Lockrings or Locktite on fixed gear

Matt Cahill wrote:

> I was just reading through some old threads on this subject (the last around November of 2003) and
> decided I'd add my two cents worth...
>
> I fall into the camp that lock rings or locktite are not necessary for riders starting out
> on fixed gear riding. My reasoning is that if you are really concerned about the marginal
> safety provided by lock rings or locktite that you really need the true safety provided by a
> second brake.
>
> While experienced and talented fixed gear riders may be able to bring their bikes to an emergency
> stop by resisting the rear wheel, I doubt that newer fixed gear riders could do the same. My own
> experience (as a fixed gear rider of a few months) is that I can go from 20 mph to 0 through
> resisting the rear wheel in maybe 10-15 seconds. Perhaps with the fear of death as a motivator I
> would do better, but I still don't think I would achieve a true emergency stopping rate.

Sprockets can loosen unexpectedly, and not necessarily under heavy "braking". Hitting a pothole
could free it off, for instance, if the shock is transmitted through the cranks, and the next time
you try to slow down the sprocket can unscrew very easily. A lockring totally prevents this, but you
obviously need a purpose-built fixed hub. Otherwise you should be riding a single speed *freewheel*
rather than fixed.

"Matt Cahill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> My own experience (as a fixed gear rider of a few months) is that I can go from 20 mph to 0
> through resisting the rear wheel in maybe 10-15 seconds. Perhaps with the fear of death as a
> motivator I would do better, but I still don't think I would achieve a true emergency
> stopping rate.

Out of curiousity, how does this compare to the maximum rate of slowing you can achieve using only
your rear brake?

Andy Coggan

>From: Zog The Undeniable

>Sprockets can loosen unexpectedly, and not necessarily under heavy "braking". Hitting a pothole
>could free it off, for instance, if the shock is transmitted through the cranks, and the next time
>you try to slow down the sprocket can unscrew very easily. A lockring totally prevents this, but
>you obviously need a purpose-built fixed hub. Otherwise you should be riding a single speed
>*freewheel* rather than fixed.

This doesn't agree with my experience or experiment-- never having a cog loosen, though admitting to
using brakes instead of backpedaling, in lots of low-gear fixed road use, and (experimentally),
needing to back the bike up to a wall to immobilize the rear wheel before two or three very hard
slams loosened a cog. (Cog put on non-gorilla tight with a normal chain whip, well-greased hub
threads.) Rider weight well over 200 lbs., controlled situation, focusing *intently* on backing the
cog off, no smashing wheels in potholes, MV traffic, etc.

You can put a same-direction "jam" lockring on at least some road hub/cog combinations.

At least one "lockring failure" (cog loosening) has been reported here, so not a foolproof system.

Why limit yourself to a singlespeed setup? No "obvious" here IME, since I never had a problem with
cogs on freewheel hubs backing off. But that's one positive about using two brakes, which bothers
some folks on the POE scale (minor sarcasm).

Ah well, it's raining and I'm on phone jockey duty anyhow, taking a turn at stirring the stew. --
Tom Paterson

Tom Paterson wrote:

> You can put a same-direction "jam" lockring on at least some road hub/cog combinations.

Yeah - an old Campag standard BB lockring, which uses the same thread. Better than nothing, but some
places sell rear track hubs on their own and I'd definitely go down that route.

Matt Cahill wrote:
> I was just reading through some old threads on this subject (the last around November of 2003) and
> decided I'd add my two cents worth...
>
> I fall into the camp that lock rings or locktite are not necessary for riders starting out
> on fixed gear riding. My reasoning is that if you are really concerned about the marginal
> safety provided by lock rings or locktite that you really need the true safety provided by a
> second brake.
>
> While experienced and talented fixed gear riders may be able to bring their bikes to an emergency
> stop by resisting the rear wheel, I doubt that newer fixed gear riders could do the same.

Actually, terrified, panicky riders can also lock the rear wheel with their legs, with common
gearing (it's easier with lower gears.)

> My own experience (as a fixed gear rider of a few months) is that I can go from 20 mph to 0
> through resisting the rear wheel in maybe 10-15 seconds. Perhaps with the fear of death as a
> motivator I would do better, but I still don't think I would achieve a true emergency
> stopping rate.

