Alex11
Active Member
- Location
- South West
I'm not sure!
Front & Rear Brakes?
- Thread starter Alex11
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
simon.r
Person
- Location
- Nottingham
Front and rear. I can't see any advantage in not having a rear brake - except, arguably, aesthetics.
wheres_my_beard
Über Member
- Location
- Norwich
Front, back or, how about a, erm.... middle?
smokeysmoo
Legendary Member
- Location
- Bolton, not very far from Nob End
^This
derrick
The Glue that binds us together.
- Location
- On the edge of London
When you need to stop quickly you need both,
Scilly Suffolk
Über Member
You're referring to a fixed gear, rather than single speed bike, I assume?
fossyant
Ride It Like You Stole It!
- Location
- South Manchester
Two plus legs. Need them in urban commuting.
Old Plodder
Living at the top of a steep 2 mile climb
- Location
- Surrey/Hants border
Brake cables do snap!
(Definately both.)
(Definately both.)
jazzkat
Fixed wheel fanatic.
- Location
- The Cumbrian Riviera
I'm front brake only but I don't ride in towns or cities. If I rode where there were lots of people and traffic I'd have the front back and centre brakes (as posted above) 
I was going to post something myself about this so I apologise for the hijack, but it is on-topic
I think the physics says that something like 70ish percent of your breaking force goes through the front tyre.
I'm assuming it is possible to lift the rear wheel on a bike as it is on a motorbike, not that I've ever tried
.
The only times I can think that you would need a back brake is to perhaps drag a bit of speed off if you were going into a corner a bit too fast or if you were on a gravelly road, maybe. Both these tasks can be done with your legs on a fixed. In an emergency stop I reckon you'd lift the rear or wash out the front on gravel. I know on the rare occasions when I've braked in an emergency I always end up locking the rear, which is then pretty useless as a brake.
So, apart from the possibility of broken cables and just feeling safe or wanting to feel safe - Do you really need an extra back brake?
I was going to post something myself about this so I apologise for the hijack, but it is on-topic
I think the physics says that something like 70ish percent of your breaking force goes through the front tyre.
I'm assuming it is possible to lift the rear wheel on a bike as it is on a motorbike, not that I've ever tried
.The only times I can think that you would need a back brake is to perhaps drag a bit of speed off if you were going into a corner a bit too fast or if you were on a gravelly road, maybe. Both these tasks can be done with your legs on a fixed. In an emergency stop I reckon you'd lift the rear or wash out the front on gravel. I know on the rare occasions when I've braked in an emergency I always end up locking the rear, which is then pretty useless as a brake.
So, apart from the possibility of broken cables and just feeling safe or wanting to feel safe - Do you really need an extra back brake?
HLaB
Marie Attoinette Fan
Most of my braking is done with the front and its almost 100% front now I'm use to fix but I still rather the rear was there.
Front only here. On a good commute (40 miles) it won't even be used, leg braking and front for the last little bit. In traffic it's really easy to control your speed with your legs.
Have occasionally had to stop in anger and haven't noticed it being any worse than with 2 on the road bike. Front full on, back wheel will come up, allowing you to easily slow it down, off a little on the front, and Bob's your Uncle. One less thing to carry around and clean.
Have occasionally had to stop in anger and haven't noticed it being any worse than with 2 on the road bike. Front full on, back wheel will come up, allowing you to easily slow it down, off a little on the front, and Bob's your Uncle. One less thing to carry around and clean.
Boris Bajic
Guest
Front and rear.
I ride in the hilly Three Counties and am glad to have that extra security. Descending at 35mph alongside cars doing 60 is a little harum-scarum even with brakes on both wheels.
A nicely set-up fixed-gear fixopholous fixie that you are used to riding will stop nicely on the front wheel in extremis by standing it on its nose; and this can be fun if you want to make an entrance, but for most occasions it's nicer to feather both brakes and ease up on the crank.
There are those who are passionately opposed to rear brakes when riding fixed. I set mine up without rears initially. I would ask those people to stop in a hurry on a fast, wet descent and then reconsider. But it's a free country, despite the fact that I am right.
I ride in the hilly Three Counties and am glad to have that extra security. Descending at 35mph alongside cars doing 60 is a little harum-scarum even with brakes on both wheels.
A nicely set-up fixed-gear fixopholous fixie that you are used to riding will stop nicely on the front wheel in extremis by standing it on its nose; and this can be fun if you want to make an entrance, but for most occasions it's nicer to feather both brakes and ease up on the crank.
There are those who are passionately opposed to rear brakes when riding fixed. I set mine up without rears initially. I would ask those people to stop in a hurry on a fast, wet descent and then reconsider. But it's a free country, despite the fact that I am right.
D
Deleted member 1258
Guest
I'm front brake only but I don't ride in towns or cities. If I rode where there were lots of people and traffic I'd have the front back and centre brakes (as posted above)
I was going to post something myself about this so I apologise for the hijack, but it is on-topic
I think the physics says that something like 70ish percent of your breaking force goes through the front tyre.
I'm assuming it is possible to lift the rear wheel on a bike as it is on a motorbike, not that I've ever tried
The only times I can think that you would need a back brake is to perhaps drag a bit of speed off if you were going into a corner a bit too fast or if you were on a gravelly road, maybe. Both these tasks can be done with your legs on a fixed. In an emergency stop I reckon you'd lift the rear or wash out the front on gravel. I know on the rare occasions when I've braked in an emergency I always end up locking the rear, which is then pretty useless as a brake.
So, apart from the possibility of broken cables and just feeling safe or wanting to feel safe - Do you really need an extra back brake?
Having nearly somersaulted my fixed doing an emergency stop from around 30mph on a descent I can confirm you can lift the back of a bike under heavy braking.
I ride fixed in all weathers, I'm also crap at leg braking, always have been, I run back and front brakes on my fixed, most of the time I use front only, but when its slippery, snow, ice, mud, leaves etc, I will rely on back brake and legs, I have more chance of catching it if the back steps out than I have if the front goes, also if the back goes I'm likely to land on my, well padded, arse, if the front goes I'm likely to land on my face.
Farky
Senior Member
- Location
- West London
^^^^you're right and this is what happens when a front wheel decides to break free in a corner...
D
Deleted member 1258
Guest
Ouch, what happened?