80" Gear

[Jakob]

I found leg braking to be pretty tough on the legs when I went up to 76".
Here in Vancouver, its hilly compared to London and 72" seems to suit me well, but due to the very short commute (3 blocks!), I also don't ride that much any more.

[Frenchie]

I'd say it's too big. For TTing people ride 81'' to 88'' around here in the summer. For all round riding I'd prefer a 72'', which is alo what we start the TT season with at my club.

[julianbramley]

I'm 6 foot tall and about 13 and a half stone, not (really) overweight and I run a 68" gear. How anyone can run around comfortably with 80" unless they are built like Chris Hoy is beyond me.
When its cold and windy and I'm riding a  good climb this gear can still come close to stalling and I wouldn't say I'm a weak rider.
I think if you're not spinning nicely it defeats the object of riding a fixed.

[Deano]

I usually ride 68", occasionally 62" - I wouldn't fancy riding 80", since with my typical average speeds of 16-17mph, I'd be teaching myself to pedal at relatively low cadences.  I agree with Julian: spinning is all part of the fun.

[Blah]

Of course Teethgrinder laughs at a measly 80"

Horses for courses innit.

[teethgrinder]

Of course Teethgrinder laughs at a measly 80"

Not really. I allways used to ride a 65" but after a few 600k Audaxes, I decided that bumpy descents at the end of the ride with sore nuts was no fun. I experimented doing short rides on a bigger gear, then went to see how far I could go on a bigger gear. I just prefer a gear in the mid 80s. I don't see why I should have to spin fast on descents and get sore nuts on long rides when I don't need to. I'd rather not use my brakes when my speed gets over 40 mph. What a waste of momentum.

I'm 6 foot tall and about 13 and a half stone, not (really) overweight and I run a 68" gear. How anyone can run around comfortably with 80" unless they are built like Chris Hoy is beyond me.

I'm 5'8" and 11 stone. You're a bit big for climbing hills so you'd probably struggle more with a bigger gear. I've climbed short 1:6 hills on my 86. I'm no Chris Hoy, but I sometimes ride a gear >100". I do avoid hills though, on a gear that size.
At first, it feels like I've been kicked in the guts by a horse after a ride. But you toughen up to it. I go back to my usual gear and it feels very light. I also go down to 65" (but not as much as I should) It's all a matter of adapting.

[ABlipInContinuity]

I'm still sticking with it. I cruise comfortably in low twenties and I'm finding (for the moment) the larger gear is actually making for more relaxed riding because I'm not spinning like a loon just to get along.

I dare say on a longer ride or an audax, I'll be pacing myself a lot more slowly making necessitating a cog swap, but for jaunting around the city I'm more than happy.

[mike]

when I bought fixie 1, before I learned about 'gear inches' it was fitted with 86" gear. 

I did quite a few miles on it before I got a new chainring and went down to about 72, it really wasn't a problem on the roads round here apart from the day when I came up a long hill into a 30mph headwind which nearly finished me off.

I didnt really learn to spin until I got a smaller gear though, I'm on 68" most of the time now. 

[Jakob]

I think if you're not spinning nicely it defeats the object of riding a fixed.

Erhh? Why is it necessary to spin nicely in order to ride fixed? It certainly has nothing to with why I ride fixed.

[Greenbank]

Erhh? Why is it necessary to spin nicely in order to ride fixed? It certainly has nothing to with why I ride fixed.

The old school use of fixed was for club riders over winter to develop souplesse, train muscles for creating gobs of torque and to improve their pedal stroke. The bigger the gear you stick on it the less you need to spin, minimising these benefits.

Obviously this isn't the sole use of fixed gear bikes now as plenty of people use them for many other reasons; their simplicity, low maintenance or image/fashion. You are, of course, free to ride fixed for whatever reason you want.

But, the old school will say that if you can't spin well (i.e. 150rpm+) then you're better off putting a *smaller* gear on and getting used it, rather than just shoving a bigger gear on to avoid it.

[Manotea]

I tried riding a shorter gear in the winter (66 from a usual 70~72) and looking back it was a mistake. I didn't spin faster I just went slower, (and as I lost fitness, slower and slower). Gearing down for a particular ride is fine but on the whole its best to stay vaguely long and work harder. Short gears make you weak!

[ABlipInContinuity]

horses for courses.

Tell you what though, when I get a bit tired, find myself fighting a cross wind or a long incline I find myself, rather than slowing down and grinding, eeking out all the efficiency I can by smoothly applying power all the way through the pedal stroke, getting into the most appropriate position e.g. aero for battling a headwind or upright and relaxed for a climb and I'm really happy with it. I find the art of keeping that gear spinning at over 80 rpm quite satisfying.

I know I can spin fast.. that is what sprinting and descending are for.

I don't want to grind and knacker my knees up. The only reason I would gear down now is if I lost fitness.

[Frenchie]

The only time I had knee pains was when riding an 81'' in town; stopping, starting etc. I have no pain when I ride one for racing, even larger gears than that in fact. I still think it is a mistake to ride  an 80'' gear for commuting and agree that it does somewhat defy the purpose of fixed gear training.

[ABlipInContinuity]

I still think it is a mistake to ride  an 80'' gear for commuting and agree that it does somewhat defy the purpose of fixed gear training.

...the bike isn't a training aid! It's a cheap way of me getting efficiently and comfortably from A to B!

As soon as I experience any kind of knee pain, I'll be reaching for the lock ring tool. After tonight's spin, I'm one happy fixer

[Jakob]

Spinning:
Chris Hoy and Rollapaluza at Salford Nocturne | Rollapaluza Roller Racing