There's a trick to it!

You lock up the leg on the lowe pedal. As the pedal rises, it starts lifting your body upward. As
your body rises it acquires upward momentum.

When the cranks get horizontal, you yank up with your other (front) foot. Since your body is moving
upward, this causes the wheel to be substantially unweighted, making it easy to lock the wheel.

Once the wheel is locked and skidding, it is easy enough to maintain the skid even as your weight
goes back to normal. You may well wreck your tire, but you'll stop pretty short.

"Braking" with the legs is sort of an "all or little" proposition. You can slow down gently, or
your can lock the wheel, but, unless your gear is pretty low, you can't use the legs for medium
intensity braking.
>
> Based on this reasoning, I just put the second brake back on my fixed gear. It in not as
> esthetically pleasing as the more trimmed down configuration. But I find that my fixed gear has
> become my favorite bike, which I ride the most.

They'll do that to you! Welcome to the cult!

Sheldon "Pignon Fixe" Brown +----------------------------------------------------------+
| The people who live in a Golden Age usually go around | complaining how yellow everything looks.
| | -- Randall Jarrell |
+----------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton,
Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts
shipped Worldwide http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

Zog The Undeniable <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Matt Cahill wrote:
>
> > I was just reading through some old threads on this subject (the last around November of 2003)
> > and decided I'd add my two cents worth...
> >
> > I fall into the camp that lock rings or locktite are not necessary for riders starting out on
> > fixed gear riding. My reasoning is that if you are really concerned about the marginal safety
> > provided by lock rings or locktite that you really need the true safety provided by a second
> > brake.
> >
> > While experienced and talented fixed gear riders may be able to bring their bikes to an
> > emergency stop by resisting the rear wheel, I doubt that newer fixed gear riders could do the
> > same. My own experience (as a fixed gear rider of a few months) is that I can go from 20 mph
> > to 0 through resisting the rear wheel in maybe 10-15 seconds. Perhaps with the fear of death
> > as a motivator I would do better, but I still don't think I would achieve a true emergency
> > stopping rate.
>
> Sprockets can loosen unexpectedly, and not necessarily under heavy "braking". Hitting a pothole
> could free it off, for instance, if the shock is transmitted through the cranks, and the next time
> you try to slow down the sprocket can unscrew very easily. A lockring totally prevents this, but
> you obviously need a purpose-built fixed hub. Otherwise you should be riding a single speed
> *freewheel* rather than fixed.

That is why I advocate using a rear brake if one is really concerned about the possibility of the
cog spinning off. I did have a cog spin off one time when I installed it poorly. (I do it alot
tighter now.) Since my front brake was working it was no big deal...at least in that incident. Are
you aware of an incident where cog spin off in and of itself caused a problem ? What I want to
avoid is the cog spinning off during an attempt at an emergency stop without any other alternative
for braking.

Ultimately, I agree that I would probably be better off with purpose-built fixed hub and I plan to
build such a wheel at some point. Until I do, I think the two brake solution is adequate.

Matt Cahill wrote:

-snip- My own experience (as
> a fixed gear rider of a few months) is that I can go from 20 mph to 0 through resisting the rear
> wheel in maybe 10-15 seconds. Perhaps with the fear of death as a motivator I would do better, but
> I still don't think I would achieve a true emergency stopping rate.
-snip-

Could you actually look at your watch and report back? 15-20 seconds is an absolute eternity in
traffic, especially as relates to stopping a bicycle.

Twenty seconds is more like freewheel coasting to a stop with no brake at all!
--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Matt Cahill wrote:
> I was just reading through some old threads on this subject (the last around November of 2003) and
> decided I'd add my two cents worth...
>
> I fall into the camp that lock rings or locktite are not necessary for riders starting out
> on fixed gear riding. My reasoning is that if you are really concerned about the marginal
> safety provided by lock rings or locktite that you really need the true safety provided by a
> second brake.

matt, i think it best to clarify that locktite is not necessary if you have a fixed gear hub with a
left-handed lockring. the locktite folks are advocating its use on a freewheel hub "locked" by an
old bb ring.

as i have personal injury experience of this last kind of "lockring" coming undone at a critical
moment, i do not think it safe to advocate the use of anything other than a proper fixed hub.

jb

Your rear wheel is for controlling speed, the front is for stopping. When you need full braking the
rear wheel provides almost zero stopping, useful to just determine how close you are to maximum ( =
how close you are to lifting it off the ground).

