# SS way overstated?



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

i keep seeing all these posts basically saying "wow after going SS im now dusting all these riders, and just went from slowest to fastest in my group" blah blah blah as if it's some sort of magical change that will transform the rider into an elite machine or something.

well no duh, of course you are going to mash past people that are pacing themselves uphill at a lower gear ratio, why would you expect otherwise? it's a simple trade-off, just like you can choose to hike uphill, or jog/run uphill, one requires more energy expenditure overall than the other and will surely get you there faster, but you pay for that with higher fatigue and energy drain. these are not new concepts.

i just don't get this aura of "revelation" that some posters seem to be relaying. honestly to me it seems like more of a fad than anything else, something a few riders came up with to cure their MTB boredom and have something else to buy and build up. i also think some people just like being part of an exclusive club where only the "hardcore" dare go.

don't get me wrong, i agree that 

1) simplification is good in general, and
2) 27 gears is ridiculous considering the amount of redundancy

but going from one extreme to the other does not seem like the best solution either. although you eliminate several problems you are just replacing them with other problems. i understand that not thinking about gears helps clear your mind, etc, but surely there must be a middle ground here that does not make such large sacrafices as SS clearly does...


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

Wow. I could never fully explain my draw to single speeding, but I assure you it isn't just a "fad" for me. Since I bought my single speed years ago I have sold my geared bikes as they weren't getting pulled from the rack anymore. 
All the reaons as to "Why SS?" should have been covered in this thread above:
http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=82461

It's been viewed 2,700 times and it has 236 replies.

Is it magical? I can't say that. Do I feel like a kid taking my somewhat simple machine into the woods? Yep. There is a warm place in my heart for single speeds that I can't explain. I wouldn't expect everybody to understand. I don't understand how some people can watch golf on TV, but I don't doubt their love for the game.


----------



## unclenorm (Jan 5, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> i understand that not thinking about gears helps clear your mind, etc, but surely there must be a middle ground here that does not make such large sacrafices as SS clearly does...


Like not thinking about some gears will partly clear your mind? :thumbsup:

Aren't gears just a compromise between *riding* your bike and an uplift / shuttle service?


----------



## Stevo26 (Jul 10, 2006)

you may be right, it may just be a fad, for some riders. But im with Dickey..


----------



## trentschler (May 18, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> i keep seeing all these posts basically saying "wow after going SS im now dusting all these riders, and just went from slowest to fastest in my group" blah blah blah as if it's some sort of magical change that will transform the rider into an elite machine or something.


I don't dust anyone! With only one speed, I'm now slower on the flats and slower up the hills than all my friends, I get passed often and regularly in Central Park, and I couldn't keep up on a brisk club ride to win a bet.

But I ride my single-speed bike almost all the time, as I have for a year now, because I love it so much. It's simple, it's fun, it's like being a kid again. I just "ride bike!"

Gears are really a kick after lots of single-speeding. I always think, "Wow! Who invented these?! It's so easy to climb. It's so easy to go fast!" But after a geared ride or two, I go back to my ss, and it's like coming home.


----------



## Just J (Feb 14, 2005)

For me SS is definitely not a fad, I did it because I was sick of my gears going wrong, so I thought I'd give it a whirl.

I'm now faster uphills, but slower on the flats.

When I get on a geared bike I ride better, and can use the gears more effectively, changing down a lot later than I used to.

I'll definitely always ride SS, I sold my geared and suspension bikes because of it, but I can still see a place for them in my armory and will probably get a geared bike at some point in the future for those play rides, and rides where I'm with my geared friends, but right now, I'm happy peddling like an idiot everywhere!


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

unclenorm said:


> Like not thinking about some gears will partly clear your mind? :thumbsup:


exactly =) to be more precise, i think that there is definitely a point of too many being a hindrance, but if the number of choices is kept low enough it becomes almost a subconscious decision requiring no real thought. say for instance somewhere in the 3-5 gear range, where if laid out properly the top and bottom would be rarely used with most of your time spent somewhere in the middle few.

that's the typical gear spread for most all autos and motorcycles, why not for bikes too. like on my offroad rig (Jeep) i only run in 1st on very steep climbs (rare), and only in overdrive (4th) on long distance road travel, and spend most of the time in 2nd or 3rd.

many of you are using tensioners in the rear which result is about as much weight and frictional drag on the driveline as a rear deraileur anyway.


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> i just don't get this aura of "revelation" that some posters seem to be relaying. honestly to me it seems like more of a fad than anything else, something a few riders came up with to cure their MTB boredom and have something else to buy and build up. QUOTE]
> 
> It is like you trying to explain your passion for biking to a bunch of 4-wheelers...Until they try they are just not going to get it...Get it?? SSimple.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

miSSionary said:


> It is like you trying to explain your passion for biking to a bunch of 4-wheelers...Until they try they are just not going to get it...Get it?? SSimple.


not really sure how that compares. how about this, why not tell the 4-wheelers to mod their rigs so they only have one gear, would be very curious to see how they respond =)

to me trying to explain SS would probably go something like "yea well i took my mountain bike and did a BMX conversion on it because i like pedalling my ass off on flats and blowing my wad on uphills (the ones im not forced to walk)"

so i guess what this comes down to is just wanting to feel like your young again? yea i think there's a name for that....isn't it called a midlife crisis?


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> not really sure how that compares. how about this, why not tell the 4-wheelers to mod their rigs so they only have one gear, would be very curious to see how they respond =)
> 
> to me trying to explain SS would probably go something like "yea well i took my mountain bike and did a BMX conversion on it because i like pedalling my ass off on flats and blowing my wad on uphills (the ones im not forced to walk)"
> 
> so i guess what this comes down to is just wanting to feel like your young again? yea i think there's a name for that....isn't it called a midlife crisis?


I just meant until you try it no, you probably won't get it. mid-life?? I'm young at 32!!


----------



## Just J (Feb 14, 2005)

I'm 29 so at least 15-20 years away from a mid-life crisis yet I'd say! 

If I wanted a BMX I wouldn't have given my Raleigh Mag Burner away or I'd just go out and get one.

Have you tried SS? Some people love it, they're generally the ones who post on this board, some people hate it and they just usually go and ride geared and forget about it!


----------



## Rainman (Apr 18, 2004)

*Ss.*



salimoneus said:


> i keep seeing all these posts basically saying "wow after going SS im now dusting all these riders, and just went from slowest to fastest in my group" blah blah blah as if it's some sort of magical change that will transform the rider into an elite machine or something.
> 
> well no duh, of course you are going to mash past people that are pacing themselves uphill at a lower gear ratio, why would you expect otherwise? it's a simple trade-off, just like you can choose to hike uphill, or jog/run uphill, one requires more energy expenditure overall than the other and will surely get you there faster, but you pay for that with higher fatigue and energy drain. these are not new concepts.
> 
> ...


 To understand single speeds, you must ride one yourself. Not just for a day or two...but for weeks...months.

After doing this, you may then begin to just start to see the reasons why we love single speed bikes so much.

There are many answers to your question, but only after riding a singlespeed yourself for a while will you be able to answer it....for yourself.

R.


----------



## Nonracerrichie (Dec 20, 2005)

There are compromises. Yes. Hills are harder, flats may be slower, and you run out of gear on downhills from time to time but, it is the challenge of it all that makes the SS fun. You find more power in you legs as you continue to challenge yourself to get up longer and steeper stuff. Your body adapts. You find a way to spin faster and smoother to get speed out of the down slopes. The revelation for me was that the body is a far more adaptalbe, and flexible engine than the bike companie's marketing departments have led me to think over the years. Riding is about riding more than ever and much less about the money I need to spend on gear or maintenance. That is fun. 

Try if you want, if you don't that is OK.


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> i keep seeing all these posts basically saying "wow after going SS im now dusting all these riders, and just went from slowest to fastest in my group" blah blah blah as if it's some sort of magical change that will transform the rider into an elite machine or something.
> 
> well no duh, of course you are going to mash past people that are pacing themselves uphill at a lower gear ratio, why would you expect otherwise? it's a simple trade-off, just like you can choose to hike uphill, or jog/run uphill, one requires more energy expenditure overall than the other and will surely get you there faster, but you pay for that with higher fatigue and energy drain. these are not new concepts.
> 
> ...


A bit harsh but some truth to your comment... My draw is, after riding and learning mtb on 4" xc susser, riding rigid rear end with fixed gear gave me that new learning how to ride mtb feel when I was stoked about riding everyday as I progressed. Plus, when I ride my other geared 4" susser, it seems so much easier when climbing and I spin a larger gear than I use to. Definetely not a "fad" since I truthfully look foward to riding my ss more than my susser. But I can't take my ss every terrain since it has limitation...unless you enjoy "dabbing" and walking your bike a lot. So riding ss is definitely harder when compared to riding geared bike when cleanning every section is mandatory. So I agree with you when people say that it's easier riding ss, they are not being truthful. Maybe around one hour ride time it could seem that way but go on a 2-4 hrs epic ride with ton of climb with a lot of techy sections, the truth will be revealed. But cyclist in us may prefer that infamous "suffering", however.

I get such a kick out of cleaning sections that I never have been able to and my friends on their full susser geared bike who dab or walk. Don't we all?

STH


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Rainman said:


> To understand single speeds, you must ride one yourself. Not just for a day or two...but for weeks...months.
> 
> After doing this, you may then begin to just start to see the reasons why we love single speed bikes so much.
> 
> ...


i don't need to ride a custom $$ bike in order to know what riding a single speed is like. just go out and pick a gear ratio and ride without changing gears, pretty simple. been there, done that, and i have to say it's not the right tool for the job.

i prefer to keep the engine in it's powerband, which results in more speed and better performance, and a better overall workout. if walking your bike uphill and coasting back down is "fun" for you, then hey man whatever works, i guess i just don't "get it"


----------



## Just J (Feb 14, 2005)

As Rainman says "Not just for a day or two...but for weeks...months."

You're not going to "get it" by putting your bike into one gear and trying to ride somewhere, it isn't going to give you the full experience.


----------



## Rainman (Apr 18, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> i don't need to ride a custom $$ bike in order to know what riding a single speed is like. just go out and pick a gear ratio and ride without changing gears, pretty simple. been there, done that, and i have to say it's not the right tool for the job.
> 
> i prefer to keep the engine in it's powerband, which results in more speed and better performance, and a better overall workout. if walking your bike uphill and coasting back down is "fun" for you, then hey man whatever works, i guess i just don't "get it"


Riding a geared bike as a singlespeed just doesn't work very well. It *may* give you a small 'taste' of the sensation of singlespeeding, but it will not show you what singlespeed riding is.

A single speed bike doesn't have to be an expensive custom bike. It's not about the money, it's about the singlespeed.

From your posts, it's very plain for us to see that you don't know what singlespeeding is about. The only way you will ever really know, is to do it. To make the committment yourself.

I have always maintained that singlespeed riding is much harder than riding a geared bike. I truly believe that to be so. You get a greater whole body workout on a SS.

You are correct in your summation though. You don't "get it".

You won't ever "get it".....unless you try it for yourself.

R.


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

*Wow!*



salimoneus said:


> i keep seeing all these posts basically saying "wow after going SS im now dusting all these riders, and just went from slowest to fastest in my group" blah blah blah as if it's some sort of magical change that will transform the rider into an elite machine or something.
> 
> well no duh, of course you are going to mash past people that are pacing themselves uphill at a lower gear ratio, why would you expect otherwise? it's a simple trade-off, just like you can choose to hike uphill, or jog/run uphill, one requires more energy expenditure overall than the other and will surely get you there faster, but you pay for that with higher fatigue and energy drain. these are not new concepts.


Just hopping on for a test ride? Sure you'll get fatigued. If you want to feel the magic you'll have to earn it.

The magic is called training effect. Ride hard and the body responds. I find myself climbing stronger and getting over the top with less fatigue. Work pays is not a new concept either.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

SingleTrackHound said:


> A bit harsh but some truth to your comment... My draw is, after riding and learning mtb on 4" xc susser, riding rigid rear end with fixed gear gave me that new learning how to ride mtb feel when I was stoked about riding everyday as I progressed. Plus, when I ride my other geared 4" susser, it seems so much easier when climbing and I spin a larger gear than I use to. Definetely not a "fad" since I truthfully look foward to riding my ss more than my susser. But I can't take my ss every terrain since it has limitation...unless you enjoy "dabbing" and walking your bike a lot. So riding ss is definitely harder when compared to riding geared bike when cleanning every section is mandatory. So I agree with you when people say that it's easier riding ss, they are not being truthful. Maybe around one hour ride time it could seem that way but go on a 2-4 hrs epic ride with ton of climb with a lot of techy sections, the truth will be revealed. But cyclist in us may prefer that infamous "suffering", however.
> 
> I get such a kick out of cleaning sections that I never have been able to and my friends on their full susser geared bike who dab or walk. Don't we all?
> 
> STH


i appreciate your candid reply.

in response to the main point you and many others have made, that being you find you are stronger when going back to the geared bike after riding SS.

well if resulting in being a stronger rider is one of the major benefits, it seems to me to be more a lack of discipline and not pushing yourself hard enough on your geared bikes to begin with. since the geared bikes can do anything and everything a SS can do, then it must be that the rider was not achieving their full potential before even making the switch.

there must surely be cheaper and easier ways to motivate one's self other than a full driveline conversion or completely new rig. in the end it's just a state of mind that makes the difference, and you don't need new hardware to make that happen


----------



## Rootberry (Jul 27, 2005)

I don't have a SS mtb, so I can't say for offroad specifically. I did however get a fixed gear recently for commuting, and after doing my hilly commute in 46x16 for 3 weeks it felt pretty "magical" climbing on my geared mtb. I don't think I have the genetics for SSing exclusively, but I would if I could. Who doesn't want a 20lb xc bike?


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> i don't need to ride a custom $$ bike in order to know what riding a single speed is like. just go out and pick a gear ratio and ride without changing gears, pretty simple. been there, done that, and i have to say it's not the right tool for the job.
> 
> i prefer to keep the engine in it's powerband, which results in more speed and better performance, and a better overall workout. if walking your bike uphill and coasting back down is "fun" for you, then hey man whatever works, i guess i just don't "get it"


Dude RELAX over there :ciappa: . I was being nice but now you get what you deserve. You are the [email protected]$$ troll coming here and slapping us in the face with what we do and love ...then telling us "you don't get it" yet you are not listening to what is said but instead surfing your little mind for your next attack...madman: ). If you want to stay close-minded why are you here in the first place?? The others are trying to give you a perspective and all you are doing is sturring the pot :yikes: . YOU DON'T GET WHAT SS'ING IS ABOUT AND I AM NOT GOING TO FIGHT WITH YOU ABOUT IT. Back to my example; Try to explain biking to someone with OTHER INTERESTS...they won't get it...just like you don't get this!! :thumbsup: 
PS~ If one more idiot says they rode their bike around in one gear and they don't understand...well who's the idiot again out: ...cause if I had all those gears you brag about i'd use them...BECAUSE YOU PAID FOR THEM, and they STILL probably cost more than my custom SS)?? I'm done with you salimoneus...have fun in your box. :incazzato:


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> i don't need to ride a custom $$ bike in order to know what riding a single speed is like. just go out and pick a gear ratio and ride without changing gears, pretty simple. been there, done that, and i have to say it's not the right tool for the job.
> 
> i prefer to keep the engine in it's powerband, which results in more speed and better performance, and a better overall workout. if walking your bike uphill and coasting back down is "fun" for you, then hey man whatever works, i guess i just don't "get it"


Here's one example. Couple of weeks ago, I was riding my ss at a local area. On the flat I noticed someone was catching up. When I got to the beginning of a long stretch downhill, I was still ahead of that rider but he was almost right behind me. I decided to hold my line and let it "pin" as fast as possible. Never saw him again until at the bottom when I waited for my dog to catch up. Well, that rider caught up to me and so did my dog. He pulled up next to me and complimented me on how fast I was riding on a HT. He hadn't noticed the fix gear yet. When I saw his bike, it was my next dream machine...Intense 6.6 w/ Fox Vans 36. That's when it darned on me that I don't need to spend $4000 dollar on a bike to have fun. So I decided to abandoned my next dream build and just be happy riding what ever gets me out on the trail. The end!

STH


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

pacman said:


> Just hopping on for a test ride? Sure you'll get fatigued. If you want to feel the magic you'll have to earn it.
> 
> The magic is called training effect. Ride hard and the body responds. I find myself climbing stronger and getting over the top with less fatigue. Work pays is not a new concept either.


thanks for the insight, but i don't need a new machine in order to train harder, especially when the machine i already have can do everything the new one has and then some.

if you improved that much riding your SS then you were a slacker on your geared bike, and you need to work on your mental game.


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> i don't need to ride a custom $$ bike in order to know what riding a single speed is like. just go out and pick a gear ratio and ride without changing gears, pretty simple. been there, done that, and i have to say it's not the right tool for the job.
> 
> i prefer to keep the engine in it's powerband, which results in more speed and better performance, and a better overall workout. if walking your bike uphill and coasting back down is "fun" for you, then hey man whatever works, i guess i just don't "get it"


The Redline Monocog is under $500 (frame)
The On-One's...under $1K
Surley...$400ish frame
Walt Custom...$800+ (Your frame may cost more?)
Bianchi SASS, SISS, BUSS, DISS...$1K give or take suspended or not
Hmmm...not that much, guess a lot of us don't need custom either...ut:


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> i appreciate your candid reply.
> 
> in response to the main point you and many others have made, that being you find you are stronger when going back to the geared bike after riding SS.
> 
> ...


I didn't realize you didn't own a ss. I am not going to try to explain anymore. Why? Then it becomes that "political" argument or differences of subjective opinion we all find ourselve into from time to time. You will never be able to convert a veggans to a meat eater and a democrat to a republican...may be I shouldn't say never. Because of that "tunnel vision effect". That's why I never talk politics w/ my friends. I just respect other's difference beliefs.

STH


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> thanks for the insight, but i don't need a new machine in order to train harder, especially when the machine i already have can do everything the new one has and then some.
> 
> if you improved that much riding your SS then you were a slacker on your geared bike, and you need to work on your mental game.


Progression...so if I am faster today than yesterday well that is what should happen with good training right?? So what if I rode geared yesterday and SS today, wouldn't I be faster on the SS then?? Slacker arguement out. :ciappa:


----------



## ernesto_from_Wisconsin (Jan 12, 2004)

*SS worldwide*

We Americans are in the notion that SS riding is a fad...we can't tolerate gears, cassettes, shifters, etc.

Some of us choose to ride this way. I did, ain't ever going back...

But the places I have been, especially 3rd World style, you see more SS riding than not. its a necessity, and they don't need to hinder their ride with things that brake easily...

Check this out: this is SS: https://abc.eznettools.net/D300013/X300109/MexCityTrike.jpg
I remember seeing

https://www.worksman.com/frontload.html and another...
https://www.absolutestockphoto.com/albums/userpics/10180/normal_Absolute_180_5185.jpg

I remember knife sharpeners: https://static.flickr.com/6/11822998_84e77ad2e5_m.jpg all SS


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> *since the geared bikes can do anything and everything a SS can do,* then it must be that the rider was not achieving their full potential before even making the switch.


Not true, typical SS is lighter. On steep technical climbs I have the confidence that nothing will break or there won't be ghost shifts.

PS No chainring tattoos and I never break a derailleur anymore.


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

Some like to sit and spin and some like to stand and deliver, some just get threatened by the fact that others can pin it with just one gear. Pretty simple.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

ernesto_from_Wisconsin said:


> We Americans are in the notion that SS riding is a fad...we can't tolerate gears, cassettes, shifters, etc.
> 
> Some of us choose to ride this way. I did, ain't ever going back...
> 
> ...


the reason that kid's bikes and other bikes elsewhere are single speed is

1) low maintenance
2) no hangers to snap off due to getting banged/tossed around (low maintenance)
3) simplistic operation
4) low maintenance

those riders most likely do not have the means or know-how or nearby shops to fix any problems. this supercedes any desire for having a choice of gears.

it does not however imply that a single speed is superior or should be more desirable to a geared bike, in particular to those whom the maintenance issue is not relevant. somehow the SS concept has crept into the world of MTB most likely due to the manufacturers needing something new to sell to all the willing buyers.


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> the reason that kid's bikes and other bikes elsewhere are single speed is
> 
> 1) low maintenance
> 2) no hangers to snap off due to getting banged/tossed around
> ...


Hey Rocket Scientist...If you have ALL the answers WHY ARE YOU HERE STILL?? ut: 
No...
1) Hangers are replaceable on pretty much every bike unless you are on like an 80's specialized....so WRONG (now days even SS are coming with handgers so those that don't like it have options).
2) I can fix your gearie better than you so nope...not why I SS.
3) Actually bike manufacturers would rather sell you more for less...so like a $4000 full suspension will make them more than an $800 rigid and single bianchi.
4) YOU ARE A CLOSE-MINDED TOOL ASKING QUESTIONS YOU DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT GETTING ANSWERS TO...GOOD LUCK WITH THAT. :winker:


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> i appreciate your candid reply.
> 
> in response to the main point you and many others have made, that being you find you are stronger when going back to the geared bike after riding SS.
> 
> ...


I am definitely not a slacker on my bike. FYI, few times a year I take my road bike from Bergan Park to top of Mt. Evans (highest paved road on North America) in CO; elevation gain 7000ft to 14200ft in 28mile oneway. Also, from Graby Lake to Estes Park, CO, via Rocky Mt. National Park out and back (100miles with amount of climb that rivals Alp's stage in Tour De France). Not a slacker, me likey "suffering"!. I just find the tallest gear I can pedal and spin up as fast as I can at hardest effort required that I can muster without pulling over to throw up. Not that throwing up is bad when I am suffering, it's that I have to stop a minute or two to do that but I consider that "slacking".

STH


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

miSSionary said:


> Hey Rocket Scientist...If you have ALL the answers WHY ARE YOU HERE STILL?? ut:
> No...
> 1) Hangers are replaceable on pretty much every bike unless you are on like an 80's specialized....so WRONG (now days even SS are coming with handgers so those that don't like it have options).
> 2) I can fix your gearie better than you so nope...not why I SS.
> ...


you missed the points ENTIRELY. how will a busted hanger or your wonderful mechanical ability help some poor courier in Ethiopia that broke his deraileur? my point was that this is the main reason why those bikes are single speed, because those people absolutely cannot afford for anything to break, so it is worth it to sacrafice having gears alltogether. i hope i made it clear enough for you.

as to the bike manufacturers, they would be happy to sell ANYTHING that they can sell for a reasonable profit. you know what they say, there is a sucker born every minute


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

*You're so right.*



salimoneus said:


> thanks for the insight, but i don't need a new machine in order to train harder, especially when the machine i already have can do everything the new one has and then some.
> 
> if you improved that much riding your SS then you were a slacker on your geared bike, and you need to work on your mental game.


_I was a slacker_. SS'ing has pushed me to win a 24H race and set the record at the Fargo Street Climb. All when I'm 30 years past mid-life crisis. If I went back to gears I might keep up with you. 

Later all - gotta ride going this morning.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

pacman said:


> _I was a slacker_. SS'ing has pushed me to win a 24H race and set the record at the Fargo Street Climb. All when I'm 30 years past mid-life crisis. If I went back to gears I might keep up with you.
> 
> Later all - gotta ride going this morning.


oh so now you're implying that if two equal ability riders race, the SS guy will beat the gearie guy? i hope you're joking. i think you just enjoy tooting your own horn. brag much?

well congrats on beating a field of noobs, i'm proud of ya


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> you missed the points ENTIRELY. how will a busted hanger or your wonderful mechanical ability help some poor courier in Ethiopia that broke his deraileur? my point was that this is the main reason why those bikes are single speed, because those people absolutely cannot afford for anything to break, so it is worth it to sacrafice having gears alltogether. i hope i made it clear enough for you.
> 
> as to the bike manufacturers, they would be happy to sell ANYTHING that they can sell for a reasonable profit. you know what they say, there is a sucker born every minute


Get real, so you say the bike companies would rather sell a $3.00 bike in Ethiopia than a $4000.00 bike to a sucker like you (your arguements are lacking...no wait...that is the space between your ears)?? ut: 
Once again you have all the answers oh wise gearie. :thumbsup: 
"You know they say, there is a sucker born every minute"...HEY SUCKER  
Your village just called...guess what...time for them to get their idiot back.


----------



## Just J (Feb 14, 2005)

I was a slacker until I got my SS, now I clear more than ever! A SS will never ghost shift, never spit the chain out into the spokes and the deraillieur will never snap. SSing gave me more confidence to push me and my bike, and it's also teaching me how to ride properly, pick the right lines, and just think about my riding and not how I'm going to afford that new XTR/XO rear mech, cassette, chain...

No-one's saying SS is better, superior or anything of the sort, it's just better and superior to us for us! You can't even comment because you've never done it properly, and in your own words you just don't get it so why not just get on with it and let us get on with it as you've not taken in anything any of us have said, go out ride your bike, perhaps borrow a friends (you have friends right? ) SS and just have fun...


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> oh so now you're implying that if two equal ability riders race, the SS guy will beat the gearie guy? i hope you're joking. i think you just enjoy tooting your own horn. brag much?
> 
> well congrats on beating a field of noobs, i'm proud of ya


Not at all, don't put words in people's mouths. The gearie would win, yahoo. However, come out and ride with me...I'll punish you on the trail. :thumbsup:


----------



## rockhound (Dec 19, 2005)

I think the singlespeed phenomenom is a hard swing 180 degrees away from 27 speeds with a lot of redundancy.

I think many will come to the realization that having gears is ok, just not 27 of them. Some singlespeeders will come back to gears, just from another perspective.

I can see people in the near future running four or five cogs in back that are more widely spaced. How about thumb shifters and a 1x5 drivetrain with less dish in the rear wheel?

I ran a 2x9 for years and have never understood why it never really caught on...maybe if Shimano had done it, cyclists would follow suit.

So that's my prediction, back to gears, only simplified.


----------



## nogearshere (Mar 7, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> my point was that this is the main reason why those bikes are single speed, because those people absolutely cannot afford for anything to break, so it is worth it to sacrafice having gears alltogether.


this was a factor in my decision to switch...i didn't have to move to Ethiopia either. ss is not just what i ride anymore...it's more of a state of mind...hmmmmmmm.



salimoneus said:


> as to the bike manufacturers, they would be happy to sell ANYTHING that they can sell for a reasonable profit. you know what they say, there is a sucker born every minute


suckers ride single speeds...i like that, may i use it?


----------



## serious (Jan 25, 2005)

In many ways *salimoneus*' attitude is similar to the attitude I used to have before getting into SSing. And he is absolutely right, the SS bike is less efficient than a geared bike. But if you don't ride *sufficiently varried terrain*, SSing can be comparable to geared riding and many SSers find that their speed does not suffer much.

I ride/race the very same terrain on both SS and geared and guess what? I have to use 32:20 gearing to avoid walking. That results in a significant compromise on flats. I am 44 years old and a very average sport class rider, so gears make a huge difference to me, especially in longer rides where I simply run out of steam. In my last race (Canada Cup) there were many climbs and by the 3rd loop I bonked. When your lap time drops by 10-11 minutes, you know that you are in trouble. Gears would have definitely helped.

Basically I am more pragmatic about the whole SS thing. I ride/race rigid SS for a personal challenge. Period. It feels good to be the only one on a rigid SS bike in the race. It feels good to get all the cheers when you clear sections that some don't. It would feel much better if I finished on the podium, but that won't happen on any bike. 

If I put the ego aside (yes my ego loves to think that SSing is special ) what I like best about my rigid SS is the contrast is provides relative to my geared FS bike. Switching between the 2 is so freakishly different. I just love them both.


----------



## mrsalty (Feb 7, 2006)

*SS is soooooo 2003*

SS is REALLY GAY.
It is definitely a fad.
Much like clipless pedals, suspension, 29er, disc brakes.
People who ride SS are just looking for attention and admiratrion.
There, do you feel better??

C..


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> as to the bike manufacturers, they would be happy to sell ANYTHING that they can sell for a reasonable profit. you know what they say, there is a sucker born every minute


 Thus the boom in so called "All Mountain" bikes.:thumbsup:


----------



## pitmang1 (Sep 11, 2005)

One Gear is fun. Geared bikes are usually faster than singlespeeds on flats, but mountain bikes aren't designed for flats, they are designed for mountains. If you follow this link you will notice that the winner of the Vision Quest was on a single speed bicycle. The guy that came in second had been talking alot of $#!+ before the race about how a single speeder could never win this kind of race. He sounded alot like Salmonella until he got beat.

http://www.warriorssociety.org/events/2006_VQ_finishing_times.html


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

*Question for everybody...*

Why do you even waste your energy responding to something like this? He obviously isn't looking for enlightment with this post, his mind is already made up and closed... in other words, he's trolling.:nono:

You know the saying... don't feed the trolls.


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

dumbaSS said:


> Why do you even waste your energy responding to something like this? He obviously isn't looking for enlightment with this post, his mind is already made up and closed... in other words, he's trolling.:nono:
> 
> You know the saying... don't feed the trolls.


Ha ha ha, thank you, I truly needed that like salimoneus needs a good public flogging!!


----------



## Just J (Feb 14, 2005)

dumbaSS said:


> Why do you even waste your energy responding to something like this? He obviously isn't looking for enlightment with this post, his mind is already made up and closed... in other words, he's trolling.:nono:
> 
> You know the saying... don't feed the trolls.


Never has a truer word been spoken, and all that coming from another dumbaSS!


----------



## nogearshere (Mar 7, 2005)

dumbaSS said:


> You know the saying... don't feed the trolls.


what??? did management cancel the commission on converting new members and nay sayers?

if thats the case, i quit.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

nogearshere said:


> what??? did management cancel the commission on converting new members and nay sayers?
> 
> if thats the case, i quit.


Hey if that's your thing have at 'em. :thumbsup:

Me... I'd rather waste my energy pedaling my really fadish one-geared-rigid-29'er up and down a mountain... enjoying every minute of it.:cornut:


----------



## Fort James (Jan 26, 2006)

Compared to the bike I am riding now, I was way slower on my old 26 singlespeed. And It was a great bike, I liked it a lot, thought it could never get better.

My new bike? It is a 29er. SS of course.


----------



## LeeMan (Feb 9, 2004)

*Troll*



salimoneus said:


> thanks for the insight, but i don't need a new machine in order to train harder, especially when the machine i already have can do everything the new one has and then some.
> 
> if you improved that much riding your SS then you were a slacker on your geared bike, and you need to work on your mental game.


I can't belive (1) you said something so rude, and (2) people are still responding to you, you troll.

Go to some other thread, would you? You're on my ignore list now.


----------



## ernesto_from_Wisconsin (Jan 12, 2004)

*spider-man*

Spider Man would whoop us regardless of what he rode...

He'd make a dir. out of webbing and then like, ride up buildings a la choy n' sh¡t.

At the Chequamegon race, I like to start near the end...gives me the opportunity to smoke them geaires as I pass them all...

At races I make fun of other SSers. As I come up from behind: "you single speeders think you're all smug with your one gear...bla bla bla...you're all better then the rest of us...bla bla bla" and then I pass...and they laugh, as I do. Its all fun n' games. We all ride what we like, even people who ride unicycles poke fun of ppl who ride with two wheels...

This thread is really lame. if we were all actually in a padded room, we'd all get along, discuss why I torment chipmunks by tossing treble hooks in the chipmunk basket...

Fighting on the internet gets absolutely nothing accomplished. Nothing at all...

If you guys want to tune in on the 29th, I'll be on 102.1 in Milwaukee radio at 7 PM...all HBFK, talking about McMamma and McDaddy n' hbfk kids...and your moms.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

rockhound said:


> I think the singlespeed phenomenom is a hard swing 180 degrees away from 27 speeds with a lot of redundancy.
> 
> I think many will come to the realization that having gears is ok, just not 27 of them. Some singlespeeders will come back to gears, just from another perspective.
> 
> ...


thank you sir, at least there is one person with some logic and reasoning left on this damn forum.

i was starting to really think the whole thing is turning into a brainwash/cult scene. well actually i still think that may be the case but there is always hope 

i still think post #7 in this thread makes the point quite nicely, and nobody else has commented on the "happy medium" approach, which just seems to make a lot more sense than going to the opposite extreme and then some how you either "feel it" or you don't. i think what you are feeling is brain suck as you realize you just blew cash on something so silly...


----------



## serious (Jan 25, 2005)

Fort James: *Compared to the bike I am riding now, I was way slower on my old 26 singlespeed ... My new bike? It is a 29er. SS of course.*

Unfortunately, posts like these are hilarious to geared bike riders.


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> you just blew cash on something so silly...


 See, this is exactly how I feel about gears and suspension. Why would I waste good money on sh!t I know I don't need to be fast or have fun.


----------



## LIFECYCLE (Mar 8, 2006)

I rarely post my replies or views about bikes on mtbr these days because i ride my bike for myself and no one else.I really do not care what other peoples opinions are on my selection of bike and components and i find it so stupid and short-sighted that people argue over trivial things.I ride single speed because I LIKE IT.Everyone is different, thankfully,people like different things and to force your opinions on someone else is just ignorance.Ride your bike for yourself.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

mrsalty said:


> SS is REALLY GAY.


i can't really comment on the sexual preference of SS, but whichever way SS leans is ok with me i do not sex discriminate 



mrsalty said:


> It is definitely a fad.
> Much like clipless pedals, suspension, 29er, disc brakes.


well all the other things you mention represent an evolution in the technology or design, having pretty clear advantages to their successors. in contrast SS has been around forever as probably the original design, and until recently being used only on cheap low-maintenance kid's bikes.



mrsalty said:


> People who ride SS are just looking for attention and admiratrion.
> There, do you feel better??


ok well this i can probably agree with. most of you guys posting seem to get real excited when all the riders you supposedly blow past tell you "wow i cant believe you have no gears!" or some other random comment. go back and read the posts, i did, and almost every one includes comments from some other riders. seems to me you put quite a lot of weight on just the reaction it gets from people as opposed to any tangible benefits. like i said before, whatever floats your superficial boat!


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

teamdicky said:


> Wow. I could never fully explain my draw to single speeding, but I assure you it isn't just a "fad" for me. Since I bought my single speed years ago I have sold my geared bikes as they weren't getting pulled from the rack anymore.
> All the reaons as to "Why SS?" should have been covered in this thread above:
> http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=82461
> 
> It's been viewed 2,700 times and it has 236 replies.


yea, and this thread already has more than 25% of the number of posts in that thread, and this one is only a few hours old. what's your point exactly?


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> after reading a bunch of SS posts including yours, then trying a buddy's SS, i've decided to rip the gears off my old steelie. can't wait =)
> 
> thanks for the report!


 So did you build up your SS and realize you just weren't fit enough to hack it?


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

jugdish said:


> So did you build up your SS and realize you just weren't fit enought to hack it?


no i remained skeptical and actually took another ride few rides on some real trails and realized how horribly inefficient and limiting SS was. thankfully im not impulsive and think something through before jumping ship just because other people have been brainwashed.

i ultimately decided it's going to become a 1x3-9 speed bike, still working out the deatils but that's where i am at now


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

Right.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

jugdish said:


> So did you build up your SS and realize you just weren't fit enough to hack it?


heh, it's funny how you guys come back with remarks about people not being "up to par" or "strong enough" for SS.

this is the exact type of response i would expect from someone with a big ego and that has everything to prove. is it that you were just a mediocre rider on your geared bike so you felt the need to become more unique to get that attention you so rightfully deserve?

i guess that makes sense, if one thing is too challenging for you then find something else that hardly anyone else is doing, then you suddenly become one of the "elites" in your little world :lol:


----------



## donkey (Jan 14, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> heh, it's funny how you guys come back with remarks about people not being "up to par" or "strong enough" for SS.
> 
> this is the exact type of response i would expect from someone with a big ego and that has everything to prove. is it that you were just a mediocre rider on your geared bike so you felt the need to become more unique to get that attention you so rightfully deserve?
> 
> i guess that makes sense, if one thing is too challenging for you then find something else that hardly anyone else is doing, then you suddenly become one of the "elites" in your little world :lol:


Oh dear....

B


----------



## Cloxxki (Jan 11, 2004)

I think on most trails and courses I'm a bit slower SS than geared. Then, I ride offroad way too little, and then only in part SS.

In races however, I find myself overtaking FITTER riders, on the flats. Spin/coasting my brain out, but not getting overly exhausted either. I do try harder, of course. And at the finish I'm more wasted.
Whether I'm faster up hills all depends on the type of hill, and especially it's run-up. A steep climb is a disaster on my long-geared SS if it starts from switchback. With a dead-straight downhill leading on to it, the SS climbs faster. Some sustained climbs favor SS due to less momentum lost shifting, and trying to stay on top of the gear.

I got into it because I was worth crap outside the 88-92 rpm window and needed a whoop-azz from the SS'ing. I kept doing it for the fun and simplicity


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Cloxxki said:


> I think on most trails and courses I'm a bit slower SS than geared. Then, I ride offroad way too little, and then only in part SS.
> 
> In races however, I find myself overtaking FITTER riders, on the flats. Spin/coasting my brain out, but not getting overly exhausted either. I do try harder, of course. And at the finish I'm more wasted.
> Whether I'm faster up hills all depends on the type of hill, and especially it's run-up. A steep climb is a disaster on my long-geared SS if it starts from switchback. With a dead-straight downhill leading on to it, the SS climbs faster. Some sustained climbs favor SS due to less momentum lost shifting, and trying to stay on top of the gear.
> ...


Thanks for the candid feedback. I guess I still don't understand that if you recognize areas where a SS is limited, why not look at going with a happy medium which maybe say has a heavily reduced set of gears, which would greatly minimize gear changing and still allow you the ability to focus only on the trail and conditioning yourself, but without the sacrafices of the steep climb disaster and other limitations of SS.

I just don't see the need to go from one extreme to the other to accomplish certain things when a seemingly better all-around solution could be had. If the modern deraileur is truly the root of all evil, then maybe we need to look at a redesign to eliminate things like ghost shifting and other problems that give people a lack of confidence in the parts.


----------



## SIGMA (Jan 30, 2004)

*why cant you see?*



salimoneus said:


> why not look at going with a happy medium which maybe say has a heavily reduced set of gears,
> 
> and why do you care?for some people the happy medium is one speed.


----------



## GFisher2001 (Mar 16, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> the reason that kid's bikes and other bikes elsewhere are single speed is
> 
> 1) low maintenance
> 2) no hangers to snap off due to getting banged/tossed around (low maintenance)
> ...


In response to your list that you created.................yea you pretty much hit it on the head, FOR ME low maintenance is more desireable and THEREFORE superior they have alot to do with why I ride SS. Since I have gotten a single speed I have had to fix the derailleurs ZERO times and tune them ZERO times. I have no ghost shifting or missed gears. I have also spent ZERO time thinking what gear to change to for the upcoming hill and instead focus alot more on momentum and fun.



salimoneus said:


> somehow the SS concept has crept into the world of MTB most likely due to the manufacturers needing something new to sell to all the willing buyers.


HAH!!!! 
And when a company goes from a 18 spd to a 21 spd to a 27If anything alot of bike companies are not throwing to much advertisement into it. You said yourself that you do not need that many gears. If you were here really trying to figure out what makes a SS'r tick that would be one thing but your just here obviously to pick a fight. Get a life dude and stop trying to get us fired up.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

SIGMA said:


> salimoneus said:
> 
> 
> > why not look at going with a happy medium which maybe say has a heavily reduced set of gears,
> ...


i'm just trying to figure out why reactions to this "retro phenomenon" are so overblown

im starting to see that it's a combination of a few things, including but not limited to exclusivity, and more importantly being fed up with problems of current designs.

i think we have suffered for too long with a lousy drivetrain setup on the typical mountain bike, and it's about time the engineers and manufactureres come up with something that works well and makes sense.


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> i'm just trying to figure out why reactions to this "retro phenomenon" are so overblown


There is nothing overblown, and there is nothing "retro" about it. It is also not a "phenomenon". You read the posts, and the people mean what they say. There is nothing to overblow except your reaction to people's choice to do something that you have no experience with.



> im starting to see that it's a combination of a few things, including but not limited to exclusivity, and more importantly being fed up with problems of current designs.


You are not "seeing" anything at all. You don't SS.



> i think we have suffered for too long with a lousy drivetrain setup on the typical mountain bike, and it's about time the engineers and manufactureres come up with something that works well and makes sense.


My drivetrain set-ups on my geared bikes are always top notch. I like 9-speed. I treat it well and maintain it as I ride it. It is no big deal and it rides just fine. I don't relate to your "suffering". It just seems that it is about time bikers learn to take care of their gear and understand how simply it works, and is to keep tuned.

I just like my SS better right now. I like riding up on jokers much like yourself, and hammering them into deep and dark holes of their souls on my frigid 29SS, up the hill, and down the technical, rockgarden singletrack.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

29Colossus said:


> ...
> I just like my SS better right now. I like riding up on jokers much like yourself, and hammering them into deep and dark holes of their souls on my frigid 29SS, up the hill, and down the technical, rockgarden singletrack.


Ahh yes, I think this pretty much sums it up. Sounds like your typical superiority complex egomaniac. Passing some random rider that is enjoying the trail and getting in a good workout, and not even racing to begin with, is such a big accomplishment. You should be proud that you showed him who is boss


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> Ahh yes, I think this pretty much sums it up. Sounds like your typical superiority complex egomaniac. Passing some random rider that is enjoying the trail and getting in a good workout, and not even racing to begin with, is such a big accomplishment. You should be proud that you showed him who is boss


Hell yeah! Bring your bag of gears and your sliding suspension up here brother, and I will singlespeed you into a deep, and heaving puke performance that will have you wondering if life is the correct path to take for the remainder of the day.

