly you're coasting or spinning at a ridiculous cadence, and it's just a bit tedious.

I'm happy to live with this on my commuter and write off the annoying spinning out against the better overall training effect, but I wouldn't consider it for anything else.

Oh, and I haven't noticed any increase in drivetrain efficiency or 'takeup' over my geared bikes. Again I'm happy to accept the drivetrain is more efficient but maybe people that say they can actually feel this need to maintain their gears better?

x-isle

No thanks, I'll just select a gear that's right for the situation.

Going about the "direct feel" and "loss of power through the drive", then surely having to exert more power to make a geared bike move is going to make you fitter!

I'm not knocking it, each to their own, but I'm living in the 21st Century, anybody got a car with a 4 speed gearbox?....