So your decision to use a lockring should be for other reasons then for braking, as your front wheel
can be used for both controlling speed and for stopping.

The only reason the rules allow track bikes to not have a front brake is there are no stop signs and
everyone has the same limited stopping power. Rear wheel stopping distance is approximately twice
that of using the front wheel.

Bruce

"Matt Cahill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I was just reading through some old threads on this subject (the last around November of 2003) and
> decided I'd add my two cents worth...
>
> I fall into the camp that lock rings or locktite are not necessary for riders starting out
> on fixed gear riding. My reasoning is that if you are really concerned about the marginal
> safety provided by lock rings or locktite that you really need the true safety provided by a
> second brake.
>
> While experienced and talented fixed gear riders may be able to bring their bikes to an emergency
> stop by resisting the rear wheel, I doubt that newer fixed gear riders could do the same. My own
> experience (as

No one can stop using only the rear wheel in the same distance as the front (unless they stop by
crashing). Experience or talent is not involved.

>From: jim beam [email protected]

>as i have personal injury experience of this last kind of "lockring" coming undone at a critical
>moment, i do not think it safe to advocate the use of anything other than a proper fixed hub.

What happened, please? --Tom Paterson

car started to turn in on me. as i entered emergency stop mode, my rear cog unscrewed so i hit the
car. road rash. chipped teeth. busted lip. could have stopped if the cog hadn't come loose.

was running a freewheel hub with a bb "lockring" & no brakes.

later found it was possible to unscrew a cog with this kind of lockring every time if i tried hard
enough. with a proper hub & l/h lockring, it's simply impossible to unscrew the cog unless the
lockring thread strips.

jb

Tom Paterson wrote:
>>From: jim beam [email protected]
>
>
>>as i have personal injury experience of this last kind of "lockring" coming undone at a critical
>>moment, i do not think it safe to advocate the use of anything other than a proper fixed hub.
>
>
> What happened, please? --Tom Paterson

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 19:34:11 GMT, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:

>car started to turn in on me. as i entered emergency stop mode, my rear cog unscrewed so i hit the
>car. road rash. chipped teeth. busted lip. could have stopped if the cog hadn't come loose.
>
>was running a freewheel hub with a bb "lockring" & no brakes.
>
>later found it was possible to unscrew a cog with this kind of lockring every time if i tried hard
>enough. with a proper hub & l/h lockring, it's simply impossible to unscrew the cog unless the
>lockring thread strips.
>
>jb
>

I haven't ridden a fix for a few years but always had r. brake. Where the heck are you riding that
you can get away with no brake? Ten years ago it was suicide to go no brakes in Vancouver and it
sure ain't gotten safer. Not pointing fingers here just curious. I might wanna move there!

Agree that it's a real lot harder to break the lock ring on a real track hub (same dif. as a bb
lockring pretty much) than it is to unscrew an un-lockringed freewheel.

another jb

"jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> car started to turn in on me. as i entered emergency stop mode, my rear cog unscrewed so i hit the
> car. road rash. chipped teeth. busted lip. could have stopped if the cog hadn't come loose.
>

Why didn't you use your front brake? Simple physics and direct observation shows that you can stop
in half the distance using the front wheel compared to the rear wheel.

Bruce

>On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 19:34:11 GMT, jim beam <[email protected]> wrote:
>>car started to turn in on me. as i entered emergency stop mode, my rear cog unscrewed so i hit
>>the car. road rash. chipped teeth. busted lip. was running a freewheel hub with a bb "lockring" &
>>no brakes.

<[email protected]> wrote:
>Where the heck are you riding that you can get away with no brake?