NO CHUNKS! NO CHUNKS! NO CHUNKS!

No really, if you have never really given it a chance, then why would you believe you knew the reasons why? Don't you think many have been JUST like you before they came to the conclusion that singlespeeding was the best thing since Cindy Crawford sex?

You really need to spend some time on a single to know why people like it. It is very likable platform. You live in Colorado? You can ride mine anytime.


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> Salmonella: "...if walking your bike uphill and coasting back down is fun for you, then hey man whatever works, i guess i just don't get it"


Wait a minute...I didn't know we were allowed to walk up the hills. I didn't get the memo. Just when I got the secret handshake down, I find out we can walk the hills?! And all this time I've been taking great pride in the fact that I can clean every climb that I have on my geared bike, which is saying a lot considering the size of my monstrously-inflated ego.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not just referring to the 1% grade 2 mile fireroads. I'm actually making it up the 2-3% grade 3 milers, too! Heck, I've even been seen making it over a few baby's-heads rocks on these Cat 1 rated climbs.

When it boils down to it, you just don't have the cojones. It kills you to admit it. You tried out for varsity and made the JV squad. You failed the test. SS doesn't take prisoners. SS doesn't accept wannabes. SS doesn't allow you to kind-of-get-a-feel-for-it. You either get it, or you don't. You didn't. And now you're trying to rationalize your failure by berating those who made the team.

Go away. As entertaining as you were, you now annoy me.


----------



## ernesto_from_Wisconsin (Jan 12, 2004)

*It is the Ultimate Showdown*

You guys are so like this: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/showdown


----------



## mtntrance (Sep 3, 2005)

*What about the Monocog?*



Rainman said:


> Riding a geared bike as a singlespeed just doesn't work very well. It *may* give you a small 'taste' of the sensation of singlespeeding, but it will not show you what singlespeed riding is.
> 
> A single speed bike doesn't have to be an expensive custom bike. It's not about the money, it's about the singlespeed.
> 
> ...


Exactly, I cant think of a better bike for the money than the ss offerings from Redline. It seems like single speeding is a way to get into mtn biking for not a lot of $.


----------



## dannymonky (Feb 8, 2004)

MODS please kill this thread before i waste another minute of my life. hey salmon go kick a kitten-go do something


----------



## mtntrance (Sep 3, 2005)

*Challenge & Training!*

Since I started to single speed I never use my granny gear on my geared bike. The quick ride I do daily in the foothills where I live was boring on the gearie even when staying in the middle ring. The ss brought the challenge back. Right now its 112 degrees where I live. Discovering what I could endure on my single speed has given me the confidence to ride in the sweltering heat (once the sun is behind the mountains) when I thought before it would be too hot. I used to only be able to ride weekends if I took the time to drive up to high elevations. Now I can go ride in an hour so as I do on several evenings a week when I used to think it was to hot. The point is that ss stretches what you think you can endure be it the grade of the hill, temperature or hitting stuff with a hardtail that formerly would only be attempted on a suspension bike.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Upchuck said:


> ...
> When it boils down to it, you just don't have the cojones. It kills you to admit it. You tried out for varsity and made the JV squad. You failed the test. SS doesn't take prisoners. SS doesn't accept wannabes. SS doesn't allow you to kind-of-get-a-feel-for-it. You either get it, or you don't. You didn't. And now you're trying to rationalize your failure by berating those who made the team.
> ...


you're right, i don't have the cojones to do a BMX conversion on my mountain bike, because it's not a BMX and i'm no longer 13 years old and can handle a few gears on my bike.

i also really dont "wannabe" an egotist with a complex, so i guess i'll never "get it". i consider myself fortunate.


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

dannymonky said:


> MODS please kill this thread before i waste another minute of my life. hey salmon go kick a kitten-go do something


?

"kill this thread"

Why? Because you can't just ignore it?

:skep:

It's a great thread.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

It's like watching a person in the chocolate lovers forum who loves vanilla and cannot understand how everyone else (except one other logical and non-brainwashed person) can prefer chocolate. And both sides are prepared to argue it to the end... it's very entertaining.:rockon:

I predict no winners.


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

dumbaSS said:


> It's like watching a person in the chocolate lovers forum who loves vanilla and cannot understand how everyone else (except one other logical and non-brainwashed person) can prefer chocolate. And both sides are prepared to argue it to the end... it's very entertaining.:rockon:
> 
> I predict no winners.


If he would only try the chocolate...


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

dumbaSS said:


> I predict no winners.


lol!

I thought it was funny to watch at first, but now it has just become terribly sad.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

mud'n'sweat said:


> I thought it was funny to watch at first, but now it has just become terribly sad.


I was just thinking the same thing... like there's not enough hate and intolerance in this world, we bikers can't even coexist. Sorry... kind of heavy.


----------



## long hazy daze (Oct 19, 2005)

Riding a geared bike a couple times without shifting it to see what SS is all about, is like rubbing one out to internet porn to see what sex is all about....so he's probably also still wandering if sex is "way overstated".

Don't worry fellas, maybe he'll "get it" one day. maybe not. But in the meantime, why dignify his persistant ignorance? Just let it go......


----------



## TREK 4 Life (Feb 20, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> you're right, i don't have the cojones to do a BMX conversion on my mountain bike, because it's not a BMX and i'm no longer 13 years old and can handle a few gears on my bike.
> 
> i also really dont "wannabe" an egotist with a complex, so i guess i'll never "get it". i consider myself fortunate.


Ok, dude, chick, hippy, computer geek, rich kid, poor bugger....whatever the hell you are. I think enough is enough. You have made your point. Gears get you off. We get it there cowboy, lets all just let it settle. Are we adults or a bunch of kids in public school? "My Dad can beat up your Dad!!!"

In all complete honesesty, who cares. You ride geared, good on ya, so do I. Sll of use here ride SS, you do not. I think your time here has come to a very tragic end. Nobody here is egotistical, nore are they perticipating in a fad.

Let me sum it up for you. I like to ride my bikes. Simple. I don't give a flippin rats behind about performance or efficiency. I have enough of that at work. I ride my bikes to escape it all. I don't care if I get blown away by some guy on gears, or some little 12 year old girl on a custom SS. Hell, if I got blown away on the trail by some 3 year old kid on a tricycle, I would buy the little bugger an ice cream.

Lets face facts, We like bikes. We like to ride bikes. We like to look at bikes. We all have a slight problem with Upgradeitis, And we all waste far to much time on the internet slamming other people and talkin smack when the whole thing boils down to the fact that we are all to pathetic to admit we are acting like children.

SS guys, time to stop playing with the ignorant. Salim......if your actually here to get answers, then shut up and ride. If your in fact trolling......just shut up.

In closing, would somebody just sell me a Turner 5 Spot for a decent price. :thumbsup:


----------



## walter (Jan 12, 2004)

*all this horsecrap....*

....from someone who rides downhill on a 10 year old rockhopper. So in theory, if he has been riding downhill on his rockhopper for almost 10 years, and the bike hasnt failed, then he must not be riding hard enough, so touche, i will be a sissy on my ss, and you, well, the word ends in ssy, but it isnt sissy.

walter


----------



## dannybob (Feb 21, 2004)

TREK 4 Life said:


> Are we adults or a bunch of kids in public school? "My Dad can beat up your Dad!!!"


My dad would SO kick his dad's ass.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

walter said:


> ....from someone who rides downhill on a 10 year old rockhopper. So in theory, if he has been riding downhill on his rockhopper for almost 10 years, and the bike hasnt failed, then he must not be riding hard enough, so touche, i will be a sissy on my ss, and you, well, the word ends in ssy, but it isnt sissy.
> 
> walter


while you were doing your little investigation to find out what i ride, if you hade done the job right you would have found the part where i said the 'hopper had been sitting around for a while getting very little use. as much as i still love the bike, it has taken the role of backup the last several years. nice try though, i'll give you a C+ for effort


----------



## KeylessChuck (Apr 15, 2006)

Salimoneus has made some good points that I'm sure we have all thought about. He also seems to be trying harder to keep his cool. The SS faithful are coming across quite defensive. 

I bought a Monocog 29er with the intention of using it only for commuting (because of the simplicity). Actually mountain biking on a rigid SS seemed like an absurd idea. I tried it and found I kind of liked it, and I was faster uphill because I had no choice. I like it enough to ride it once in a while which has impoved my strength.

Like Sal said, I should have been climbing like that all along, but like you ss guys say, I'm faster on my ss (uphill). I do like the simplicity. I've realized that you don't need the wonderbike to go fast and have fun. BUT, I hate it when people ask me why ss. The answers just seem intangible (other than the simplicity part). I hate it when someone tells me "you just have to try it" without giving me good reasons to do so, so I can understand Sal's skepticism.

Keep asking the tough questions, and keep trying to answer the tough questions.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

dannybob said:


> My dad would SO kick his dad's ass.


Jack O'Neill is that you? (SG1 reference =)


----------



## erol/frost (Jan 3, 2004)

Nonracerrichie said:


> There are compromises. Yes. Hills are harder, flats may be slower, and you run out of gear on downhills from time to time but, it is the challenge of it all that makes the SS fun. You find more power in you legs as you continue to challenge yourself to get up longer and steeper stuff. Your body adapts. You find a way to spin faster and smoother to get speed out of the down slopes. The revelation for me was that the body is a far more adaptalbe, and flexible engine than the bike companie's marketing departments have led me to think over the years. Riding is about riding more than ever and much less about the money I need to spend on gear or maintenance. That is fun.
> 
> Try if you want, if you don't that is OK.


Best reply sofar.

+1


----------



## unclenorm (Jan 5, 2005)

jugdish said:


> *Some like to sit and spin and some like to stand and deliver*, some just get threatened by the fact that others can pin it with just one gear. Pretty simple.


Kind of sums up the thread really.

Surely we all actually started on single speeds?

How many 3 year olds do you hear screaming 'Dad, where are my gears?!!!!'


----------



## pinkdirt (Jun 28, 2005)

*posted 1 week ago by the same member salimoneous??? how odd*

_* 1 Week Ago

salimoneus 
mtbr member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 69

after reading a bunch of SS posts including yours, then trying a buddy's SS, i've decided to rip the gears off my old steelie. can't wait =)

thanks for the report! *_


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Maybe he tried it and didn't like it.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

Martin.mac.au said:


> Maybe he tried it and didn't like it.


I think that's what this was always about.

Bought into it... tried it... hated it... came back to set us straight.

The truth is the "revelation" is real for some people. But like everything, there are many possible reactions from revalation to hated it and everything in between. Just because there are people at the other end of your taste doesn't mean there is something wrong with them. And don't try to boil it down to one reason why people are into singlespeeding, it's just not that black & white.


----------



## Riding for Sanity (Mar 18, 2006)

I agree a lot with what rockhound had to say, I might run an internal gear hub, someday. SS for me is my Savior! I wasn't riding at all for 4 years because of work scheduling. I didn't find time to tune up my gears that were all screwed up. I figured "I ride a lot more if I didn't have to fiddle with it so much". That was this Spring, now I ride my new Track bike to work everyday. Its the most fun I've had on two wheels! Now I gotta Revert my MTB back to dirt worthy. SS of course, but this time Rigid front, and a better "motor".

I would like to take this opportunity to thank this Forum, and you guys: For which I wouldn't be on two wheels again, and probably be full blown crazy by now!

THANKS!~


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> Sounds like your typical superiority complex egomaniac.


Pot, meet Kettle


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Riding for Sanity said:


> I agree a lot with what rockhound had to say, I might run an internal gear hub, someday. SS for me is my Savior! I wasn't riding at all for 4 years because of work scheduling. I didn't find time to tune up my gears that were all screwed up. I figured "I ride a lot more if I didn't have to fiddle with it so much". That was this Spring, now I ride my new Track bike to work everyday. Its the most fun I've had on two wheels! Now I gotta Revert my MTB back to dirt worthy. SS of course, but this time Rigid front, and a better "motor".
> 
> I would like to take this opportunity to thank this Forum, and you guys: For which I wouldn't be on two wheels again, and probably be full blown crazy by now!
> 
> THANKS!~


I'm the opposite. For me, gears are instinctive, and for whatever reasons I very rarely need to tune mine. Due to this I've had no inclination to try SS. However I can definitely see you guys are having fun with it and that it works well for a lot of people.


----------



## zasky (Apr 23, 2006)

I ride a singlespeed because it's fun. Some people say it's not fun and tell me I should ride a bike like theirs. I don't argue with these people because it leaves less time for me to ride my singlespeed. And that's not fun at all.


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

KeylessChuck said:


> Salimoneus has made some good points that I'm sure we have all thought about. He also seems to be trying harder to keep his cool. The SS faithful are coming across quite defensive.


you call throwing down the first insult keeping cool?

Sal "_if you improved that much riding your SS then you were a slacker on your geared bike, and you need to work on your mental game_."

My mistake was to think he came in with an open mind but he rejects advice, perhaps because of frustrations with his first attempt.

Did you see what Pinkdirt found from 1 week ago? 

http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=2058975&postcount=1

Sal: "_after reading a bunch of SS posts including yours, then trying a buddy's SS, i've decided to rip the gears off my old steelie. can't wait =)

thanks for the report! "_


----------



## Impy (Jan 6, 2004)

My SS is fun.

My geared dual suspension bike is fun. 

My cross bike is fun.

I love all my bikes. They are all really fun.

The SS breaks down the least, is quieter, and gets me a funner and harder workout on the same trails compared to the others. So I grab it the most.


----------



## banana (Nov 7, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> i guess that makes sense, if one thing is too challenging for you then find something else that hardly anyone else is doing, then you suddenly become one of the "elites" in your little world :lol:


If people get a lot of fun out of riding single speeds (or Dursley Pedersens, recumbents, Rohloffs, tricycles...), why would you see it fit to do anything other than just let them?

I thought for a minute we were going to get some rational discussion. You were doing so well before you sank below Jugdish's level. He was just forthright and sarcastic. You're a malicious joker. To come here asking for justification for single speed cycling makes some sense given the title of the forum. To come here having already tried it to tell everyone how dillusional they are just makes you a troll.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

pinkdirt said:


> _* 1 Week Ago
> 
> salimoneus
> mtbr member
> ...


ummm why dont you try actually reading the thread before presenting old information, this was already covered by another private eye wannabe


----------



## Rainman (Apr 18, 2004)

*Ahhhh...I see...*

So, you dipped your toe in the SS water and found it ... too hard, Sal?

Heheheh... now I understand.

I'm finished with this thread now that I can see why Sal, the OP is so opposed to SS.

...."Sour grapes"... 

R.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

banana said:


> If people get a lot of fun out of riding single speeds (or Dursley Pedersens, recumbents, Rohloffs, tricycles...), why would you see it fit to do anything other than just let them?
> 
> I thought for a minute we were going to get some rational discussion. You were doing so well before you sank below Jugdish's level. He was just forthright and sarcastic. You're a malicious joker. To come here asking for justification for single speed cycling makes some sense given the title of the forum. To come here having already tried it to tell everyone how dillusional they are just makes you a troll.


actually i thought i made several good points early on, but everyone is apparently too afraid to respond to them, all i hear is "you just dont get it" or "you gotta feel it". all i'm hearing is a bunch of defensive responses from egomaniacs that wanna ride me into a deep dark hole.

not all that suprising now that im beginning to understand what is really behind the SS movement.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

pacman said:


> ...
> 
> Did you see what Pinkdirt found from 1 week ago?
> 
> ...


another one apparently a little slow on the uptake. why don't you go read posts 59 and 60 in this thread (note: PAST tense, already happened) and you will find that this was already covered and explained.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

well since apparently so many of you have such a low level of reading comprehension skills, i decided to copy my earlier reply that explains why i did not go ahead with the SS conversion:



salimoneus said:


> no i remained skeptical and actually took another ride few rides on some real trails and realized how horribly inefficient and limiting SS was. thankfully im not impulsive and think something through before jumping ship just because other people have been brainwashed.
> 
> i ultimately decided it's going to become a 1x3-9 speed bike, still working out the deatils but that's where i am at now


----------



## TREK 4 Life (Feb 20, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> another one apparently a little slow on the uptake. why don't you go read posts 59 and 60 in this thread (note: PAST tense, already happened) and you will find that this was already covered and explained.


Hey everyone, lets all point and laugh at the little boy who has lame insults.

rft:


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> no i remained skeptical and actually took another ride few rides on some real trails and realized how horribly inefficient and limiting SS was. thankfully im not impulsive and think something through before jumping ship just because other people have been brainwashed.


So are you saying... because YOU found it horribly innefficient and limiting that EVERYBODY should find it horribly innefficient and limiting? And therefore we are all brainwashed?

Have you ever heard the word arrogance...
: an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

zasky said:


> I ride a singlespeed because it's fun. Some people say it's not fun and tell me I should ride a bike like theirs. I don't argue with these people because it leaves less time for me to ride my singlespeed. And that's not fun at all.


I'm not trying to tell anyone to ride only geared bikes, I 'm just trying to find out why people like SS so much and why they sound so excited about it. It's apparently the best thing since sliced bread.

So far most everyone is just saying "you just need to do it for a while" and "you either get it or not" which really tells me that *the SS thing is nothing more than a state of mind, and a motivational tool.* So I will say it again, if you are finding drastic improvements in your conditioning after going SS then you just weren't putting in a solid enough effort on your geared ride.

*In summary, you should buy an SS conversion (or even whole new bike, why not right) if you don't have the discipline to ride in one gear throughout an entire trail, and require new hardware in order to trick your brain into feeling like a kid again, and to trick your brain into doing the conditioning you did not have the discipline to do on your very capable geared bike.*


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> *In summary, you should buy an SS conversion (or even whole new bike, why not right) if you don't have the discipline to ride in one gear throughout an entire trail, and require new hardware in order to trick your brain into feeling like a kid again, and to trick your brain into doing the conditioning you did not have the discipline to do on your very capable geared bike.*


Boy I thought I was going to stay out after I saw where this was going, but I gotta get back in. 
You may just not get it. 
I had the discipline. I got a sponsorship to race endurance events, and I trained for them. I stood on the podium quite a few times, but after awhile it lost its luster. Now my life is full of new challenges. Can I finish a multi-stage race on a SS? Can I still get onto a podium in a 24 hour race on a SS? Can I clean a nasty line on a rigid fork? Can I develop my skills instead of buying the latest SPV/stable platform suspension design? Can I get stronger instead of gearing down to a 22X34 gear? 
I was never attracted to cycling because it was easy, but I kept buying things to go faster/longer/stronger. I could probably write a book about how I feel about my bike. I really do love it. I used to think my Ellsworth Truth was the be all/end all racing machine. It was never good fit with whatever resides in my heart. It was the fastest bike (all around) I have ever ridden, but I don't think I'm in such a hurry anymore. 
Well there's the intro to the book.


----------



## LoneStar (Jun 17, 2004)

For the longest time, I saw the singlespeed forum and thought, along with most of my riding friends, that while you guys and gals must be fit as hell, you were all crazy! I have a hard enough time with gears. Then one by one we all converted a hardtail and were hooked. Now some of us are more hooked than others and that's cool. Me? I like my Salty every bit as much as my new SS. I built the SS up primarily just to make some of my local trails a bit more challenging. Next thing you know, you are tackling harder and harder trails. It is challenging, fun and different. Its that simple to me. I can see how not everybody likes it though, and a little tolerance from both perspectives would be nice to see.


----------



## banana (Nov 7, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> well since apparently so many of you have such a low level of reading comprehension skills, i decided to copy my earlier reply that explains why i did not go ahead with the SS conversion:
> 
> 
> salimoneus said:
> ...


Quoting your own posts now, as if you think people will want to read them again.
Charitably ignoring the fact that your post above is once again little more than a direct insult to the members of this discussion group, I really can't see, given its content, where you expect this thread to lead. As you've said - twice - you find single speeding "horribly inefficient and limiting" and feel that some of us are "brainwashed". I'm happy for you in being so willful and independent. Clearly though, allowing all that willful independence to keep you hanging around here when you've obviously found yourself in the wrong forum makes you no sharper than a bowling ball. Goodbye and good luck.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

banana said:


> Quoting your own posts now, as if you think people will want to read them again.
> ...


i don't normally quote myself but i adapt to the circumstances. tell your boys to stop digging up old news and i wont need to


----------



## umbertom (May 28, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> just go out and pick a gear ratio and ride without changing gears, pretty simple. been there, done that, and i have to say it's not the right tool for the job.


excatly what i do.... while road biking my mtb, mtbing single speed is nuts you guys have issues if you're that good lol im kidding


----------



## khenry44 (May 2, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> I'm not trying to tell anyone to ride only geared bikes, I 'm just trying to find out why people like SS so much and why they sound so excited about it. It's apparently the best thing since sliced bread.[/B]


why do i ride singlespeed? because its simplicity in motion. Trails that were once easy became difficult again. The days of being a kid on their bike were revisited. Its different for everyone, but for those who do catch the bug, everyone will agree it stirs up something thats tough to explain and the answers to that are different for everyone and subsequently its NOT for everyone. By riding a singlespeed you instantly know "well-i'm going to be walking a few hills today." Another reason is because i'm humbled by the terrain time and time again. One section that i cruised through one ride bites me in the ass the next. So there is also an unpredictability about too. But if you ride and the type of bike you ride makes you happy, then thats all that matters-be it 27 gears or 1 gear.


----------



## ridindog (Jun 6, 2006)

Now i get it! judging by the frequency of posts sal doesnt even have a bike id say shes just some fat chic sittin around pretending to be a mountain biker. Hell shes probably like the freak in fight club addicted to 12 step programs only sal is addicted to different website forums i bet shes a member of at least 10 of them and all she does is go around starting arguements by critisizing peoples lifestyles cause she dosent have one of her own ut: hey sal really go get a bike of any kind and just try riding it really it is fun:ciappa:


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

ridindog said:


> Now i get it! judging by the frequency of posts sal doesnt even have a bike id say shes just some fat chic sittin around pretending to be a mountain biker. Hell shes probably like the freak in fight club addicted to 12 step programs only sal is addicted to different website forums i bet shes a member of at least 10 of them and all she does is go around starting arguements by critisizing peoples lifestyles cause she dosent have one of her own ut: hey sal really go get a bike of any kind and just try riding it really it is fun:ciappa:


Well thanks for reminding me why I dislike MTBR so much and stick to other MTB sites. Some of these posts are petty and childish.


----------



## ridindog (Jun 6, 2006)

Martin.mac.au said:


> Well thanks for reminding me why I dislike MTBR so much and stick to other MTB sites. Some of these posts are petty and childish.


sure glad to help the forgetful:thumbsup:


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Martin.mac.au said:


> Well thanks for reminding me why I dislike MTBR so much and stick to other MTB sites. Some of these posts are petty and childish.


Except for just this once, right?

Admit it, you like watching this train wreck as much as I do!


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

*Explain what you really did*



salimoneus said:


> another one apparently a little slow on the uptake. why don't you go read posts 59 and 60 in this thread (note: PAST tense, already happened) and you will find that this was already covered and explained
> 
> 
> jugdish said:
> ...


Seems you answered *NO* to building up an SS. As you stated riding a geared bike without shifting is equivalent, so you rode some real trails without shifting. whoopee!



salimoneus said:


> _i don't need to ride a custom $$ bike in order to know what riding a single speed is like. just go out and pick a gear ratio and ride without changing gears, pretty simple. been there, done that, and i have to say it's not the right tool for the job. _


If you really built(?) an SS then you were *impulsive* when you quit SS'ing, as many have said it takes time to build up the body for SS riding. Besides reading skills you need comprehension skills. Maybe show and tell works better for you - go out and ride with some SSers.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

Nat said:


> Except for just this once, right?
> 
> Admit it, you like watching this train wreck as much as I do!


I still come here, but I visit here, maybe 1/5th as often as I used to. So many threads seem filled with nothing but bs and bike hate.

There are some people who do a good job of coming across as zealots. Then others take offence to it and troll to get a rise. Then it all turns into name calling. I've no idea what came first, the troll or the zealot, but ffs, they're just bikes. Does it really matter what you ride?


----------



## ridindog (Jun 6, 2006)

Martin.mac.au said:


> I still come here, but I visit here, maybe 1/5th as often as I used to. So many threads seem filled with nothing but bs and bike hate.
> 
> There are some people who do a good job of coming across as zealots. Then others take offence to it and troll to get a rise. Then it all turns into name calling. I've no idea what came first, the troll or the zealot, but ffs, they're just bikes. Does it really matter what you ride?


i totally agree :thumbsup:


----------



## Thor29 (May 12, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> I'm not trying to tell anyone to ride only geared bikes, I 'm just trying to find out why people like SS so much and why they sound so excited about it. It's apparently the best thing since sliced bread.]


No you are NOT trying to find out why people like SS so much. People keep telling you why they like single speeds and you aren't interested in the answers. People are excited because they ARE HAVING FUN. It doesn't really matter if they are going faster or are getting in better shape, what most people are talking about here is that, for them, single speed mountain bikes are more fun. For them. If you disagree, well, don't get a single speed. Pretty simple, no?

Besides being fun, less maintenance, lighter, more challenging (up hills anyway), etc, here are a few more reasons I like my single speed:

It is much more pleasing to the eye than a geared FS rig.
The chain doesn't rattle and slap the chainstays when I am flying downhill.
I don't like uphills so much, so riding single speed makes them go by faster. (And while it is true that in theory I could try to force myself to ride faster with gears, I wouldn't do it).

I also find 29er wheels, and steel hardtails to be more fun. You can argue with me until you are blue in the face, but I like what I like. Could I go faster if I had the latest, greatest double-squishy geared bike? Maybe, although I would guess that the actual difference would be quite small and since I am already faster than all of my friends (who do ride such bikes) then I would only have to wait longer for them to catch up.


----------



## PapaLegba (Jul 15, 2006)

Single speed bikes are like all other mountain bikes.

Specialized for a task.

No bike is the best at everything and all bikes are compromises.

A gain in one field means a loss in another.

With that said, I want to build one.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Martin.mac.au said:


> Well thanks for reminding me why I dislike MTBR so much and stick to other MTB sites. Some of these posts are petty and childish.


You know, honestly I started this thread trying to figure out what all the buzz was about, because I even gave it a try myself due to all the hype, then after all the defensive posts started showing up with people telling me they wanted to ride me into the ground and trouce me, and how weak I must be because I coudn't cut it on a single speed, I think that is where the thread started to take a more juvenile and immature tone. Yea I made some slightly sarcastic replies but only in response to getting attacked myself, and even then I think I've kept my cool pretty well considering.

Also several posters made some assumptions (about what I ride and my fitness level) based on very little information, which is also a sign that they are only posting to provoke a response and not to contribute anything useful.

Even if I still don't "get it" about SS, at least after this thread I have a better feeling for the types of people I can expect to see riding an SS bike and their thought process, albeit somewhat primitive  So I guess I actually have leared something useful.


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> then after all the defensive posts started showing up with people telling me they wanted to ride me into the ground and trouce me,


INTO THE GROUND AND TROUNCE?

Now that is some kind of heat! :crazy:


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

29Colossus said:


> INTO THE GROUND AND TROUNCE?
> 
> Now that is some kind of heat! :crazy:


Well I certainly didn't lose any sleep over the comments, but what it did show is the childish mentality of several of the posters in this thread, which someone else also just pointed out a few posts ago.


----------



## DanD (Jan 15, 2004)

I ride single speed and love it. That being said I've got 2 comments:
*#1*: Am I seriously the only one who rides single speed because I was put to the decision of gears vs. food on my table?
*#2*: The troll has a point. If you converted to ss for the physical aspect of it, and are finding that it is getting you in better shape, you were not pushing yourself as hard as you could have on the geared bike.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> I'm not trying to tell anyone to ride only geared bikes, I 'm just trying to find out why people like SS so much and why they sound so excited about it. It's apparently the best thing since sliced bread.
> 
> So far most everyone is just saying "you just need to do it for a while" and "you either get it or not" which really tells me that *the SS thing is nothing more than a state of mind, and a motivational tool.* So I will say it again, if you are finding drastic improvements in your conditioning after going SS then you just weren't putting in a solid enough effort on your geared ride.
> 
> *In summary, you should buy an SS conversion (or even whole new bike, why not right) if you don't have the discipline to ride in one gear throughout an entire trail, and require new hardware in order to trick your brain into feeling like a kid again, and to trick your brain into doing the conditioning you did not have the discipline to do on your very capable geared bike.*


I do not see someone who came here to learn anything. Someone interested in learning how other people feel about something sits back and listens to what they have to say and asks for more information from people if there is anything of interest.

You on the other hand have done nothing but challenge, contradict and turn everbodys thoughts and feelings into something negative from the start. There are some posts that could be considered negative but most were in response to your negativity, you reap what you sow here.

There were ALOT of very good responses that answer the question you supposedly came here looking for, go back and read through with an open mind this time.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

DanD said:


> *#2*: The troll has a point. If you converted to ss for the physical aspect of it, and are finding that it is getting you in better shape, you were not pushing yourself as hard as you could have on the geared bike.


I kind of disagree with this, again nothing is so black & white. Sure I could have ridden my geared bike up hills in the wrong gear forcing me to stand up and wrench the handlebars back and forth using the muscles in my legs, upper body and arms just like singlespeeding. But what's the point of running gears then, your running gears to be more efficient aren't you?


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

Martin.mac.au said:


> *I've no idea what came first,* the troll or the zealot, but ffs, they're just bikes. Does it really matter what you ride?


Go back and view the thread in linear mode. The troll was first (post #9) to turn the conversation from informative to childish flaming with comments like "midlife crisis" and "slacker'. Sanctimonious didn't come to learn. Agree bikes are just bikes, but insults are insults.


----------



## Martin.au (Jan 1, 2006)

pacman said:


> Go back and view the thread in linear mode. The troll was first (post #9) to turn the conversation from informative to childish flaming with comments like "midlife crisis" and "slacker'. Sanctimonious didn't come to learn. Agree bikes are just bikes, but insults are insults.


I wasn't referring to just this thread. I was referring, as mentioned in my earlier post, to MTBR.com.

Even if we consider just this thread, does it matter who threw the first insult. It sure doesn't matter to me.


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

dumbaSS said:


> I do not see someone who come here to learn anything. Someone interested in learning how other people feel about something sits back and listens to what they have to say and asks for more information from people if there is anything of interest.
> 
> You on the other hand have done nothing but challenge, contradict and turn everbodys thoughts and feelings into something negative from the start. There are some posts that could be considered negative but most were in response to your negativity, you reap what you sow here.
> 
> There were ALOT of very good responses that answer the question you supposedly came here looking for, go back and read through with an open mind this time.


Agreed %100. I think though that now that he has been called out on it heavily, he is doing some back stepping which is cool with me. No point in arguing over anything in such a manner on the internet. Maybe he can stop trolling, and start understanding. Not everyone can feel the same way about everything. The sooner he accepts that and moves on, the better his days will be.


----------



## Pooh Bear (May 25, 2006)

Oh, I came to like this thread. It will be a classic someday in the future. That's why I just write something to be a member of this elite thread (just kidding).  

Of course singlespeed bikes are not as efficient as the geared ones - they lack the harder gears for the flats and downhills. I think that going uphill maybe ss bikes are more efficient if it comes to timing (not seeing strength output, just time results). If there is a hill I can't ride uphill because it's too steep I run. Even then I pass geared riders pedaling their azz off - per pedes.  

I think there is a point about "not getting" ss because of not trying it long enough. I think it really has to do with mental states and the whole "no option" thing. And if salimoneus still doesn't get it: poor bugger he is. I think the whole lot of answers including "try it and you will get it" sum it up perfectly. 

SS is fun. That's it. :yesnod: 

I don't like people asking me "Why?" I won't ask back "Why not?" 
I won't try to convert others to riding SS. 
AND I came to hate these: "Wow, you did that on a..." :madman: 
It's just a bike. Simple as can be.

Oh and I like smilies!


----------



## khenry44 (May 2, 2004)

Sal- Yes, i agree, simplification is good, 27 gears does seem like a lot of redundancy. But, when you state: "going from one extreme to the other does not seem like the best solution..." Singlespeeding is definately NOT looking for the best solution-nor is it attempting to solve the singletrack equation that all the companies market hype deem they've solved with each new model. But i do think as technology grows, the urge to simplify begins to take hold of some. Just like coming out of the industrial revolution there was a resurgence of hand made goods, emphasis on minimalistic design carried out through precise craftsmanship-they call it "Arts & Crafts". We see that happening in a lot of smaller frame builders of today-emphasis on craftsmanship and minimalism. Vanilla Bicycles? Is this a back lash against the Bigs and technology? Thats up for debate i suppose. 

Singlespeeding does have a little f-you to it too. you deliberately tear off everything that the Bigs say you need. Front derailleur? F that thing. Rear Derailleur? what the hell are they? shifters? no thank you. GEARS!? I'll take one please. So against good clean common sense you throw yourself into the fire and you have become a sort of mad scientist in your basement making rash decisions about whats good for your bike, when it goes against "common sense". "you're nuts" you hear other riders say. "that takes balls" some spew forth. But to me-it boils it all down to the bare essentials, its exactly what i need to go out and ride. You take HUGE broad sweeping benefits and throw them right out the door. You say F you Specialized! GO PLAY IN TRAFFIC TREK. You tell all the full suspension goo-roos to take a hike. what is better in life than to be rebellious? to go against the grain or what is found to be the norm. What is the norm and who the hell is telling me that that is the way its supposed to be? ..singlespeeding can be a little like that i suppose.

But when i tore down my geared bike and rebuilt it as a singlespeed, for me-there was a transformation in the bike AND in the ride. The trails i new so well and could ride through with little problem became new and challenging again. Clearly you could look at singlespeeding only as an Anerobic workout. you build power and strength. Riding steady with gears builds your Aerobic base. i'm paraphrasing with fitness on this one but you get the point. and if your point is to gain more power and strength and want to try a different approach-singlespeeds could be the answer-fixed gear too. but i don't thats what "going singlespeed" is what it is about.

But i think when most convert they are truly not after this-its different for everyone and everyone has their reasons. Just like riding-everyone rides for different reasons. What we've all got in common is we're all out there riding. Each of our setups makes us happy and delivers that satisfaction not found elsewhere. what could be wrong with that?


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Pooh Bear said:


> Of course singlespeed bikes are not as efficient as the geared ones - they lack the harder gears for the flats and downhills. I think that going uphill maybe ss bikes are more efficient if it comes to timing (not seeing strength output, just time results).


I'm not sure why people keep trying to justify singlespeeding as being more efficient. Is maximum efficiency really the goal for everyone? To break as little of a sweat as possible? Not for me.


----------



## long hazy daze (Oct 19, 2005)

*Since this rediculous thread is still going......*

How about this perspective...

Who goes mountain biking because it's _easy_?

I think it's safe to assume that a big part of what we like about mountain biking is the challenge. I see it as somewhat counterproductive to continually introduce thechnology that makes it easier and takes the edge off. If what you're after is a super smooth, easy ride, why are you mountain biking? You should just be riding on the road where there are no rocks and stumps and other obstacles to ruin your good time. Or why not just ride a morotcycle for that matter? Then you can have a machine that soaks it all up and doesn't require you to exert your self so much

SS'ing (especially rigid) keeps the sport challenging and more pure IMHO. I can't help but think someone is a bit soft or just missing the point of MTB'ing all together when they think they need 6" of suspension and a whole mess of gears to get through a few miles of trail in the woods. It almost seems like cheating to me.

Personally, it irks me when people make those comments; "Man you must be a badass" or "Dude, that's crazy, I don't know how you do it", etc. Because I think it's crazy to think you'd need more than what I have to have fun and clean a trail. And I never think of myself as better, I just recognize that I have a different perspective on the sport. Like with bodybuilders, some juice, some don't. Are you going to rely on yourself and your own abilies to get you where you want, or are you going to depend on as much external help as is available to make it as easier for you?

It should be about how well *you* can control your machine and clear obstacles, not how well your bike can do it for you. Having a bunch of gears and suspension takes much of your bike handling and overall riding skills out of the equation. For instance, at the trails yesterday, I ended up meeting a guy with a new FS Stumpjumper, Full XTR, etc. Not once did he drop me going down hill, and on the climbs, I was faster. And this guy was a good rider. He commented on how strong I was on the climbs and how good my bike handling skills were (which I feel need *lots* of improvement). There was no egotistical, condescending, superior or inferior sentiment. We both had a great time riding bikes.

I'll admit, every once in a while I wish I could drop to a lower gear on a steep climb, but once I clear it with my one gear, I have a sense of accomplishment and satisfaction that I wouldn't be able to get otherwise, because *I* cleared it, not my bikes thechnology and ability to make it easier for me. And if I don't clear a climb or if I spill in a technical section, I have only myself to blame, not my bike.

And another thing, I never have to worry about my fork being properly tuned, or my derailleur getting smashed or bent, or gears skipping, mis-shifts, chain suck, etc.

It's just, go ride, do it well, and have a blast. Simple. :thumbsup:


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

long hazy daze said:


> Personally, it irks me when people make those comments; "Man you must be a badass" or "Dude, that's crazy, I don't know how you do it", etc.


When people say that to you, they're actually paying you a compliment. I try to take it gracefully.


----------



## unclenorm (Jan 5, 2005)

long hazy daze said:


> It's just, go ride, do it well, and have a blast. Simple. :thumbsup:


On that note I just want to take the bike out again


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

pacman said:


> Go back and view the thread in linear mode. The troll was first (post #9) to turn the conversation from informative to childish flaming with comments like "midlife crisis" and "slacker'. Sanctimonious didn't come to learn. Agree bikes are just bikes, but insults are insults.


Don't confuse bluntness with childish flaming, and if you couldn't tell, the "midlife crisis" part was said in jest.

Sugar-coating is for women and children.


----------



## long hazy daze (Oct 19, 2005)

Nat said:


> When people say that to you, they're actually paying you a compliment. I try to take it gracefully.


I know, and I try to take it gracefully, too, but I've never taken compliments well. Humble I guess. Not that it really _irks_ me, but I prefer when people comment on my _bike_ and we can talk about gear and riding, rather than they make assertations as to my abilities or mentality based on my bike. I'd never go over to someone with a trick FS rig and say "man, you must be a badass", if anything I'd say "sweet ride". If that makes any sense. Perhaps I'm a little socially inept:madman:


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

long hazy daze said:


> How about this perspective...
> 
> Who goes mountain biking because it's _easy_?
> 
> I think it's safe to assume that a big part of what we like about mountain biking is the challenge. I see it as somewhat counterproductive to continually introduce thechnology that makes it easier and takes the edge off. If what you're after is a super smooth, easy ride, why are you mountain biking? You should just be riding on the road where there are no rocks and stumps and other obstacles to ruin your good time. Or why not just ride a morotcycle for that matter? Then you can have a machine that soaks it all up and doesn't require you to exert your self so much


I do ride a motorcycle, and it has gears. Why don't you propose that Harley or Honda build a single speed motorcycle, I would love to hear their response. Don't really see your point as to how it relates to gears and SS.



long hazy daze said:


> SS'ing (especially rigid) keeps the sport challenging and more pure IMHO. I can't help but think someone is a bit soft or just missing the point of MTB'ing all together when they think they need 6" of suspension and a whole mess of gears to get through a few miles of trail in the woods. It almost seems like cheating to me.
> 
> Personally, it irks me when people make those comments; "Man you must be a badass" or "Dude, that's crazy, I don't know how you do it", etc. Because I think it's crazy to think you'd need more than what I have to have fun and clean a trail. And I never think of myself as better, I just recognize that I have a different perspective on the sport. Like with bodybuilders, some juice, some don't. Are you going to rely on yourself and your own abilies to get you where you want, of are you going to depend on as much external help to make it as easy as possible?
> 
> It should be about how well *you* can control your machine and clear obstacles, not how well your bike can do it for you. Having a bunch of gears and suspension takes much of your bike handling and overall riding skills out of the equation. For instance, at the trails yesterday, I ended up meeting a guy with a new FS Stumpjumper, Full XTR, etc. Not once did he drop me going down hill, and on the climbs, I was faster. And this guy was a good rider. He commented on how strong I was on the climbs and how good my bike handling skills were (which I feel need *lots* of improvement). There was no egotistical, condescending, superior or inferior sentiment. We both had a great time.


I really don't care of you wish to go fully rigid and abuse your body and joints. I tend to think long term in that regards, and wish to keep my body intact and healthy. Constant jarring for hours a day surely can't be good.

But that's off topic anyway, this thread is about SS.



long hazy daze said:


> I'll admit, every once in a while I wish I could drop to a lower gear on a steep climb, but once I clear it with my one gear, I have a sense of accomplishment and satisfaction that I wouldn't be able to get otherwise, because *I* cleared it, not my bikes thechnology and ability to make it easier for me. And if I don't clear a climb or if I spill in a technical section, I have only myself to blame, not my bike.
> ...


Ok, and you could just as easliy "every once in a while drop to a *higher* gear" and do the same damn thing as you do on your SS. No different.


----------



## perttime (Aug 26, 2005)

long hazy daze said:


> Who goes mountain biking because it's _easy_?
> 
> I think it's safe to assume that a big part of what we like about mountain biking is the challenge...


I have two reasons to think about converting my current ride to singlespeed:
1. just BECAUSE
2. When the winter comes, there is no way my cogs and deraileur will be packed with snow.

Number one seems to be the major thing and its definition certainly includes the thing about _challenge_.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> I tend to think long term in that regards, and wish to keep my body intact and healthy. Constant jarring for hours a day surely can't be good.


Actually it's supposed to be good for your bone density.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

khenry44 said:


> Sal- Yes, i agree, simplification is good, 27 gears does seem like a lot of redundancy. But, when you state: "going from one extreme to the other does not seem like the best solution..."
> ...
> (lengthy post snipped)
> ...


