Originally Posted By: 4age

Originally Posted By: robbbby

Originally Posted By: 4age

Now in a road context, I also agree. However, a fixed drivetrain is much more efficient at early season training in getting those legs back. Nothing else will spike power outputs in the same manner--you are forced to stand and mash up hills, and then you are forced yet again to spin like a crazed person going down hills. Working on both cadence and power output simultanously, and ensuring that any distance you cover was with 100% pedalling has it's advantages. Not arguable. Just awesome. Truly is more harder more better.

For most people who don't ride for the 5+ months of cold weather, i'm not sure I totally agree with the SS to "get those legs back". Though I don't follow the whole base mileage concept religiously, I do agree with it somewhat and don't think hopping on a single speed after not having ridden for 5+ months and mashing up hills is a great idea or pedaling at such a low cadence/high power output.

Which is why a road fixed gear should not have such high gearing $\:\)$
I think once again we're on the same page. I do not advocate mashing up a hill at 40rpm. There's a clear issue with going up a climb at that rpm.

But ok - good conversation. If you don't agree with riding a single speed to get the legs back, are you advocating that riding a faster, more efficient geared bike is better? Most people with the option of "copping out" on a climb and dropping a few gears will take it. That isn't doing them any favors with regards to building fitness.

And yes, one can force themself to ride a lower gear early season on a road bike, but ultimately, you aren't forced to spin as you otherwise would on a fixed gear (read: no coasting option)...so the benefit is not identical to riding a fixed for a couple months before swinging a leg over the geared bike.

I think people like 355si can advocate for me with regards to my ability to spin. That didn't come out of no where. And I'd argue that most people who strictly ride a geared bike generally would not have a similar range of "operating cadence/rpm". There are benefits to be had there.

I missed in the previous post where you mentioned fixed gear, thought we were talking about regular SS. Fixed gear is even dumber IMO, if it was such a great training tool everybody would be riding one. They are impractical in every sense of the word, again, IMO. I'm not an olympian, I don't need a fixed gear bike to train and prevent me from coasting, or use one so I don't cheat myself by gearing down. If anybody actually cared THAT much about training they could select the gear they want on a geared bike so they could train a particular cadence/power output. If you don't have the mindset/willpower to stay in a particular gear on a geared bike there is no way you would ride a fixie.

I also don't see how dropping gears on a climb is "copping out", cycling is both an aerobic and anaerobic exercise. Just because you aren't mashing up a climb using every bit of muscle power you have on tap, doesn't mean you aren't working. So I drop a couple gears and spin my ass off at 110 instead, it's just as beneficial overall. Look at Lance, after his comeback he went from being a powerhouse to a crazy spinner in order to try and keep up with the younger guys.

Maybe it's because i'm not a pedal masher and prefer to spin or put the power down while seated, but I personally don't see the point of what you're suggesting. I have gears and I can easily keep a 110+ cadence for distance
or put the power down at 60rpm. The more I think about it the more I question why anybody besides hipsters or track cyclists would even bother with fixed gear, but in reality there probably is very few people who do use them anyways.

To each their own I guess. As long as you enjoy riding one who am I to say otherwise.

The only way to find a real winner in the geared vs. fixed battle is to have a good old fashioned race $\:\)$