Er, obviously, he CAN'T get away with no brake.
--
Rick Onanian

"Bruce" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > car started to turn in on me. as i entered emergency stop mode, my rear cog unscrewed so i hit
> > the car. road rash. chipped teeth. busted lip. could have stopped if the cog hadn't come loose.
> >
>
> Why didn't you use your front brake? Simple physics and direct observation shows that you can stop
> in half the distance using the front wheel compared to the rear wheel.
>
> Bruce

Dear Bruce,

For reasons beyond the comprehension of most people, many fixed-gear riders insist on riding with no
brakes. They just fight the pedals and hope that their rear tire alone will stop them or that they
can dodge.

When informed of this bizarre cult, a friend of mine remarked that riding with deliberately
ineffective braking offers all the exhilaration, sense of superiority, and irresponsibility of
driving drunk without the hangover.

I haven't thought of a good rebuttal yet.

Carl Fogel

agreed.

i put a fixie together last year, including front brake, and have found that once i got back into
it, i don't use the front brake much.

i'd forgotten what fab fun fixed gear is!

jb

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> uce-<< was running a freewheel hub with a bb "lockring" & no brakes. >><BR><BR>
>
> Even on a track hub, with a proper lockring, i think one brake, the front probably, is a
> good idea.
>
> Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St. Boulder, CO, 80302
> (303)440-3535 http://www.vecchios.com "Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

also consider the possibility of being teenage & in hormone overdrive in that scenario!

Carl Fogel wrote:
> "Bruce" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
>>"jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>car started to turn in on me. as i entered emergency stop mode, my rear cog unscrewed so i hit
>>>the car. road rash. chipped teeth. busted lip. could have stopped if the cog hadn't come loose.
>>>
>>
>>Why didn't you use your front brake? Simple physics and direct observation shows that you can stop
>>in half the distance using the front wheel compared to the rear wheel.
>>
>>Bruce
>
>
> Dear Bruce,
>
> For reasons beyond the comprehension of most people, many fixed-gear riders insist on riding with
> no brakes. They just fight the pedals and hope that their rear tire alone will stop them or that
> they can dodge.
>
> When informed of this bizarre cult, a friend of mine remarked that riding with deliberately
> ineffective braking offers all the exhilaration, sense of superiority, and irresponsibility of
> driving drunk without the hangover.
>
> I haven't thought of a good rebuttal yet.
>
> Carl Fogel

> Dear Bruce,
>
> For reasons beyond the comprehension of most people, many fixed-gear riders insist on riding with
> no brakes. They just fight the pedals and hope that their rear tire alone will stop them or that
> they can dodge.
>
> When informed of this bizarre cult, a friend of mine remarked that riding with deliberately
> ineffective braking offers all the exhilaration, sense of superiority, and irresponsibility of
> driving drunk without the hangover.
>
> I haven't thought of a good rebuttal yet.
>
> Carl Fogel

"...beyond the comprehension of most people..." "...insist on riding with no brakes. "They just
fight the pedals..." "...hope that their rear tire alone will stop them or that they can dodge."
"...this bizarre cult..." "...deliberately ineffective braking..." "...sense of superiority..."
"...irresponsibility of driving drunk..."

i'd give this a c[T]= .8 ("c sub T", coefficent of troll). it should be good for >100 responses.

>>"jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>>car started to turn in on me. as i entered emergency stop mode, my rear cog unscrewed so i hit
>>>the car. road rash. chipped teeth. busted lip. could have stopped if the cog hadn't come loose.

> "Bruce" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>>Why didn't you use your front brake? Simple physics and direct observation shows that you can stop
>>in half the distance using the front wheel compared to the rear wheel.

Carl Fogel wrote:
> For reasons beyond the comprehension of most people, many fixed-gear riders insist on riding with
> no brakes. They just fight the pedals and hope that their rear tire alone will stop them or that
> they can dodge. When informed of this bizarre cult, a friend of mine remarked that riding with
> deliberately ineffective braking offers all the exhilaration, sense of superiority, and
> irresponsibility of driving drunk without the hangover. I haven't thought of a good rebuttal yet.

It _is_ exhilarating. After a week or two of 'exhilarating' I added a front brake. It's been that
way ever since.

--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971