Ok now this post has some real content. Once I get a chance to fully digest it I think some of my answers might be in there, at least one guy's perspective :thumbsup:


----------



## long hazy daze (Oct 19, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> I do ride a motorcycle, and it has gears. Why don't you propose that Harley or Honda build a single speed motorcycle, I would love to hear their response. Don't really see your point as to how it relates to gears and SS.


-The point is that if you want to more easliy spin through the woods, trying to exert yourself as little as possible, you may as well ride a motorcycle. Suggesting a SS motorcycle is irellevant and not the point, the engine is doing the work, so what difference would that make to your physical challenge rather or not it has gears. 
I see you're trying very hard to make some sort of point in a forum in which you don't understand the basic premise on which it is based, I'd hope you would have better things to do with your time, like ride your bike. But I'll play along for a minute.



> I really don't care of you wish to go fully rigid and abuse your body and joints. I tend to think long term in that regards, and wish to keep my body intact and healthy. Constant jarring for hours a day surely can't be good.
> 
> But that's off topic anyway, this thread is about SS.


-I'm a drummer first and foremost, so don't think I have no regard for my joints and such. Part of it is aquiring the _skill_ to be relaxed enough to let your body soak up and absorb impact. Look at trials riders, they ride funny little fully rigid bikes and take drops that are 10 feet plus, how do they do it? They use body english and the skiils that go with it to absorb those impacts. But your right, this is off topic. But since you brought it up........



> Ok, and you could just as easliy "every once in a while drop to a *higher* gear" and do the same damn thing as you do on your SS. No different.


-I don't even know what this means.

You are just arguing for the sake of argument. You're not actually trying to "understand" anything, as you initially proposed. Were you truly trying to understand something here, you would have a more open mind and be overall less on the offense. I was offering a _perspective_, a _view point_, not an _argument_. I get the feeling there's lots of things in life you "don't understand", and with your attitude, you probably never will. How unfortunate.


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

It’s amazing but not totally that this thread is still going… I will use myself as an example as to why own or ride ss. 

I don’t know if I can consider myself to be a ss’der since I ride my ss ht with 4” cush up front. But then again I never wanted to be known as a ss’der only. I only care to be known as a cyclist…it’s that simple. SS bike that I started riding 4 to 6 months ago is a result of my cycling fetish…I own many bikes, from road to freeride. Anywho, I don’t think any bikers nor hardcore ss’der cares that I am too wimp to not ride rigid both ends. Nor do I. Maybe someday I will but not yet. It’s hard enuff running 32:18 gear with 4” susser up front for me.

Yesterday I went for an epic mtb ride above treeline in the alpine (Kenosha to Georgia pass to be exact). I had to think about it in the morning but I decided to take my 5” trailbike. I knew that I was not quite up to the task yet for this long climb in the 12000feet alpine elevation with ss. It kicked my a$$ as I struggled up on my 31lbs beast via singletrack in the trees then finally above the treeline way up in the mts of Rockies. At top, I took a long break as I observed the scenery then my euphoria kicked in. It was so good to be alive, I thought. I knew in my heart that on my ss it would have been so much harder. But I look forward to that challenge and can’t wait until I feel that I have enuff strength do such a monumental task. If you break down all this experience and feeling that I went through yesterday, it’s not because I enjoy ss or known as ss’der. It’s because I am a cyclist at heart and love all kinds of bikes. It just that right now, at this immediate point, I really dig riding ss because I am cleaning and riding trails that was once thought to be impossible in my own mine…albeit at very slow progression. Anytime I clean a section or ride the entire trail that thought I couldn’t ride on my ss, I get this same sensation as when I break my PR on a century ride or 10K run. Sure I could make it just as hard by riding my geared bike in one gear but I am cyclist who loves bicycles, so I have no shame in building myself another bike…ss this time, maybe something completely different next year. Plus, building bike is another one of my passionate hobby. I am so lucky to live my dream while I exist in a nano scale of time.

Question to SS hater:
If you rode up to the same point on the trail where I was taking an euphoria break, would you have treated me any different or thought of me as that “ss cult freak” if I rode up on my ss not my 5” geared trail bike? If so, why? 

STH


----------



## adimiro (Jan 11, 2006)

Whoaa!!

It's all about riding a bike and having fun (or whatever your individual goals). I am fortunate to have several bikes including road, single speed, geared mountain, BMX racers, cruisers, etc and I love riding them all for different reasons.

Although I agree with some (and disagree with other) comments posted by 'salimoneus', some of the replies by the 'Singlespeeders' border on religious fanatacism. How 'bout some tolerance of differences in opinions and restraints on personal attacks.

Just go out and ride.


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> Ok now this post has some real content.


It's funny how you only consider the post that have your similar views to be the only ones of "some real content". There have been EXCELLENT responses in many post with better content, you simply chose to ignore them and come up with some ridiculous retort for the sake of arguing. It is glaringly clear that you did not start this thread to try and understand anything, or to gain a different perspective. Instead, it is obvious you started this thread strictly to try and stir the pot and heckle people for their own personal taste in what gives them enjoyment. This my friend, is the epitome of trolling.

The one good thing about this thread is that we have heard from some very passionate people in the world of SS who have given some awesome testimonials and perspectives. You've made yourself look like the grumpy argumentative kid who'd rather spend more time behind their computer arguing rather than out on their bike enjoying these long coveted summer days on beautiful rolling single track. Why not spend your time doing something much more productive?


----------



## TheDude (Feb 18, 2004)

Broad generalizations are kindling for trolls.


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

long hazy daze said:


> I know, and I try to take it gracefully, too, but I've never taken compliments well. Humble I guess. Not that it really _irks_ me, but I prefer when people comment on my _bike_ and we can talk about gear and riding, rather than they make assertations as to my abilities or mentality based on my bike. I'd never go over to someone with a trick FS rig and say "man, you must be a badass", if anything I'd say "sweet ride". If that makes any sense. Perhaps I'm a little socially inept:madman:


Makes total sense.

You have made some excellent points in this thread hazy daze!:thumbsup:


----------



## banana (Nov 7, 2005)

*Keep it going boys*



mud'n'sweat said:


> The one good thing about this thread is that we have heard from some very passionate people in the world of SS who have given some awesome testimonials and perspectives.


You can find that from like-minded cyclists throughout the SS message boards.

I don't think there's anything good about this thread. The most surprising thing about it is the number of people like yourself who can see right through the folly of posting endless anti single speed rhetoric in a single speed forum, and yet still you continue to humour the stupid pr1ck to the tune of 150+ posts. I'm not sure who the joke is on but I suspect he's doing most of the laughing.


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

banana said:


> You can find that from like-minded cyclists throughout the SS message boards.
> 
> I don't think there's anything good about this thread. The most surprising thing about it is the number of people like yourself who can see right through the folly of posting endless anti single speed rhetoric in a single speed forum, and yet still you continue to humour the stupid pr1ck to the tune of 150+ posts. I'm not sure who the joke is on but I suspect he's doing most of the laughing.


Agreed, that is why I have refrained from commenting until today. I let it marinate and made my commentary, no sweat off my back.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

mud'n'sweat said:


> It's funny how you only consider the post that have your similar views to be the only ones of "some real content". There have been EXCELLENT responses in many post with better content, you simply chose to ignore them and come up with some ridiculous retort for the sake of arguing. It is glaringly clear that you did not start this thread to try and understand anything, or to gain a different perspective. Instead, it is obvious you started this thread strictly to try and stir the pot and heckle people for their own personal taste in what gives them enjoyment. This my friend, is the epitome of trolling.
> 
> The one good thing about this thread is that we have heard from some very passionate people in the world of SS who have given some awesome testimonials and perspectives. You've made yourself look like the grumpy argumentative kid who'd rather spend more time behind their computer arguing rather than out on their bike enjoying these long coveted summer days on beautiful rolling single track. Why not spend your time doing something much more productive?


Actually I don't have similar views with anything in his post, it was just one of the few posts that gave a logical reasonable explanation that made sense to me, and more importantly did not border on religious fanatical (thanks *adimiro* that was well put) like many of the others sound. Also not once did he fall back on the overused and meaningless "you either get it or you dont" schpeal.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

long hazy daze said:


> I'd never go over to someone with a trick FS rig and say "man, you must be a badass", if anything I'd say "sweet ride".


Of course not. The proper introduction would be, "man, you must have a lot of money but lousy skills."

Settle down, it's just a joke. Smiles everyone, smiles...


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Now is mud'n'sweat "The Dude," or is The Dude "The Dude?"


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

banana said:


> You can find that from like-minded cyclists throughout the SS message boards.
> 
> I don't think there's anything good about this thread. The most surprising thing about it is the number of people like yourself who can see right through the folly of posting endless anti single speed rhetoric in a single speed forum, and yet still you continue to humour the stupid pr1ck to the tune of 150+ posts. I'm not sure who the joke is on but I suspect he's doing most of the laughing.


no actually i was thinking my post count was a bit low, and that this thread might _give it a rise_


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

Nat said:


> Now is mud'n'sweat "The Dude," or is The Dude "The Dude?"


EDIT: Make that "The DudeS abide", that's all I'm gonna say.


----------



## TheDude (Feb 18, 2004)

I'm one of the dudes.......


----------



## ridindog (Jun 6, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> no actually i was thinking my post count was a bit low, and that this thread might _give it a rise_


SO I WAS RIGHT YOUR JUST A LAME ASS BIAATCH STARTING ARGUMENTS, WAY TO GO ! AHEM GO GET A LIFE


----------



## shwinboy (Jan 13, 2004)

I'm going to assume you are really trying to undestand the SS thing and not just Trolling. I think the problem is you are trying to apply too much logic and rationality to it. To me trying to explain to some one why I ride SS is very similar to explain to a third party why I am so in love with some one when they just keep saying "I just don't know what you see in her."

Sure my SS beates me up and acts like a ***** but I still love love her. There isn't much rational or logical about the relationship but we have a lot of fun and for some reason I find it easier to ride my SS than my gearie. I've tried to explain it but I've always found that if I over analyse a relationship I end up killing it. SO I just accept it for what it is. This may explain why you don't find the explanation "You either get it or you don't" very satisfying despite it probably being the truest statement about SSing. Where one man will love his wife to bits despite any shortcommings she may have, you just couldn't imagine your self ever finding her attractive. Do you then say that love is over rated or try to convince that man that he is wrong because you wouldn't want to date her? No. You say each to their own, move on and find you're own piece of happiness. Acceptance is in it's self a form of understanding.


----------



## Pooh Bear (May 25, 2006)

*No, not efficient at all!*

Don't get me wrong Nat. I know singlespeeding isn't efficient. But somewhere back then when this thread started someone started this efficiency thing. Just wanted to reply. 
I know that keeping it simple isn't at all about efficiency. It's just about riding. For me at least.


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

Wow...shwinboy, you hit the proverbial nail on the head! Thanks for being the voice of reason.


----------



## Pooh Bear (May 25, 2006)

Yup, shwinboy. Nice allegory! 


BTW: Do you know those conversations when everyone wants to have the last word?


----------



## Jutt77 (Apr 24, 2006)

*Great Debate!*

So far, this is what I have observed:

- Most folks prefer to SS because it is a harder, less efficient yet simple way to ride a bike.

- SS bikes are cheaper and therefore better than geared bikes. Does this reasoning come from a financial standpoint?

- The common underling reasoning that SS riders use to defend SS is that you either get it or you don't.

- Some SS riders that used to ride geared set-ups appeared to have had a higher than average amount of mechanical failures with their geared setup, thus the reason to go SS

- If one doesn't agree with the SS argument then they are close minded. Shouldn't one be open to criticism in order to be open minded?

- Some SS arguments come across simply as being elitist. Example: I ride a bike that is harder and less efficient to ride, therefore I'm better that a "gearie".

I personally rode a single speed for 12-13 years, however since switching to gears, I have never looked back. I'm fairly competent when it comes to bike repair and maintenance, so gears and drive train don't cause me enough problems to warrant going single and honestly, compared to vehicle repair/maintenance, geared bike repair/maintenance is down right simple. I have no problem or issue with pushing my thumb or pulling my index finger back to switch gears. I'm honestly having a hard time understanding the logic behind some of the SS arguments throughout this post.


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

Jutt77 said:


> I'm honestly having a hard time understanding the logic behind some of the SS arguments throughout this post.


 Is that suprising? It's the internet. Take a deep breath and forget about it.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Jutt77 said:


> So far, this is what I have observed:
> 
> - Most folks prefer to SS because it is a harder, less efficient yet simple way to ride a bike.
> 
> ...


Oh for crying out loud...


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

Jutt77 said:


> So far, this is what I have observed:
> 
> - Most folks prefer to SS because it is a harder, less efficient yet simple way to ride a bike.
> 
> ...


I may be mistaken... but this just sounds like more flame bait to me.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Nat said:


> Oh for crying out loud...


yea kinda makes you wonder huh. if im just a troll then it's the first time in history a troll has had several other forum members post similar sounding remarks in agreement with him. and most smart people on this forum probably stay away from this particular group like the plague so im surpised i got any support at all.

call me what you will, but somebody's gotta have the stones to ask the tough questions


----------



## dankilling (Feb 24, 2004)

Wow- this is a fun thread...Ill throw my .02 in. I SS because I enjoy the experience of doing it. It changes up my perception of trails that I might otherwise be bored on, and lets me appreciate what my gears do for me when I choose to ride that bike. For me, it has nothing to do with being a fad, or being easier/harder, or faster/slower- it has everything with changing up my routine, and letting me have a choice on each ride what/how I want to ride, as well as the way I want to experience the trail I am on. Thats it. Simple. If I want 6+inches of 27 geared full-squish, I can choose that. If I want 23lbs of hardtail race bike, I can choose that. If I want the simplicity of 1 gear, I can choose that. I dont think my question has ever been why, but more of why not?


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> I lost track of how many of your 92 posts were in this thread. Have fun! :incazzato:


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

dankilling said:


> Wow- this is a fun thread...Ill throw my .02 in. I SS because I enjoy the experience of doing it. It changes up my perception of trails that I might otherwise be bored on, and lets me appreciate what my gears do for me when I choose to ride that bike. For me, it has nothing to do with being a fad, or being easier/harder, or faster/slower- it has everything with changing up my routine, and letting me have a choice on each ride what/how I want to ride, as well as the way I want to experience the trail I am on. Thats it. Simple. If I want 6+inches of 27 geared full-squish, I can choose that. If I want 23lbs of hardtail race bike, I can choose that. If I want the simplicity of 1 gear, I can choose that. I dont think my question has ever been why, but more of why not?


I totally agree with you! Your reason is very similar to mine but if it were different I could careless. Every ss'ders (ones who only own ss and own mutiple bikes) has different reason for riding and owning ss. I am not going to list all that here. They have all been posted. However the part that seems to be a sticky point some is: someone disagreeing (ss'der or non-ss'der) with someone else's reason for riding ss. Can we just accept an answer from whoever confess their reason for riding ss? Why is that so hard to swallow? Unless some folks think other's reason for riding ss is based on lie and it just bugs them. Why do we all ss'der have to have same common reason for riding ss? Of course same question can be asked for DH, all mountain, xc, road, bmx, dirt jump...


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

Jutt77 said:


> So far, this is what I have observed:
> 
> - Most folks prefer to SS because it is a harder, less efficient yet simple way to ride a bike.
> 
> ...


I love SS. Here are some of my thoughts:

1. I don't like SS because it is harder, less efficient or simpler. Indeed, I have said many times that SS is not necessarily harder. There are circumstances where I find it easier. For example, there are climbs that I cannot do on a SS, but can do on a gearie. It is easier to walk up these hills than ride the gearie. I don't consider simplicity or efficiency as factors for or against SS.

2. The cost of the bike is meaningless to me.

3. Ultimatey, it is true that someone will either get it (like it) or won't get it (not like it), but I agree this really does not say much. So, I will try to explain why I like SS:
a. I like the feel of direct transfer of power. A hardtail vs. a FS provides some of this, but the lack of a derailler does too. 
b. I like standing up when climbing. I never really felt comfortable standing up on my FS geared bike. I have not used a hardtailed gearie in 10 plus years and cannot comment on what it feels like to standup on one. 
c. I like the fact that my SS is much lighter than my FS, and no matter what I do, I can build my SS lighter than my geared FS. 
d. I like the pub it gives me. Yes, I will admit it straight up. Part of why I like SS is because I feel a part of an exclusive group. I like the fact that riding a SS does get me some positive attention. The oohs and aahs. I like feeling a bit different or special. This aspect cannot be dismissed. It is perhaps a small percentage of the reason why I like SS, but it is there. 
e. I do feel good when I clear a hard climb on a SS. The accomplishment feels really good. A SS provides this feeling more than a FS because of the trails I ride. Simply put, I ride the same trails 95% of the time. Most of them can be done on a FS geared bike, but some of them are harder on a SS. Again, overall, a SS is not necessarily harder or easier than a geared bike. There are times when it is easier. 
f. I like SS because I tried it, I liked it, and I just kept doing it. Really, it is that simple. I don't race, I don't like to go fast, I don't really care about finding the most efficient way to get or stay fit and so on. I ride 95% of the time at the same trail system blocks from my house. The SS works well here, so I keep riding it.

4. Mechanical reasons have very little to do with any of my riding decisions.

5. There are a ton of closed minded people on both sides.

6. Yes, there are SS elitists. There are also gearie elitists. This is being human.

Bottom line, I do not think SS is harder than gears. If I was racing, gears are faster - period. If I wanted to be efficient, gears is the way to go, period. There are SS elitists, and those that think it is harder, and therefore they are better. Big deal.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Dirdir said:


> I love SS. Here are some of my thoughts:
> 
> 1. I don't like SS because it is harder, less efficient or simpler. Indeed, I have said many times that SS is not necessarily harder. There are circumstances where I find it easier. For example, there are climbs that I cannot do on a SS, but can do on a gearie. It is easier to walk up these hills than ride the gearie. I don't consider simplicity or efficiency as factors for or against SS.
> 
> ...


I like your organization outline and breakdown. Unfortunately almost every relevent point that was made has more to do with FS vs Hardtail than anything to do with SS ( 3 a,b,c,e ).

Point 1 almost sounds to be in favor of gears.

That basically only leaves the points you made about the *exclusivity factor*, and the *props people give you.* If props make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside then hey man whatever works. At least you can admit it, props just for that 

But seriously, this post shows exactly the idea I have had all along, which is that the whole attraction to SS is mostly smoke and mirrors, and has to do with being unique and exclusive, and getting attention, more than anything else.


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

"Smoke and mirrors"... ?

I think the SS must have kicked you in the ass. You sure do seem butthurt.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> But seriously, this post shows exactly the idea I have had all along, which is that the whole attraction to SS is mostly smoke and mirrors, and has to do with being unique and exclusive, and getting attention, more than anything else.


I think it's fairly obvious we're dealing with weapons grade stupidity here and it's time to stop feeding it.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

i think you guys need a logo for your cult...


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> I like your organization outline and breakdown. Unfortunately almost every relevent point that was made has more to do with FS vs Hardtail than anything to do with SS ( 3 a,b,c,e ).
> 
> Point 1 almost sounds to be in favor of gears.
> 
> ...


I think this last posts underscores what others have said about your true agenda. Here. You cannot simply dismiss all of 3 a, b, c and e. There are nuances that you seem to not find relevant. I have added some futher thoughts to my previous statements in the hopes of better understanding. These are at the ******

3. a. I like the feel of direct transfer of power. A hardtail vs. a FS provides some of this, but the lack of a derailler does too.

****** This is fairly clear. A geared hartail does provide more direct transfer of power than a geared FS. However, a SS provides more direct transfer of power than a geared hardtail. You cannot just dismiss this fact. The rear derailler does suck out some of the direct power transfer.

b. I like standing up when climbing. I never really felt comfortable standing up on my FS geared bike. I have not used a hardtailed gearie in 10 plus years and cannot comment on what it feels like to standup on one.

***** See the above. No derailler = more direct power transfer. Better for climbing. Pretty clear to me.

c. I like the fact that my SS is much lighter than my FS, and no matter what I do, I can build my SS lighter than my geared FS.

***** Are you dismissing this statement because you beleive that a geared bike weighs less than a SS, everything else being equal. Hell no. That just cannot be true. No matter how you add things up, a SS can always be built lighter than a geared bike.

e. I do feel good when I clear a hard climb on a SS. The accomplishment feels really good.

***** Why are you just dismissing this comment? You are not making sense. Clearing a hill on a SS is very different than clearing one on a geared hardtail.

I think that your theory that "... the whole attraction to SS is mostly smoke and mirrors, and has to do with being unique and exclusive, and getting attention, more than anything else" ultimately makes little sense. There are some people that are willing to go through all the added expense and time to go SS just to get some "pub", but most of us have better things to do. We don't care all that much about the little nuggets of "pub" that we may get. For example, I have a really great geared bike. I spent $4,000 on it. It sits in my garage gathering dust. I could never justify letting that bike grow spider webs just so I could get a bit of "pub". Moreover, I still ride my SS on solo rides. Why would I do that if I just wanted the "pub".


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

Dirdir said:


> ...Moreover, I still ride my SS on solo rides. Why would I do that if I just wanted the "pub".


I also find myself riding ss solo. Usually at night and at trails where I don't see hikers or other bikers around.

Reason being:
1. Most of my friends don't own ss. I tend to bog the group speed down when I am the only one with ss. This is because I still needs to improve my ss riding speed. I am very fit per others but not "ss" fit and lack the monster leg torque to crank 2:1.
2. I usually ride ss after work so I can get my dog exercise and me. Because I go slower than my geared bike, my dog has better time keeping up with me. Given 1 to 1.5 hr ride time, I go much slower (or cover less terrain) when compared to geared bike but I am much more tired at the end. It works out well since I am tired and my dog is too. We are both very satisfied & happy at the end of the ride. "Woof" that, says Sally.
3. Becasue I bring my dog during ss ride, I avoid other bikers and hikers who are not happy about sharing trail with dog with no leash. I just hate it when I get lectured by hikers and bikers who has boned to pick with my dog and me getting some exercise together. So I seek the solitute where I have best chance at running into anyone.

If I want some attention or complement from others, I bring my susser (not ss) with CK wheel. And wear a shirt that says, "No Fear!" and try to do some 5'+ drop in front of poeple who happens to be walking or riding near the same section. And I pray, " I hope I stick this landing and look smooth...". A bit of show boat but I am sure we have all done it at one point in our biking career.

STH


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Meat Foot said:


> salimoneus said:
> 
> 
> > I lost track of how many of your 92 posts were in this thread. Have fun! :incazzato:
> ...


----------



## Ziggy-Stardust (Jan 26, 2004)

_...no i remained skeptical and actually took another ride few rides on some real trails and realized how horribly inefficient and limiting SS was. thankfully im not impulsive and think something through before jumping ship just because other people have been brainwashed._

What are you talking about? Firstly, the SS drivetrain is much more efficient than any multi-gear system, usually by several percent. Repeat, _several _percent *more *efficient. That really means something when a measly human is the powerplant. Secondly, the momentum conserving nature of SS riding is inherently more efficient than typical gearie riding. An SS-er will usually learn to stay off the brakes in order to maintain speed/momentum through turns and especially at the base of hills. This saves energy and is a more efficient means of riding. Thirdly, the efficiency of a chaindrive system improves when you increase the amount of power you dump into it (i.e. its efficiency increases when you pedal harder and decreases when you pedal with less force). Since you apply maximum (or near max) power SS-ing up hills, you are by definition putting the drivetrain into its highest mode of efficiency during this most critical part of energy usage - again optimizing your meager human power output. And remember, total rider + bike weight being equal, it takes the same amount of energy to move a gearie bike+rider up a hill as it does an SS bike+rider up that same hill. And when you factor in the increased mechanical and riding efficiencies inherent to SS-ing, the SS rider+bike will actually take *LESS* total energy to climb the same hill! Fourthly, when you power up substantial hills (by necessity on an SS), your body will be subjected to a deeper fitness cycle, which will in time then be imparted into your overall fitness. SS-ers tend to be fitter and have stronger hearts, lungs and legs - all other things being equal. This makes you a stronger and faster rider under many or even most circumstances, especially when combined with the improved mechanical/riding efficiency improvements specified above.


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

In Sal's first post he showed he didn't know the difference between power and energy. I ignored his error because I thought he really wanted to learn something. But being kind to a troll is like trying to pet a rattlesnake.


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

pacman said:


> But being kind to a troll is like trying to pet a rattlesnake.


:lol: 
So true. I come back and this guy Sal has pretty much fizzled out. Lemme go warm my popcorn up. Wow. I never knew I was in a "cult". Spooky sh!t......wait a minute. I bet I was brain washed.


----------



## SlowSSer (Dec 19, 2003)

Meat Foot said:


> salimoneus said:
> 
> 
> > I lost track of how many of your 92 posts were in this thread. Have fun! :incazzato:
> ...


----------



## Roger___ (Jan 27, 2004)

His point? Being brief and pointing you in the direction of a thread with the same subject. The better question; what's your point? 

Hope your 1x? project works out for you.


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

SlowSSer said:


> ok, who the he!! is that a picture of?


 Beats the shi* out of me! I found that gem on google images when I searched fishing + trolling. I think I spent too much time, considering I went to page 2 of images.  [yawn]


----------



## wrenchmonkey (Jan 8, 2004)

*If only it was so easy!*

If singlespeeds were so fast you'd see them on world cup podiums - end of story. The reason ss riders are often faster is that they have probably found a motivation and a commitment to riding (for whatever reason) and actually get out there and ride. The extra riding generally translates to better fitness and improved bike-handling skills - generally! You ride 4 times a week, your mate rides once, you're probably going to be faster. Myself, I ride 6 or 8 times a week on my ss, and I still get whipped. My problem is that when it starts to hurt I back off. Single speed hasn't made me faster, but I enjoy the experience for many other reasons. Fight the hype. I've smoked too many people on geared dream bikes, and been smoked by too many people of absolute pieces of crap to place any faith on miracle cure bike designs and fads. Get out there and ride, that's how you'll get faster.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Dirdir said:


> I think this last posts underscores what others have said about your true agenda. Here. You cannot simply dismiss all of 3 a, b, c and e. There are nuances that you seem to not find relevant. I have added some futher thoughts to my previous statements in the hopes of better understanding. These are at the ******
> 
> 3. a. I like the feel of direct transfer of power. A hardtail vs. a FS provides some of this, but the lack of a derailler does too.
> 
> ...


You are delusional if you think that a deraileur provides any measurable amount of drag/friction on a bike, certainly not to the point of being human-detactable. That is a complete myth.

On top of that, many of the SS bikes I see are using a tensioner, which actually puts MORE drag on the chain because of the increased tension on the chainline.

Most of your other points have to do with SS vs geared HT, and since we all know the geared HT can simply be put in the same grear ratio as the SS, it's really shouldn't matter. If you want to fool yourself into thinking the SS has some magical abilities then feel free to live under that illusion.


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

wrenchmonkey said:


> If singlespeeds were so fast you'd see them on world cup podiums - end of story. The reason ss riders are often faster is that they have probably found a motivation and a commitment to riding (for whatever reason) and actually get out there and ride. The extra riding generally translates to better fitness and improved bike-handling skills - generally! You ride 4 times a week, your mate rides once, you're probably going to be faster. Myself, I ride 6 or 8 times a week on my ss, and I still get whipped. My problem is that when it starts to hurt I back off. Single speed hasn't made me faster, but I enjoy the experience for many other reasons. Fight the hype. I've smoked too many people on geared dream bikes, and been smoked by too many people of absolute pieces of crap to place any faith on miracle cure bike designs and fads. Get out there and ride, that's how you'll get faster.


I agree. There is all this talk, from both sides, about efficiency, better fitness this, faster that. It's all irrelevant to me. Gears are faster, otherwise we would be seeing single speeds at World Cup events. So, they are faster - big deal. As to all the rest of it, fitness, efficiency, etc., it's all bunk and speculation.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Meat Foot said:


> ok, who the he!! is that a picture of?


probably his b/f


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> probably his b/f


Clever of you sal.
Score:
Sal = 1; MF = 0

No really, my wife and I got a real chuckle out of that.


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> You are delusional if you think that a deraileur provides any measurable amount of drag/friction on a bike, certainly not to the point of being human-detactable. That is a complete myth.
> 
> On top of that, many of the SS bikes I see are using a tensioner, which actually puts MORE drag on the chain because of the increased tension on the chainline.
> 
> Most of your other points have to do with SS vs geared HT, and since we all know the geared HT can simply be put in the same grear ratio as the SS, it's really shouldn't matter. If you want to fool yourself into thinking the SS has some magical abilities then feel free to live under that illusion.


You are delusional if you actually think that a geared bike left in one gear, in the same ratio as a single speed, is the same as a single speed. Absolutely bonkers. With SS, the chain also runs in a perfectly straight line, unlike geared bikes. If you don't think the derailer and the pulleys have a significant impact on the feel and performance of the chain and power transfer, you are simply hiding your head in the sand. Let's go ask some trackies what they think about derailers.

Plus, you continue to overlook weight. A single speed gets rid of the weight of the derailers, shifters, cables, extra sprockets and longer chain. All else being the same, a single speed will always be lighter.

As far as chain tensioners on SS go, I have never used one and thus am reluctant to comment on them. I personally don't think I would like them, but they are often needed to convert a geared bike. I suspect that they cause less chain drag than a regular old derailler, but I could be wrong. Ultimately, the direct transfer of power and/or the "neat" feel of a derailler-less drive train (either one will do), is only one of the several reasons I like SS.

I don't think SS are magic. Hell, I already said that if top speed is your thing, a geared bike is the way to go, no question. I have a friend who is a pro racer and I fully understand why he has little interest in SS. His agenda differs from mine.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Dirdir said:


> You are delusional if you actually think that a geared bike left in one gear, in the same ratio as a single speed, is the same as a single speed. Absolutely bonkers. With SS, the chain also runs in a perfectly straight line, unlike geared bikes. If you don't think the derailer and the pulleys have a significant impact on the feel and performance of the chain and power transfer, you are simply hiding your head in the sand. Let's go ask some trackies what they think about derailers.
> 
> Plus, you continue to overlook weight. A single speed gets rid of the weight of the derailers, shifters, cables, extra sprockets and longer chain. All else being the same, a single speed will always be lighter.
> 
> ...


If you can feel anything less than a 5% difference in power transfer, or a 5% difference in weight, then you have some superhuman sensory perception. The difference is so marginal as to be hardly worth mentioning. Sure if your ultimate goal is a super lightweight, sure every little bit counts, but that's not the subject of this thread, there is another forum dedicated to the weight freaks.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

FYI here is a post I found from Rik O'Shea on rec.bicycles.racing, a fairly reputable source if you know him at all. Once I find more scientific information I will follow up, but this post basically covers it:



> The bicycle is the most efficient transport mechanism ever invented. *A
> state of the art single speed track bike is about 98% efficient* i.e.
> only 2% of the power that you generate is wasted due to the drive
> train inefficiency, the rest goes into the forward propulsion of the
> ...


Original found here:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/msg/87cd6be01dca8d38


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> If you can feel anything less than a 5% difference in power transfer, or a 5% difference in weight, then you have some superhuman sensory perception. The difference is so marginal as to be hardly worth mentioning. Sure if your ultimate goal is a super lightweight, sure every little bit counts, but that's not the subject of this thread, there is another forum dedicated to the weight freaks.


More or less 10% in weight savings right off the bat. Yes, you can feel that. My gearie is at 25# and the SS sits in at 22-22.5#. Nothing weight "freakish" about it either. Stuff that works, such as XT and Avid mechs, SRAM chains, beaters, etc. One bike is steel (the SS FWIW), the other not (ti, FWIW).

To elaborate more on why I choose to SS more often than not, I enjoy the physical and mental challenges of SSing. I also enjoy riding when it rains. Doing this requires a bike that does not need a tear down every 4th ride. Up here we are blessed with silts and clays that get into the works and grind up drivetrain bits. Plus having a rigid bike frees itself from shock maintenance. Check pressure, lube chain and ride! After all that is what it is all about. Right?


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Meat Foot said:


> More or less 10% in weight savings right off the bat. Yes, you can feel that. My gearie is at 25# and the SS sits in at 22-22.5#. Nothing weight "freakish" about it either. Stuff that works, such as XT and Avid mechs, SRAM chains, beaters, etc. One bike is steel (the SS FWIW), the other not (ti, FWIW).
> 
> To elaborate more on why I choose to SS more often than not, I enjoy the physical and mental challenges of SSing. I also enjoy riding when it rains. Doing this requires a bike that does not need a tear down every 4th ride. Up here we are blessed with silts and clays that get into the works and grind up drivetrain bits. Plus having a rigid bike frees itself from shock maintenance. Check pressure, lube chain and ride! After all that is what it is all about. Right?


Let me get this straight, you're comparing the weight of two totally different bikes, and therefore conclude the entire 10% difference is attributed soley to the fact that one is an SS? Wow that's a pretty scientific conclusion there...


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> Quote: The bicycle is the most efficient transport mechanism ever invented. A
> state of the art single speed track bike is about 98% efficient i.e.
> only 2% of the power that you generate is wasted due to the drive
> train inefficiency, the rest goes into the forward propulsion of the
> ...


Good on you. After running the calcs on the 8W lost, it appears Chris would have been able to run a solid 49.450 km/h if he were indeed using a simpler SS machine. I definitely can tell the difference between 49.442 and 49.450, can't you?


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> If you can feel anything less than a 5% difference in power transfer, or a 5% difference in weight, then you have some superhuman sensory perception. The difference is so marginal as to be hardly worth mentioning. Sure if your ultimate goal is a super lightweight, sure every little bit counts, but that's not the subject of this thread, there is another forum dedicated to the weight freaks.


I have a geared IF Deluxe and a SS IF Deluxe. Other than the dropouts, both frames are identical in size, material and geometry. The geared bike has top of the line components: FSA MegaExo crankset with external BB, Dave's Speed Dreams wheels- CK hubs/Bontrager Valiant rims (lighter than CrossMax SL), SRAM XO drivetrain, Spec FastTrak Pro tires, Easton MonkeyLite XC bar etc. Definitely weight conscious.

The SS has a set of Middleburn cranks, Nevegal 2.1R/2.5F tires, and Phil Wood hubs/517 rims. The SS has an On-One Mary bar. Hardly weight conscious.The rest is identical in build.

It amazes me that the SS is about 2 pounds lighter (10% less than the gearie) It is more responsive when taking off from a dead stop, and is quicker feeling on the climbs (race buddy didn't believe me until he test rode both). I much rather stand and hammer up the climbs on the SS than on the gearie. The SS even feels more lively on tight singletrack.

Whether this can be attributed to the differences in the drivetrain or just psychological impression is unimportant to me. In the end, the SS is just funner to ride.


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> Let me get this straight, you're comparing the weight of two totally different bikes, and therefore conclude the entire 10% difference is attributed soley to the fact that one is an SS? Wow that's a pretty scientific conclusion there...


Nothing scientific about it. The 2 bikes I have are about as close as I could come to having 2 bikes identical, one geared and one SS. Did I say I ran a scientific test in a wind tunnel? They *feel* different. Read my post again, I won't insert a quote from my previous post.:nono:


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

Upchuck said:


> I have a geared IF Deluxe and a SS IF Deluxe. Other than the dropouts, both frames are identical in size, material and geometry. The geared bike has top of the line components: FSA MegaExo crankset with external BB, Dave's Speed Dreams wheels- CK hubs/Bontrager Valiant rims (lighter than CrossMax SL), SRAM XO drivetrain, Spec FastTrak Pro tires, Easton MonkeyLite XC bar etc. Definitely weight conscious.
> 
> The SS has a set of Middleburn cranks, Nevegal 2.1R/2.5F tires, and Phil Wood hubs/517 rims. The SS has an On-One Mary bar. Hardly weight conscious.The rest is identical in build.
> 
> ...


There, an even better comparison and summary of why most of us reach for the SS and pull it from the quiver.

*salimoneus*, happy sailing on your fishing expedition. troll.


----------



## 8200rpm (Apr 28, 2006)

*Bicycling way overstated?*










Bicycling and especially bicycling up a friggin moutain seems sort of ridiculous. What the turd is on top of that mountain anyway? A bag of cash? 72 young virgins? Nothing really.

If you really need to get someplace, wouldn't a car be more appropriate? Especially in hot as hades places like Utah, Colorado, and New Mexico, and Arizona? Why wouldn't you want the benefit of air conditioning.

I'm just trying to understand why people ride bicycles. And all of you brainwashed idiot suckers buying from capitalist pig bourgeois Taiwanese men in expensive Hong Kong tailored wool suits are just nothing but egomaniacs.

Logic people, logic. Don't you get it? Please explain it to me you friggin stupid idiots.

BTW, I tried riding my bike to work and realized how inefficient and limiting it was. My SUV is so much better. It also saves time so I have more time to use the computer and post delicious questions. Then, I yank my wank while I read the replies from the middle aged fools going through a midlife crisis riding bicycles around and pretending that they are kids again and not losing hair and getting saggy boobs.

I'm so smart. And you are not. HAHAHHAHAHAHA. Obviously you are all too stupid to explain it to smart, logical guy like me.:nono:


----------



## DanU (May 9, 2006)

There's one argument for SSing that I haven't seen anyone mention yet: Three-dimensionality. With a geared bike, riding is two-dimensional. You go forwards, right or left. But when you are constantly gearing to keep the correct rpm, you don't get a feel for the terrain, the third dimension. 

Remember the old roadie word "faux-plat", false flat, used to describe a slight uphill or downhill that is so close to flat you can't really tell that it's not flat. Well, on an SS there are no faux-plats. You feel the slightest change in percentage, which gives a unique feel for the terrain you're riding. (Terrain in this case meaning rolling hills, not rocks and roots.)


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

DanU said:


> There's one argument for SSing that I haven't seen anyone mention yet: Three-dimensionality. With a geared bike, riding is two-dimensional. You go forwards, right or left. But when you are constantly gearing to keep the correct rpm, you don't get a feel for the terrain, the third dimension.
> 
> Remember the old roadie word "faux-plat", false flat, used to describe a slight uphill or downhill that is so close to flat you can't really tell that it's not flat. Well, on an SS there are no faux-plats. You feel the slightest change in percentage, which gives a unique feel for the terrain you're riding. (Terrain in this case meaning rolling hills, not rocks and roots.)


Um, yea. How could I have forgotten about three-dimensionality. I thought I was pushing the envelope with the whole direct transfer of power argument I made. I guess I was not even close to the edge on that one.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Dirdir said:


> Um, yea. How could I have forgotten about three-dimensionality. I thought I was pushing the envelope with the whole direct transfer of power argument I made. I guess I was not even close to the edge on that one.


Hey, and don't forget about the fourth dimension: time! It's a time travel machine!


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Nat said:


> Hey, and don't forget about the fourth dimension: time! It's a time travel machine!


Yea just hop on the bike and you're instantly 15 years younger!

Haha, ok so some of you cultists actually do have a sense of humor. I was beginning to feel sorry for yaz...


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

Interesting stuff. I came to this thread from Jugdish's (casual AM Troll) link in the AM forum. Anyway, at least it shows that it's pointless wandering into someone else's forum and telling them they're all numpties.

I replaced my big ring with a bashguard, so I'm one step closer to being a SSer


----------



## DanU (May 9, 2006)

Dirdir said:


> Um, yea. How could I have forgotten about three-dimensionality.


I don't know. Maybe you live in Holland? Check for windmills. Hmm... If you actually do live in Holland the wind becomes the third dimension. This is getting groovy. Let me light up some more inscence and think about this some more.


----------



## datako (Aug 27, 2004)

I can understand why Salimoneus doesn't get SS. My brother is the same. Both seem to be confusing riding in a single gear on their derailleur bikes with riding a proper single speed bike. 

My take on it is that I prefer to ride a bike rather than operate it, and I prefer to ride a bike to maintaining it. I like the feel of a well setup SS bike, and I ride SS on the road as well.

I am not interested in going fast - I used to do that on my motorbike and didn't get to enjoy the mountains. I like a light reliable bike that I can lug anywhere in the mountains.

But it's great that Salimoneus is at least riding a mountain bike and enjoying it. He's obviously got a sense of humour because he's enjoying stirring us up.  

BTW a single speed rider won the toughest 24hour MTB race in UK (the Strathpuffer - run in mid winter) against a field of mainly geared riders. The conditions were real mountain conditions and many of the geared competitors wrecked their entire transmissions.


----------



## gijsberg (Dec 2, 2005)

*The bike can be that quick, but the rider has to pedal it*

Singlespeed bikes are much faster  , but the rider still has to pedal it


----------



## Nikolas (Feb 11, 2004)

*One for me*

One is the loneliest number...

Overstated or not, one is the right number for me. I don't care about SS Supermen. I just want ride my bicycle.


----------



## tomimcmillar (Oct 27, 2005)

*Sal, answer me this......*



salimoneus said:


> blah blah blah.......
> That basically only leaves the points you made about the *exclusivity factor*, and the *props people give you.* If props make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside then hey man whatever works. At least you can admit it, props just for that
> 
> But seriously, this post shows exactly the idea I have had all along, which is that the whole attraction to SS is mostly smoke and mirrors, and has to do with being unique and exclusive, and getting attention, more than anything else.


*OK Sal, we get it!* 
We see the point you're trying to make. That we're all just a bunch of brainwashed maroons who have no clue what it means to be a 'real' mtn biker or whatever, because we're all just a bunch of fad chasers (hey, anybody wanna go rollerblading later?). But, could you answer me one question that's been bugging me since I got sucked into watching this trainwreck?

Have you ever toed the line at a race, bicycle or otherwise? Ever sprinted for a town sign? Or enjoyed a friendly little round of one-ups-manship while cruising the singletrack with your buddies?

