hard day?

[pumpkin]

http://www.redbull.com/en/bike/events/1331722639222/patrick-seabase-1910-fixed-gear-challenge

[The Seldom Killer]

Looks like an impressive challenge. Of course roads in those days weren't paved and riders didn't have the benefit of today's technology, technical fabrics etc so there will probably be a raft of people whinging about how it isn't the same and overblowing other petty gripes, the same as they did with Go Steve.

It's still good to see someone having a crack at this and seeing how it goes. For the majority of cyclists, this is anathema to how we ride today so it will be interesting to see how he gets on. Personally I wish him fair winds and no p*nct*r*s. If he does well, perhaps we should invite him to our fair shores to have a go at the Crackpot 1000.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Tough ride to do without brakes. The website says 'one gear' but, given that they flipped their rear wheels back in the day, that an uphill and a downhill gear would be on the cards.

[fields5069]

I think he's the guy who has tackled single climbs/descents in the past. He spins very quickly, and needs to fixie-skid every 30 revolutions or so. I wonder if he calculates his skids so that different parts of the tyre get worn? Also I hope there are no hairpins on the descents!

[Martin109]

Surely the original guys would have had brakes... or a brake... or something?

[marcusjb]

I've watched some of his other videos in the past - he's got big swingers for sure.  He can spin well and then skid to scrub off speed.   I saw a video where he did shred a tyre, so I expect more than one tyre might be needed for this accomplishment. 

Doing that stage on gears would be demanding enough!  I could just about conceive of tackling one or two of the ascents on fixed, but coming down brakeless - no way!

Awesome stuff!

[Pancho]

That page says he expects to get through three tyres.

[trumpet]

No brakes - TWAT !

[JennyB]

I wonder if he calculates his skids so that different parts of the tyre get worn?

That depends on his his gear ratio, since the skid always happens at (more or less) the same crank position.  With, say, a 26" wheel and a 52" gear he'd have only two possible contact points. For most even wear the chainwheel and sprocket should have no common factors.  A  chainwheel with a prime number of teeth would work.  I  think. 

[Oaky]

I wonder if he calculates his skids so that different parts of the tyre get worn?

That depends on his his gear ratio, since the skid always happens at (more or less) the same crank position.  With, say, a 26" wheel and a 52" gear he'd have only two possible contact points. For most even wear the chainwheel and sprocket should have no common factors.  A  chainwheel with a prime number of teeth would work.  I  think. 

As I understand these things,  a 52" gear does not equate to 2 revolutions of a 26" wheel per crank revolution.

The 52" refers to the equivalent diameter (or possibly radius) of Penny Farthing (aka Ordinary) wheel to produce the same gearing.  There is therefore a further factor of pi involved (or 2*pi if it was radius).

The skid patches depend on the ratio of teeth between chainring and sprocket.  Ideally you want a prime number of teeth on your chainring.  Sheldon's explanation is here

[marcusjb]

http://www.bikecalc.com/skid_patch_calculator

(17, since you're asking).

[tom_e]

As I understand these things,  a 52" gear does not equate to 2 revolutions of a 26" wheel per crank revolution.

The 52" refers to the equivalent diameter (or possibly radius) of Penny Farthing (aka Ordinary) wheel to produce the same gearing. 

It refers to exactly that, they're the same thing.  26" is the diameter, 52" is the equivalent diameter.  Ratio of two between them.  Same units, same meaning.

There is therefore a further factor of pi involved (or 2*pi if it was radius).

You only need that factor to get to the distance covered along the ground though.


Bold, but I'm not sure I can admire a desire to trash three tires in one day in order to look cool.  They had brakes in 1910.

[phantasmagoriana]

Is it legal to ride brakeless on the road in France, then?

[Oaky]

As I understand these things,  a 52" gear does not equate to 2 revolutions of a 26" wheel per crank revolution.

The 52" refers to the equivalent diameter (or possibly radius) of Penny Farthing (aka Ordinary) wheel to produce the same gearing. 

It refers to exactly that, they're the same thing.  26" is the diameter, 52" is the equivalent diameter.  Ratio of two between them.  Same units, same meaning.

There is therefore a further factor of pi involved (or 2*pi if it was radius).

You only need that factor to get to the distance covered along the ground though.

D'oh!  You (and JennyB) are exactly right.

I've had a bad case of brain-fade there - stemming from the olden days when I used to think the gear inches were the development (i.e. distance rolled out on the ground) and only realised about the equiv. wheel size thing after reading up on the matter... Now I've gone and essentially made the opposite mistake...

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Is it legal to ride brakeless on the road in France, then?

A question that's never occurred to me before.  I can't think why.

[iddu]

Is it legal to ride brakeless on the road in France, then?

A question that's never occurred to me before.  I can't think why.

Code de la route, Article R315-3 "Any cycle must be fitted with two effective braking devices."

Depends on yer definition of 'effective' then - fixed transmission + foot on tyre could count, making descents interesting 

[Ian H]

Surely the original guys would have had brakes... or a brake... or something?

Yes, and a few had gears.

[mrcharly-YHT]

No brakes - TWAT !

Precisely

[hubner]

Surely the original guys would have had brakes... or a brake... or something?

Yes, and a few had gears.

Yeah of course they had brakes, and freewheels, with 2 sprockets on each side of the wheel. And the bikes probably weighed twice or even three times more than the current all carbon bike. You can bet bet they didn't ride track bikes in road races.

Any in any case, heavier bikes, bad roads etc doesn't make any difference because all the riders in a particular race or era had the same bikes and roads. But if you want  to compare rides or riders from different eras, then surely you have to take the type of bikes and road conditions into account.

Perhaps it would be better to compare this ride with current professionals; riding a modern track bike vs a modern road bike, everything else would be roughly the same.