If so, would you please give us an honest answer why? 
Do you race because you need the prize winnings to put food on the table? Do you need that big fat winner's check to pay the rent? Do you need the best pick off the prize table so you can E-bay it to feed yourself or your family? Does racing a bike and the financial windfall it provides make ends meet for you? Is it a base requirement for your pursuit of life, liberty and happiness?

Or do you compete (officially or otherwise) as a means to challenge yourself? To figure out what you're made of? To achieve some arbitrary personal goal? And is there maybe a bit of ego involved? Do you enjoy the feelings that come when standing on top of the podium? Perhaps maybe enjoying and basking in the respect and props you get from your clan on that day.......

Seriously, give an honest answer to this and then tell me exactly how that differs from the SS inspiration that others get from doing more with less. Then tell me how you feel justified in berating those who cite these sensations as part of their answer to the age old question of "why ss?"

Or maybe you really are the one true Buddha on a bike and you ride for the Zen of it, with no ego involved, no competition, no self gratification.......because you're above all that. 

Bicycles are freedom, no matter what you ride.
peace.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

*Internet troll*

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In Internet terminology, a troll is someone who comes into an established community such as an online discussion forum, and posts inflammatory, rude, repetitive or offensive messages designed intentionally to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt the flow of discussion, including the personal attack of calling others trolls.

More info

Not sure if everyone understands what's going on here... you will never convince him.


----------



## galleywench (May 21, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> FYI here is a post I found from Rik O'Shea on rec.bicycles.racing, a fairly reputable source if you know him at all. Once I find more scientific information I will follow up, but this post basically covers it:
> 
> Original found here:
> 
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/msg/87cd6be01dca8d38


Wasn't Chris Boardman's one hour speed record done on a fixed gear SS bike?


----------



## Lucky 7 (Oct 20, 2005)

Sheesh, why can't it be a personal decision and left at that? Five pages of this over a little trolling. SS makes me feel good inside and gives me a grin, is that a good enough reason?:madman:


----------



## EastCoast (Sep 25, 2005)

*Sal, give it a rest*

I ride my SS because it's fun. It feels good. If other people don't enjoy it, that's fine by me. What else needs to be said in defense? If you don't find SS fun in practice, then any theorizing won't convince you differently. And that's ok.

There are no objective, impersonal reasons for why someone -should- or -must- like SS. That doesn't mean that it is impossible to like SS. It's like asking someone the 'reasons' why their favourite colour is green. If someone likes it, they just do. If you don't like green, you won't be convinced that you should. That doesn't mean it's dishonest, or cultish, or disingenuous.

Sal, you seem to be trying to convince me that I am 'wrong' for liking SS, as though a verbal argument would compel me to dislike something I enjoy. Look - you said SS was a supposed solution to a problem, but it's not, it's just something that is fun.

Oh, and you're a troll because you're here to prove people wrong under the pretense that you're simply curious about SS. According to you, it is impossible for people to enjoy SS - if they do, they are brainwashed by elitism. You're the only elitist I see here, because you think you're smarter and know better than the people you're talking about ('talking about' because you're not really 'talking with' anybody). I expect a real non sequitur of a reply, so don't disappoint.

Oh, and to the rest of you, my first post!


----------



## Khan (Jul 18, 2006)

Ok so this seems to be a burn fest and your all saying that you would do this or they would do that...I win bla bla. I think personaly Im unbiased seeing as I ride a fixed gear road bike all fall and winter and then I ride a mtb with 8 gears (all you need) the rest of the year. There are parts of the trails I do that you cannot climb with the same gear you run for going quick in other places...If you are on a well groomed trail or road then single speed is hella sweet, but if you go from racing across flats to climbing rocks with a big angle on them...you have to have gears...if you want to be efficiant...and Im sure most bikers would say they want that. I mean thats the point of both buying super new high end crap and the point of ss.

Wow...that didnt make me half as happy as burning somone...wierd.


----------



## Irishbuddha (Feb 25, 2004)

*Smelly reply*

Dear Salimoneus or shall we call you the Sanctimonious Gearie.

When I was a wee young lad I use to like Charmin 4-ply paper because it was cushy and efficient. As I grew older and sprouted hair on my arse it began to collect in tiny balls known as bodagets. This required more and more scrubbing to get the same affect. As time went on, it became apparent that the Winco single-ply-bung-wipe did the job much more effective, required less maintenance and was cheaper.

So one winter night, I am in the garage working on the drivetrain of my gearie and was really bummed because the cluster and rings are tweaked from winter riding in the wet frozen gritty winter conditions we have in Idaho. So I thought why not make the toilet paper leap and build a single speed to save some money and keep the FS for summer. Summer rolls around, and the FS bikes are still in the garage and I am riding the SS Inbred and loving the challenge.

That was a few years ago and I have learned there are a lot of things I love about single speeding.

1)	I love the challenge!
2)	I love the simplicity of the two options - in the saddle or out.
3)	I love the extra money in the bike budget from not having to replace expensive drivetrains.
4)	I love the endorphin high from putting it all out there!
5)	I love going to my happy place after a nasty lung busting climb! 
6)	I love the full body workout.

So Sanctimonious, pull the trigger. We all know you are going through that same mental struggle we went through on why to ride a single speed. Sometimes it doesn't make sense and you just have to stop thinking about it.

Most of us don't care what you ride or what you use to wipe. But next time you sit down to take big dump (and from your responses we know you take big rank steamers) ask yourself, why do I mountain bike? You might find that a single speed might push what you want out of your riding experience.

BTW, is your motorcycle an efficient one?


----------



## Ziggy-Stardust (Jan 26, 2004)

wrenchmonkey said:


> If singlespeeds were so fast you'd see them on world cup podiums - end of story.


"End of story?" No it isn't. The fastest, fittest riders in the world who are invariably sponsored by the biggest companies (Trek, Specialized, Shimano et al) in mountain biking are going to be riding and using whatever technology those companies dictate. And the high $$ sponsors want their high end products on display, not some low cost stripped down retro-SS thing. And the sponsors want the very best riders possible to win riding/using these products "proving" that all us little people need all the gears and gizmos too if we also want to be competitive. Do you honestly think that Shimano would want an SS to win national/world championships? Do you honestly think Trek and Specialized want some simplified, stripped down Alum SS hardtail to win? What do you think that would do for all of their most expensive and most profitable sales efforts? (i.e. 27 gear XTR and FS out the ying yang). The fact of the matter is, is that the it's much more about the man/woman on the crate and not the crate itself. In other words, if you took the very best riders in the current crop, gave them super high end 17lb singlespeeds, cut them loose on a rigorous long term training program to acclimate to SS-ing and its special riding techniques and physical conditioning...do you really think they would all fall flat on their faces in top level competition?? I don't, not one bit. As long as the track was not grotesquely SS inappropriate, they'd be right up there and in some cases would dominate. I believe a championship world class mountain biker who won races on a geared bike, would be able to do the same on an SS mixing it up with gearies, given time to acclimitize and especially given the weight, fitness and efficiency advantages SS offers. But that will never happen, because the very best riders in the world are paid big bucks to NOT do that very thing.


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

Ziggy-Stardust said:


> "End of story?" No it isn't. The fastest, fittest riders in the world who are invariably sponsored by the biggest companies (Trek, Specialized, Shimano et al) in mountain biking are going to be riding and using whatever technology those companies dictate. And the high $$ sponsors want their high end products on display, not some low cost stripped down retro-SS thing. And the sponsors want the very best riders possible to win riding/using these products "proving" that all us little people need all the gears and gizmos too if we also want to be competitive. Do you honestly think that Shimano would want an SS to win national/world championships? Do you honestly think Trek and Specialized want some simplified, stripped down Alum SS hardtail to win? What do you think that would do for all of their most expensive and most profitable sales efforts? (i.e. 27 gear XTR and FS out the ying yang). The fact of the matter is, is that the it's much more about the man/woman on the crate and not the crate itself. In other words, if you took the very best riders in the current crop, gave them super high end 17lb singlespeeds, cut them loose on a rigorous long term training program to acclimate to SS-ing and its special riding techniques and physical conditioning...do you really think they would all fall flat on their faces in top level competition?? I don't, not one bit. As long as the track was not grotesquely SS inappropriate, they'd be right up there and in some cases would dominate. I believe a championship world class mountain biker who won races on a geared bike, would be able to do the same on an SS mixing it up with gearies, given time to acclimitize and especially given the weight, fitness and efficiency advantages SS offers. But that will never happen, because the very best riders in the world are paid big bucks to NOT do that very thing.


I think you're stretching your SS enthusiasm a bit far here.


----------



## banana (Nov 7, 2005)

Lucky 7 said:


> Sheesh, why can't it be a personal decision and left at that? Five pages of this over a little trolling. SS makes me feel good inside and gives me a grin, is that a good enough reason?:madman:


Couldn't agree more. The problem though, is that you guys can never stop at the end of your second sentence and insist on indulging Old Sanctimonious with an ongoing explanation of why you SS. Can there be anyone in here who still thought he was even slightly interested in what or why you ride by the end of page one?


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

uktrailmonster said:


> I think you're stretching your SS enthusiasm a bit far here.


Ya. After Ziggy's statement, I think I am going to switch to Salimoneous' side. That is a huge stretch and sounds like single speed propaganda.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

For the record, I never said that SS is completely useless and absurd, I definitely think there is a place for it. I think SS is quite ideal for: short commuter, folding bikes, town or beach cruiser, show bikes, some road bikes, kids bikes, and maybe easy trail bikes. I also very much like the clean look of an SS, especially on a steel hardtail, which is why I was tempted at first. Of course there is also the other benefits like the lack of chain slap and deraileur noises, low maintenance and adjustments, weight, etc.

Having said that, I obviously still have difficulty in seeing why someone would neglect and in some cases ditch their geared rides in favor of SS as their main trail bike, but I think I will just have to be satisfied with "not getting it" and leave it at that.

This thread was kinda sorta fun I guess, it wasn't intitially intended as a troll, and may have ended up seeming like so after all the defensive posts started to show up, but I think that was pretty hard to avoid considering the topic  I still think it was kept pretty clean and playful though, so kudos for not letting things get fugly. Hey how boring would life be without a little sibling rivalry to shake things up once in a while


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

Yo Sal, are you just going to ignore the fact that someone actually had a legit comparison of a gearie vs a SS?


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Upchuck said:


> Yo Sal, are you just going to ignore the fact that someone actually had a legit comparison of a gearie vs a SS?


Are you referring to Ziggy's post, about the professional racers and sponsors and such? I really couldn't care less what manufacturers and sponsors do and try to promote, and I doubt most people here do much either. If I wanted their opinion I woud write to them and ask them, not post here trying to pick the brains of actual riders. He also implied that given equal ability riders, the SS would be neck and neck with an optimally configured geared bike on a challenging course. Still find that notion quite amusing. Just because one guy won a race in the UK doesn't mean squat. Maybe that particular course was optimal for riding in just one gear, although doubtful. In that case then I'd say just run in one gear?

Not sure if that was the post you were referring to though, there are so many...


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Irishbuddha said:


> ...
> 1)	I love the challenge!
> 2)	I love the simplicity of the two options - in the saddle or out.
> 3)	I love the extra money in the bike budget from not having to replace expensive drivetrains.
> ...


Or were you referring to this post? Call me crazy, but that looks like a list that could come from someone riding anything, don't need an SS specific setup for any of those things to happen. Unless for some reason you believe you need an SS in order to "put it all out there" or go for a "busting climb". Most people can just use the appropriate gear selection depending on what they want to get out of it, simple no?


----------



## gonzo (Feb 18, 2004)

*What do you do for a living??? Mr. Rightous*

What line of work are you in? Nothing to do with SS but your just so rightous about anything that comes out of your mouth...............

Do you have friends
Do your co-workers like you?
Are you the alpha male that thinks everyone else is is a moron..?

Sorry I just wasted my time even repling to this post.............:madman:


----------



## cocheese (Jan 12, 2004)

After years of different hardtal and then suspension bikes, I decided to try a singlespeed...29er rigid singlespeed. I was amazed by how much fun it is. Pure fun! It really dones free you to enjoy the ride and not worry about mech failures. Will I have a geared bike in the future, probably at some point. Am I enjoying my SS like I did my BMX bike as a kid? Yes! Don't get me wrong as it is tough. I am winded going up hills much more than normal, but when you get there the reward is that much better. I'm not a torture junky but it does give me a greater sense of accomplishment. It has taken its toll on my left knee which was injured from a previous accident several years ago.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

gonzo said:


> What line of work are you in? Nothing to do with SS but your just so rightous about anything that comes out of your mouth...............
> 
> Do you have friends
> Do your co-workers like you?
> ...


Hey I'm just trying to make sense of the reasons people are giving me about why they feel passionate about single speed. If after examing those things in detail, it appears that many of them have less to do with SS and more to do with things like motivation, the fun factor, feeling like a kid again, exclusivity, then so be it. It's not meant as an insult. If you can get all of those benefits just by converting to SS then hey that's great, but my brain doesn't work like that. Maybe it's my loss and I'm missing out, if so then what a tragedy for me I guess.

Oh and yes there are lots of morons out there in the world, aren't there?


----------



## twysted_prism (Sep 14, 2004)

Since when was cycling about speed and efficiency? "The right tools for the job." etc.... Some of us want to escape the dreary 'MAX PERFORMANCE' mindset of the workplace and just enjoy riding a bike, whatever bike it has to be. Clearly you're trapped in the whole protestant work ethic thing and i'm sorry, man, i really am. When you have sex do you like it to be over and done with as fast as possible? I don't, I like to enjoy a thing 

I lurrrve that inefficiency, that lazy ass walk up a hill on a summer's day when it's just tooo hot to bother. True, i also like not having to bother with the hassle of gears (maintenance, endless replacing of bits etc) and you know what? I don't have to.

One gear, many speeds.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> but my brain doesn't work like that


All those who care... please raise your hand.:shocked:


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

Here, lemme repost for you:
I have a geared steel IF Deluxe and a SS steel IF Deluxe. Other than the dropouts, both frames are identical in size and geometry. The geared bike has top of the line components: FSA MegaExo crankset with external BB, Dave's Speed Dreams wheels- CK hubs/Bontrager Valiant rims (lighter than CrossMax SL), SRAM XO drivetrain, Spec FastTrak Pro tires, Easton MonkeyLite XC bar etc. Definitely weight conscious.

The SS has a set of Middleburn cranks, Nevegal 2.1R/2.5F tires, and Phil Wood hubs/517 rims. The SS has an On-One Mary bar. Hardly weight conscious.The rest is identical in build. 

It amazes me that the SS is about 2 pounds lighter (10% less than the gearie) It is more responsive when taking off from a dead stop, and is quicker feeling on the climbs (race buddy didn't believe me until he test rode both). I much rather stand and hammer up the climbs on the SS than on the gearie. The SS even feels more lively on tight singletrack.

Whether this can be attributed to the differences in the drivetrain or just psychological impression is unimportant to me. In the end, the SS is just funner to ride.


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

dumbaSS said:


> All those who care... please raise your hand.:shocked:


Well I've always been curious about singlespeeds. They don't make any logical sense if you ride in different conditions and gradients, but I can see why people might find them fun, challenging, simple to maintain, cheaper etc. Not for me though, I need gears to get around.


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

Khan said:


> There are parts of the trails I do that you cannot climb with the same gear you run for going quick in other places...If you are on a well groomed trail or road then single speed is hella sweet, but if you go from racing across flats to climbing rocks with a big angle on them...you have to have gears...if you want to be efficiant.





uktrailmonster said:


> They don't make any logical sense if you ride in different conditions and gradients.


 Yeah, there's some walking involved at times but you'd be amazed at the stuff you can climb on a SS if you commit.


----------



## serious (Jan 25, 2005)

salimoneus: *I also very much like the clean look of an SS, especially on a steel hardtail, which is why I was tempted at first. Of course there is also the other benefits like the lack of chain slap and deraileur noises, low maintenance and adjustments, weight, etc.*

So is it efficiency that turned you off from SS? Did you select a gear ratio that caused you to walk all over the place? What exactly did you not like about it? Assuming that money was not an issue, why not have a simple, clean, low maintenance bike?

Furthermore, how can you not understand the desire to *race* with a single gear? It is about making the right gear ratio choice and living with that choice regrardless of what terrain you encounter.


----------



## Ziggy-Stardust (Jan 26, 2004)

uktrailmonster said:


> Well I've always been curious about singlespeeds. They don't make any logical sense if you ride in different conditions and gradients, but I can see why people might find them fun, challenging, simple to maintain, cheaper etc. Not for me though, I need gears to get around.


Ahh, I knew it. Another gearie, offering strong opinions concerning how limiting an SS is without actually having any substantial experience with it. Did you get owned on the trail by an SS and now grumble in the SS forum about how "SS doesn't make sense" now? That's the usual pattern, you know. I used to be like you about 7 years ago. I saw my first nice SS on the trail with some older guy riding it. I said, "What's that all about? How in the world can you get around without gears? Must be miserable up hills." And he said, "you dont need any more than a single gear, especially on this trail" (which wasn't particulary hilly, but still with plenty of techy stuff). He went on to explain the benefits and advantages of singlespeeds. I was shocked he would try to sell me on the idea, I dismissed him pretty much outright. I was so confident I was right too, after all I had just learned all about the latest Specialized Horst linkage suspension and XTR rapid fire stuff and was preparing to clunk down some big $$ on a bike like that. All I could envisage about SS is "There's no way you could make that really work". A year later I started riding with a few SS guys. They were always fitter, faster and absolutely powered up hills. How could this happen? I didn't understand and was taken aback by the whole thing. Intrigued, I built my own SS, and suffered riding it in the beginning. Stuck to it and learned more and more. A year later I was fully converted and sold on the idea. It truly was an ephinany, and changed my entire outlook on mtbiking, technology and what it can and _cannot _do. Won't go on explaining why or what it did for my riding, or suggest it's for everyone. But I would suggest keeping an open mind. I've been on both sides of the fence, and the grass is definitely greener over here.


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

UKTM came over (I'd assume) because of a post of mine in the AM forum, you can blame me for his doubting Thomas posts.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Upchuck said:


> Here, lemme repost for you:
> I have a geared steel IF Deluxe and a SS steel IF Deluxe. Other than the dropouts, both frames are identical in size and geometry. The geared bike has top of the line components: FSA MegaExo crankset with external BB, Dave's Speed Dreams wheels- CK hubs/Bontrager Valiant rims (lighter than CrossMax SL), SRAM XO drivetrain, Spec FastTrak Pro tires, Easton MonkeyLite XC bar etc. Definitely weight conscious.
> 
> The SS has a set of Middleburn cranks, Nevegal 2.1R/2.5F tires, and Phil Wood hubs/517 rims. The SS has an On-One Mary bar. Hardly weight conscious.The rest is identical in build.
> ...


Ok, well first off I think 10% is too much. As said before I think that 9 gears max is plenty of gears. So take off the front deraileur and extra chainrings and chain guard and that should drop it down into the non-detactable range because you are removing rotational weight which is important. Also most people are using cog spacers in the back which amount to about the same weight as cogs, and the tensioner probably weighs about as much as the deraileur so the weight savings is somewhat of an illusion as well.

And since we have already covered the fact that there are no discernable differences in drivetrain efficiency between a single speed and geared bike, then there isn't much more to say on that. If you think it feels more responsive and quicker then great, just like the guy down the street that put on new K&N air filter and claimed he could feel the 3HP he gained. Sure every little bit helps, and I do K&N filters myself because it's an easy replacement, but would I rip out my entire drivetrain just to gain 2% efficiency? No.


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

jugdish said:


> UKTM came over (I'd assume) because of a post of mine in the AM forum, you can blame me for his doubting Thomas posts.


Correct  and I'm trying really hard to be polite to these SS dudes


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

Ziggy-Stardust said:


> Ahh, I knew it. Another gearie, offering strong opinions concerning how limiting an SS is without actually having any substantial experience with it. Did you get owned on the trail by an SS and now grumble in the SS forum about how "SS doesn't make sense" now? That's the usual pattern, you know. I used to be like you about 7 years ago. I saw my first nice SS on the trail with some older guy riding it. I said, "What's that all about? How in the world can you get around without gears? Must be miserable up hills." And he said, "you dont need any more than a single gear, especially on this trail" (which wasn't particulary hilly, but still with plenty of techy stuff). He went on to explain the benefits and advantages of singlespeeds. I was shocked he would try to sell me on the idea, I dismissed him pretty much outright. I was so confident I was right too, after all I had just learned all about the latest Specialized Horst linkage suspension and XTR rapid fire stuff and was preparing to clunk down some big $$ on a bike like that. All I could envisage about SS is "There's no way you could make that really work". A year later I started riding with a few SS guys. They were always fitter, faster and absolutely powered up hills. How could this happen? I didn't understand and was taken aback by the whole thing. Intrigued, I built my own SS, and suffered riding it in the beginning. Stuck to it and learned more and more. A year later I was fully converted and sold on the idea. It truly was an ephinany, and changed my entire outlook on mtbiking, technology and what it can and _cannot _do. Won't go on explaining why or what it did for my riding, or suggest it's for everyone. But I would suggest keeping an open mind. I've been on both sides of the fence, and the grass is definitely greener over here.


I don't think I offered a strong opinion above. I just said they look fun, but they're not for me thanks. Only came here out of curiosity (thank Jugdish for that). It's great that you love your SS and I'm not going to be drawn into throwing stones at it. But your SS doesn't make you any better or worse a rider than me. I ride up hills in a lower gear than I ride down them. Big frigging deal.


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

Ziggy-Stardust said:


> Ahh, I knew it. Another gearie, offering strong opinions concerning how limiting an SS is without actually having any substantial experience with it. Did you get owned on the trail by an SS and now grumble in the SS forum about how "SS doesn't make sense" now?


I've been "owned" on the trail by guys on DH rigs, SS, HT, BMX, Unicycles, the lot. I quite frankly don't give a toss. I've never got to the end of a ride and been handed a big fat cheque for getting there first. It's all just for fun.


----------



## fatheadfred (Dec 17, 2004)

SS is good for dads and moms cuz they don't have time and $ to fark with cables and derays.

SS is good for ex wrenches cuz we quit wrenching for a reason.

SS is good for anyone who would rather ride than screw around fixing crap.

and yes it is cool and especially w/ a clean, steel, rigid setup.


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> Ok, well first off I think 10% is too much.


How can it be "too much"? The math works, 10%.



salimoneus said:


> So take off the front deraileur and extra chainrings and chain guard and that should drop it down into the non-detactable range because you are removing rotational weight which is important.


Illogical/contradiction, if it is in the non-detectable range, then why would anyone care?



salimoneus said:


> Also most people are using cog spacers in the back which amount to about the same weight as cogs, and the tensioner probably weighs about as much as the deraileur so the weight savings is somewhat of an illusion as well.


I highly doubt spacers amount to the weight of a 11-32 cassette. Deore, XTR, 105, whatever. I use a PVC spacer, and how could a chunk 1.5-2 inches long amount to the 200-400 grams of a cassette? As for the tensioner, probably about the weight of a mech. But, it will not have associated cables, housing, and pod.

No illusions, no magic, no smoke and mirrors, just elliminated parts and weight drops. Simple.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

serious said:


> salimoneus: *I also very much like the clean look of an SS, especially on a steel hardtail, which is why I was tempted at first. Of course there is also the other benefits like the lack of chain slap and deraileur noises, low maintenance and adjustments, weight, etc.*
> 
> So is it efficiency that turned you off from SS? Did you select a gear ratio that caused you to walk all over the place? What exactly did you not like about it? Assuming that money was not an issue, why not have a simple, clean, low maintenance bike?
> 
> Furthermore, how can you not understand the desire to *race* with a single gear? It is about making the right gear ratio choice and living with that choice regrardless of what terrain you encounter.


I just don't see the need to "make one choice and live with it", as I don't see all that many drawbacks to having a few different choices, which expands your options and eliminates unworkable mismatches (like the more extreme uphill and downhill). You still have the option of riding one gear if you wish as well for conditioning purposes, or whatever the reason. I think ripping off the front deraileur and chainrings, and doing regular maintenance on the rear should provide plenty of trouble free riding. If you have had that many issues with deraileurs then I might suggest a new mechanic, but it's not terribly difficult stuff, all you need is what one wrench? I seem to do just fine with it and I'm far from being an expert mechanic...


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Meat Foot said:


> How can it be "too much"? The math works, 10%.
> ...


Maybe YOUR bike is 10%, but it doesn't have to be. That just means that your gearie could stand to lose some extras like the front deraileur, chainrings, etc.

I guess you also aren't familiar with the concept of rotational mass and inertia. Removing the chainrings up front will have a bigger effect on perceived inertial forces than removing dead weight like cables and such from the rear. For some resources on this you might find some good reading on automotove forums under the topic "lightweight flywheel"


----------



## banana (Nov 7, 2005)

uktrailmonster said:


> I don't think I offered a strong opinion above. I just said they look fun, but they're not for me thanks. Only came here out of curiosity (thank Jugdish for that). It's great that you love your SS and I'm not going to be drawn into throwing stones at it. But your SS doesn't make you any better or worse a rider than me. I ride up hills in a lower gear than I ride down them. Big frigging deal.
> 
> I've been "owned" on the trail by guys on DH rigs, SS, HT, BMX, Unicycles, the lot. I quite frankly don't give a toss. I've never got to the end of a ride and been handed a big fat cheque for getting there first. It's all just for fun.


Hats off - a gentleman... And a colossus of cognitive reason, ungrudging equitability and altruistic fair play amid an ocean of, er... <cough> ...arse wipes.

That all good things may be your portion is the wish of your sincere disciple.

Banana


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> just means that your gearie could stand to lose some extras like the front deraileur, chainrings, etc.


No, it is just fine thanks.



salimoneus said:


> I guess you also aren't familiar with the concept of rotational mass and inertia. Removing the chainrings up front will have a bigger effect on perceived inertial forces than removing dead weight like cables and such from the rear. For some resources on this you might find some good reading on automotove forums under the topic "lightweight flywheel"


How the hell do you know what I am and am not familiar with? That is quite a leap there Sal. I am quite familiar with rotational vs. non-rotational masses, having had 2 years of physics. Of course we dealt with optics and electricity too. I don't recall ever mentioning rotational vs. non-rotational masses. I have been talking about non-rotational "weights" as that is easily determined by putting a bike on a scale with gears and bits vs. the alternative. As for flywheels, they have material distributed throughout, whereas a ring generally has mass towards the outside with arms coming into the center (4 or 5 of them, typically). Yes there are some DH rings that are solid throughout. You still did not address the contradiction you posed above about "non-detactable range" and "important" in the same sentence. Care to comment?


----------



## serious (Jan 25, 2005)

sal,

I have no issues with my geared ride. I have said many times here that I love my geared bike and I've had very few mechanical problems (but I do maintain it quite well).

My SS is rigid (as opposed to the FS geared bike), so the challenge of riding SS goes well beyond gears. But when it comes to racing, a rigid SS is a challenge that a geared FS bike cannot provide. Obviously I race for myself and have no illusions about the disadvantages of having no suspension and no gears. I truly am not an SS fanatic, but I love it for what it is: *different*.


----------



## neville (Jan 7, 2004)

Sal's wife calling him on his cell phone "Dear, I'm watching the news and they are showing a cyclist riding the wrong way on the bike path".
Sal answering " What do you mean one, their all going the wrong way. I'm the only one going the right direction".


----------



## DanU (May 9, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> I guess you also aren't familiar with the concept of rotational mass and inertia. Removing the chainrings up front will have a bigger effect on perceived inertial forces than removing dead weight like cables and such from the rear. For some resources on this you might find some good reading on automotove forums under the topic "lightweight flywheel"


I'm sorry to say that you are way off when it comes to rotational mass in this case. Even the rotational mass effect of the wheels is so small it's ridiculous. Not to mention the effect of the cranks. You compare it to the flywheel of a car, well, the flywheel, weighing lots more than a crank or a bicycle wheel, needs to accelerate from let's say 1000 rpm to 8000 in a matter of a second or two. There's lots to save there.

But accelerating a crank or a wheel in the most extreme case, from standstill to, i don't know, 20 rpm in the first two strokes, is nothing. The power needed for the rotational acceleration of these few kilos (wheels and crankset) is zilch compared to accelerating the 80-90 kilos of the rider, the rest of the bike *and* the wheels and crankset (which need to accelarate forward as well as around their axis).

Simple test: Lift a wheel off the ground and spin it with just one finger. No problem I'm sure. Now put your buddy on the bike and try pushing him from a standstill with just one finger. Not that easy I'm sure.

So, come again, are *you* familiar with the concept of rotational mass and inertia?


----------



## What_Gears (Oct 20, 2005)

*You quite possibly will never understand so stop trying to and move on...*

Salimoneus,
You just don't get it and I am pretty convinced by now that you should stop trying to.
=============================================================
Quote:
i keep seeing all these posts basically saying "wow after going SS im now dusting all these riders, and just went from slowest to fastest in my group" blah blah blah as if it's some sort of magical change that will transform the rider into an elite machine or something.

Response:
I have been faster on every trail I ride than I ever was on My geared Race bike (Yeti ARC) or My Geared Full Suspension rig(Yeti 575) 
Sold the 575 after converting the Arc to SS and then bought dedicated SS frame to replace the ARC.

I only Ride with my geary friends and I hold my own with them on flats, hills, Rock Gardens etc.

Quote:
well no duh, of course you are going to mash past people that are pacing themselves uphill at a lower gear ratio, why would you expect otherwise? it's a simple trade-off, just like you can choose to hike uphill, or jog/run uphill, one requires more energy expenditure overall than the other and will surely get you there faster, but you pay for that with higher fatigue and energy drain. these are not new concepts.

Response:
Higher Fatigue rate??? You should go over the the Encurance racing forum and investigate just how many LOOOOOONNNNGGGG distance MTB Endurance racers ride Single Speed or Fixed Single Speed. "Higher Fatigue rate" pheh! 
I have a 52 mile loop I do from my house that entails road, gravel road, and one of the more rocky technical trails in my area. on the road and gravel road sections, I can run around 14 to 16 mph and I can do that for 10 -15 mile sections without blowing up. 
Oh yeah, that is with a 32x17 on 26in ratio.
I just this past weekend did a 63mi road rally and because I had been talking to a roadie that is way to in love with all his gears, I decided to pick a 2.8:1 ratio and I rode the whole 63 miles, averaged 17.5mph and the last 10, I did at a 19-20 mph pace just to own anyone I came across<G>

Quote:
i just don't get this aura of "revelation" that some posters seem to be relaying. honestly to me it seems like more of a fad than anything else, something a few riders came up with to cure their MTB boredom and have something else to buy and build up. i also think some people just like being part of an exclusive club where only the "hardcore" dare go.

Response:
Yep, its so much of a fad that the first bikes were singlespeed/fixed gear and we still have bike that are singlespeed/fixed gear.

Closing thoughts, If you don't like singlespeed for whatever reason that is certainly your perogative. BUt you are wasting a huge crapload of time trying to convince people on this "SINGLESPEED" forum that it is wrong. It works for all of us for whatever our reasons. Matter of fact, you try hard enough to convince us and you just migh end up singing Singlespeeds praises. SHUDDER to think it<VBG>


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

What_Gears said:


> I have a 52 mile loop I do from my house that entails road, gravel road, and one of the more rocky technical trails in my area. on the road and gravel road sections, I can run around 14 to 16 mph and I can do that for 10 -15 mile sections without blowing up.
> Oh yeah, that is with a 32x17 on 26in ratio.
> I just this past weekend did a 63mi road rally and because I had been talking to a roadie that is way to in love with all his gears, I decided to pick a 2.8:1 ratio and I rode the whole 63 miles, averaged 17.5mph and the last 10, I did at a 19-20 mph pace just to own anyone I came across<G>


Wow!! You f*#*ing hero. Of course you'd be nowhere on a "slow" geared bike


----------



## GregC (Jan 27, 2004)

What_Gears said:


> I just this past weekend did a 63mi road rally and because I had been talking to a roadie that is way to in love with all his gears, I decided to pick a 2.8:1 ratio and I rode the whole 63 miles, averaged 17.5mph and the last 10, I did at a 19-20 mph pace just to own anyone I came across


Are you riding a bike or playing online video games? ..."own anyone I came across"? Are you 12 years old or something? Christ...some of you guys are doing you damndest to prove Salimoneus's point about SS being an ego thing.


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

GregC said:


> Are you riding a bike or playing online video games? ..."own anyone I came across"? Are you 12 years old or something? Christ...some of you guys are doing you damndest to prove Salimoneus's point about SS being an ego thing.


I bought a blow-up doll today and drew Salimoneus's little mustache on it. I outfitted it in the best gear from Fox and FoxRacing and Fox&Jocks and Fox U. I put Sally on a SS first, just to see his technique. He had none. I owned him no matter what conditions I put him in. It was pathetic.

Ohhh yeeaaa, he whined and moaned and kicked about how much the single gear just sucked, and the wind was blowing too hard, his air valve was leaking. You name it, and old Sally had the excuse.

I decided, "Fine Sally, I'll own you on any bike you want, and in any gear you happen to run." I could tell that he was no match for the giant power of my pedal smashing SS legs. I would squash him! I was ready to pull the Top Gun fly-by; upsidedown, helmet to helmet. I would be sucking on a GU of course, while he flailed about incredulous over my owning skillZ.

But that never came to be. He looked all yellow. Maybe his valve was leaking. He couldn't get his feet into the pedals. I decided that he could offer up his pure defeat of being supremely owned by my ginormous skillZ. He did that, and we went our separate ways.

It was a glorious defeat. No more from you Sally! You were owned on the trail, and you have sounded defeat.

If you can't ride this one, then you can't ride that one.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Meat Foot said:


> ...
> 
> [snipped some ramblings about rotational mass, nothing new]
> 
> ...


Contradiction? Don't really see any contradiction. I probably could have put it a bit clearer though, let me try again:

As I said in my first post, I think 27 gears is a lot of redundancy and therefore overkill in many ways. In my opinion, a geared bike would do just fine with only 9 or less gears. That means a bike with 9 or less gears has:

1) no front deraileur
2) no cables and hardware up front
3) one less shifter
4) only one chainring

In my opinion, this would reduce that 10% difference in weight that was taked about earlier in the thread to about half, say around 5% or less. This is what I was referring to when I said the "non-detectable range". If you can detect a difference of less than 5% then you have super-human perception abilities.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Ok well I was hoping to be done ripping these posts to shreds, because it's getting old and too easy, but this one is so bad it just begs for a response.



What_Gears said:


> Salimoneus,
> You just don't get it and I am pretty convinced by now that you should stop trying to.
> =============================================================
> Quote:
> ...


Nothing new here. If you are that much faster on your SS bike, like many others apparently, you were a complete and total slacker on your geared bike. That's not an insult, it's just the blunt way of telling it like it is. Several other SS riders have agreed with this, look back in the thread for proof.

If you need an SS to give you the motivation to try harder, then I would say stick with your SS. Lots of other people can seemingly motivate and push themselves just fine with what they have though. Gears are not the enemy.



What_Gears said:


> Quote:
> well no duh, of course you are going to mash past people that are pacing themselves uphill at a lower gear ratio, why would you expect otherwise? it's a simple trade-off, just like you can choose to hike uphill, or jog/run uphill, one requires more energy expenditure overall than the other and will surely get you there faster, but you pay for that with higher fatigue and energy drain. these are not new concepts.
> 
> Response:
> ...


Oh so you are telling me that standing up and going absolutely all out and mashing a hill, will not drain significantly more engery than pacing yourself and trying not to gas yourself for the remainder of the ride? That's just like a fighter coming out in the first round and punching himself out, then holding onto the opponent like a girl for the second and third rounds trying to catch his breath. There is only so much energy available in the tank, choose to spend it how you want. It seems to me that pro racers on geared bikes seem to be taking most all of top spots.



What_Gears said:


> Quote:
> i just don't get this aura of "revelation" that some posters seem to be relaying. honestly to me it seems like more of a fad than anything else, something a few riders came up with to cure their MTB boredom and have something else to buy and build up. i also think some people just like being part of an exclusive club where only the "hardcore" dare go.
> 
> Response:
> Yep, its so much of a fad that the first bikes were singlespeed/fixed gear and we still have bike that are singlespeed/fixed gear.


Just because something still exists today as in it's original form doesn't imply anything except that it is still useful and still has a place, and I already stated several types of SS bikes that seem to make sense to me (beach cruisers, kids bikes, etc). Just because a group of elitest bikers wanting to be exclusive decide to do something does not make it superior in any way shape or form.


----------



## lanceh (Aug 15, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> As I said in my first post, I think 27 gears is a lot of redundancy and therefore overkill in many ways. In my opinion, a geared bike would do just fine with only 9 or less gears.


so if this is your feeling on gears then why do you not have a bike with rohloff? if efficiency is so important to you, which it must be since one of your biggest points against a SS is its inefficiency, why would you choose to not have the most efficient setup?

i realize i'm making the assumption here that you don't have one but i'm thinking if you did you would have mentioned it in one of your 700 posts in this thread.

i guess my biggest question in this is why do you care? you have obviously formed your opinion already. so why do you care what anyone has to say at this point?


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

lanceh said:


> so if this is your feeling on gears then why do you not have a bike with rohloff? if efficiency is so important to you, which it must be since one of your biggest points against a SS is its inefficiency, why would you choose to not have the most efficient setup?
> 
> i realize i'm making the assumption here that you don't have one but i'm thinking if you did you would have mentioned it in one of your 700 posts in this thread.
> 
> i guess my biggest question in this is why do you care? you have obviously formed your opinion already. so why do you care what anyone has to say at this point?


when i say SS is inefficient, i am referring to being out of the powerband most of the time. there is a particular range of RPMs where you have the most leverage and torque, similar to a car engine. what gears do is essentially allow you to remain in that powerband to achieve maximum output as much of the time as possible.

for me i will be going to a 8 speed setup and am hoping that will be the most efficient setup, because it will reduce gear changing to the point of being more instinctive and require almost no thinking. for the most part i can stay in a range of just a few gears, but still have the ability to drop even higher or lower and avoid having to walk or spin the crank like a donkey.


----------



## lanceh (Aug 15, 2005)

great, have fun. like i said you've already made up your mind on what you want for your bike. so why are you still here fighting with others?


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

lanceh said:


> great, have fun. like i said you've already made up your mind on what you want for your bike. so why are you still here fighting with others?


i'm not fighting, people just keep calling me out wanting me to respond, like you did. as you can see a few posts back i actually tried to wrap things up and give a nice little summary, but i guess that wasn't good enough for you guys?


----------



## Locoman (Jan 12, 2004)

You wack. Since my first spin on a single speed my life has never been the same. I can now clear what the gearies could only dream of clearing. I beat everyone. My health improved and I've never been sick since. It helped me to win the lottery. I now have gold teeth. My car became faster. My IQ has increased 70 points. And models want to sleep with me. 

That's what single speed has done for me.

Way overstated? Naw, just stated.


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> but i guess that wasn't good enough for you guys?


No, you did a fine job. You are an ambassador of our sport. E-hug?


----------



## Black Bart (Apr 19, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> Oh so you are telling me that standing up and going absolutely all out and mashing a hill, will not drain significantly more engery than pacing yourself and trying not to gas yourself for the remainder of the ride?


Does standing up to climb mean you always have to go all out?

(helpful hint: if you go the "middle of the two extremes" route and go 1x9/5/3/whatever, when you hit the steeps you will need to develop your SS style standing climbing skills just like a real SSer does.)

BB - Pseudo SSer (1x9 with a well worn 21T cog)


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Black Bart said:


> Does standing up to climb mean you always have to go all out?


No I wouldn't think so, not always, but from the sounds of it that is what many *real SSers* are doing.



Black Bart said:


> (helpful hint: if you go the "middle of the two extremes" route and go 1x9/5/3/whatever, when you hit the steeps you will need to develop your SS style standing climbing skills just like a real SSer does.)


Actually I have been working on my "standing climbing skills" (don't need to prefix with SS because it has nothing to do with SS) for quite some time, just pick a gear and go.



Black Bart said:


> BB - Pseudo SSer (1x9 with a well worn 21T cog)


Nice setup, just lose the lame SS tag and come up with a new name for it


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Locoman said:


> You wack. Since my first spin on a single speed my life has never been the same. I can now clear what the gearies could only dream of clearing. I beat everyone. My health improved and I've never been sick since. It helped me to win the lottery. I now have gold teeth. My car became faster. My IQ has increased 70 points. And models want to sleep with me.
> 
> That's what single speed has done for me.
> 
> Way overstated? Naw, just stated.


LOL :thumbsup:


----------



## DanU (May 9, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> In my opinion, this would reduce that 10% difference in weight that was taked about earlier in the thread to about half, say around 5% or less. This is what I was referring to when I said the "non-detectable range". If you can detect a difference of less than 5% then you have super-human perception abilities.


So, let's say that you're right and 5% is non-detectable. Here are three arguments I read out of your posts, that I can't see any logic in:

-Going from 1x9 to 1x1 gives a non-detectable weight difference and is therefor not worth the bother.
-Going from 3x9 to 1x9 gives a non-detectable weight difference but is worth the bother.
-Going from 3x9 to 1x1 gives two non-detectable weight differences and maths are to hard. 

You're arguing for 1x9 in much the same way that SSers argue for 1x1, when it comes to reducing weight and maintenance, yet you think your arguments for this are more valid than the SSer's? For me 1x9 sounds like a rotten compromise. You still have the maintenance, half the weight, chainslap and too short a gear-span.

Personally I would like to have a bike with shaftdrive and 3 or 5 internal gears, controlled by back pedalling or mind power. Clean and efficient.


----------



## xc-ss'er (Jul 11, 2006)

Personally, I'd much rather have a 2 speed. 1 huge gear for flats and downhills, and then a climbing a gear. 38 front ring with a 48 front = yummy. 21 rear....yeah Im working on it.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

DanU said:


> So, let's say that you're right and 5% is non-detectable. Here are three arguments I read out of your posts, that I can't see any logic in:
> 
> -Going from 1x9 to 1x1 gives a non-detectable weight difference and is therefor not worth the bother.
> -Going from 3x9 to 1x9 gives a non-detectable weight difference but is worth the bother.
> ...


I don't think the weight and maintenance issues are as big a deal as people seem to think. A tensioner and cog spacers give back some of the weight saved, and things like chain stretch, magic gears, and (this one is my fav) some people are even using zip ties to hold the tensioner together. I hardly call that a "rock solid" or "low maintenance" setup, you are just replacing some work with other work.

I agree that 1x9 is not the best solution, but it seems like the best compromise we have with currently available and affordable technology.



DanU said:


> Personally I would like to have a bike with shaftdrive and 3 or 5 internal gears, controlled by back pedalling or mind power. Clean and efficient.


An internal geared setup would indeed be sweet. Too bad they are still so damn $$$

Oh, and I don't think we are too far away from the mind control thing. I was just reading about some brainwave sensor technology they are using with paralyzed patients, allowing them to perform some 50 odd functions just using their thoughts. Pretty cool stuff.


----------



## DanU (May 9, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> I was just reading about some brainwave sensor technology they are using with paralyzed patients, allowing them to perform some 50 odd functions just using their thoughts.


I'm not sure that I need as much as 50, but as a singlespeeder I like to be able to perform odd functions...


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

Geared bikes suck. They just do. They are noisy. They require constant attention -- not in the workshop, but on the trail where you have to pay attention to how _they_ want to be ridden every time the grade changes.

I feel the same way about whiny, high maintenance bikes as I do about whiny, high maintenance people. I avoid them, and my life is better for it.

In that vein. . . . . . .


----------



## cocheese (Jan 12, 2004)

I know what you mean PBB. 

I got my first SS a month or so ago and I find that it allows me to enjoy the riding and frees me from worrying about an equipment failure. I find myself in the predicament where I physically miss having gears but do not miss the hassle they present from a reliability/contant tuning stndpoint.

I wonder if the Rohloff is a good middleground? I've considered one because it seems to have a low maintenance record. Is it kind of a cross between the simple SS setup and the full front/rear der combo? I mean the chainline is clean and there is nothing dangling down to be hit by rocks and such. On the downside, I'm sure that the innards of the Rohloff hub are pretty high-tech leaving little chance of trailside fixes should something go wrong.


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

cocheese said:


> I know what you mean PBB.
> 
> I got my first SS a month or so ago and I find that it allows me to enjoy the riding and frees me from worrying about an equipment failure. I find myself in the predicament where I physically miss having gears but do not miss the hassle they present from a reliability/contant tuning stndpoint.
> 
> I wonder if the Rohloff is a good middleground? I've considered one because it seems to have a low maintenance record. Is it kind of a cross between the simple SS setup and the full front/rear der combo? I mean the chainline is clean and there is nothing dangling down to be hit by rocks and such. On the downside, I'm sure that the innards of the Rohloff hub are pretty high-tech leaving little chance of trailside fixes should something go wrong.


I would imagine some of the dudes here would consider a Rohloff to be the work of the devil himself


----------



## cocheese (Jan 12, 2004)

Ha! I didn't even think of the religous impacts of the SS vs. geared debate.


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

cocheese said:
 

> Ha! I didn't even think of the religous impacts of the SS vs. geared debate.


Steady!!! We might have to go mafioso on you  Nothing a little concrete couldn't cure.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

uktrailmonster said:


> I would imagine some of the dudes here would consider a Rohloff to be the work of the devil himself


haha I would not doubt it :lol:


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

I'd guess more than 2/3rds of the people who've responded so far to this would drop your a$$ like a bad habit, even carrying the weight of all that ego. :thumbsup:


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

jugdish said:


> I'd guess more than 2/3rds of the people who've responded so far to this would drop your a$$ like a bad habit, even carrying the weight of all that ego. :thumbsup:


actually just the sight of someone on an SS will cause my cojones to shrink into tiny little baby nutz, and me and my geared bike will both cower in fear to the trailside, wilting like malnourished plants


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> actually just the sight of someone on an SS will cause my cojones to shrink into tiny little baby nutz, and me and my geared bike will both cower in fear to the trailside, wilting like malnourished plants


FINALLY some truth!

Bow to the singlespeeder Sally! Bow!


----------



## cocheese (Jan 12, 2004)

Meat Foot said:


> Steady!!! We might have to go mafioso on you  Nothing a little concrete couldn't cure.


No cement shoes or long walks of of short piers. Please!!! I mean I like them all...uh...SS and geared and puppies and...just call of the squad.


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

cocheese said:


> I mean I like them all...uh...SS and geared and puppies and...just call of the squad.


Not gonna happen, I dropped a dime on you. Watch out for folks carrying sledgehammers your way. :skep:


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

I had a dream last nite. I am riding home from the trail, and while passing a group of parked SSers one of them says "hey troll". Then before I know it the group comes out of nowhere and I am surrounded. They circle around me like vultures on a corpse, waiting to make their move. On every bike that circles I can see that single cog in the rear, spinning smoothly and unobstructed from view, growing larger in my mind until it finally becomes so large that I cannot escape the grip of it's teeth. I try to make a run for it, but one of them kicks in my deraileur and I lose chain integrity, forcing me to my feet. I run hard, and keep running, with only silence behind me, but I know they are still there, hunting me down, silently chasing me, always chasing me....until I finally awaken


----------



## DanD (Jan 15, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> I had a dream last nite. I am riding home from the trail, and while passing a group of parked SSers one of them says "hey troll". Then before I know it the group comes out of nowhere and I am surrounded. They circle around me like vultures on a corpse, waiting to make their move. On every bike that circles I can see that single cog in the rear, spinning smoothly and unobstructed from view, growing larger in my mind until it finally becomes so large that I cannot escape the grip of it's teeth. I try to make a run for it, but one of them kicks in my deraileur and I lose chain integrity, forcing me to my feet. I run hard, and keep running, with only silence behind me, but I know they are still there, hunting me down, silently chasing me, always chasing me....until I finally awaken


Haha, that's awesome. I hope you don't get driven away by closed-minded people, good sense of humour.


----------



## lanceh (Aug 15, 2005)

in this trainwreck of a thread started by salimoneus he did make one point that i think is accurate. for the typical rider, going SS shows you how little you were pushing yourself on a geared bike. while sal seems to be of the belief that this is the purely the fault of the rider i don't agree.

gears are in the purest sense a crutch. they help you go faster and they help you climb. a crutch that we were given the day we started mountain biking. so i think it's really hard to expect someone to not use that crutch all the time when that's all you've ever known. SS'ing throws that crutch to the side of the trail and teachs you that while in some situations that crutch is a good thing you don't need it nearly as much as you had originally thought.

if sal is able to find this balance of when they're not needed and when they can help out then he's a better biker than 99% of us. i know for myself and every other person i've spoken to who has seriously attempted SS'ing that it wasn't until they tried it that they realized how badly they used that crutch and how unnecessary it was.

that's my explaination for the "magic" of SS'ing. you're doing things you never thought were possible, they obviously were but SS'ing is what showed you.


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

Hey Sal....


----------



## stan4bikes (May 24, 2006)

*why are you here?*

Sali"moan"eus, I just read thru all these posts and am really curious why you're here? It seems as someone else said "just to stir the pot". You really haven't made any valid points other than you don't enjoy Single Speeds. Thats OK! You don't have to, but others do have the right to. I have a geared hardtail, a SS hardtail, a geared rigid, a SS rigid, a geared full suspension and am working on a SS full suspension..Why? Because they are all fun to ride in thier own way. I don't have a road bike because I don't enjoy them. But others do and I respect thier choice. Go have fun on your geared bike, get your great workout, do everything on it you say you can do....but respect other people too. You don't sound like a very happy person, I hope you get over it.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

stan4bikes said:


> Sali"moan"eus, I just read thru all these posts and am really curious why you're here? It seems as someone else said "just to stir the pot". You really haven't made any valid points other than you don't enjoy Single Speeds. Thats OK! You don't have to, but others do have the right to. I have a geared hardtail, a SS hardtail, a geared rigid, a SS rigid, a geared full suspension and am working on a SS full suspension..Why? Because they are all fun to ride in thier own way. I don't have a road bike because I don't enjoy them. But others do and I respect thier choice. Go have fun on your geared bike, get your great workout, do everything on it you say you can do....but respect other people too. You don't sound like a very happy person, I hope you get over it.


I certainly agree, people have the right to whatever they want to build, buy, ride, race, and so on. I also have the right to ask them why. If they choose to repond or not is up to them, not you. Apparently that was the case here as plenty of people made a contribution, more than I can say for your post.

Also a lot of the stuff in here was posted in jest, as in "sense of humor required". You don't sound like a very humorous person, I hope you can work on that.


----------



## Raghavan (Aug 14, 2005)

I just like to SS because it's fun. It's not the most efficient way to ride, but i like it because it's the most simplistic.


----------



## DanD (Jan 15, 2004)

I can afford some beer and some gears, or a lot of beer and one gear. No brainer.


----------



## sobeecycle (Jul 24, 2006)

I have been reading these forums for months now, purposely avoiding getting into it and disrupting my perfectly serene SS lifestyle. But alas, I have taken the plunge and here's my two cents....

It seems to me that this question resembles the person who might say* "I don't like lifting weights, they're too heavy." *Ask a weight lifter why he does it and you'll most definitely not get an answer about efficiency. It's not about efficiency. Because he/she wants too, that's why... Some like lighter weights and high reps and aerobics. Some like to pound big iron. But they both can coexist in the same gym, hell some even go to the gym just to socialize and drink smoothies, who gives a damn..let it be.I'm not saying SS is the same thing, we all have our reasons why we ride with our own superiority although the original poster will figure out a way to turn it around so let the games begin.


----------



## unclenorm (Jan 5, 2005)

lanceh said:


> gears are in the purest sense a crutch. they help you go faster and they help you climb. a crutch that we were given the day we started mountain biking. so i think it's really hard to expect someone to not use that crutch all the time when that's all you've ever known. SS'ing throws that crutch to the side of the trail and teachs you that while in some situations that crutch is a good thing you don't need it nearly as much as you had originally thought.


I wonder how many time's Sal's thumbs twitched toward non existent shifters the moment he came across his first uphill on his SS?

Crutch! Crutch! Wherefore art thou crutch?!

:thumbsup:


----------



## unclenorm (Jan 5, 2005)

lanceh said:


> gears are in the purest sense a crutch. they help you go faster and they help you climb. a crutch that we were given the day we started mountain biking. so i think it's really hard to expect someone to not use that crutch all the time when that's all you've ever known. SS'ing throws that crutch to the side of the trail and teachs you that while in some situations that crutch is a good thing you don't need it nearly as much as you had originally thought.


I wonder how many time's Sal's thumbs twitched toward non existent shifters the moment he came across his first uphill on his SS?

Crutch! Crutch! Wherefore art thou Crutch?!

:thumbsup:


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

sal, that was some seriously funny shite! Good on you. I've had similar dreams, but the riders were wearing newspaper carrier bags and were only 10 years old. They wanted their two dollars...


----------



## MrAnderson (Jun 3, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> heh, it's funny how you guys come back with remarks about people not being "up to par" or "strong enough" for SS.
> 
> this is the exact type of response i would expect from someone with a big ego and that has everything to prove. is it that you were just a mediocre rider on your geared bike so you felt the need to become more unique to get that attention you so rightfully deserve?
> 
> i guess that makes sense, if one thing is too challenging for you then find something else that hardly anyone else is doing, then you suddenly become one of the "elites" in your little world :lol:


If riding a single speed makes me an elite so be it. It's ****ing fun!!


----------



## Adirondack Blues (Mar 4, 2004)

lanceh said:


> in this trainwreck of a thread started by salimoneus he did make one point that i think is accurate. for the typical rider, going SS shows you how little you were pushing yourself on a geared bike. while sal seems to be of the belief that this is the purely the fault of the rider i don't agree.
> 
> gears are in the purest sense a crutch. they help you go faster and they help you climb. a crutch that we were given the day we started mountain biking. so i think it's really hard to expect someone to not use that crutch all the time when that's all you've ever known. SS'ing throws that crutch to the side of the trail and teachs you that while in some situations that crutch is a good thing you don't need it nearly as much as you had originally thought.
> 
> ...


Amen. That, and SS bikes just look cool.


----------



## JrockFeltaz (Jun 7, 2006)

*its simple*

I dont ride a ss. Its very easy for me to see why one would. learing cadence, with using ones own weight to push the bike faster. It forces you to ride harder, it forces you to find a cadence you wouldnt achive on a geared bike. I have several friends in san fran who are messengers. The fastest ones ride fixed geared track bikes. This is a worse debate than does road biking improve your mtn biking skills. Have the balls to suck it up and say a ss'er kicked my ass. Then look at your own riding and discpline to see why they smoked you up that climb.


----------



## RetroG (Jan 16, 2004)

Dude...Have you ever ridden a go-cart?


----------



## RetroG (Jan 16, 2004)

long hazy daze said:


> maybe he'll "get it" one day. .


Please. I loathe the day. Let's not get to slack with who we admit. This guy is way too smart and may convince the other sheep to wander.


----------



## RetroG (Jan 16, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> So far most everyone is just saying "you just need to do it for a while" and "you either get it or not" which really tells me that *the SS thing is nothing more than a state of mind, and a motivational tool.* .[/B]


You forgot fun..That word has come up numerous times in this thread and you refuse to acknowledge it. Perhaps next you will ask us to _*prove that it is fun*_.


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

RetroG said:


> Dude...Have you ever ridden a go-cart?


Yep and proper quick ones have gears too.


----------



## skifastchad (Mar 30, 2004)

*Can I pay 2cents and beat the dead horse too?*

My cross country skis are singlespeeds.
My canoe is a singlespeed.
My bikes are singlespeeds.

With all 3, I feel better about myself that I can make it up a hill under my own strength than rely on a machine to make the job easier. Maybe its a little extreme, but I think that multiple gears on a bike are like a chairlift for skis, or a motor on a canoe. Its just not as personally rewarding.


----------



## uktrailmonster (Oct 10, 2004)

skifastchad said:


> My cross country skis are singlespeeds.
> My canoe is a singlespeed.
> My bikes are singlespeeds.
> 
> With all 3, I feel better about myself that I can make it up a hill under my own strength than rely on a machine to make the job easier. Maybe its a little extreme, but I think that multiple gears on a bike are like a chairlift for skis, or a motor on a canoe. Its just not as personally rewarding.


By that logic, what are you doing riding any form of bike (machine) up a hill? Get off and run using your own strength!

Seriously though, gears don't reduce the effort required to go up a hill at the same speed. i.e they are not an engine! They just change your pedalling cadence and allow you to work at your most efficient "engine speed".


----------



## AlliKat (Apr 28, 2006)

I didn't read this thread. My $.02 is I have trouble with low back and hamstrings. Spinning is the best thing I've found to prevent such issues. As much as I've been tempted to convert my old bike to SS, I won't in order to prevent injury.


----------



## tommyrod74 (Jul 3, 2002)

lanceh said:


> gears are in the purest sense a crutch. they help you go faster and they help you climb. a crutch that we were given the day we started mountain biking. so i think it's really hard to expect someone to not use that crutch all the time when that's all you've ever known. SS'ing throws that crutch to the side of the trail and teachs you that while in some situations that crutch is a good thing you don't need it nearly as much as you had originally thought.


So why not just kill the granny and big rings, size up the middle to, say, a 38 or so, and run a 8-9 speed rear, with a road cassette? Sure wouldn't be any "easier" than the SS on the climbs, and would allow you to actually pedal on flats and DH without spinning out. I mean, if you can do without the "crutch" of coasting the DH...

For what it's worth, I saw tons of SS riders at the Off-Road Assault on Mt. Mitchell this past weekend. 11,000 ft. of climbing over 64 miles. I passed a ton of them on the climbs as they pushed (I was on the heaviest bike I saw all day, a 34 lb. Santa Cruz Nomad), and I passed a ton of them on the DH as they coasted and picked their way through terrain I could blast through.

That being said, I'm CERTAIN that many SS riders finished ahead of me as well. Just wanted to make the point that this whole SS thing doesn't necessarily make anyone a superman. The ideal bike for that course was probably a geared 23 lb. short-travel FS bike, which is what the winner (Jeremiah Bishop) was riding. In the end, if you aren't fit, and can't push yourself, you aren't fast. And there is definitely an ideal tool for any race or trail. The versatility of a lightweight geared bike would probably make it the best choice for overall speed if one could have only one bike and only cared about the fastest way from point A to point B.

I'd like an SS for a winter training tool, just to mix it up and to have a super-light bike for a change. I don't think it'll be the primary bike in my quiver, though.


----------



## tommyrod74 (Jul 3, 2002)

What_Gears said:


> I just this past weekend did a 63mi road rally and because I had been talking to a roadie that is way to in love with all his gears, I decided to pick a 2.8:1 ratio and I rode the whole 63 miles, averaged 17.5mph and the last 10, I did at a 19-20 mph pace just to own anyone I came across<G>


There's a reason road riders are in love with their gears. Even the local SS zealots here ride fixed road rigs only as commuters. When it's time for a fast group road ride, they all ride normal road bikes because they're much faster.

You'd have to average 22-23 mph+ around here to "own anyone you came across" for 63 miles (or 100 miles, for that matter), and it's not exactly flat here...


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

tommyrod74 said:


> I'd like an SS for a winter training tool, just to mix it up and to have a super-light bike for a change. I don't think it'll be the primary bike in my quiver, though.


That's how it always starts...


----------



## tommyrod74 (Jul 3, 2002)

Nat said:


> That's how it always starts...


I knew someone would say that 

As a former BMX guy and sometime DH racer, I don't see a SS rig being able to satisfy my need to plow through super-tech terrain at speed. Or be much fun at the jump park, or on the stunts. That's OK, I have another bike for that. As long as the SS is fun, challenging, and different, I'll be happy.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

tommyrod74 said:


> . As long as the SS is fun, challenging, and different, I'll be happy.


So true.


----------



## ferday (Jan 15, 2004)

Nat said:


> So true.


agreed.

there is no way i'll ever ride *just* SS (i've been riding one for 2 years now) because it isn't the best tool for the job, but i'll *always* ride SS because it's the most fun i've had on a bike.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Adirondack Blues said:


> Amen. That, and SS bikes just look cool.


I certainly agree with that last part. I think the "Post your Singlespeed" thread is the best one on this site, as I find myself going back and browsing through it, lots of beautiful bikes! (except for that fugly chrome one with the white tires, no offense =)


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

tommyrod74 said:


> So why not just kill the granny and big rings, size up the middle to, say, a 38 or so, and run a 8-9 speed rear, with a road cassette? Sure wouldn't be any "easier" than the SS on the climbs, and would allow you to actually pedal on flats and DH without spinning out. I mean, if you can do without the "crutch" of coasting the DH...
> ...


Right on, that's exactly what I'm planning on once I get my bikes and the rest of my stuff out of storage (othewise I'd obviously be out doing it now and riding instead of mass posting here =). I think I might take it a step further though and in addition to only running one chainring up front, I will drop a layer of gears in the rear and run with 1 3 5 7 9 to give me a 5 speed. The increments are so small on the 9 speed that I'm hoping an every-other setup will work out nicely. I figure to spend roughly 90% of the time in the middle three gears which should greatly simplify the "thinking" part and let me concentrate more on the trail and the challenges it presents. More simplified, less maintenance, less weight, and still enough flexibility to get the job done. Do I think it's the absolute best possible solution? No, but given what is currently available it's a decent compomise and certainly affordable (free).


----------



## DanU (May 9, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> I will drop a layer of gears in the rear and run with 1 3 5 7 9 to give me a 5 speed. The increments are so small on the 9 speed that I'm hoping an every-other setup will work out nicely.


I'm not sure that it would work. If you take out every other cog and spacer and put spacers in one end to compensate for the extra room, you will get a steeper angle between 1 and 9. The derailleur might not handle this, since the top pulley will come quite far below the outermost cog in your setup.

The alternative would be to replace every other cog with an extra spacer, but that results in four neutrals. It will probably work, but it won't be very pleasant every time you miscalculate and click one time too many or too few on the shifter and end up with the glockenspiel on the top tube.


----------



## dumbaSS (Sep 8, 2005)

Not challenging you, just curious, why do you would want to remove gears? If you're going to run a derailleur, cables and shifter, why not use the cassette the way it was designed, as an eight or nine speed. I would think removing three gears would offer 0 benefits and add a layer of complexity by using the parts in a way it was not intended.

I am also considering setting up a bike as a 1 x 8.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> I will drop a layer of gears in the rear and run with 1 3 5 7 9 to give me a 5 speed.


What cassette are you going to use for this modification?


----------



## ernesto_from_Wisconsin (Jan 12, 2004)

*I like*

I like string cheese. Its simpler than cottage cheese.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

dumbaSS said:


> Not challenging you, just curious, why do you would want to remove gears? If you're going to run a derailleur, cables and shifter, why not use the cassette the way it was designed, as an eight or nine speed. I would think removing three gears would offer 0 benefits and add a layer of complexity by using the parts in a way it was not intended.
> 
> I am also considering setting up a bike as a 1 x 8.


I think the gear gap on a 8 or 9 speed is too close. Removing every-other will still allow me the full range of a 9 speed but at larger intervals, which will greatly reduce shifting. It seems like 5 speeds is quite adequate on every other vehicle on the planet (cars, trucks, motocycles, etc), why not bikes too.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Nat said:


> What cassette are you going to use for this modification?


I am going to try it with my LX cassette


----------



## lanceh (Aug 15, 2005)

i'm with dumbaSS on this one.

if you like tinkering with bikes that's one thing but all else considerd this seems like a lot of work for very little gain. the possibility of this modified cassette grenading is one hell of a chance to take just to eliminate 3 or 4 cogs. everytime you need to shift just shift twice, same effect. too bad you can't get a combined regular and rapid rise derailleur since then you could double shift in both directions.


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

lanceh said:


> everytime you need to shift just shift twice, same effect. too bad you can't get a combined regular and rapid rise derailleur since then you could double shift in both directions.


 Or you could pick just one gear and sack up.


----------



## Meat Foot (Jan 14, 2004)

jugdish said:


> Or you could pick just one gear and sack up.


That sounds too complicated 

Sorry, I just could not resist.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

*Geared is Geared.*

I've tried the 1xN thing and the Nx1 thing and the bottom line for me is that they are more trouble than they are worth. You have all of the hassles of chain drop, chain slap, der. adjustment etc., added cost, added weight etc. IMO, they are just as complex as a full 27 speed drivetrain with less flexibility.


----------



## SIGMA (Jan 30, 2004)

*been gone for a week*



salimoneus said:


> i'm just trying to figure out why reactions to this "retro phenomenon" are so overblown
> 
> im starting to see that it's a combination of a few things, including but not limited to exclusivity, and more importantly being fed up with problems of current designs.
> 
> i think we have suffered for too long with a lousy drivetrain setup on the typical mountain bike, and it's about time the engineers and manufactureres come up with something that works well and makes sense.


and i havent read the last week of this thread.i have to agree on suffering a lousy drivetrain.i switched my 5spot from shitmano to sram and that improved things a lot,but it still has drawbacks,for me anyway. if only something like a rollhoff that was light was around that didnt cost a grand i would use gears more.cassettes and derailluers are more trouble than they are worth for me ,especially when you throw full suspension into the mix .i still use them when i go to pisgah,but i dont need them at home.


----------



## 8200rpm (Apr 28, 2006)

I've never rode a SS up a mountain trail in a timed competition. I've never ridden a SS in a roadie group ride.

I've learned many times the hard way that one must pick the *BEST* tool for the *JOB*.

But before you can do this, you must define what the *JOB* is. That seems to be the key point that is missing or ignored from this argument.

WHAT IS THE *JOB* THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH???

If not having to [email protected] with shifters and clunky, noisy drivetrains is the *JOB* while riding around a friggin over-price, over-engineered, *TOY*, e.g. a friggin *BICYCLE*, then the BEST tool for this *JOB* is the SS.

Please go outside, find the closest traffic sign, and argue with IT why the sign is wrong. HAVE FUN!!:thumbsup:


----------



## Lucky 7 (Oct 20, 2005)

Somebody should lock this abomonation of a thread so we can all just watch it sink to the bottom of the list and forget it ever happened. :madman:


----------



## sfmtber (Aug 30, 2004)

Because I've never been able to turn away from a good train wreck, I'll contribute....

I think I tend to agree that the SS movement is a bit of a fad, not to say that it isn't enjoyable and isn't legitimate but all the claims of "best time I've had on a bike" and "re-connecting with my childhood" and "re-connecting with the soul of the sport" sound way too much like overzealous rationalizationg for jumping over to the cool kids table. EVERY sport splinters into it's niches and SS is just the latest incarnation of this. some of the same people who go on and on about the wonders of SS are the same people who were shouting from the mountain tops that all-mountain freeriding with 6 inches of travel was where it was at. next year it'll be fully rigid steel fixies (if it's not already here) and after that, it'll be retro-Huffys with coaster brakes (because why should you brake with your hands?!).

but whatever, ride what you got. just don't profess yourself to have more connection to the sport or being more 'core because you ride SS -which, i'm sure, is the root of all these "SS is way overstated" type posts.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

*Off base.*

"Soul of the sport" may be subjective, but what is doubtful about the other hypothetical claims you list? Why can't SS be the best time someone has had on a bike. Or remind them of their childhood on one-speed bikes?

SS is not "the latest" incarnation of anything. Its has been around for years, even if you only count modern single speed mountain bikes. Search the archives and you will find the same anxious, whiny, naysaying posts about how SS is a fad that isn't what it is cracked up to be from 5 years ago. Fixie MTBs and retro coaster brake cruisers are also old news. Very old. Much older than Freeride-Black Diamond-All Mountain blah blah blah. But hey, if some AM evangelist wants to claim that he is having the best time on a bike in the history of mankind _I am stoked to hear that he is having so much fun on a bike_. I'm not going to waste my breath pretending that I know better than he what kind of bike he should be riding.


----------



## Baulz (Sep 16, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> I am going to try it with my LX cassette


Ha ha. Good luck with that. Your bike will not shift if you take cogs out. Shimano has designed the ramps on each cog to work with the cog next to it. If you take a cog out, the ramps will not line up, your bike will not shift well and make terrible noises. You may even be lucky enough to break your chain.

You will have better luck buying 5 Surly cogs if you really think a 5spd. is the way to go.

Let me know if you are really going to try this. I would love to ride by you on my SS as you try to figure out why your bike wont work.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

lanceh said:


> i'm with dumbaSS on this one.
> 
> if you like tinkering with bikes that's one thing but all else considerd this seems like a lot of work for very little gain. the possibility of this modified cassette grenading is one hell of a chance to take just to eliminate 3 or 4 cogs. everytime you need to shift just shift twice, same effect. too bad you can't get a combined regular and rapid rise derailleur since then you could double shift in both directions.


as if im really worried about a cassette "grenading" anyway, i want to find the best all around setup. if stuff breaks in the process of finding it then so be it. im hardly one to quit before i even start to try just because of a few risks. got skirt?

so you want me to shift twice? yea that's great, thanks.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

jugdish said:


> Or you could pick just one gear and sack up.


you must be the type that also picks just one woman. have fun with that...


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Baulz said:


> Ha ha. Good luck with that. Your bike will not shift if you take cogs out. Shimano has designed the ramps on each cog to work with the cog next to it. If you take a cog out, the ramps will not line up, your bike will not shift well and make terrible noises. You may even be lucky enough to break your chain.
> 
> You will have better luck buying 5 Surly cogs if you really think a 5spd. is the way to go.
> 
> Let me know if you are really going to try this. I would love to ride by you on my SS as you try to figure out why your bike wont work.


hey another badazz SSer that wants to blow by me on the trail. what a shock.

btw, i've seen setups with a 3 cog gap that shift with no problems. guess i will find out. at least it's worth trying before spending money on specialized parts that i may not even need.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

sfmtber said:


> ...
> next year it'll be fully rigid steel fixies (if it's not already here) and after that, it'll be retro-Huffys with coaster brakes (because why should you brake with your hands?!).
> ...


yea, once the SS fad is washed up and the riders have lost their passion for the sport yet once again, i personally see the Unicycle (FS) making a strong showing


----------



## Baulz (Sep 16, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> hey another badazz SSer that wants to blow by me on the trail. what a shock.
> 
> btw, i've seen setups with a 3 cog gap that shift with no problems. guess i will find out. at least it's worth trying before spending money on specialized parts that i may not even need.


Thanks for putting words in my mounth. :nono: I said I would like to ride by you while you try to figure out why your bike doesn't work. Never said anything about blowing anyone away.

Nice to be labelled as a badazz SSer when you know nothing about me. 

Just so you know, the bike I ride the most is 1X8.


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> you must be the type that also picks just one woman. have fun with that...


 Man, you are SO impressive. Please keep posting.


----------



## cazloco (Apr 6, 2005)

*Thanks for your opinion on SSing salimoneus.*

Whatever. Someone once said, "it's not about the bike" and truely that's it. It's about the rider. It's about the ride. SSers waste more energy? So gearies conserve energy while spinning up hill in thier granny-gears? How much time and energy and money do gearies waste on maintaining shifters, derailers, cassettes, chainrings, pullies and cables? As a SSer, sure I get to the top faster and then I have time to rest while my geary buddies catch up.

One could go on and on about this debate but what it comes down to is "you" and how you are an individual who does his/her own thing the way you want. If you don't want to be a SSer; then don't. Nobody's forcing you to join the "fad".


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

*Ironic*



salimoneus said:


> yea, once the SS fad is washed up and the riders have lost their passion for the sport yet once again, i personally see the Unicycle (FS) making a strong showing


Being a clueless SS doubter is even older news than the Muni.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

PeanutButterBreath said:


> Being a clueless SS doubter is even older news than the Muni.


actually there is no doubt, SS merely describes the physical difference, all the rest you make up in your own mind. feel free to be consumed by that mental trickery, its ok really, millions of people let it happen every day with lots of different things

and im not going to tell you what to ride because i really don't care. im just telling it like it is and cutting through the bull


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

"SSers waste more energy"

I like to call that "getting exercise."


----------



## jugdish (Apr 1, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> ...because i really don't care.


 I've never seen someone so consumed with efficiency waste so much time on something they don't care about.


----------



## clarkenstein (Mar 8, 2006)

jugdish said:


> I've never seen someone so consumed with efficiency waste so much time on something they don't care about.


brilliant.


----------



## SIGMA (Jan 30, 2004)

*please*



salimoneus said:


> you must be the type that also picks just one woman. have fun with that...


you are such a stud.is your real name biff?


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

jugdish said:


> I've never seen someone so consumed with efficiency waste so much time on something they don't care about.


sounds like the only ones consumed with anything are the cultish SS followers, especially the ones that think a deraileur somehow saps power. so many myths and untruths to debunk in this thread, i admit it does get tiring but i've still yet to see anything new that presents a good case for SS. just the same old religi-babble *yawn*


----------



## 8200rpm (Apr 28, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> i've still yet to see anything new that presents a good case for SS.


salimoneus,

I'd like to know what your thoughts are on other inefficient modes of pedaling such as recumbents, fixed gear bikes, or bicycle commuting. Maybe better yet... commuting on fixed gear recumbents.

:skep:


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

8200rpm said:


> salimoneus,
> 
> I'd like to know what your thoughts are on other inefficient modes of pedaling such as recumbents, fixed gear bikes, or bicycle commuting. Maybe better yet... commuting on fixed gear recumbents.
> 
> :skep:


i honestly don't know much about recumbents, and am admittedly not a fan of fixed gear bikes, i'd prefer a freewheel hub any day. i think with a commuter, or town/beach cruiser, the terrain you typically see will not vary to nearly as much of a degree as you would see on a challenging MTB course, therefore the need for gears is not as great. i have owned single speed cruisers and folding bikes and was happy with how they performed on the road, as you are rarely outside of the usable RPM range. in these cases ease of use and low maintenance prevail

it is specifically the idea of replacing a gearie with an SS as your main trail bike, and in some cases using SS for MTB racing that i find intriguing (amusing?)


----------



## DanU (May 9, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> it is specifically the idea of replacing a gearie with an SS as your main trail bike, and in some cases using SS for MTB racing that i find intriguing (amusing?)


Some facts:
1. In addition to my SS I have a really nice blingy full-suspension 2x9 bike and a nice and quick racer.
2. I ride alone 90% of the time.
3. On my way to and from work I don't meet anyone that I need to "impress".
4. Four days out of five I select the SS when commuting to work, no matter if I choose to take the tarmac hillclimb route or the technical trail route to work.

Now explain that, if you feel the need to. 
Ego? Wrong, see 2 and 3. 
Religion? Wrong, see 2 and 3. 
No other choice? Wrong, see 1. 
No suitable roads or trails for the other bikes? Wrong, see 4.

So then I'm probably just stupid. Or could it be that I just really enjoy SSing, without having to rationalise it?


----------



## Impy (Jan 6, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> you must be the type that also picks just one woman. have fun with that...


Egads.

Speaking of being a stud, has anyone here actually ridden with mr salmonellalonius? Is he indeed a efficient SS-rider-crushing-climber? I say, a challenge of sorts seems to be in order for you all, to settle this once and for all as gentlemen. I'm sure there are one or two south bay SSers who would take on the challenge, no?


----------



## neville (Jan 7, 2004)

Impy said:


> Egads.
> 
> Speaking of being a stud, has anyone here actually ridden with mr salmonellalonius? Is he indeed a efficient SS-rider-crushing-climber? I say, a challenge of sorts seems to be in order for you all, to settle this once and for all as gentlemen. I'm sure there are one or two south bay SSers who would take on the challenge, no?


Sal would first have to borrow or buy a bike, and then have to actually learn how to ride rather than type


----------



## Guest (Jul 29, 2006)

If you like SS, then great! If you like gears, then super! WTF cares? So you ride your bike and have a great time on the same trails. If you're so much faster, then go up a class and you'll go back to having your ass kicked agian.

We're talking about bikes here, not life saving medical devices.

I do agree with you that it's not quite as simple to change a geared bike and make it a very clean looking SS. I thought I could just switch them out, but with the smart new bb's, and rear hubs there are a lot more options. This it without even considering a 29er...oh the options.


----------



## TREK 4 Life (Feb 20, 2006)

I can't believe it. I go away for a week to Iowa, surounded by the glory that is RAGBRAI and I come back to find that this assinine thread is still active. 

GOOD:thumbsup: I was hoping to read some funny sh!t when I got back.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

this thread owns, all that enter will be defeated


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Impy said:


> Egads.
> 
> Speaking of being a stud, has anyone here actually ridden with mr salmonellalonius? Is he indeed a efficient SS-rider-crushing-climber? I say, a challenge of sorts seems to be in order for you all, to settle this once and for all as gentlemen. I'm sure there are one or two south bay SSers who would take on the challenge, no?


actually i'm in Vegas now, so gather your sin city brethren and bring it on


----------



## noslogan (Jan 21, 2004)

*Hey Sally*

I got an SS a few years ago. I went out for a regular loop ride and when we were done some other buddies of mine showed up. The first ride was 20 miles or so. I was so stoked and impressed that I went out again with the other group. Another 20 miles.

I now have three single speeds. I gues that I should only have one since I can only ride one at a time. Same goes for the three or four geared hardtails and the three or so full suspension bikes laying around.
Maybe I am just having too much fun consuming.

If you are so concerned about efficiency then get a chauffer to take you around on a motorbike. You can sit side saddle on the back.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

noslogan said:


> ...
> If you are so concerned about efficiency then get a chauffer to take you around on a motorbike. You can sit side saddle on the back.


no i just dont understand the attraction to a setup that forces you to spin the crank like a donkey on longer flats and downhills and then walk the steep uphills. but hey if that's your thing then please don't let me stop you, by all means knock yourself out :lol:


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

TREK 4 Life said:


> I can't believe it. I go away for a week to Iowa, surounded by the glory that is RAGBRAI and I come back to find that this assinine thread is still active.
> 
> GOOD:thumbsup: I was hoping to read some funny sh!t when I got back.


This meow, I mean thread, has nine and half lives. Just when...nope! It's back! I must admit it does make my dull work day less boring. I must give some what of a prop to Sal for being so resilient.


----------



## Lucky 7 (Oct 20, 2005)

I don't think Sal has even visited this thread since the first page. Every post since has been generated by an auto-response algorithm programmed with certain repeatable phrases designed to question the existence of single speed bicycles. I think it's best if we move off topic to confuse his ingenious device:

Dear Sal's Auto-response,

I find chicken nuggets to be a tasty, satisfying mid afternoon snack. Some say that chicken nuggets are fattening and contain too much cholesterol to be considered as an option for healthy snacking. Some have even suggested such items as apples or rice cakes as a replacement. Can you give me some direction with this problem, keeping in mind that I REALLY like chicken nuggets?

Thank you,
Deep Fried in Denver


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

Vegas, eh? Be sure to post your exposé on the inefficiency of long term, meaninigful relationships. Especially the part about how hollow they must be based on the couple of lap dances you bought.


----------



## nogearshere (Mar 7, 2005)

Lucky 7 said:


> Dear Sal's Auto-response,
> 
> I find chicken nuggets to be a tasty, satisfying mid afternoon snack. Some say that chicken nuggets are fattening and contain too much cholesterol to be considered as an option for healthy snacking. Some have even suggested such items as apples or rice cakes as a replacement. Can you give me some direction with this problem, keeping in mind that I REALLY like chicken nuggets?
> 
> ...


your reasoning for liking nuggets is based purely on emotion and so-called personal preference. these things, these 'reasons' have no place in the modern world.

please alter your diet accordingly.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Lucky 7 said:


> ...
> 
> Dear Sal's Auto-response,
> 
> ...


I honestly don't understand why yur iwre eiilads

ueoer nnrrwpq

* Fatal Error at address #AD039A, unable to compute. Aborting...


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> no i just dont understand the attraction to a setup that forces you to spin the crank like a donkey on longer flats and downhills and then walk the steep uphills. but hey if that's your thing then please don't let me stop you, by all means knock yourself out :lol:


If that is your experience on a singlespeed, then singlespeed is clearly not for you. Take it from me though, its a blast if you have the legs to climb hills steep enough that you don't need to spin down because you can coast faster than terrain or common sense will allow.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

PeanutButterBreath said:


> If that is your experience on a singlespeed, then singlespeed is clearly not for you. Take it from me though, its a blast if you have the legs to climb hills steep enough that you don't need to spin down because you can coast faster than terrain or common sense will allow.


if your single gear can climb the steepest of hills and also not spin downhill then that's one hellova magic gear you got there. either that or you are one of a handfull of uber-elite athletes in the world. i'm pretty sure none of those are the case.


----------



## DanU (May 9, 2006)

Sal, you need to read his post again, since you clearly misunderstood it. You don't need a "hellova magic gear" to coast downhill. In fact you don't need a gear at all. I think PeanutButterBreath has a really good definition of singlespeed heaven there, to be able to ride up something that is so steep you would coast down even if you had gears.


----------



## Lucky 7 (Oct 20, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> I honestly don't understand why yur iwre eiilads
> 
> ueoer nnrrwpq
> 
> * Fatal Error at address #AD039A, unable to compute. Aborting...


:lol:

I like it!


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> I will drop a layer of gears in the rear and run with 1 3 5 7 9 to give me a 5 speed. The increments are so small on the 9 speed that I'm hoping an every-other setup will work out nicely. I figure to spend roughly 90% of the time in the middle three gears which should greatly simplify the "thinking" part and let me concentrate more on the trail and the challenges it presents. More simplified, less maintenance, less weight, and still enough flexibility to get the job done.


Hey guys, don't bag on sal for this idea just because he's being a d1ck about singlespeeding. That's just bipolar thinking. In fact, this is _exactly_ how I set up my geared bikes. My 'crosser is currently geared 13-16-19-24-32, and for the next few weeks my Vulture will be running 14-18-21-28-33 as an experiment in geared mountain biking. It works _fine_. Yes, the derailer can handle the change in angle, and the big jumps. HyperGlide is an amazing innovation, and although the shifting is slightly slower than stock, it is quite acceptable. And no, my franken-cassette isn't going to suddenly blow up on the trail, any more than the single-cog-plus-spacers I've put thousands of SS miles on. Jeebus.

Why? Well, I need more than one gear for some of the riding I'm doing. But I don't need 9. I want a wide overall range, but the little 10-15% jumps between gears are silly, and just encourage shifting too often and spending too much time thinking about shifting. With my 20-30% gaps I only shift when my RPMs have drifted so far out of optimal that it's obvious anyway. And having SSed for several years, my legs are used to varying my cadence a bit.

Addressing the overall direction of this thread: yes sal, you're being being a d1ck. It's like this: hey, I've tried fixie riding (for example) both on and off road, and I hate it. But I still respect other people's choices, and I don't go on the roadbikereview fixed gear forum and stir up a 10 page thread about why fixie is such a bad idea. To each their own.


----------



## nogearshere (Mar 7, 2005)

GlowBoy said:


> I don't go on the roadbikereview fixed gear forum and stir up a 10 page thread about why fixie is such a bad idea. To each their own.


then you are limiting your potential and should be punished.


----------



## dannybob (Feb 21, 2004)

*this thread smells like poo poo.*

der biere shiezen.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

GlowBoy said:


> Hey guys, don't bag on sal for this idea just because he's being a d1ck about singlespeeding. That's just bipolar thinking. In fact, this is _exactly_ how I set up my geared bikes. My 'crosser is currently geared 13-16-19-24-32, and for the next few weeks my Vulture will be running 14-18-21-28-33 as an experiment in geared mountain biking. It works _fine_. Yes, the derailer can handle the change in angle, and the big jumps. HyperGlide is an amazing innovation, and although the shifting is slightly slower than stock, it is quite acceptable. And no, my franken-cassette isn't going to suddenly blow up on the trail, any more than the single-cog-plus-spacers I've put thousands of SS miles on. Jeebus.
> 
> Why? Well, I need more than one gear for some of the riding I'm doing. But I don't need 9. I want a wide overall range, but the little 10-15% jumps between gears are silly, and just encourage shifting too often and spending too much time thinking about shifting. With my 20-30% gaps I only shift when my RPMs have drifted so far out of optimal that it's obvious anyway. And having SSed for several years, my legs are used to varying my cadence a bit.
> 
> Addressing the overall direction of this thread: yes sal, you're being being a d1ck. It's like this: hey, I've tried fixie riding (for example) both on and off road, and I hate it. But I still respect other people's choices, and I don't go on the roadbikereview fixed gear forum and stir up a 10 page thread about why fixie is such a bad idea. To each their own.


Good to know someone is running with that setup without problems, thanks for the feedback.

I know some of my replies haven't been as constructive as possible, but in most of those cases I was being attacked so I had to come up with some kind of a comeback. What do you expect me to lay down like a woman? Sorry but I don't do bottom anymore...

Seriously though, I think it's been an interesting thread overall, I've had a chance to get several riders' opinions on what the typical "SS benefits" are such as better conditioning, more efficient drivetrain, less maintenance and weight, more fun, etc, and have had a chance to respond with somewhat intelligent discussions. As I have stated in several posts I still see SS as one exteme solution to several problems which I believe there are better solutions to...

and for those that do not see it as a solution, but rather an alternative, I also don't understand how simply going SS makes riding more fun, or forces you to raise your performance and movitation levels, but maybe I'm not at the point where I need something new to spice up my riding.

So yea, basically I still don't "get it", but that's just the way life is sometimes. I also don't get necrophilia or cannibalism, and I hope I never need to resort to any kind of exclusivity or extremism to accomplish what I want in life, but you never know I'm not dead yet.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Lucky 7 said:


> I don't think Sal has even visited this thread since the first page. Every post since has been generated by an auto-response algorithm programmed with certain repeatable phrases designed to question the existence of single speed bicycles. I think it's best if we move off topic to confuse his ingenious device:
> 
> Dear Sal's Auto-response,
> 
> ...


Oh, just wanted to add a serious comment here just to clarify, since I've done a bit of research recently into nutrition. It seems that dietary cholesterol (like egg yolks, etc) has much less effect on blood cholesterol levels than many people think, only about 10%. Saturated and trans fats have some of the biggest negative effects, and things like omega fish oils have the biggest positive effects. So ditch those fried nuggets, open a can of tuna in spring water, pour on some healthy olive or canola oil, and maybe a dash of miracle whip and you're good to go. Oh and Triscuits finally got rid of that nasty shortening so they are now trans-fat free, and are a hella-good combo with the tuna.

Thank you FDA for requiring trans fats on all nutritional labels starting this year!


----------



## jjonespeed (Feb 17, 2004)

Some folks just don't get it.....JJ


----------



## stan4bikes (May 24, 2006)

I really think his name is mispelled, should be "sanctimonious" not salimoneus! I hope he's just pulling everyones leg on this thread, otherwise I concur with a previous poster...he's just a d!ck....that's all, I'm outa this waste of time thread....


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

just thought i would check back in and see how all you fine folks were doin. it's funny i just looked at the recent topics and found a few more cult inductees all excited about this great new "revelation"

i'd seriously like to know your secrets as to the SS brainwashing process. i have some ideas for a cult of my own in fact, one where all the members donate large portions of their paychecks to me every week. all i need to do is figure out some way to sucker them in like yall apparently do so well. unfortunately most of the good ones have already been taken (mothership in the sky, god's disciples, etc) ...


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> just thought i would check back in and see how all you fine folks were doin. it's funny i just looked at the recent topics and found a few more cult inductees all excited about this great new "revelation"
> 
> i'd seriously like to know your secrets as to the SS brainwashing process. i have some ideas for a cult of my own in fact, one where all the members donate large portions of their paychecks to me every week. all i need to do is figure out some way to sucker them in like yall apparently do so well. unfortunately most of the good ones have already been taken (mothership in the sky, god's disciples, etc) ...


You don't singlespeed brother. That is the only problem here.


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

Still looking from the outside in, huh? Jealousy is a good color on you.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> just thought i would check back in and see how all you fine folks were doin. it's funny i just looked at the recent topics and found a few more cult inductees all excited about this great new "revelation"
> 
> i'd seriously like to know your secrets as to the SS brainwashing process. i have some ideas for a cult of my own in fact, one where all the members donate large portions of their paychecks to me every week. all i need to do is figure out some way to sucker them in like yall apparently do so well. unfortunately most of the good ones have already been taken (mothership in the sky, god's disciples, etc) ...


Have you finished building up your 1x5 yet?


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Nat said:


> Have you finished building up your 1x5 yet?


Nope, I gave the 1x5 a shot but it just didn't want to shift cleanly/consistently. so I'm currently stuck with a 1x9. I will probably revisit that and give it another try with some newer components, maybe the 8 year old cassette just wasn't up to the task...


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> Nope, I gave the 1x5 a shot but it just didn't want to shift cleanly/consistently. so I'm currently stuck with a 1x9. I will probably revisit that and give it another try with some newer components, maybe the 8 year old cassette just wasn't up to the task...


Sally don't ride man.


----------



## GoreyTrails (Sep 10, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> i keep seeing all these posts basically saying "wow after going SS im now dusting all these riders, and just went from slowest to fastest in my group" blah blah blah as if it's some sort of magical change that will transform the rider into an elite machine or something.
> 
> well no duh, of course you are going to mash past people that are pacing themselves uphill at a lower gear ratio, why would you expect otherwise? it's a simple trade-off, just like you can choose to hike uphill, or jog/run uphill, one requires more energy expenditure overall than the other and will surely get you there faster, but you pay for that with higher fatigue and energy drain. these are not new concepts.
> 
> ...


I noticed a significant difference in my speed/endurance/skillsets after I began riding SS offroad. I still race on a geared bike.

Anytime you change something about your ride & drivetrain that significant'y, master the changes - You will notice increased performance in an associated skill. It's why I'm contemplating a fixed gear soon, to improve my road performance. I understand it's worked for many road riders throughout history, especially for winter training.


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

Don't Make Baby Drink The Kool Aid!!!!!


Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo


----------



## Roger___ (Jan 27, 2004)

If you figure that out on the latter please share. ;0)

Regarding your SS opinion, thanks again for sharing.


----------



## noslogan (Jan 21, 2004)

*I think you meant to say....*



salimoneus said:


> great new "revelation".


_"great new"_ revelation. If the quotes were to be meant as sarcasm.

It is not a revelation or new or great (for everything). It is very old for sure. Everything since inception has been a revelation. It is great on every trail it can be ridden on and blows on all the trails it can't.

Revelation _now_ comes from within. The people that experience this "Revelation" within are like DeVinci or Michelangelo.

The people that do not experience it are like Schumaker or Johnson. They just hit the gas and go.

It sounded good in my mind.


----------



## unclenorm (Jan 5, 2005)

I felt that this recent post sums it up quite well.

http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=2227973&postcount=24

I guess Sal could adapt it and say that the quarter of his brain that doesn't have to worry about shifting the front mech is free to enjoy the ride


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

unclenorm said:


> ...
> I guess Sal could adapt it and say that the quarter of his brain that doesn't have to worry about shifting the front mech is free to enjoy the ride


actually that's pretty close 

once i figure out how to get a decent 1x5 working i believe shifting will become instinctive and require no thinking. just like with say a 5/6 speed sports car or motorcycle, the brain can pretty easily match road speed to one of only 5 gears. some day soon...


----------



## Nonracerrichie (Dec 20, 2005)

SS is not a sacrifice. Rigid is not a sacrifice. Gears are not an unmanagable mechanical burden, just like suspension. It is two wheels, a chainring pulling a chain and a cog in turn. A place to start riding and a place to end. There are some tubes welded into a frame holding it all together. Pick your parts, pick your pace, pick your nose, pick your path, pick your chamios from your a$$ and go for a ride.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

they make chamois asswipes? huh, sounds "Charmin Soft", will hafta try those


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> Good to know someone is running with that setup without problems, thanks for the feedback.
> 
> I know some of my replies haven't been as constructive as possible, but in most of those cases I was being attacked so I had to come up with some kind of a comeback. What do you expect me to lay down like a woman? Sorry but I don't do bottom anymore...
> 
> ...


Sal, I have said this before, but I ride SS partly for the "pub"/attention. I pretend I don't want it, but I do. I am not looking for a solution, not looking to raise my performance or motivation. I am not even looking to go faster or for a new challenge. I laugh everytime I see posts where people describe their old trails as "new" all over again because they tried night riding or single speeding, or anything else. Yea, they are new for perhaps one ride or so, and then they are just the same old trails. I night ride because I work and because the summers are too damn hot during the day. When I do, it takes me a long time to fall asleep. So, if I am done at 9:00 or so, I can pretty much guarantee that I will be up past midnight. This generally sucks.

Anyway, there is a religious like atmosphere among single speeders and 29ers. There is also an elitist theme. I am a single speeder 29er, so I am not actually saying these things as an attack. We all naturally tend to think what we do is the better way. It is life and human nature. As far as what type of riding is faster, I think it is pathetic that there is even an argument. If all other factors are equal, an elite racer will be faster on a geared bike 99% of the time. Go ask the elite racers to race single speed at the World Championships. It ain't going to happen. Hell, it shouldn't. I am often faster on my single speed than others, but that proves nothing. I am often slower than others using gears.

What bothers me more than anything else about this thread is that there seems to be too many people that think riding ability defines us. It shouldn't. We respect good riding way more than we should. It means nothing if I suck or am better than others. It is meaningless crap.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Dirdir said:


> We respect good riding way more than we should. It means nothing if I suck or am better than others. It is meaningless crap.


I for one will admit that I respect good riding. I respect anyone who does what he or she does well (riding or otherwise). I get a huge kick out of watching people do their thing well. It's more inspirational to me than just about anything else.


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

Nat said:


> I for one will admit that I respect good riding. I respect anyone who does what he or she does well (riding or otherwise). I get a huge kick out of watching people do their thing well. It's more inspirational to me than just about anything else.


That is fine. I guess I am the same. My issue is with the attacks that some people make on others based on riding ability. I think that attacking someone based on riding ability sucks way more than anything Sal said about single speed. I have seen the same crap within the martial arts world. People wearing black belts were are not gods.


----------



## Lucky 7 (Oct 20, 2005)

Well, it's a pointless argument to begin with. Like I've said numerous times over the last 9 pages, everybody would be a lot happier if they could just focus on their OWN damn self. Sal doesn't see the point in single-speeding and I think everybody needs to accept it. The reverse is true as well and Sal needs to accept it.

If we could all just ride what we want and turn our focus inward rather than outward, I think there'd be a lot more smiles on the trails. Persue your passion, as they say. I've chosen mine.:thumbsup:


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Dirdir said:


> That is fine. I guess I am the same. My issue is with the attacks that some people make on others based on riding ability. I think that attacking someone based on riding ability sucks way more than anything Sal said about single speed.


Yes.



Dirdir said:


> I have seen the same crap within the martial arts world. People wearing black belts were are not gods.


[TANGENT] Don't get me started on martial arts. What a weird establishment. "You will learn honor, respect, courage, self-discipline, character, blah blah." You can learn those things by doing any number of things, including other sports, school, jobs, etc. I wish a martial arts school would just come out and say, "you will learn combat" without trying to pretty it up so soccer moms don't mind sending their kids to Fong's Kick-Ass School.

I studied four different martial arts, got a black belt in one of them at age 15, and then later realized how weird the whole thing is. Thank god for Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and UFC to provide a genuine test of hand-to-hand combat rather than the showy, pointless katas and shopping mall demonstration b.s. [/TANGENT]


----------



## Dirdir (Jan 23, 2004)

Nat said:


> I wish a martial arts school would just come out and say, "you will learn combat" ...


Yep. My experience was with an old school Karate organization. They should have told us up front that "you will learn combat...ego combat". It was a load of turd. Oh, we also had to basically worship the Chief Instructor as if he shat diamonds from his a$$ instead of smelly fecal matter.

I would have rather been a member of the "bad" dojo in Karate Kid. At least everything in that dojo was clear.


----------



## TREK 4 Life (Feb 20, 2006)

I simply can't believe this. I have been gone to my Mustang Forums for a few weeks (not enough time to devote to both forums, gotta ride and drive) and low and behold here is this monstrosity of uselessness still going. 8 pages of people snipping back and forth over something that is supposed to be so pure.

SS is what it is. This is just nuts. Just my .02, but you think that this thread would have died awhile ago. Ah well, good job on defending the SS way to someone who really doesn't care.:thumbsup:


----------



## Rivet (Sep 3, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> i keep seeing all these posts basically saying "wow after going SS im now dusting all these riders, and just went from slowest to fastest in my group" blah blah blah as if it's some sort of magical change that will transform the rider into an elite machine or something.
> 
> well no duh, of course you are going to mash past people that are pacing themselves uphill at a lower gear ratio, why would you expect otherwise? it's a simple trade-off, just like you can choose to hike uphill, or jog/run uphill, one requires more energy expenditure overall than the other and will surely get you there faster, but you pay for that with higher fatigue and energy drain. these are not new concepts.
> 
> ...


You know what's funny, I ride a singlespeed quite often and I agree with pretty much everything you said. I built one just to try something different about 5 years ago and I had most of the parts already. I do however like my geared suspension bikes just as much. If your fast your fast and no amount of gears or lack of gears is going to change that. My main motivation for having one now is that it's my bulletproof bike that always works.


----------



## tier (Sep 4, 2006)

Ah, the curse of the internet ! It gives a voice to anyone, no matter how ignorant or offensive, that has a computer.


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

This thread was beat to death for way too long, then dead for way over a month, but no, sal just couldn't let it go.  

There are some incredibly lame trolls on these forums as of late.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

mud'n'sweat said:


> This thread was beat to death for way too long, then dead for way over a month, but no, sal just couldn't let it go.
> 
> There are some incredibly lame trolls on these forums as of late.


hey i just figured many people missed out on the fun while on summer vacation so i thought i'd give them a chance to chime in as well. i like to be inclusive and hear from everybody 

if you dont like the thread then why post again? admit it you know you like it babey


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*after reading through this thread...*

"Riding a geared bike as a singlespeed just doesn't work very well. It *may* give you a small 'taste' of the sensation of singlespeeding, but it will not show you what singlespeed riding is"

and finding this post from Rainman, which I agree with, I though id chime in. I was never, ever interested in ss. thought the guy's that rode them were a little strange and elitist. I did notice that many were very fast though. After buying my first 29er (soma Juice) and riding it during the wet winter months my local bike shop buddy suggested I switch to ss to save my sram 9.0sl/xtr drivetrain parts. He told me to put the bike in 32x20 gear and ride it to see what I thought. I though it was much harder and involved my upper body much more. 
Still in the interest of saving my parts I converted. Over the first 2 weeks I rode 2-3 times a week, my usual 15 mile night loop. Like everyone says, I got stronger quickly, but the experience of riding a ss turned out to be a very rewarding experience for me. I found it to be down right fun, plus you see the trail differently when riding ss. It is a function of the limitations of the bike, which causes you to look within for answers instead of relying on external help i.e. gears or squish. There are guys doing 6,12, and 24 hr races on ss bikes. guys doing 100 mile races. No one is going to spend that much time doing something they dont enjoy, plus it would be almost impossible to be successful at it. Sometimes people cant understand why some do what they do, which is fine. However,you should walk in their shoes for a while (not a nano-second) before you make judgements about the why's and what fors. Free your mind.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

edouble said:


> "Riding a geared bike as a singlespeed just doesn't work very well. It *may* give you a small 'taste' of the sensation of singlespeeding, but it will not show you what singlespeed riding is"
> 
> and finding this post from Rainman, which I agree with, I though id chime in. I was never, ever interested in ss. thought the guy's that rode them were a little strange and elitist. I did notice that many were very fast though. After buying my first 29er (soma Juice) and riding it during the wet winter months my local bike shop buddy suggested I switch to ss to save my sram 9.0sl/xtr drivetrain parts. He told me to put the bike in 32x20 gear and ride it to see what I thought. I though it was much harder and involved my upper body much more.
> Still in the interest of saving my parts I converted. Over the first 2 weeks I rode 2-3 times a week, my usual 15 mile night loop. Like everyone says, I got stronger quickly, but the experience of riding a ss turned out to be a very rewarding experience for me. I found it to be down right fun, plus you see the trail differently when riding ss. It is a function of the limitations of the bike, which causes you to look within for answers instead of relying on external help i.e. gears or squish. There are guys doing 6,12, and 24 hr races on ss bikes. guys doing 100 mile races. No one is going to spend that much time doing something they dont enjoy, plus it would be almost impossible to be successful at it. Sometimes people cant understand why some do what they do, which is fine. However,you should walk in their shoes for a while (not a nano-second) before you make judgements about the why's and what fors. Free your mind.


I really don't need to walk in someone else's shoes when that would basically mean riding an oversize BMX bike and doing a lot of uphill walking or spinning the crank like a donkey. Either that or you are all riding nice easy smooth trails that allow you to keep pedalling through all conditions.

So tell me how many of those SSers are winning those races? I must be missing all of the press on how SS is taking over the podiums, and I'm not talking about some guy beating a bunch of noobs either. Oh and how many professional racers are racing SS?


----------



## Pete Gurney (Jun 18, 2006)

i can't believe that this guy is actually serious. i could easily go into the downhill/freeride group and talk about how i don't understand why you would put your bike on a chairlift in order to go jump off stuff that scares the crap out of me, but i don't ( because it doesn't interest me). if you don't like my fire than don't come around....because...well you know.


----------



## Suffer (Sep 16, 2005)

Sal, you sound like a fence rider to scared to take the plunge. You want less gears but are scared to go all the way. The reason you are scared is because you have to much pride to walk a hill. You are riding a bike for a totally different reason than me. I ride to have fun and challenge myself not look cool and "beat" all the other riders who share the few feet of trail in front of me. Here in TN we have some fairly steep trails. When I first started riding SS I could not clean the steepest parts of the trails. Well after many attempts I now can clean every one. So I think that means that I improved not only my conditioning but my bike control too. It is a lot harder to stand on a steep climb, jerking on the bar, keeping the front wheel down and on line than it is to sit and spin. SSing also improved my low speed handling skills. Some of the stuff I could never manuver through before has now become a cake walk.


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*Do you realize...*



salimoneus said:


> I really don't need to walk in someone else's shoes when that would basically mean riding an oversize BMX bike and doing a lot of uphill walking or spinning the crank like a donkey. Either that or you are all riding nice easy smooth trails that allow you to keep pedalling through all conditions.
> 
> So tell me how many of those SSers are winning those races? I must be missing all of the press on how SS is taking over the podiums, and I'm not talking about some guy beating a bunch of noobs either. Oh and how many professional racers are racing SS?


how uninformed your statement is  . There are guys right on this forum who race and ride in the mountains on ss. You also dont comprehend very well. I said that guys wouldnt be riding ss in these endurance races "IF THEY DIDNT ENJOY IT". Are you so dumb that you dont realize that most people race knowing they are not going to win :idea:?. If competing was only about winning most people would stay home. Thank God most folks are smarter than you :thumbsup: . From all the sh!t you talk I would imagine you live on the podium. Just pitch a tent and call it home huh  . This is what you dont understand, some guys just enjoy the things that ss has to offer. Its not for everybody, nothing is. This simple fact of life eludes you :incazzato: . You are trapped in the prison that is your mind :madman: . The sad thing is YOU DONT WANT TO GET OUT. You want to stay in there were its safe and warm :yesnod: . Go right ahead, the rest of us will experience life and base our opinions on what we have learned through those experiences. You can continue to be the worlds most formidable "armchair QB". Hut! Hut!


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Suffer said:


> ...
> When I first started riding SS I could not clean the steepest parts of the trails. Well after many attempts I now can clean every one. So I think that means that I improved not only my conditioning but my bike control too. It is a lot harder to stand on a steep climb, jerking on the bar, keeping the front wheel down and on line than it is to sit and spin. SSing also improved my low speed handling skills. Some of the stuff I could never manuver through before has now become a cake walk.


You could have accomplished the same thing on a geared bike, or even a 1x9 bike. Why did it take an SS rig for you to actually put in a real effort and stand and mash up the hills instead of grannying it? I guess you just did not have the discipline to force yourself to climb in a higher gear?

Hey if that's what it takes then do whatever you gotta do to get it done, but it seems much easier to just tell myself "self, it's time to stand and mash" and just do it. I don't need to restrict myself to a drivetrain that was designed for 10 year old boys in order to condition myself how I want.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> . . .it seems much easier to just tell myself "self, it's time to stand and mash" and just do it.


A lot of things SEEM easy.  When you are racing or riding at the edge of your ability, assuming you ever try, you will understand.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> You could have accomplished the same thing on a geared bike, or even a 1x9 bike. Why did it take an SS rig for you to actually put in a real effort and stand and mash up the hills instead of grannying it? I guess you just did not have the discipline to force yourself to climb in a higher gear?
> 
> Hey if that's what it takes then do whatever you gotta do to get it done, but it seems much easier to just tell myself "self, it's time to stand and mash" and just do it. I don't need to restrict myself to a drivetrain that was designed for 10 year old boys in order to condition myself how I want.


You have a point here, that with discipline I could've ridden as hard on a gearie. I hereby openly admit that I did NOT have the discipline. I needed the bike to not give me the option to shift down. When I ride my singlespeed, I am my bike's bi*ch.


----------



## Suffer (Sep 16, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> You could have accomplished the same thing on a geared bike, or even a 1x9 bike. Why did it take an SS rig for you to actually put in a real effort and stand and mash up the hills instead of grannying it? I guess you just did not have the discipline to force yourself to climb in a higher gear?
> 
> Hey if that's what it takes then do whatever you gotta do to get it done, but it seems much easier to just tell myself "self, it's time to stand and mash" and just do it. I don't need to restrict myself to a drivetrain that was designed for 10 year old boys in order to condition myself how I want.


You are contradicting yourself now. At first you said that standing and mashing was a waste of energy and that a geared bike kept you from having to waste, that much needed energy. Now you are saying that mashing SHOULD be done on a geared bike. Which is it? No discipline? I guess you can say that about a guy that ditches his noisy, breakable, high maintenece drivetrain for a quite, dependable, no maintenece (more ride time) one. When I see two bikes and two riders with those bikes and I look down, and one is geared and one is not, I have never thought to myself; self, that guy with one gear must have no discipline. Why? Because the guys I ride with and see on the trails have owned geared bikes or still do They are on the trails everyday, they ride at night, the ride in the cold, they ride 12 and 24 hour races on SS. No discipline? Now this is the part you are having a hard time understanding; THEY LOVE TO RIDE!!!!! It has nothing to do with condition. They like bike inflicted pain which they get more of on a SS.


----------



## Ptor (Jan 29, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> You could have accomplished the same thing on a geared bike, or even a 1x9 bike. Why did it take an SS rig for you to actually put in a real effort and stand and mash up the hills instead of grannying it? I guess you just did not have the discipline to force yourself to climb in a higher gear?.


No less than Travis Brown himself has stated that he's faster on a single speed on a lot of courses than when he's geared, perhaps (he admits) because it keeps him on the "rivet" more. If Travis can admit needing the enforced discipline of a SS on occassion, I have no reason to shy from admiting that need as well. Do you have the discipline it would require to beat Travis Brown? Thought so...


----------



## DaveVt (Jun 13, 2005)

Sali...You don't get it. That's about it. MTB drive trains are ugly, expensive to maintain, and LOUD. Riding with one gear changes everything. And after 15 years of riding geared, 26 inch wheel bikes, it is the best thing I've done for my enjoyment. I didn't have to buy anything new, just got rid of the "pinky toe" hanging off the back of my rig. All these folks have been there and done that on your set up, and now they move on becuse they don't need all the advantages gears give them to ride trail like they want, and we all agree it is good. We understand your perspective, just admit you are ignorant to the joys of ghosting thru the wood w/o that chain rattle, just your freehub buzzing, laying down the power in bold strokes rather then frantic little gyrations.....U just don't get it. Maybe you never will, but I suggest trying it for a while. And don't let your lack of power discourage you at first, it'll come. ; )
Really though, I went thru the same de-evolution as you Sali. WEnt to a 1x8, then 1x5, then 1x3, then 1x2 with an old DX friction shifter. That was a [retty good setup. Simple shifter, rebuildable and it was like having 2 ss. One for the road and one for the trail. Realized was just wussing out and went for it. 36:18. I think it's gonna be my next tattoo.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

DaveVt said:


> Sali...You don't get it. That's about it. MTB drive trains are ugly, expensive to maintain, and LOUD.
> ...


heh, well i do agree that SS rigs do look much cleaner, but i think a 1x9 cleans things up quite nicely, losing that mess up front got rid of most of my complaints. as far as being expensive, i have not found that to be the case, maybe in the case of SRAM those tend to break before the hangers 

regarding the noise level, i don't find my latest 1x9 setup to be any louder than the CK hubs used by many of the SS blingers. i took a bunch of links out of the chain and went with a medium cage XT and the chainline has little play with no chainslap (i only do like 3-4ft drops max tho). but that is on a FS rig and around here i guess that kind of talk is sacrilege...


----------



## PapaLegba (Jul 15, 2006)

I like SS.

I like the clean look of a Bontrager retrofitted with new parts and a SS drivetrain. Shifting's not a big deal for me, I'm strong enough to tackle most difficult trails, and when things get nasty I whip out my geared bike.

What's the big deal?

No one is forcing you to have one bike.

You can have three or four and ride the one you feel like using for the appropriate trail.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

PapaLegba said:


> ...
> and when things get nasty *I whip out my geared bike.*
> ...


yea i hear those new pocket-sized geared bikes are pretty convenient for those nasty sections


----------



## PapaLegba (Jul 15, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> yea i hear those new pocket-sized geared bikes are pretty convenient for those nasty sections


Depends on the trail, my mood, etc.

That kind of logic would mean that my trail bike should also be able to tackle roads and vice versa, it's ridiculous.

I don't have only one gun, why should I have only one bike?


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

PapaLegba said:


> Depends on the trail, my mood, etc.
> 
> That kind of logic would mean that my trail bike should also be able to tackle roads and vice versa, it's ridiculous.
> 
> I don't have only one gun, why should I have only one bike?


dude it was a joke, pretty much like the rest of this thread, quite laughable


----------



## DaveVt (Jun 13, 2005)

Loud. And BTW, it's not about the easiest solution, it's about the most fun solution.


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

IMHO, i love riding my SS. I take it on all my epic rides and i primarily race it. Why? because its more of a challenge and more rewarding at the end of the day. 
BUT
I do NOT train on it. It has done nothing but make me slower in pretty much all aspects of riding other than short power bursts to get up tricky rock gardens and such. I really dont feel like getting into it completely because it is a LONG subject, but read some training books and maybe you'll understand. I train primarily on my geared bike now (which is similar in weight and geometry to my SS) and i ride the SS maybe once a week for fun and my race results have improved dramaticaly and consistantly. I am now beating people by minutes that, a few months ago when i was riding primarily SS, were beating me by minutes. As bad as it sounds, if you got faster by riding your SS, then you probably werent riding your geared bike to its full potential. Everyone is different so *maybe* there are exceptions, but everything i've read and seen first hand has proved that geared is better.


----------



## Mtn. Biker123 (Sep 17, 2005)

Sum it up...WE ALL LOVE RIDING! I am new to the SS phenom and this forum. I can tell you that my SS was originally a project bike because I did not have all of the parts to rebuild my hardtail with gears. Since then I have probably spent more time on the SS only because I do find it more challenging. There are some trails, especially in NM, that are just more fun on a hardtail SS. The foothills of The Sandias are right out my front door and rather than spend the gas to go elsewhere, I can take out the SS and make an otherwise boring ride with a sussy into a challenging and much more techy ride with the SS. It is a hobbie, as is building hot rods or motorcycles. You really have to enjoy it in all of its forms. If you feel so compelled to argue with people about why they are doing what they enjoy, then you must be searching for something that is lacking in yourself. I derived a great amount of satisfaction taking this:










and turning it into this:










The geared bike still has its place, but I think that the SS has a special meaning for me. This Schwinn was the first bike that I ever bought with my own money and I rode the hell out of it. Now it is like a new machine and I love it. I am going to race on it this weekend...wish me luck!

BTW...I do 3-4 footers on my SS too!


----------



## CB2 (May 7, 2006)

Mtn. Biker123 said:


> Sum it up...WE ALL LOVE RIDING! I am new to the SS phenom and this forum. I can tell you that my SS was originally a project bike because I did not have all of the parts to rebuild my hardtail with gears. Since then I have probably spent more time on the SS only because I do find it more challenging. There are some trails, especially in NM, that are just more fun on a hardtail SS. The foothills of The Sandias are right out my front door and rather than spend the gas to go elsewhere, I can take out the SS and make an otherwise boring ride with a sussy into a challenging and much more techy ride with the SS. It is a hobbie, as is building hot rods or motorcycles. You really have to enjoy it in all of its forms. If you feel so compelled to argue with people about why they are doing what they enjoy, then you must be searching for something that is lacking in yourself. I derived a great amount of satisfaction taking this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good Luck! Nice paint job!

Similar to you, I built a singlespeed with an old frame I had because I didn't have the parts to fix my geared bike. As I waited for those parts to show up I just had a complete blast riding the singlespeed. So much so I converted my main bike too.

The funny thing is, for the past 5 years, I thought singlespeeds were silly, and would be useless on the trails I ride. I found the only hills I can't clean are the ones that are iffy when I was riding with gears.

My first race on the singlespeed is next weekend.


----------



## Mtn. Biker123 (Sep 17, 2005)

And I wish you well in your race also. I started to read this thread and it took me back to another thread in my home forum in which someone was ranting on and on about some useless argument for or against something. Seems that sometimes we loose touch with why we are here in the first place. To share our experience (good and bad) so that others may benefit from our knowledge. Too many times we get lost in these "no-win" battles with the other side. You know the game...tic-tac-toe.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

ISuckAtRiding said:


> everything i've read and seen first hand has proved that geared is better.


Geared bikes are not better for singlespeeding though.


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

Nat said:


> Geared bikes are not better for singlespeeding though.


not sure that i agree, all depends on your riding style. i've been training primarily on my geared bike for a couple months now and i just had my best SS race ever (out of like 15 races this year). my single speed had been ridden maybe 4 times in that period. I had passed some Semi Pro geared guys who got a 2 minute head start on us at the starting line, and i pretty much never do that on the SS.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

ISuckAtRiding said:


> not sure that i agree, all depends on your riding style. i've been training primarily on my geared bike for a couple months now and i just had my best SS race ever (out of like 15 races this year). my single speed had been ridden maybe 4 times in that period. I had passed some Semi Pro geared guys who got a 2 minute head start on us at the starting line, and i pretty much never do that on the SS.


You missed my point. Geared bikes are not as good for singlespeeding because they have gears and are therefore not singlespeeds. I'm not talking about racing. I'm talking about riding a singlespeed. Race results are completely unimportant. Riding for joy is. Remember, this is the singlespeed board, not the racing and training board.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

i don't necessarily think that "devolving" from a 3x9 to a 1x9 means that a 1x1 is where i will eventually end up, as implied by a previous poster.

for me, the 1x9 does greatly simplify things in that i only have one shifter to think about. for me, it's really not even a weight thing, or an esthetics thing, it's 100% a functional thing. i like the range of the 1x9, and find myself using just about the full range of gears overy varying terrain, and i think it is capable of handling just about anything but the most extreme of conditions. my only complaint is that i find myself doing a lot of double shifts, the gear gap is just too small, which is why the 1x5 would seem ideal, keep the same range as the 1x9 but give me more room to work within each gear.

to anyone with the capability of doing so: please make a 5 speed drop-in conversion package that performs as well as the current 9 speeds! i think you would be suprised how many people would be interested in trying that fairly cheap option. it seems like all we would need is a replacement cassette with correct spacing and hyperglide ramping setup correctly, and maybe some derailleur tweeks (longer adjuster bolts?).

i think that would totally rock


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

Nat said:


> You missed my point. Geared bikes are not as good for singlespeeding because they have gears and are therefore not singlespeeds. I'm not talking about racing. I'm talking about riding a singlespeed. Race results are completely unimportant. Riding for joy is. Remember, this is the singlespeed board, not the racing and training board.


well i misinterpreted what you said since you werent very clear and frankly noone was even arguing that point so i really dont even know why you said it.
people have been making points throughout this thread and forum about how single speeds make you faster or slower. I was just adding my point of veiw and experiences towards the subject. Thats what people do on a web forum. Since i race a single speed, i dont see why i cant discuss it here. I see alot of passionate posts in this thread alone, including yours. Doesnt that belong in the Passion Forum by your standards?


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

ISuckAtRiding said:


> well i misinterpreted what you said since you werent very clear and frankly noone was even arguing that point so i really dont even know why you said it.
> people have been making points throughout this thread and forum about how single speeds make you faster or slower. I was just adding my point of veiw and experiences towards the subject. Thats what people do on a web forum. Since i race a single speed, i dont see why i cant discuss it here. I see alot of passionate posts in this thread alone, including yours. Doesnt that belong in the Passion Forum by your standards?


You can say whatever you want but so will I, and if you know how to read metamessages you'll find that I'm always crystal clear.


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> i don't necessarily think that "devolving" from a 3x9 to a 1x9 means that a 1x1 is where i will eventually end up, as implied by a previous poster.
> 
> for me, the 1x9 does greatly simplify things in that i only have one shifter to think about. for me, it's really not even a weight thing, or an esthetics thing, it's 100% a functional thing. i like the range of the 1x9, and find myself using just about the full range of gears overy varying terrain, and i think it is capable of handling just about anything but the most extreme of conditions. my only complaint is that i find myself doing a lot of double shifts, the gear gap is just too small, which is why the 1x5 would seem ideal, keep the same range as the 1x9 but give me more room to work within each gear.
> 
> ...


a 1x9 has crossed my mind and i even went as far as to make a quick change conversion for my PUSS to go from 1x1 to 1x9 but i found the gearing to not be quite right. I think the way to go would be a 11-34 rear and a 36t front if it were to be done at all. of course it all depends on your terrain but on my normal training routes i have some long flats and the big ring really helps with building leg power. obviously if all you ride is techy or steep single track then a 1x9 would probably be sufficient. a 36 in the front wouldnt be too bad but it would require me to run a 18-20 in the rear depending on the trail and the largest sprocket i own is an 18. Its easy enough to buy some i guess but i'm lazy when it comes to that.


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

Nat said:


> You can say whatever you want but so will I, and if you know how to read metamessages you'll find that I'm always crystal clear.


what the hell is a metamessage?


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

ISuckAtRiding said:


> what the hell is a metamessage?


What do you mean?


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

Nat said:


> What do you mean?


Dogs dont know its not bacon.


----------



## ofg3216 (Sep 1, 2006)

nice tomato!! i just sold my blue one to some lucky guy. I built up a custom.

for you other folks that don't... singlespeeding sucks, don't try it. I hear Trek has a new Full Suspension 3X10 comming out that will suit you better.


----------



## rockhound (Dec 19, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> i don't necessarily think that "devolving" from a 3x9 to a 1x9 means that a 1x1 is where i will eventually end up, as implied by a previous poster.


I say a 2x8 drivetrain over a 1x9 drivetrain.


----------



## DaveVt (Jun 13, 2005)

Front D's suck. I've smashed my knee off my stem after dropping the chain enough to just not want a front D.


----------



## SingleSpeedSoldier (Mar 24, 2006)

I went from a 1x1 to a 1x7 two weeks ago and really like the set up. 

I got tired of changing out the gearing everytime my legs got strong enough to push something taller and running out of top end on the longer rides.

Now I have 48x28 to 48x11. Was riding 36x16 before.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

SingleSpeedSoldier said:


> I went from a 1x1 to a 1x7 two weeks ago and really like the set up.
> 
> I got tired of changing out the gearing everytime my legs got strong enough to push something taller and running out of top end on the longer rides.
> 
> Now I have 48x28 to 48x11. Was riding 36x16 before.


interesting, i came across a few 1x7 but i believe they were lower end shimanos, no XT or comparable. which one are you using?


----------



## SingleSpeedSoldier (Mar 24, 2006)

I have some billet derailleur that I got for like $30, and an old gripshift.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> interesting, i came across a few 1x7 but i believe they were lower end shimanos, no XT or comparable. which one are you using?


dug a little more and found the XT 7 speed. just for fun i took a closer look at how the cassettes are laid out and compared them:

7 speed 14/32
---------------------------------------------------
cogs: 14-16-18-21-24-28-32
tgaps: 2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 4 - 4

7 speed 12/28
---------------------------------------------------
cogs: 12-14-16-18-21-24-28
tgaps: 2 - 2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 4

9 speed 11/34
----------------------------------------------------
cogs: 11-13-15-17-20-23-26-30-34
tgaps: 2 - 2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 4 - 4


```
[B]comparing the cog spread[/B]


      14  16  18  21  24  28  32
11  13  15  17  20  23  26  30  34
  12  14  16  18  21  24  28


[B]comparing the tgaps[/B]


      2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 4 - 4
2 - 2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 4 - 4
  2 - 2 - 2 - 3 - 3 - 4
```
so the tooth count jumps are really about the same, they just shift the shorter 7 speed range towards the upper or lower end depending on which way you go and lop off the rest. unfortunately this doesn't really solve the problem of having too narrow a gap between jumps, and you lose range in the process.


----------



## Traktor (Oct 18, 2004)

*Truly*

Hey man, I love singlespeeding so much. It's really about simplicity brother. For instance, I'm so totally SS that I have this blender that I converted to single speed. I tried just using it as a single speed without converting it but my biotch kept going into the liquify and whip settings. I was like, hey no babe, don't use anything but puree, keep it pure honey. But she didn't seem to get it. So then I took all the buttons off with a screwdriver except puree. Now its a sweet single speed machine and I gotta tell you, when I'm making a smoothee, its solid core simple. It just feels right to use the puree setting. Only one speed, one choice. Sure its more challenging but I'm so the SShi+ that it aint nothing to me to liquify something at the puree setting or grate some gdam nuts on the puree. I'm finding that my smoothees are getting made quicker and better since I converted. You just don't get it do you? My girlfriend didn't get it either, Maybe someday she'll see the light and come back to me. Meantime I'm the SShzbit Mo Fo one speed puree stampeed. And if you jakes want to use other settings on your blenders, I am totally alright with that, not everyone can be the topdog Mo Fo that I am.


----------



## Tracerboy (Oct 13, 2002)

Best thread ever! Go on brothers, let that troll twist your minds little bit more.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

*bows*


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

Traktor said:


> Hey man, I love singlespeeding so much. It's really about simplicity brother. For instance, I'm so totally SS that I have this blender that I converted to single speed. I tried just using it as a single speed without converting it but my biotch kept going into the liquify and whip settings. I was like, hey no babe, don't use anything but puree, keep it pure honey. But she didn't seem to get it. So then I took all the buttons off with a screwdriver except puree. Now its a sweet single speed machine and I gotta tell you, when I'm making a smoothee, its solid core simple. It just feels right to use the puree setting. Only one speed, one choice. Sure its more challenging but I'm so the SShi+ that it aint nothing to me to liquify something at the puree setting or grate some gdam nuts on the puree. I'm finding that my smoothees are getting made quicker and better since I converted. You just don't get it do you? My girlfriend didn't get it either, Maybe someday she'll see the light and come back to me. Meantime I'm the SShzbit Mo Fo one speed puree stampeed. And if you jakes want to use other settings on your blenders, I am totally alright with that, not everyone can be the topdog Mo Fo that I am.


Ironically enough, you joke but did you realize the top end hamilton beach industrial bar blenders are single speed? Even funnier yet, it is for simplicity and ease of maintenance. With several friends of mine who own bars, one finally ended up in my home after many complaints of failing blenders. This thing is a beast and it has worked flawlessly for many years. Good choice of analogies there my friend :thumbsup:


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

and my heavy duty juiceman blender has worked great for years too, and it's not even top end i think i paid like 50 bucks shipped. i use the full range of speed settings depending on what im blending, and it seems to work very efficiently that way. 

no fuss, no maintenance issues, just crisp clean speed changes at your fingertips. hmm, that sounds vaguely familiar...


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

:skep: :lol:


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> and my heavy duty juiceman blender has worked great for years too, and it's not even top end i think i paid like 50 bucks shipped. i use the full range of speed settings depending on what im blending, and it seems to work very efficiently that way.
> 
> no fuss, no maintenance issues, just crisp clean speed changes at your fingertips. hmm, that sounds vaguely familiar...


Hmm ... my even heavier duty Vita-Mix blender has one speed (coincidentally, I paid 50 bucks for it too, at a garage sale) and has worked fantastically for years too -- you could blend rocks with it if you wanted. No fuss, no maintenance issues, no speed changes -- why the hell would you want to downshift a blender anyway? One speed is all you need: ON!


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

i find that for bigger chunks and harder frozen items a slower speed does a better job at breaking the stuff up. sure a higher speed would work but it would just take longer and not be as efficient


----------



## Ross W. (Jul 3, 2006)

your all pussies

I mash it with my muscular hands.


----------



## noslogan (Jan 21, 2004)

*AAHHHhhh!!!!*



salimoneus said:


> i find that for bigger chunks and harder frozen items a slower speed does a better job at breaking the stuff up. sure a higher speed would work but it would just take longer and not be as efficient


AAAHHHhh you must be a frapppecchino drinker.

Not sure why Glowboy mentioned Vita-Mix (freakin Ausies). Personally I'd mention margaritas but, I don't use a blender. No need for speeds. I just poor.


----------



## Suffer (Sep 16, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> i find that for bigger chunks and harder frozen items a slower speed does a better job at breaking the stuff up. sure a higher speed would work but it would just take longer and not be as efficient


For cutting up the strawberries in you daquiri?


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> i find that for bigger chunks and harder frozen items a slower speed does a better job at breaking the stuff up. sure a higher speed would work but it would just take longer and not be as efficient


You obviously haven't tried a Vita-Mix. Actually, its speed isn't that high. Weaker blenders use high speeds to make up for their lack of power. If you've got enough power behind it, one speed is plenty!  Besides, if you've got stuff that's that hard to break up, pulsing is better than lowering speed.



noslogan said:


> Not sure why Glowboy mentioned Vita-Mix (freakin Ausies).


 Huh? Sal mentioned his Juiceman blender, I brought up my Vita-Mix blender. What's not to understand? And neither I nor Vita-Mix are Ausies [sic].


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Suffer said:


> For cutting up the strawberries in you daquiri?


protein smoothies. soooo much better with gears, errr i mean frozen fruit :thumbsup:


----------



## Lucky 7 (Oct 20, 2005)

If you use the Magic Bullet, you can prepare omlettes, chili, nachos, pasta sauce, salsa, and smoothies....all in the same machine!! If you order in the next ten minutes, we'll throw in a second Magic Bullet...ABSOLUTELY FREE!!!!! Again, you can cut, chop, puree, blend, mix, and crumble in 1...2...3.....it just that easy!!! Order now and we'll also throw in the blender cups with their own handles and lids....ABSOLUTELY FREE!!!!! But you must order now, so call that number on your screen!!!!


----------



## Suffer (Sep 16, 2005)

Lucky 7 said:


> If you use the Magic Bullet, you can prepare omlettes, chili, nachos, pasta sauce, salsa, and smoothies....all in the same machine!! If you order in the next ten minutes, we'll throw in a second Magic Bullet...ABSOLUTELY FREE!!!!! Again, you can cut, chop, puree, blend, mix, and crumble in 1...2...3.....it just that easy!!! Order now and we'll also throw in the blender cups with their own handles and lids....ABSOLUTELY FREE!!!!! But you must order now, so call that number on your screen!!!!


Yeah and it is a single speed.


----------



## MellowCat (Jan 12, 2004)

*I use...*

one of these.

http://www.gasblender.com/detailed.htm

Two stroke adds a nice finish to your drink!

MC


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Lucky 7 said:


> If you use the Magic Bullet, you can prepare omlettes, chili, nachos, pasta sauce, salsa, and smoothies....all in the same machine!! If you order in the next ten minutes, we'll throw in a second Magic Bullet...ABSOLUTELY FREE!!!!! Again, you can cut, chop, puree, blend, mix, and crumble in 1...2...3.....it just that easy!!! Order now and we'll also throw in the blender cups with their own handles and lids....ABSOLUTELY FREE!!!!! But you must order now, so call that number on your screen!!!!


is that the one where they blend the frozen drink right inside the mug, then screw on a special cap to cover the threads, and have several different colors so everyone remembers which drink is theirs?!?!?!

like the goofy tall dude in the background with no acting experience and the curly hair and super fake smile says... "THAT'S INCREDIBLE!"


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

so is it about performance or is it about having fun?


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

noslogan said:


> AAAHHHhh you must be a frapppecchino drinker.
> 
> Not sure why Glowboy mentioned Vita-Mix (freakin Ausies). Personally I'd mention margaritas but, I don't use a blender. No need for speeds. I just poor.


I thought you just drank beer and whatever you keep in that mystery flask of yours!


----------



## eurorider (Feb 15, 2004)

If you guys truly loved riding, you would all have geared bikes to prevent your knees from being blown out (long term damage?)


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

eurorider said:


> If you guys truly loved riding, you would all have geared bikes to prevent your knees from being blown out (long term damage?)


Why, do you know of any proven association with singlespeeding and long-term knee damage?


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

eurorider - I truly love riding, have been doing it for 35 years and my knees were bad from the get go. Riding has only made them stronger. 

Singlespeeding is the absolute shizzle and I do not know of any long term studies that would indicate that running one gear causes any more knee problems than running multiple gears.

I now run an SS on the road and on the trail and have to remember not to neglect my other bikes.


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

Obviously this conversation can only go to the next inevitable question at this point. I just stepped up to the new larger blender blades. So much more momentum to chop with, it's simply amazing and is the obvious choice for single speed blending.

Who's going fully rigid on their blenders?


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

The 29 cm blender blades take a fraction of a second longer to get up to speed than the 26 cm blades and need a slightly stronger motor but once they're spinning they really hold momentum.

They really work best in a fully rigid blender.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

The 29 cm blender blades take a fraction of a second longer to get up to speed than the 26 cm blades and need a slightly stronger motor but once they're spinning they really hold momentum.

They really work best in a fully rigid blender.


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

You also get more contact area with a 29cm blade which really helps to do some choppin'


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

So how many people in this thread can HONESTLY say they dont take drugs besides myself?
Actually, how many people in this thread besides myself arent high right now?


----------



## SS-Rider (Feb 27, 2006)

The bottom line is if we have to explain it to you then you will never ever get it! :thumbsup:


----------



## Anonymous (Mar 3, 2005)

ISuckAtRiding said:


> So how many people in this thread can HONESTLY say they dont take drugs besides myself?
> Actually, how many people in this thread besides myself arent high right now?


I don't even drink beer. The strongest thing I take is a Claritin, or a Motrin after a good crash. 
edited to add: Unless you count cafine.


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

SS-Rider said:


> The bottom line is if we have to explain it to you then you will never ever get it! :thumbsup:


I get why I ride SS. 
I just dont like the "holier than thou" additude that alot of people in the scene portray. It is almost as as bad as those ***** road weekend wariors that will snub you if your lycra isnt color coordinated. Dont get me wrong, i've met tons of cool SSers but many if not most of them barely give the time of day to gearies, even though most gearies have alot of respect for us. I see it in this thread, in this forum, at every race, and almost every ride. I see the same groups of single speeders every time i ride the local canyons and i say hi all the time. If i'm on my geared bike, i get snubed. If i'm on the SS, i get a big cheery hello. I've NEVER been snubed by a gearie when i'm on my SS. 
Bottom line is, they both have pluses and minuses. If you like it, GREAT! go out and ride it. Just dont come across like you or your bike are better because frankly, if you were THAT good, you probably wouldn't have time to dick around on the SS.


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

Anonymous said:


> I don't even drink beer. The strongest thing I take is a Claritin, or a Motrin after a good crash.
> edited to add: Unless you count cafine.


Wow, props to you. I've quit drinking on and off durring the racing season and i really didnt see any improvement by quiting (actually i was faster when i did drink, but i'm sure its not related) so i fell off the horse and now i barely remember the after party after the races lol. One of my good friends and training buddy doesnt drink at all. He's got awesome endurance and he usually beats me in races although we're fairly equal when we train. He's a gearie though. I'm trying to get him on a SS but he's low on funds. I'm sure he'd give Travis Brown a good run for his $$ since i'm fairly certain that he's faster than him on gears at least.


----------



## Tracerboy (Oct 13, 2002)

ISuckAtRiding said:


> Wow, props to you. I've quit drinking on and off durring the racing season and i really didnt see any improvement by quiting (actually i was faster when i did drink, but i'm sure its not related) so i fell off the horse and now i barely remember the after party after the races lol. One of my good friends and training buddy doesnt drink at all. He's got awesome endurance and he usually beats me in races although we're fairly equal when we train. He's a gearie though. I'm trying to get him on a SS but he's low on funds. I'm sure he'd give Travis Brown a good run for his $$ since i'm fairly certain that he's faster than him on gears at least.


Eh, technically speaking T. Brown is not the fastest ss in the world as of 2005 where he got beat at sswc.


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

fanghasyou said:


> Eh, technically speaking T. Brown is not the fastest ss in the world as of 2005 where he got beat at sswc.


He also got beat at National Championships i believe. I know he isnt THAT fast, but someone else in this thread used him as an example so i figured i would too. besides, we all have bad races. sometimes i get beat by people i regularly hose. doesnt mean they are faster than me, it just means i probably drank too much


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

ISuckAtRiding said:


> He also got beat at National Championships i believe. I know he isnt THAT fast, but someone else in this thread used him as an example so i figured i would too. besides, we all have bad races. sometimes i get beat by people i regularly hose. doesnt mean they are faster than me, it just means i probably drank too much


C'mon, Travis and everyone who competes at that level is fast. Give a little credit (and take some for yourself too) where it's due.


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

Nat said:


> C'mon, Travis and everyone who competes at that level is fast. Give a little credit (and take some for yourself too) where it's due.


i know he's fast and i give him tons of credit. I just dont think he'd be on top if he was on gears.
If he was one of the fastest riders (geared included) then he'd probably be on gears. Unfortunately there isnt a huge future in mountain biking and there's an even smaller future in SS'ing at this point. It would be far more beneficial to be the fastest geared rider rather than the fastest SS'er (unfortunately). It sucks but alot of sponsors dont care if you're on a SS or not. They'd rather see you pull a faster lap time on a geared bike for the most part (from what i've experienced). What i've been noticing is that many pros who arent extremely competetive in the geared circuit go SS because its easier to score a win. Thats partially true with myself. Its far easier for me to win SS class than the geared class in most cases so it just looks better on my race resume.


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

eurorider said:


> If you guys truly loved riding, you would all have geared bikes to prevent your knees from being blown out (long term damage?)


Fortunately most of us have the brains to stand up on climbs. Knee damage is caused by pushing too hard while seated. Duh.:crazy:


----------



## SS-Rider (Feb 27, 2006)

ISuckAtRiding said:


> I get why I ride SS.
> I just dont like the "holier than thou" additude that alot of people in the scene portray. It is almost as as bad as those ***** road weekend wariors that will snub you if your lycra isnt color coordinated. Dont get me wrong, i've met tons of cool SSers but many if not most of them barely give the time of day to gearies, even though most gearies have alot of respect for us. I see it in this thread, in this forum, at every race, and almost every ride. I see the same groups of single speeders every time i ride the local canyons and i say hi all the time. If i'm on my geared bike, i get snubed. If i'm on the SS, i get a big cheery hello. I've NEVER been snubed by a gearie when i'm on my SS.
> Bottom line is, they both have pluses and minuses. If you like it, GREAT! go out and ride it. Just dont come across like you or your bike are better because frankly, if you were THAT good, you probably wouldn't have time to dick around on the SS.


Where I live its the other way wround the gearies talk smack & point & laugh at you
but people here also mostly ride to be seen & like to show off their $2,000 FS bike with the lastest techo bits


----------



## gatman (Jun 10, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> no i remained skeptical and actually took another ride few rides on some real trails and realized how horribly inefficient and limiting SS was. thankfully im not impulsive and think something through before jumping ship just because other people have been brainwashed.
> 
> i ultimately decided it's going to become a 1x3-9 speed bike, still working out the deatils but that's where i am at now


All I can say is when you go in thinking that it is not going to work, guess what?? More often than not, it does not work.

You don't like it? Fine, I could care less if you do or don't. I love it. That is all I need for me. :skep:


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

ISuckAtRiding said:


> i know he's fast and i give him tons of credit. I just dont think he'd be on top if he was on gears.
> If he was one of the fastest riders (geared included) then he'd probably be on gears. Unfortunately there isnt a huge future in mountain biking and there's an even smaller future in SS'ing at this point. It would be far more beneficial to be the fastest geared rider rather than the fastest SS'er (unfortunately).* It sucks but alot of sponsors dont care if you're on a SS or not. They'd rather see you pull a faster lap time on a geared bike for the most part (from what i've experienced).* What i've been noticing is that many pros who arent extremely competetive in the geared circuit go SS because its easier to score a win. Thats partially true with myself. Its far easier for me to win SS class than the geared class in most cases so it just looks better on my race resume.


Racing is in the end a form of advertising for the sponsor, right? If Travis were racing a geared bike and not winning, would we take much notice? But everyone knows about "Travis the pro who races that Trek singlespeed" though. I bet his sponsors like the exposure.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Nat said:


> Racing is in the end a form of advertising for the sponsor, right? If Travis were racing a geared bike and not winning, would we take much notice? But everyone knows about "Travis the pro who races that Trek singlespeed" though. I bet his sponsors like the exposure.


exactly. so it sounds like we've come full circle back to page 1: SS is all about the attention and being unique


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> sounds like we've come full circle back to page 1: SS is about the attention and being unique


Are you still here? Have you put your bike together _yet_?


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

*Hmmm...*



salimoneus said:


> exactly. so it sounds like we've come full circle back to page 1: SS is all about the attention and being unique


Apparently, singlespeeding isn't the only pursuit which salimoneus considers unnatural, and feels the need to vocally condemn ad nauseum rather than simply accept that it's not for him:

http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=2297669&postcount=41


----------



## Marrkie (Aug 17, 2004)

So Salimonius does not like bum love or SS. I am sure by his weak logic that means all SS'ers like bum love. 

One up the bum, no harm done


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

GlowBoy said:


> Apparently, singlespeeding isn't the only pursuit which salimoneus considers unnatural, and feels the need to vocally condemn ad nauseum rather than simply accept that it's not for him:
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=2297669&postcount=41


Hardly. I think there are several good applications for SS bikes, and I mentioned those several pages back if you bothered to even read the thread. I have a feeling you haven't though and just wanted to drag some other totally irrelevant post into the mix. Try again BlowBoy.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

hey boys and girls, just thought i'd stop in and rejuvenate the best thread ever

so how are all you freaks enjoying your gearless rigid twenty niners "with no bar ends because it's not esthetically pleasing to the eye" ?

just curious, how did you feel when you found out that SS really was just smoke and mirrors after all just like uncle Sal said, and when you went to dump the junk on ebay you come to find out that nobody else wants it either. that musta been a real bummer.

we should make this thread a sticky and rename it to "SS Exposed"


----------



## CB2 (May 7, 2006)

Thanks for dropping in Mr. Sunshine.
Sorry, the charms haven't worn off. In fact, singlespeed has even made me a better technical rider too.


----------



## Suffer (Sep 16, 2005)

Contrare, monfrare, I actually sold everything except my SS. I now only have a SS, a commuter, and 2 road bikes. Life is so much simpler. Lately my time has been spent on my new ride, my Ducati Monster S2R1000


----------



## ~gomez~ (Sep 26, 2006)

Uncle Sal........:ciappa:


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

Yeah riding an SS sucks  ..specially in winter.... where the geared bikes stop shifting because of the mud :lol: (I do ride geared too...just not when the trails are super muddy)


----------



## JUNGLEKID5 (May 1, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> not really sure how that compares. how about this, why not tell the 4-wheelers to mod their rigs so they only have one gear, would be very curious to see how they respond =)
> 
> to me trying to explain SS would probably go something like "yea well i took my mountain bike and did a BMX conversion on it because i like pedalling my ass off on flats and blowing my wad on uphills (the ones im not forced to walk)"
> 
> so i guess what this comes down to is just wanting to feel like your young again? yea i think there's a name for that....isn't it called a midlife crisis?


 MIDLIFE CRISIS? ok smart guy some of us sser are really on the young side.. so no its not a midlife crisis.. we just like the purist form..


----------



## dip n ride (Jun 9, 2006)

Uncle Sal! Check out what I found bro:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-speed_bicycle

If all the answers given in the last 10 pages weren't enough of an explanation for you, that, by default, is the end-all-be-all of reasoning behind singlespeed mountain biking.

But really, I got a kick out of all your bickering and retorts.


----------



## gonzo (Feb 18, 2004)

*keep it safe and stay in line*

Child.......... innovation, revolution you are NOT but simply a pack follower.......keep it safe and stay in line

Let others explore so you can read about their exploits and comment on how lame that is. You are no Columbus or Niel Armstrong. Thats OK and I do not critize you - to each his own..

Peace........:thumbsup: ..


----------



## datako (Aug 27, 2004)

salimoneus - isn't that some sort of bug that gives you the sh*ts?

I think you're doing a good job of that with this thread. Keep it up - we don't want to get too serious about ourselves :thumbsup:


----------



## obi_twan_kenobe (Dec 5, 2005)

So, salimoneus, what kind of response did you expect? You attack whatever reasons SSers have for riding their rigs and then mock the responses of those whom you offended. Do us all a favor and go to the 1x3 forum...oh, wait, there is no 1x3 forum.


----------



## pitmang1 (Sep 11, 2005)

sally is why there is an ignore list


----------



## bikeuphill9 (Apr 23, 2006)

Midlife Crisis? Far from it (I hope). I am 19 and started riding SS three months ago. I still ride fully geared 2x9 on the road and suspension w/ 3x9 on most mtb rides. I use my SS for buzzing around campus, doing urban riding, getting groceries, and when the spirit moves me (about once or twice a month) on some rolling trails. SS riding forces me to concentrate on my form, some thing which geared riding compensates for. When I am sloppy on the SS, I loose traction, fall over, or have to walk a hill. If I am sloppy on my full suspension C'dale, then I shift gears and forget about. But what it all boils down to is having fun. So if you find you 1x to more fun than a SS, enjoy it. I am going to stick with what works for me and that is SS (soon to be rigid and 29er). Oh ..... GET OUT AND RIDE!!!


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> we should make this thread a sticky and rename it to "SS Exposed"


Sal, your children must be quite special, because you sure are retarded. Over 6 months later and you are still obsessed with this topic? You should seriously seek help. Of all the pathetic things I have ever seen on the internet, this trainwreck of a thread absolutely takes the cake.

I have never in my life seen some loser be so obsessed with what other people are doing in their own lives. It's pretty damn creepy.


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

I gotta feeling your nothin but dead weight over those peddles of yours sally (I gotta 'nother feeling too...thought it was you...nope...hemroids!!...I named 'em Sal, good times)!!:ciappa: 
We do love ya, keep checking back with us!!


----------



## aka brad (Dec 24, 2003)

*Guess I missed all the fun..*



salimoneus said:


> hey boys and girls, just thought i'd stop in and rejuvenate the best thread ever
> 
> so how are all you freaks enjoying your gearless rigid twenty niners "with no bar ends because it's not esthetically pleasing to the eye" ?
> 
> ...


Where was I when all this was going on? Must have been on a long ride. Anyway, I looked through a handful pages of this thread and I think somwhere the truth of SS got lost. To me trying explain why one rides a SS is like trying to prove the exsistance of god with science; it only necessary for those who have no faith; okay maybe that's a bad analogy but how you explain why something is fun? I ride SS because I have more fun on a SS than any other kind of bike. Sure their are advantages and disadvantages, but basically it's a hoot. Are there some folks that ride SS because it's a fad, sure, but that's okay. It just means there are now more and cheaper SS components and frames out there to choose from. To me SS is like magic, sometimes I alomost can't believe I can get away with a SS on some of the rides I do. Ands I'm sure it's the same for the majority of SS riders. Unfortunately, that sometimes results in a holier than thou attitude and of course that's wrong. The human condition is such that we set obtacles in front of us to make us stronger (it's the only way we get stronger). It's the reason you get that rush of pride when you finally clean the ride to the top of the hill; and maybe you did it on a SS!

1G1G, Brad


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

gonzo said:


> Child.......... innovation, revolution you are NOT but simply a pack follower.......keep it safe and stay in line
> 
> Let others explore so you can read about their exploits and comment on how lame that is. You are no Columbus or Niel Armstrong. Thats OK and I do not critize you - to each his own..
> 
> Peace........:thumbsup: ..


that's amusing. so you're suggesting that the SS movement is using some sort of revolutionary new thing, whereby everyone joining the sport will suddenly become a more skillful rider and discover new frontiers. very amusing indeed.

that sounds about like the typical rhetoric that's been spewed all along. if you believe that then your mind has been stolen along with the rest.

oh, and by the way in case you haven't noticed, single speed drivetrains have been around longer than many of us put together. nothing new, nothing revolutionary. up until recenty you only found that old technology on either beach cruisers or childrens bikes, right where it belongs. yea an SS MTB sure sounds like a ground breaking discovery to me!


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

mud'n'sweat said:


> Sal, your children must be quite special, because you sure are retarded. Over 6 months later and you are still obsessed with this topic? You should seriously seek help. Of all the pathetic things I have ever seen on the internet, this trainwreck of a thread absolutely takes the cake.
> 
> I have never in my life seen some loser be so obsessed with what other people are doing in their own lives. It's pretty damn creepy.


No children as of yet, although I used to ride the trails with a baby strapped in front, but unfortunately my deraileur snapped off on a rock causing the chain to lock and I went straight into a tree, little fella had no chance. Haven't been able to get another babysitting job ever since...


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

train wreck.somebody invite pvd to the party at least he put some thought into his bashing


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> Try again BlowBoy.


Name calling. Nice. What are you, 6 years old?



salimoneus said:


> Hardly. I think there are several good applications for SS bikes, and I mentioned those several pages back if you bothered to even read the thread. I have a feeling you haven't though and just wanted to drag some other totally irrelevant post into the mix.


I declined to respond to this post earlier so that this thread could die. But since it's back, I will respond now.

That other thread is 100% relevant, and it's incredible to me that don't see the connection. In both cases, you get really worked up attacking others for their personal decisions that *do not affect you*. And in both cases the answer is MYOB: *If you don't like the behavior you disagree with, do not engage in it.* It's really that simple.

Of course, as it often turns out in these cases the greatest hysteria towards others' private behavior is usually just a mask for curiosity. If I found out 5 years from now that you were a closeted gay SSer, I wouldn't be surprised. And the only thing I would condemn about you then is your hypocrisy.

I hope you can learn to live and let live. Go out and ride your bike, enjoy doing it and respect the other riders out there doing the same thing. If you can't shake this obsession with others' behavior, maybe consider "experimenting" and answering your questions once and for all while you're young and unattached ...


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> so how are all you freaks enjoying your gearless rigid twenty niners


 Well, on Sunday I rode my geared FS 29"er, but only shifted it about 8 times. Also rode my SS hardtail 29"er with a Thudbuster and a Brooks saddle that day. Then the next day I rode my rigid 29"er with an ultra-odd 3-speed internally geared hub. Hope your head doesn't explode when you fully visualize the freakshow that is my bike collection!


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

GlowBoy said:


> Of course, as it often turns out in these cases the greatest hysteria towards others' private behavior is usually just a mask for curiosity.


yea that's what those groups usually say in order to defend their choice or position. sometimes people have different positions that conflict fundamentally to the core, there is no psycho analysis to be done here. sorry but that just doesn't fly. of course this applies more to the other thread you posted than some silly SS vs geared discussion, which is pretty irrelevant in the big picture.



GlowBoy said:


> If I found out 5 years from now that you were a closeted gay SSer, I wouldn't be surprised. And the only thing I would condemn about you then is your hypocrisy.


finally some signs of humor, that was actually pretty funny!


----------



## BSIDE (Nov 21, 2006)

WOW! This is better than watching Jerry Springer.

It's been a good show. If anybody else's opinion mattered on why riding should be fun for me I could join in this pissin' match.


----------



## lucero (Nov 21, 2006)

I ride both geared and SS. Singlespeed helps me get a better workout in, cause I don't have the option of taking it easy. Maybe I'm weak for not shifting up and choosing the hard way out, but not needing to worry about that choice feels like a blessing sometimes. I don't ride my Unit to beat random people on the trail or to prove myself superior, I do it because it's fun and rewarding. I won't even say I'm a better or stronger cyclist than you. I will say that coming in here to try and force a point makes us all glad we don't see you on the trail every day.


----------



## codfish (Dec 12, 2006)

*Don't ride angry*

It's sort of curious that you felt the need to come back after such a long time and start up this tread in such a manner. Given all the messengers and courier's that ride fixies and single speeds is it really that surprising that this type of riding has migrated to trail riding? It doesn't matter how great or cheap or "better" a geared bike is if you don't get out on it or have fun. If riding single speed makes riding fun for people and they end up riding more isn't that the objective? I guess it must be frustrating for you that so many people have so much fun on their ss rigs. Perhaps you should look at it like the exercise machine that sits in the basement or the unused health club membership. Both great ideas in theory but a complete waste if unused. With respect to under utilized bikes their will always be people who aren't suited for ssing or don't get into it. I've found that I see far more geared bikes going at fire sale prices on ebay with the usual tag line "sat in the garage and was never used". Also consider that some trail riders may not be traversing mountain passes or ride relatively even terrain, or perhaps they had a bad derailleur experience, who knows, who cares? I suggest that you not get too worked up about it - try to have fun like all of us - we really don't care what type of bike you ride or how you ride it. Just don't ride angry.


----------



## noslogan (Jan 21, 2004)

*Esthetics? This ain't Fung Shwayyyyyy*



salimoneus said:


> hey boys and girls, just thought i'd stop in and rejuvenate the best thread ever
> 
> so how are all you freaks enjoying your gearless rigid twenty niners "with no bar ends because it's not esthetically pleasing to the eye" ?
> 
> ...


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

*This whole thread is a train wreck...but I guess I likes it!!*



hollister said:


> train wreck.somebody invite pvd to the party at least he put some thought into his bashing


hollister,
If this is aimed at me I am sorry I offended you:skep: , but you all gotta realize that an educated response to Sal seems to get lost in translation (I, along with the rest of us, tried the "educated" post early in the thread quickly realizing the thread was not for education but entertainment for Sal...I mean the guy's gotta be showing all his buddies how long the thread has gone on for...And I REALLY hate to say this but Sal has been a master at getting hot-heads like me to respond thus keeping the thread alive and providing Sal and his buddies DAYS of entertainment value) this is shown time and again by his posts on this thread (he is not hearing the statements but simply planning a response attack). It is VERY difficult to explain something new to someone who already has their mind made up that you are in the wrong on the subject (also, do you really think he cares or do you think he just revisits the thread simply "to stir the pot"?:idea: ...I pick choice two).:yesnod:

btw; "No children as of yet, although I used to ride the trails with a baby strapped in front, but unfortunately my deraileur snapped off on a rock causing the chain to lock and I went straight into a tree, little fella had no chance.:yikes: Haven't been able to get another babysitting job ever since..." Sal:lol:

Sal's quote here shows lots of constructive thought huh?? OR...Does he loose his message (sarcasm or not) by stating deraileur issues thus showing once again why we SS?? Ha ha, thinking the sarcasm was great (and actually funny, see Sal can make funnies!!) but the bottom line to that statement; Sal needs a SS because he brakes deraileurs. SSimple.:winker:

Why am I posting if I have come to these realizations?? Because Sal gets under my skin and I start to bash back.:madmax: What happens after that is I re-read the posts and find all the humor, thus I end up mainly laughing at myself:blush: ...So I post an uneducated response taking a shot at Sal (cause I am bored like Sal and it made for "fun times")...that's what he's doing to us. Now I find this thread very fun and gotta throw a shout out...THANK YOU SAL...I truly mean it:smilewinkgrin: , you are helping me not take myself too seriously...something I have needed help with for a while. Taking anything too seriously is an issue the SS has been getting onto me about, the supermodel (my SS) says SSers can't be too serious and if I want the relationship to continue I need to RELAX!:madman: I love her so "I'll do it!" I said.:thumbsup: Now me and the supermodel have a GREAT and healthy relationship!! She also said if I won the lotto the first thing I must do is set Sal up with her sister, she seems to think Sal needs some rigid ti 29er love!!:crazy: Sorry for all the smilies guys but they sure are fun...just like this thread!!:cornut:


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

miSSionary said:


> ...entertainment for Sal...


Yes, he's totally f'ng with everyone and everyone is walking right into it. I'm having fun yet wincing while reading each response. It's like watching Ultimate Fighting.

Sal's all, "Who wants some? Who wants some? Come get some!"


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

Nat said:


> Yes, he's totally f'ng with everyone and everyone is walking right into it. I'm having fun yet wincing while reading each response. It's like watching Ultimate Fighting.
> 
> Sal's all, "Who wants some? Who wants some? Come get some!"


Ha ha ha Nat...Right you are! I never knew a train wreck could be so entertaining!


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

miSSionary said:


> hollister,
> If this is aimed at me I am sorry I offended you:skep: ,:


not aimed at you.

so whats your opinion on blenders


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

hollister said:


> not aimed at you.
> 
> so whats your opinion on blenders


Hollister,
Sweet! My opinion on blenders??...to many speeds to deal with (can't seem to get the thumb or fingers to shift speeds??...Crazy those thingies are)!! That is one answer or; great for Sal...As in "Blenders"..."come and meet your new mate" type stuff.:thumbsup:


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

miSSionary said:


> Hollister,
> Sweet! My opinion on blenders??...to many speeds to deal with (can't seem to get the thumb or fingers to shift speeds??...Crazy those thingies are)!! That is one answer or; great for Sal...As in "Blenders"..."come and meet your new mate" type stuff.:thumbsup:


my last blender came with dual control:sad:


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

Well you know because of the multiple speeds and my non-ability to use a blender I have resorted to putting everything in my mouth...Then I run in circles for 30 seconds, turn, go the other direction for thirty seconds, stand on my head, crunch my teeth together 50 times and then repeat the running in circles part. 
You know the worst part?? My girlfriend is ALWAYS asking me to make her smoothies...She hasn't actually been invited to see the process yet, she just looks at the clean blender on the counter and then I get bonus points...because she also thinks I cleaned the blender.:thumbsup:


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

*i need a towel*



miSSionary said:


> Well you know because of the multiple speeds and my non-ability to use a blender I have resorted to putting everything in my mouth...Then I run in circles for 30 seconds, turn, go the other direction for thirty seconds, stand on my head, crunch my teeth together 50 times and then repeat the running in circles part.
> You know the worst part?? My girlfriend is ALWAYS asking me to make her smoothies...She hasn't actually been invited to see the process yet, she just looks at the clean blender on the counter and then I get bonus points...because she also thinks I cleaned the blender.:thumbsup:


i just spit coffee all over my monitor........ funniest thing I've read in a while:thumbsup:


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

Thanks hollister, I'll add a disclaimer next time so no more coffee has to be sacraficed in order to keep a thread alive!


----------



## pisiket (Sep 19, 2006)

*Mine is related to midlife crisis*



salimoneus said:


> so i guess what this comes down to is just wanting to feel like your young again? yea i think there's a name for that....isn't it called a midlife crisis?


First, I am still young at 40 and better in all aspects than any previous version of myself. 

Second, yes, SS came as one of the gifts of midlife crisis. I love it! I enjoy every single day as if it's my last one. 

Ali


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

miSSionary said:


> Well you know because of the multiple speeds and my non-ability to use a blender I have resorted to putting everything in my mouth...Then I run in circles for 30 seconds, turn, go the other direction for thirty seconds, stand on my head, crunch my teeth together 50 times and then repeat the running in circles part.
> You know the worst part?? My girlfriend is ALWAYS asking me to make her smoothies...She hasn't actually been invited to see the process yet, she just looks at the clean blender on the counter and then I get bonus points...because she also thinks I cleaned the blender.:thumbsup:


Extremely funny!!! :lol: :thumbsup:


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

miSSionary, I actually love a good troll thread, but it takes a bit more wit for me to actually get a laugh out of it. Unfortunately for Sal, he does not fit the bill.


----------



## aka brad (Dec 24, 2003)

*Premature ejaculation?*



salimoneus said:


> To me trying to explain SS would probably go something like "yea well i took my mountain bike and did a BMX conversion on it because i like pedalling my ass off on flats and blowing my wad on uphills (the ones im not forced to walk)"


This very common with folks who are beginner SS. Like all those you are young and stupid, you think you have to give it all right now, rather than save something for the long run. When you start off SS, just like biking in general, the hills are very intimidating. With a geared bike you go for the bail out gear and give it for all it's worth. With SS. the inexperienced tend to do the same. Soon however, if you stick with it, you discover that can stand and give 40-60% and make it up the hill with about as much energy as sitting and spinning. I know that conventional wisdom says that standing takes more energy, but if you are like me and have like no fast twitch muscles, slow plodding climbing is a lot less tiring. So, if you don't have the life experience (or SS climbing experience), you going to give it all its worth and curse the bike. Or you can give it some time and see if you have the capacity to pick it up. And if you can't, don't blame SS, it just isn't for you.

1G1G, Brad


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

crisillo said:


> Extremely funny!!! :lol: :thumbsup:


Thanks crisillo, just don't tell the little lady, she has no idea she's getting ABC (already been chewed) smoothies!!:devil:


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

miSSionary said:


> Thanks crisillo, just don't tell the little lady, she has no idea she's getting ABC (already been chewed) smoothies!!:devil:


OK! I won't tell! 

Besides it could be seen as an "added value" to the smoothies... customly chewed  :lol:


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

crisillo said:


> OK! I won't tell!
> 
> Besides it could be seen as an "added value" to the smoothies... customly chewed  :lol:


Ooooh GREAT point crisillo, unfortunately, she'd have to know the process in order to understand the "added value"[email protected]!!...AND this is how she's gonna look when she DOES find out>>>:incazzato:...and then I will look like>>>:shocked:


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

miSSionary said:


> Ooooh GREAT point crisillo, unfortunately, she'd have to know the process in order to understand the "added value"[email protected]!!...AND this is how she's gonna look when she DOES find out>>>:incazzato:...and then I will look like>>>:shocked:


Ok... so let's keep it just between us (the thousands of users of mtbr) :lol:


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

crisillo said:


> Ok... so let's keep it just between us (the thousands of users of mtbr) :lol:


Sounds like a plan!!...FYI...I made a smoothie for Sal as well (his even came with other special offerings...VERY HUSH HUSH), so don't tell him either!!


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

miSSionary said:


> Sounds like a plan!!...FYI...I made a smoothie for Sal as well (his even came with other special offerings...VERY HUSH HUSH), so don't tell him either!!


ok.. ssshhhhhh, everybody!


----------



## BShow (Jun 15, 2006)

Its unfortunate that this thread is still going.


----------



## ernesto_from_Wisconsin (Jan 12, 2004)

*I like bikes*

I like bikes, no matter what you ride, I like it. My preference, for me, single speeds.


----------



## Lucky 7 (Oct 20, 2005)

I think it's official: Sal is the most skilled troll to ever drop a line. All other trolls are laid to ruin in the shadow of his efulgent crapulence.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

miSSionary said:


> ...I made a smoothie for Sal as well (his even came with *other special offerings*...)


yea thanks bro, looks delish, can't wait to dig in...

.


----------



## Kalgrm (Sep 22, 2005)

I don't ride a SS, but if I did, it would be for only one thing: *The Challenge*.

I've just read all the posts here. You guys rise to the bait every time! (Good work Sal). The thing that I find the hardest to comprehend in all this is that so few of you relate back to the real reason you're using only one gear.

* It is the CHALLENGE of doing it with only one gear.*

The challenge is what makes it fun - knowing there are easier ways to ride the trails and yet foregoing them for the harder option because you feel better about yourself afterwards.

Several posters skirted the issue, and many said it was more fun, but what makes it fun is pushing yourself beyond the psychological and physical limits you had imposed upon yourself. Challenging yourself with goals which seem out of reach, and then reaching them, is both gratifying and FUN.

Personal challenge is the reason we do this sport (or any other for that matter). If the challenge were not important to us, we would ride a motorbike or drive a car (which was the point an earlier poster tried to make, but was twisted into a discussion on whether a geared or SS motorbike is more efficient.)

Why do people climb mountains?
Why do people swim across oceans?
Why do people run marathons?
_ Why do people troll internet forums?_
Why do people do crosswords?
Why do people ride SS MTBs?
One answer: _The Challenge_.

Sal, if you don't understand why someone would want to challenge themselves, you have no hope of understanding why people rate SSing so highly: the two are inextricably linked.

Oh, and why don't I ride SS? I'm already challenged enough with my hardtail on the tracks I ride now. However, I can see a SS in my future, but only when the tracks lose the challenge they now present for me.

Cheers,
Graeme


----------



## datako (Aug 27, 2004)

Kalgrm said:


> I don't ride a SS, but if I did, it would be for only one thing: *The Challenge*...Several posters skirted the issue, and many said it was more fun, but what makes it fun is pushing yourself beyond the psychological and physical limits you had imposed upon yourself...


I'm not sure that it is any more challenging than riding an ordinary mtb.

I took a geared bike out the other day and didn't find it any easier. What I did find was that I had to be really careful in nadgery bits because I didn't want to bash the chain misaligning thingy and this interfered with my control. I seemed to be in the wrong gear all the time. I was having to concentrate on *operating* the bike rather than *riding* it.

Riding SS is like a stopped clock, at least the time is right twice a day. Worse still was having to carefully clean all the goobie bits out of the chain bending device at the end of the day - my SS is happy with a hosedown.

I have nothing but admiration for guys who can ride geared bikes, avoid bashing their dangly bits and remember to change gear at the right time - that's a real CHALLENGE


----------



## EastCoast (Sep 25, 2005)

Kalgrm said:


> The thing that I find the hardest to comprehend in all this is that so few of you relate back to the real reason you're using only one gear.
> 
> * It is the CHALLENGE of doing it with only one gear.*


But that's not why I ride SS. So don't assume.

This is the dumbest thread ever. And I just added to it.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

datako said:


> ...
> I seemed to be in the wrong gear all the time.
> ...


that brings up a good point, i'm sure some people decide to go SS because they have a hard time judging where their power zone is and matching the "engine" speed with the trail speed. all i can say there is practice makes perfect. just like when you learned how to drive a stick shift, after a while it becomes instinctive. i guess if you're one of those people that just can't drive a stick shift and the idea of having manual gears scares you then maybe SS is the best option for you.

as far as the standard MTB gearing being over complicated, i can definitely relate to that feeling, which is why i went 1x9 and things are greatly simplified because there is only one shifter. just like in any other vehicle be it a motorcycle, car, boat, 4 wheeler, whatever. one shifter, nice and simple, and after a while it becomes instinctive. the only trick is you can't buy junk and expect it to perform.


----------



## SLX (Aug 15, 2005)

Wow I can see now why they made a forum for single-speed and a forum for drive-train.


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

*Speak for yourself*



Kalgrm said:


> the real reason you're using only one gear.
> 
> * It is the CHALLENGE of doing it with only one gear.*
> 
> The challenge is what makes it fun - knowing there are easier ways to ride the trails and yet foregoing them for the harder option because you feel better about yourself afterwards.


There are a lot of different reasons people go singlespeed. For many people, challenge is one, or in your case the primary reason. But in my case it doesn't even make the top 5.

For me the biggest reason is *performance in adverse conditions.* I ride in rain and mud . A lot. I don't like doing drivetrain maintenance after every ride, I don't like squeaky pulleys, and I don't like my chain skipping because my cassette has packed up with mud or snow As for the drier half of the year, it comes down to a close (and overlapping) second reason: *simplicity*. Why have all these gears and clutter you don't really need? Whenever people ask me "why SS?" I reply that the more pertinent question is "why 27 speeds?" For the riding I do on my hardtail (most of my mountainbiking) one gear works fine. On my commuter I've found that 3-5 gears is optimal, and my new FS will probably end up 1x5. For me it's not about purity or doing what everyone else does -- it's about riding _what works for me_.


----------



## mcoco01 (Sep 29, 2005)

I thought this was a mountain biker's forum. Who let all these roadies in? God, they can be so *****y sometimes.

I've never heard of a cyclist who didn't want to buy more bikes. Who didn't want to fill his entire garage with bikes. Hell, fill the whole world with bikes. The reason to ride a SS (or any bike) is because it's a bike and we like to ride bikes. All my bikes are fun to ride. Sometimes I even go cruise around with my wife on her comfort bike at 5-6mph. I'm on a high-end bike going 5-6mph and I'm not thinking about the performance or what gear I'm in or the challenge or which crankset would make me tear up this technical section of bike path just a hair faster. I'm thinking, "Dam, this is fun and my wife's ass looks great on a bike."

Whenever I start taking riding too seriously I stop having fun. As soon as I go back to having fun, all the good things happen: I get faster, ride better, enjoy the challenge, blah, blah, blah.

I was hit by a car 3 weeks ago and I'm sitting here with a broken back, ankle and hip. Not to mention an ass swollen to the size of this thread. So since I can't ride for another month or two, do me a favor: *Shut up and go ride! All of you. On whatever bike you want. With as many or few gears as you want.*


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

i go away for a week and look what happens. yea i think it needs a tensioner of some sort, but that aside i think it's actually growing on me. it was either that or the HT had to go. damn you all!

.


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> i go away for a week and look what happens. yea i think it needs a tensioner of some sort, but that aside i think it's actually growing on me. it was either that or the HT had to go. damn you all!
> 
> .


Welcome to the dark side!! :devil:

It's looking real good! congrats!:thumbsup: :thumbsup:


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> i go away for a week and look what happens. yea i think it needs a tensioner of some sort, but that aside i think it's actually growing on me. it was either that or the HT had to go. damn you all!
> 
> .


Ha ha haha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

*Pig w/ a wing flying in the sky?*

:yikes: Suspension seat post and bar ends...not even close!:nono: Put some Rennen to straighten the noodley chain and swap out the rear with 16t or 18t cog...getting closer.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

SingleTrackHound said:


> :yikes: Suspension seat post and bar ends...not even close!:nono: Put some Rennen to straighten the noodley chain and swap out the rear with 16t or 18t cog...getting closer.


I'm just appreciating the fact that Sal is trying it _at all_ (and telling us about it)!


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

Nat said:


> I'm just appreciating the fact that Sal is trying it _at all_ (and telling us about it)!


Word. Hollywood should make a movie about this thread where Sal becomes the moderator in ss forum. I may actaully buy a dvd copy.


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> yea thanks bro, looks delish, can't wait to dig in...
> 
> .


OMG, now that is great!!:thumbsup:


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

Enjoy the SS Sal...Off to go live today like it is my last...getting hints that h3ll has froze over!! SSeriously though, enjoy!!:thumbsup:


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

SingleTrackHound said:


> Word. Hollywood should make a movie about this thread where Sal becomes the moderator in ss forum. I may actaully buy a dvd copy.


In about six months we'll meet MTBR's newest member: SSalimoneus!


----------



## aka brad (Dec 24, 2003)

*Hey....*



SingleTrackHound said:


> :yikes: Suspension seat post and bar ends...not even close!


 Thats just wrong :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono:


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

yea yea, i already yanked the sus post off and replaced with the original, much better. as much as i like em the bar ends will probably go once i pick up a riser bar.

i honestly don't even remember what cog i ended up going with, i just picked the one that was closest to the "magic gear" so i could ride it. it was somewhere near the middle of the 11-32 =)

i only envision myself using this bike as a townie/cruiser and maybe for flat trails, i am still not sold on SS for the "real" trails, but since i have it i'm sure i will give it another go at some point

so far, the things i like most after doing this conversion, are the weight savings, the simple look, and the fact that when i pick up the rear end and bounce it, there are no clanks or chain noises to be heard, the rubber hitting the cement is all you can hear. i have to admit there is something pure and clean about that which just feels good.


----------



## nogearshere (Mar 7, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> i have to admit there is something pure and clean about that which just feels good.


tell me this thread isn't going to end.

please.


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

aka brad said:


> Thats just wrong :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono: :nono:


I was just joking. I own bar ends myself.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

*the death of bar ends, the birth of an SS*



SingleTrackHound said:


> I was just joking. I own bar ends myself.


i do like the bar ends, but since i have come to prefer a good riser with backsweep + upsweep, and now that i'll actually be riding this bike again, i'm afraid their time has past


----------



## bykegnurd (Jun 8, 2005)

*If I could have...*

I'd have put a bullet into this b!thces brain 4 months ago... Then we'd all have missed Sal's miraculous transformation. However, after several climaxes, the crescendo has been realized, someone drop the curtain.


----------



## pinkheadedbug (Aug 16, 2006)

22 pages and counting... LOL


yeah I bought a diSSent. so sue me.


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> i do like the bar ends, but since i have come to prefer a good riser with backsweep + upsweep, and now that i'll actually be riding this bike again, i'm afraid their time has past


Silver bar ends go mighty nice with the rest of your silver scheme. Keep her! Thudbuster shall also go mighty nice with the Zoke you have up front. Get yourself some tensioner and get some dirt!

This thread has definitely added a whole new meaning to single speed conversion.


----------



## P.I.-SSer (Feb 24, 2006)

*how bout a...*

Jones H-Bar, or an On-One Mary for your ride, Sal?


----------



## ISuckAtRiding (Jul 7, 2006)

Be prepared to get 3 times faster by your third ride. If you're doing it right, you should be able to climb Mt. Fuji by your fifth.


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

I _knew_ it!

Next comes the poofting.


----------



## big mario (Jan 8, 2007)

*fun thread*



mcoco01 said:


> I'm on a high-end bike going 5-6mph and I'm not thinking about the performance or what gear I'm in or the challenge or which crankset would make me tear up this technical section of bike path just a hair faster. I'm thinking, "Dam, this is fun and my wife's ass looks great on a bike."
> 
> I have been a peeping tom on this thread. just reading and not posting. I haven't been able to read it for about a week because of time but I checked it out tonight and i am with you MCOCO01. That is one main reason I like riding with my wife. And to Sal.. , I was against the whole ss thing too. Thinking, why wouldn't you want gears? Then a buddy got one and I did the old keep it in one gear thing for a few rides until I talked myself into spending the $$$ for another bike. Best thing I did. Fun, quiet, good work out, blah blah blah. Can't wait to install my King headset and hubs (sisterinlaw works for them or i wouldnt own them) to break the silence on a ride. Hope the thread keeps going though, it's been fun


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

are you fahqing kidding me? :skep:


----------



## Ross W. (Jul 3, 2006)

This thread was so great if you just skipped over all the serious posts.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

wow im really seeing the need for a tensioner now. i took a lady friend out for her first ride on a build i did for her, and i decided to bring the "new" SS since my main rig is awaiting new tires, and i figured it would keep me from running up ahead of her too far. i must have dropped the chain about half a dozen times and we had to cut the ride short, and this was a relatively smooth trail.

i can definitley now see that taking the SS to rides where you may be the strongest rider is a good option, or maybe when taking out newer riders. at least it seems to make it more challenging in those situations.

im actually looking forward to going back out with a tigher chainline, and perphaps a smaller cog, the 21 was a bit much when paired with the 32


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

with rennen, proper chain, and 18t

should be able to hit the trails this weekend and see how she/i holds up...

.


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

Looking good, sal!

You could also try to use the Rennen to push up instead of down to increase chain wrap on the cog...


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> with rennen, proper chain, and 18t


Nice!:thumbsup: Dig the silver bullet schem...


----------



## flee (Oct 3, 2005)

*Conversion of the ages.*

Props to everyone for keeping it cool. Yeah...a little flaming...but not too bad considering the circumstances.

Sal.......major props for having the sack to come back with pics of a built up SS. AND....it looks noice.

word.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

i just took her out for some XC on Sunday, my first real trail ride on the bike, and i'm real glad i waited for my last ride of the weekend to do it cuz i got my ass kicked. i was able to avoid walking all but a couple spots, and found myself out of the saddle about 90% of the time unlike my FS rig which is usually the opposite in comparison. the last few miles of the ride were pretty brutal, a long steady climb and the only way i was gonna finish it was standing and grinding, i just didn't have any leg left at that point.

it was amazing how fast i made it up a couple medium grade hills that i normally pace myself up and around the obstacles. it was a blast just hammering it all the way up, but i really felt it during the recovery. it was a little disappointing not to even have attempted one difficult climb in particular that i can normally do some damage on, but there were plenty of other little challenges to make me forget about that quick enough.

yall are some masochistic mofos. somehow i think i'm beginning to appreciate that though


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

salimoneus said:


> i just took her out for some XC on Sunday, my first real trail ride on the bike, and i'm real glad i waited for my last ride of the weekend to do it cuz i got my ass kicked. i was able to avoid walking all but a couple spots, and found myself out of the saddle about 90% of the time unlike my FS rig which is usually the opposite in comparison. the last few miles of the ride were pretty brutal, a long steady climb and the only way i was gonna finish it was standing and grinding, i just didn't have any leg left at that point.
> 
> it was amazing how fast i made it up a couple medium grade hills that i normally pace myself up and around the obstacles. it was a blast just hammering it all the way up, but i really felt it during the recovery. it was a little disappointing not to even have attempted one difficult climb in particular that i can normally do some damage on, but there were plenty of other little challenges to make me forget about that quick enough.
> 
> yall are some masochistic mofos. somehow i think i'm beginning to appreciate that though


:lol: yeah..that's the good stuff.. it is a bit humbling in a way...

glad you had a blast!


----------



## Jeffington (Nov 16, 2006)

I'm cleaning up my keyboard from the puke I just spewed after reading the more recent posts...

Having labored through this thread, during which I was increasingly shown by Sally that she is a complete douche-bag, I now have to read all the " way to go Sal" respnses just because she has finally decided to do what she said she was gonna do initially and then wishy washed back to the holier than thou A**hole that she is!

All along this complete dick has demonstrated his complete lack of technical knowledge and understanding incorrectly stating pretty much everything. From understating the weight loss, the impact that weight loss would have, drive train loss impact, arguing against the fact that manufacturers dictate what their pro riders ride and that they DON'T want to promote the less profitable blinged down SS bikes, the fact that if you take a current podium finishing pro riding a 23 LB FS Geared bike and put him on a 15 LB SS rigid (yes that is a attainable weight), on SOME courses he would KICK ASS, etc.

In addition, ragging on the fact that a SS is an improved workout by saying if you weren't getting that kind of workout on a FS Gearie, you weren't trying hard enough.

Even though he is now seemingly wide eyed with wonder and going through some of the process that most of us have already gone through, it doesn't change the fact that while debating the merit of SS, he was a complete troll, dick, douche-bag, etc. It's kind of like the old guy who is a complete A**hole and you think you should give the guy a break because he's old. Well, unless his age has seriously broken down his mental make-up, he is just displaying what he's always been perhaps a little more transparently. If he's acting like a dick at 75, chances are he was a dick at 45 and a bigger dick at 30. That's the category I lump Sally into.

Yeay, she may now wholeheartedly embrace the SS way, but prior to her journey she showed her true colors in this forum. And frankly, she may give up on it and go back to her close minded criticism of all the reasons we love the genre.

Sally just doesn't get it and probably never will. I say who cares?

I'd be happy to expound on my technical statements, but I have already wasted enough finger strength on her. I do feel better, though!


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

Thank you for voicing my thoughts exactly! Sal is a schmo. Albeit, a schmo on a SS, but still a schmo.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Jeffington said:


> *she* is a complete douche-bag,
> ...
> *dick* has demonstrated *his* complete lack
> ...
> ...


are you trying to imply that i'm a shemale or something? if not pick a damn gender and stick with it jerky. you bore me.


----------



## SlowSSer (Dec 19, 2003)

aside from Jeffington's name calling, i don't think he's/she's/it's far off


----------



## SlowSSer (Dec 19, 2003)

SingleTrackHound said:


> Word. Hollywood should make a movie about this thread where Sal becomes the moderator in ss forum. I may actaully buy a dvd copy.


single speed conversion. hmm. very _film noir_ as in black and white, bad lighting, subtitles, and it's got to eb in french


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

let's not get carried away here. after a long holdout and some effort (mostly just banter) to resist the temptation, yea i did the conversion, and yea i found some fun in it. BUT...

1) i still don't think it's suited for anything more than mostly smooth XC trails with little baby hills, which i spend relatively little time doing

2) it just happened to be the only way i could justify keeping my beloved hardtail because it sat untouched for so long and was on it's way out the door

3) i think it's a nice option for those times when riding with new or much less experienced riders. unfortunately so many of you are so damn arrogant and elitest, that i'd bet very few actually take the time to introduce new riders to the sport

4) i think it's a great self-punishment tool

let's not confuse the issues though, all that aside i still feel that a well maintained and operated geared bike is always going to be faster and allow me to experience all of the mountain. i love climbing the steep stuff.

so i'm not looking for anyone's endorsement or acceptance, i could give a sh1t less whether or not you think im a phony or maybe you don't even think the bike is really mine. in fact i don't even want to be part of your cult, i still think the guys that consider SS a religion and way of life are total whack jobs. but hey enjoy whatever you enjoy. this is just one guy's take on it.


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

Nice generalizations, Sal. 


salimoneus said:


> 1) i still don't think it's suited for anything more than mostly smooth XC trails with little baby hills, which i spend relatively little time doing


So in other words, you couldn't make it up the climbs on your usual routes on the SS. Don't worry, you'll get stronger if you keep at it. Then you'll know what it's like to really fly up those hills. Remember, a race is won on the climbs.
I'm certainly no more fit or skilled than the average rider who posts here (mid-pack Sport class), but I can assure you I can climb just about anything on my SS that most do on their geared HT. 


salimoneus said:


> 3) i think it's a nice option for those times when riding with new or much less experienced riders. unfortunately so many of you are so damn arrogant and elitest, that i'd bet very few actually take the time to introduce new riders to the sport


I prefer to ride my SS when I'm with experienced and fairly fit riders. Any SS rider can tell you, a rookie wouldn't stand a chance with keeping up. 
Arrogant and elitest?:skep: Yeah, we're the ones who started the thread to call you out and say you weren't allowed to try the kool-aid...


salimoneus said:


> so i'm not looking for anyone's endorsement or acceptance, i could give a sh1t less whether or not you think im a phony or maybe you don't even think the bike is really mine.


The only reason you came back with pics of your SS was to gain acceptance from the tribe. If you really couldn't care less, you wouldn't have bothered. BUSTED. That's OK. We already knew you couldn't afford the membership: kinsmanship with your fellow rider.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

I'm just tickled you made The Biggest 180* of 2006!


----------



## SlowSSer (Dec 19, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> let's not get carried away here. after a long holdout and some effort (mostly just banter) to resist the temptation, yea i did the conversion, and yea i found some fun in it. BUT...
> 
> 1) i still don't think it's suited for anything more than mostly smooth XC trails with little baby hills, which i spend relatively little time doing


baby hills only? mostly smooth? XC?

hmm. then what the heckl was i doing on my SS on saturday on a 40 mile race with 8000 feet or so total elevation gain? what happened on the bigger climb? who was i passing? geared bike people. how many? about a dozen. i dont claim to be in the best shape, but the advantage was clear.

here's the route:

http://www.geoladders.com/show_route_maps.php?using_sport=8&route=3781

i'm sorry, but if we're all spouting opinions here, this race was better suited for a SS than a geared bike. and no, it wasnt with baby hills or anywhere near "mostly smooth" or XC.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Upchuck said:


> Nice generalizations, Sal.
> ...but I can assure you I can climb just about anything on my SS that most do on their geared HT.


that's not saying very much, a geared HT is usually what people start on, so i'm sure it's true you can climb with best of the noobs. hurrah for you.



Upchuck said:


> The only reason you came back with pics of your SS was to gain acceptance from the tribe. If you really couldn't care less, you wouldn't have bothered. BUSTED. That's OK. We already knew you couldn't afford the membership: kinsmanship with your fellow rider.


no, the reason i posted pics is because i think it's truly a beautiful bike after the conversion, i could look at the damn thing all day long, the simplicity, having removed the drivetrain parts emphasizes that "steel is real" and i can really appreciate that. i don't want acceptance, i just thought someone might appreciate her for what she is. i truly couldn't care less what you think of me, but insult the bike, then we have a problem


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

Touche, Sally. I should have said geared bikes. I only said HT's because there's a common misconception that the best weapon of choice for climbing is a HT rather than a FS. Just like there's a common misconception that all people are born with common sense. Thanks for setting me straight on both accounts.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

SlowSSer said:


> baby hills only? mostly smooth? XC?
> 
> hmm. then what the heckl was i doing on my SS on saturday on a 40 mile race with 8000 feet or so total elevation gain? what happened on the bigger climb? who was i passing? geared bike people. how many? about a dozen. i dont claim to be in the best shape, but the advantage was clear.
> 
> ...


wow you really passed a dozen guys on geared bikes? that's incredible! and of course we should assume that it was all because of the equipment and not the rider right?


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

Gear reduction therapy has been good for my riding soul.

And I'm still a mountain goat.


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> wow you really passed a dozen guys on geared bikes? that's incredible! and of course we should assume that it was all because of the equipment and not the rider right?


Your right Sal, it is about the rider. That's why you couldn't hack it and only found it doable on "baby" hills as you so appropriately put it yourself :thumbsup:


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

Nat said:


> I'm just tickled you made The Biggest 180* of 2006!


No doubt. Where are all those '04 Republican conventioneers when you need them? "FLIP! FLOP! FLIP! FLOP! FLIP! FLOP!"


----------



## Jeffington (Nov 16, 2006)

mud'n'sweat said:


> Your right Sal, it is about the rider. That's why you couldn't hack it and only found it doable on "baby" hills as you so appropriately put it yourself :thumbsup:


Ha Ha! Well said...

So Sal, you kinda remind me of some race car drivers I know. When they do well, it's all about them. When they do poorly, it's all about the crappy car... You're the same with a twist, if you can't make a hill on your SS, it's because of the bike, but when someone can, they're just a great rider!

Just because YOU can't get over anything but "baby hills", doesn't mean WE can't climb the steep stuff.

The only climbs I can't make are ones that I wouldn't have had more than a slim chance of making on my ex-geared FS bikes in small ring 1st or 2nd gear. Like I said in an old post elsewhere, I went through (and am continuing) a heck of a learning curve with my SS. (Started last November) For a couple of months I was making sections for the first time almost every ride. Just grow a pair and hang tough.

It IS mostly about the rider. "Baby hills".... the real reason for all this.... Wah!


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

if you're trying to tell me that i should be able to climb anything on my SS (32 x 18) that i do on the smallest ring on my 1x9 (32 x 11) then that's utterly ridiculous and you're blowing as much smoke as anyone else around here


----------



## electric mustard (Jul 23, 2005)

I love my SS and ever since I have ridden it (less than a year) my legs have become stronger, my fitness is climbing with every ride and my riding skills have developed exponentially. Yeah, the same thing was happening when I was riding my hardtail but not at the rate its happening now 
Also, its fun to blow past your mates on their hardtails when climbing steep hills:thumbsup:


----------



## Jeffington (Nov 16, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> if you're trying to tell me that i should be able to climb anything on my SS (32 x 18) that i do on the smallest ring on my 1x9 (32 x 11) then that's utterly ridiculous and you're blowing as much smoke as anyone else around here


I think you're confused again. 32X11 on your 1X9 would be your top end gear. Depending on your cassette, 32X 32 or 34 would be your ultimate climbing gear. And, yes, you and your SS should be able to climb over 95% of the climbs that you can do on your FS Geared Bike. Especially with 32X18 which, while a good beginner gear, is a little shorter than necessary for most rides. It would take some time and it will be one heck of a workout. Oh, but you don't need a different type of machine for that, you just work harder on your Gearie...

There are actually a couple of technical sections that I can clear on my SS that I rarely made on my gearie. Maybe it's the lighter weight (SS 19LB vs FS 24LB) or the fact that I hit it faster because I CAN stand up on the approach.

Your response, (other than the incorrect gear spec) indicates that you are still very much basing SS capabilities on your idea of what is possible rather than what truly is possible. And not just by the sharp end of the grid.

I will admit that, prior to taking my own SS journey, I thought SSers were nuts and that they couldn't possibly make some of the climbs I was working so hard to clear with my gearie. I will also admit that I was WAY WRONG!! I do it regularly and I am by no means a top dog rider. There are plenty of SSers who will make me look silly. Plenty of gearies too for that matter!

Oh, and just because I thought they were nuts didn't prompt me to go on their forum and moronically tell them so! (Had to get one name call in.)

Again, I'm wasting finger strength on you...


----------



## tomimcmillar (Oct 27, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> with rennen, proper chain, and 18t
> 
> should be able to hit the trails this weekend and see how she/i holds up...
> 
> .


A picture is worth a thousand words, and with that messed up saddle angle you're apparantly running.....

Well, that pretty much tells me all I need to know.....


----------



## tomimcmillar (Oct 27, 2005)

Jeffington said:


> .......
> 
> There are actually a couple of technical sections that I can clear on my SS that I rarely made on my gearie. Maybe it's the lighter weight (SS 19LB vs FS 24LB) or the fact that I hit it faster because I CAN stand up on the approach.
> 
> .........


So, does mean that you're unable to pedal out of the saddle/sprint on your FS?

interesting......


----------



## Jeffington (Nov 16, 2006)

*Oh, Brother*

Yeah, I can't. Only on the magical SS can I stand and pedal. 

If you've ridden both, you know that standing and pedaling on a mushy is no fun and energy wasting. Certainly not what I would do prior to a technical climbing section. Everybody I know just sits, spins and maneuvers through it.

Perhaps my wording wasn't the best, but I think you knew where I was going. Are you related to Sal?


----------



## tomimcmillar (Oct 27, 2005)

Jeffington said:


> Yeah, I can't. Only on the magical SS can I stand and pedal.
> 
> If you've ridden both, you know that standing and pedaling on a mushy is no fun and energy wasting. Certainly not what I would do prior to a technical climbing section. Everybody I know just sits, spins and maneuvers through it.
> 
> Perhaps my wording wasn't the best, but I think you knew where I was going. Are you related to Sal?


nope, not at all....

Just found it ironic/funny to see that particular statement as a response to similarly written drivel that Sal & others have been posting. "Well, I'm only able to do like it this, so anything else is outside the realm of what's possible."


----------



## Jeffington (Nov 16, 2006)

Well, I guess drivel breeds drivel. It's coming out of the woodwork! And my keyboard!

I find it laborious and no fun to stand on a FS bike. I find it advantageous and enjoyable to stand on a single. But that's just me, I'm sure there are TONS of others that do it opposite and better than me. :thumbsup:


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Jeffington said:


> I think you're confused again. 32X11 on your 1X9 would be your top end gear. Depending on your cassette, 32X 32 or 34 would be your ultimate climbing gear. And, yes, you and your SS should be able to climb over 95% of the climbs that you can do on your FS Geared Bike.


yes i meant 32x34, my bad. your claim is still bogus. if you can climb 95% of the climbs using a 32x18 that you can do using 32x34, then you climb a lot of girly hills.



tomimcmillar said:


> A picture is worth a thousand words, and with that messed up saddle angle you're apparantly running.....
> 
> Well, that pretty much tells me all I need to know.....


that's the best you can do?

i took that pic just after the build, nothing had been adjusted yet. who cares though, like i said i spent about 90% of the time OUT of the saddle while on the SS anyway so how is the saddle angle even relevant

i stand and mash plenty when climbing with my 1x9 FS rig, and am in the camp that believes having both front and rear suspension makes the rider a better technical climber. you can't just blast up and over every hill, at least the ones i like to ride which are usually steep switchbacks and very rocky. i would be willing to bet that most all of you would peter out and be walking up after about 20 feet on your beloved 32x16 regardless of the suspension.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

When my rigid was geared the lowest gear I had was a 28:28 and folks couldn't believe I could climb the things I do without any real granny gear... quite often I'd be climbing in the middle ring while other folks were spinning in their lowest gear and things would have to get pretty intense for me to use the 28:28. I kept the 38 tooth middle ring when I converted the rigid to an SS that runs an 18 tooth cog in the rear.

My Trek HT SS has a 32:18 gearing and I can climb anything I did when this bike was geared as a 1 by 7 with a 32:34 (low) gear and usually climb thse hills faster as there is no option for me to spin. I use this bike for XC and singletrack riding.

And I hate walking.


----------



## ATBScott (Jun 4, 2006)

Being "New" to the SS thing - at least since I was riding all over creation on my 20" C/Brake as a kid in the late 60's... I decided to get a SS 29'er to do 2 things: Check out the 29" thing and to see if riding the SS would help me get stronger (or blow out my knees!). I find that on a short hill, I am sometimes the fastest - but also sometimes the one blowing up at the top! If I "reach for a gear" it is on the flats or slight downhill where I have spun out. If the hill is too steep/technical for me to get up on the SS, I go as far as I can, commit the spot to memory and see if I get up farther the next time! There is something that I like - sort of primitive/childish about the enjoyment I am getting from the SS, but I have to say that for longer and more epic rides, I am sure that I will also be riding my geared bike(s) also. Just like some people have completely drunk the Kool-Aid on the 29'er thing (which is pretty damn fun - like it for Rigid) I am also pretty sure that I'll have a 5+ inch travel 26" trailbike or three in the stable. SS is fun - it is a challenge, and it is a killer workout. I like it for rolling rides without long climbs, and they are great if it has been wet and mucky - less to clean/maintain. If someone tries and doesn't like - I can respect that but don't rain on someone's parade if they still dig it, and you think gears are better. Hell, we're all out there on the trail to have fun and keep/get fit. What type/style/brand/color of bike should be one of the last things we have on our minds.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

Scott..I must be regressing to my childhood as I just wrapped up a night's work on my 1933 CCM; it's a fully rigid, 28inch wheeled, C brake equipped, single speed.

Unlike the c brake equipped bikes I rode as a kid, this old girl has a rather robust single gearing of 52 and 18 which makes me think that folks were a lot tougher back in the 30's.

It's a fabulous ride and pushing the 52:18 isn't as hard as one would think and those big wheels really hold the bike's momentum.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Jeffington said:


> I find it laborious and no fun to stand on a FS bike. I find it advantageous and enjoyable to stand on a single.


Same here. Standing on a FS blows. It's like running on a mattress.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

ATBScott said:


> Being "New" to the SS thing - at least since I was riding all over creation on my 20" C/Brake as a kid in the late 60's... I decided to get a SS 29'er to do 2 things: Check out the 29" thing and to see if riding the SS would help me get stronger (or blow out my knees!). I find that on a short hill,* I am sometimes the fastest - but also sometimes the one blowing up at the top! *If I "reach for a gear" it is on the flats or slight downhill where I have spun out. If the hill is too steep/technical for me to get up on the SS, *I go as far as I can, commit the spot to memory and see if I get up farther the next time! * There is something that I like - sort of primitive/childish about the enjoyment I am getting from the SS, but I have to say that *for longer and more epic rides, I am sure that I will also be riding my geared bike(s) also.* Just like some people have completely drunk the Kool-Aid on the 29'er thing (which is pretty damn fun - like it for Rigid) I am also pretty sure that I'll have a 5+ inch travel 26" trailbike or three in the stable. SS is fun - it is a challenge, and it is a killer workout. I like it for rolling rides without long climbs, and they are great if it has been wet and mucky - less to clean/maintain. If someone tries and doesn't like - I can respect that but don't rain on someone's parade if they still dig it, and you think gears are better. Hell, we're all out there on the trail to have fun and keep/get fit. What type/style/brand/color of bike should be one of the last things we have on our minds.


I took note of your statements that I made bold. I feel the exact same way! I like how I'd have difficulty making it up a certain hill, even blowing sky high at the top, but then it'd be easier the next time. If I can't make a certain section or climb it sticks in my memory -- not because I _try_ to memorize it but because it just does. Unrequited love or something, like the girl you _should've_ asked out but didn't. For me it also extends to pondering the really long epics on which I _think_ a fs gearie would be the logical choice, "but damn, _could_ I make it on a singlespeed?" "What if I get half way out there and blow up?" I like that uncertainty because when you make it successfully it feels really rewarding.


----------



## tomimcmillar (Oct 27, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> ........
> i took that pic just after the build, nothing had been adjusted yet. who cares though, like i said i spent about 90% of the time OUT of the saddle while on the SS anyway so how is the saddle angle even relevant
> 
> i stand and mash plenty when climbing with my 1x9 FS rig, and am in the camp that believes having both front and rear suspension makes the rider a better technical climber. you can't just blast up and over every hill, at least the ones i like to ride which are usually steep switchbacks and very rocky. i would be willing to bet that most all of you would peter out and be walking up after about 20 feet on your beloved 32x16 regardless of the suspension.


The *bike* DOES NOT MAKE YOU A BETTER TECHNICAL CLIMBER!

Suspension is a tool/crutch that makes it easier for you to clean a technical section. If you can't clear a particular section of trail it on a rigid ss, but can on a dualie, the dualie has not given you some magical lift in ability, it has simply made it easier for you. Your skill level is still the same, regardless of what you're riding. I'm the same rider whether I'm on my Yeti, the road fixy, my mtn fixy, the regular road bike or my vintage Ritchey. My riding skills don't change based upon which bike I choose on a given day, get a clue.

And regarding your saddle issues. If you're gonna go on the intraweb and spray your esteemed knowledge all over the place, don't proudly post a picture of your ride that looks like it was set up by a 7yr old who knows nothing about proper fit, it does nothing for your credability. To say that saddle angle isn't relevant cuz you're out of it 90% of the time, does also this mean that you're rolling 90% of flat spinny sections out of the saddle, along with 90% of your descents? Not only do you apparently not know shite about fit, but you've also got plenty to learn about technique as well.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

Nat said:


> Same here. Standing on a FS blows. It's like running on a mattress.


that's what happens when you buy a lousy FS design, either that or you have poor pedaling technique. a good FS with a good rider will soak up the terrain with little bob and allow you to maintain more control while going over the obstacles

if all you know how to do is "stand and mash" then you better stick with your rigid SS 29er whatever else.

this reminds me of the guy that always found himself in the wrong gear. just because you can't hack it don't mean it don't work right, it just means that you could never get it right.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> if you're trying to tell me that i should be able to climb anything on my SS (32 x 18) that i do on the smallest ring on my 1x9 (32 x 11) then that's utterly ridiculous and you're blowing as much smoke as anyone else around here


You should not only be able to do it, you should be able to do it faster. If you can't, you need more time riding SS. Or maybe you should spend a little time at 32:20 before graduating to taller gears -- there's no shame in it. Or maybe SS just isn't going to work for you, especially given the attitude displayed in this thread. The man who says he can and the man who says he can't are both right.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> that's what happens when you buy a lousy FS design, either that or you have poor pedaling technique. a good FS with a good rider will soak up the terrain with little bob and allow you to maintain more control while going over the obstacles
> 
> if all you know how to do is "stand and mash" then you better stick with your rigid SS 29er whatever else.
> 
> this reminds me of the guy that always found himself in the wrong gear. just because you can't hack it don't mean it don't work right, it just means that you could never get it right.


Good pedaling technique on a FS means smooth spinning. I don't like doing that though. I like the feel of standing and a hardtail is what lets me do that most enjoyably. Having had multiple FS bikes in the past, I learned how to spin smoothly but I now _prefer_ to stand and mash, so that's why I selected a hardtail.

Edit: I never had any problems with shifting, being in the right gear, doing maintenance, or anything else a lot of people clain as reasons for picking a singlespeed. I don't even think someone instantly gets faster simply from hopping on a singlespeed (but if you ride one a lot it can force you to ride harder than you might have unless you were disciplined -- I was not). I just like how it feels. It makes me happy.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

that's great if you prefer to stand and mash on an SS, i have no problem with that. all i'm saying is that you are limiting the types of terrain you can climb using that style and setup whether you want to admit it or not. maybe it's because you don't have any steep technical terrain around, or perhaps you have to skip those sections now and have blocked them from your mind as viable trails.

not everything can be overcome with speed and momentum alone, and that is pretty much your only means with that style and setup.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

I am not limited on Downieville or Tahoe's long loose climbs riding with expert xc racers on FS geared bikes. I'm not limited in Bootleg Canyon's sandy, rocky, techinical short steeps. I've ridden all over the Costal and Intermountain West and have yet to be limited. Please tell me what I am skipping -- I'm always looking for a challenge.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> that's great if you prefer to stand and mash on an SS, i have no problem with that. *all i'm saying is that you are limiting the types of terrain you can climb using that style and setup whether you want to admit it or not. maybe it's because you don't have any steep technical terrain around, or perhaps you have to skip those sections now and have blocked them from your mind as viable trails.*
> 
> not everything can be overcome with speed and momentum alone, and that is pretty much your only means with that style and setup.


Yes, there are trails that I cannot climb on my bike, but I have been able to climb pretty much everything in my home vicinity, so it works for me 99% of the time. If I had a lower gear I might've been able to climb that last 1% of the time, but that's just something I accept by riding a singlespeed. I might have to walk once in awhile. Or maybe, if I train real hard, I might be able to make that climb next month, or next year.

Also, if I had a 6+6 FS I could've gone faster down the descent but I wouldn't have enjoyed the climb nearly as much. Those are trade-offs I'll take. When I was all about downhilling, I had a 6+6 fully. Now I'm more into climbing.

Can you see that I'm agreeing with you? Riding a singlespeed _is_ limiting. That's part of why it's so fun. You have only one gear from which to choose. With it, you make the climb or you don't. There's no option for shifting.


----------



## Upchuck (Jan 30, 2004)

Last year I raced on my SS for the first time. When I asked a fellow teammate SS'er what gear I should run for that particular course, he gave me some sage advice. 

No matter what gear ratio you run, it will always be the wrong one. It will either be too hard of a gear for a climb or too easy of a gear on the flats. You can't have it both ways. You will have the same disadvantages as any other SS rider out there. Just pick a gear you're comfortable with and ride it. Oh, and don't forget to call out "on your left" as you pass the gearies.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

sal...You're repeated comments about SS bikes not being able to handle steep technical terrain are completely bogus... perhaps you are only speaking from your own experience as I definately don't spend 90% of my riding time out of the saddle. 

If I can't climb it on my SS (running a 32:18) I'm not going to be able to climb it with a gearie and if I can't climb it, it's going to be a mother of a hill for anyone to climb. I could run a lower gear and probably dust off those climbs from hell but then I'd lose my top end speed which I find essential on those inital attacks. 

The guys here are starting to embrace the SS thing and I should soon have some company on rides where I'm the only maniac who's riding with only one gear.

Last year I rode my SS with guys who have some extremely decent FS bikes and hardtails and never felt like I was handicapped by my choice of bikes.

I have a rigid running a 38:18 for when our rides involves more high speed XC and moderate singletrack although the old rigid handles the steep and twisty stuff as well as my HT.

Geared bikes have their place and I have 9 of those besides the 4 SS bikes I ride... my non SS commuters run 3 and 21 or 24 gears depending on what wheelset I'm running and even when I ride a gearie I often find myself sticking it one one gear.


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

"loose climbs" and "short steeps" pretty much sums it up. in other words, you can't do any serious climbing on that thing, but hey there is no shame in sticking to the baby hills and low grade stuff, lots of people do and they still have plenty of fun.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> "loose climbs" and "short steeps" pretty much sums it up. in other words, you can't do any serious climbing on that thing, but hey there is no shame in sticking to the baby hills and low grade stuff, lots of people do and they still have plenty of fun.


What's an example of the climbs you're talking about?


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

salimoneus said:


> "loose climbs" and "short steeps" pretty much sums it up. in other words, you can't do any serious climbing on that thing, but hey there is no shame in sticking to the baby hills and low grade stuff, lots of people do and they still have plenty of fun.


If this is a response to the terrain I listed, its clear that you are not only and SS newb but an MTB newb (and a reading comprehension newb). Get a clue. _Then_ share your opinion.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

nm . . .


----------



## electric mustard (Jul 23, 2005)

STOP FEEDING THE TROLL:madman:


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

electric mustard said:


> STOP FEEDING THE TROLL:madman:


Troll? I figure he is just a little slow on the uptake. But either way, a waste of any more time.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

PeanutButterBreath said:



> Troll? I figure he is just a little slow on the uptake. But either way, a waste of any more time.


But every single one of you (us) enjoys jerquing off on threads like this. Admit it!


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

To dredge up one of my all-time favorite posts:



Francis Buxton said:


> .....can't......resist......poking......the......b ear........


[For non-29" board regulars, here's a link to the start of that memorable train wreck. Ranks up with this thread as one of the all time greats!]


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

GlowBoy said:


> To dredge up one of my all-time favorite posts:
> 
> [For non-29" board regulars, here's a link to the start of that memorable train wreck. Ranks up with this thread as one of the all time greats!]


I'm all nervous and giddy skimming through that mess from last year! Hoooo! I wonder if 514Climber made it to the race? Did he dehydrate? Somebody direct him to this thread so we can find out (and maybe have the biggest, baddest, messiest train wreck in history)!

Cage fight: Salimoneus v. 514Climber v. pvd. Who would win???


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

Yeah... I'd also like to know what kind of climbs Sal is talking about.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Sixty Fiver said:


> Yeah... I'd also like to know what kind of climbs Sal is talking about.


In my head I have an image of something like this. Okay, I'll concede that I would _probably_ have to walk the green and red routes, but I could sprint up the yellow. I'd huck the white on the way down and nose-wheelie to a stop for flair.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

Walk the green ?

Wuss.

LOL.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Sixty Fiver said:


> Walk the green ?
> 
> Wuss.
> 
> LOL.


Well, I _am_ geared 53/11x29, so...


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

oh common, that little baby peak had unicycle written all over it


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

salimoneus said:


> oh common, that little baby peak had unicycle written all over it


Sh!t, I bet I could do it on a _fully rigid _unicycle.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

Nat...

53:11 ?

I thought I was pretty tough to be riding a 38:18 where I do as well as riding a 52:18 on my cruiser and a 52:16 on my road bike.

My fixie will be running a 45:14 (86 gear inches) when I get the wheel built.

I'm also building up a new rear wheel for the rigid and think I will first try running a dual cog so I have an xc/road gear and a lower gearing better suited for the steep and twisty singletrack... a 38:20 would give it a gearing that is pretty close to the 32:18 on my HT SS (49 vs 46 gear inches).


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Sixty Fiver said:


> Nat...
> 
> 53:11 ?
> 
> ...


Just joshin'. My "all-around" ratio is only 34/19.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

Nat - I just came in from the shop where I was playing with the SS bikes...the road bike is now running a 52:18 for a little quicker dial up, smoother running, and more spin and I'm still figuring out what I'm going to do with the rigid's gearing. I want it to serve double duty as my xc bike / commuter (my commute is xc) and give it the gearing for some extreme stuff... ie. climbs from hell.

I think the dinglespeed is the way to go as I could then run a 2 by 2 with something like a 38:17 and a 28:28. A 28:28 low gear is what the bike had when it was a gearie and I never had a problem climbing anything with that. I have horizontal dropouts so a little wheel adjustment is possible. I've been running a 38:18 all winter and have been loving this gearing for snowy xc riding.

My HT runs a 32:18 for the really extreme stuff which is a little lower than your 34:19 so I guess I'm the wuss.

Cheers!


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Right now (as in tonight -- who knows what I'll be into tomorrow) I'm pretty hot-in-the-pants for a Surly Cross Check. My mental inventory tells me that I have just about everything I'd need to put together a new bike except for the frame, tires, levers, and down tube shifters. I haven't used down tube shifters since about 1982!

I want to get some panniers and reel out some 50+ mile road/singletrack loops this summer. If only it'd stop snowing!


----------



## chinamtb (Mar 10, 2007)

Have a go on a single speed you will be amazed!!! 
I have even managed to convert my mate and he swears by single speed now.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

Nat... I have quite a few old roadies with downtube shifters and shifting with them is as easy as bar mounted anythings. Many generations of racers did just fine on dt mounted friction shifters and the only thing I'd like better would be some vintage Suntour Barcons. 

My only issue is when I switch from a bike running the properly designed Suntours (mmmm !) to the backwards Shimanos.

.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Sixty Fiver said:


> Nat... I have quite a few old roadies with downtube shifters and shifting with them is as easy as bar mounted anythings. Many generations of racers did just fine on dt mounted friction shifters and the only thing I'd like better would be some vintage Suntour Barcons.
> 
> My only issue is when I switch from a bike running the properly designed Suntours (mmmm !) to the backwards Shimanos.
> 
> .


My first road bike had the DT shifters, so I don't think it'd take any getting used to for me. I'd like to run them if nothing else for the sake of nostalgia.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

Nat - My boys (14 and 16) discovered road biking last year and although they were pretty resisitant to trying it, it only took a single ride to convert them to another form of cycling. It didn't take them long to get comfy with the DT shifters.

In other news... my duallie project on the Kuwie morphed into a 1 by 3 at a time so I'm running a 13, 18, and 24 tooth cog in the rear (with the 38 up front) and used a Shimano road D to handle the tensioning and manual shifting duties. There's no shift on the fly and no bailout and the drive is smooth as buttah with virtually no chatter.

I basically have a higher commuting gear (38:13), an XC and singletrack gear (38:18) and a gear (38:24) for getting the old rigid through the gnarly stuff that the 38:18 won't handle. 

I have 41, 55, and 76 gear inches ay my disposal and it ony tales a few seconds to change my cog selection and the chainline through all three gears is great with the 38:18 being dead true.

It's like three SS bikes in one...


----------



## mud'n'sweat (Feb 16, 2006)

salimoneus said:


> if you're trying to tell me that i should be able to climb anything on my SS (32 x 18) that i do on the smallest ring on my 1x9 (32 x 11) then that's utterly ridiculous and you're blowing as much smoke as anyone else around here


Well, who knows what YOU should be able to do, that all depends on YOUR fitness and ability, which may need some work from the sounds of it. That is expected though, you have yet to spend time to acclimate to the SS.

Also, if you can climb a hill in a 32:11 gearing, you sure as hell better be able to do it at 32:18.


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Apr 10, 2006)

32:11 = 75 gear inches

32:18 = 46 gear inches

My road ss runs 76 gear inches and my HT SS runs 46 gear inches.

I don't think Sal was claiming that he could climb the extreme stuff on a 32:11 and a 32:18 is what I use for my most extreme SS riding...it's too low a gear for much of anything else.


----------



## E ! (Jan 15, 2005)

*Heya Sally!*



salimoneus said:


> i just took her out for some XC on Sunday, my first real trail ride on the bike, and i'm real glad i waited for my last ride of the weekend to do it cuz i got my ass kicked. i was able to avoid walking all but a couple spots, and found myself out of the saddle about 90% of the time unlike my FS rig which is usually the opposite in comparison. the last few miles of the ride were pretty brutal, a long steady climb and the only way i was gonna finish it was standing and grinding, i just didn't have any leg left at that point.
> 
> it was amazing how fast i made it up a couple medium grade hills that i normally pace myself up and around the obstacles. it was a blast just hammering it all the way up, but i really felt it during the recovery. it was a little disappointing not to even have attempted one difficult climb in particular that i can normally do some damage on, but there were plenty of other little challenges to make me forget about that quick enough.
> 
> yall are some masochistic mofos. somehow i think i'm beginning to appreciate that though


What's up with this?
Are you brainwashed now?
"please don't bring that SS brainwashing into here, this thread is about 1x9, not about simplistic and limiting designs such as those used on child's bikes. you have your own forum for that, use it "
http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?p=2507240#post2507240


----------



## salimoneus (Oct 12, 2004)

mud'n'sweat said:


> Well, who knows what YOU should be able to do, that all depends on YOUR fitness and ability, which may need some work from the sounds of it. That is expected though, you have yet to spend time to acclimate to the SS.
> 
> Also, if you can climb a hill in a 32:11 gearing, you sure as hell better be able to do it at 32:18.


yea that was a mistype, as i said in a later reply i meant 32:34


----------

