This was so underwhelming. You can do better than that.

Your ignorance on this subject is quite amusing; you obviously don't ride yourself.

So here it is: Much like on a motorcycle the majority(about 80%), of your stopping power is in the front brake. The front brake works so well most people use it exclusively even when a functioning back brake is available.

Please find some other topic you know absolutely nothing about to comment on next time.

In addition, a bike can be a single speed without being a fixed gear. Which are you talking about with the single brake?

Have you not noticed that many riders of fixed gear bikes don't have any brakes at all? Instead many rely on the skid stop, and if you're in to stupid bike tricks, not having brake cables makes it possible to spin your handlebars and such. I personally think that as a means of transportation fixed gears are pretty dumb (also their riders who refuse to ever put a foot down while stuck at a red light - your track stand wiggling is both annoying and disconcerting to other cyclists waiting near you) but if you're going to try to approach your complaint as though you're part of the "fixie" club, you should figure out what you're talking about before you set in. I don't even ride one and I can tell that you're bullshitting.

lol this person is totally saving your life right now. haha

I agree with ForWhomTheBellTrolls about people standing on their bikes at red lights.

how do people not get this? the post is about those who ride single speed bikes with just a front brake in order to make it seem as if they are riding a fixed gear. this is the bike equivalent of glasses with clear lenses.

Oh for christ sakes who fucking cares.

BIIIIIIIIIIIKES!

theofeus, newly-registered commenter, you're the author of this post, aren't you? Defending your own rant is a NAH-NAH-NAH-NAH-NO-NO here! (But, by all means, dig yourself deeper.)

I've been riding single-speed bikes all my life, I had no idea it was just my pathetic attempt at pretending to follow some stale trend.

Glasses with no lenses serve no legitimate purpose, bikes on the other hand are a form of transportation and free exercise; even the ones with front brakes.

How is this even a rant? And how does it affect you, you know, personally, if someone rides any kind of drivetrain/ brake combo?

It's dumb not to have a rear brake on a coasting bike. Two cases come to mind, and both are crimes against functionality that reveal how little thought the rider put into his / her "custom" ride:

1) Cyclist is riding a track frame without a rear brake mount, set up as a coasting singlespeed. Dumb! Get a frame that suits your needs and stop posing!

2) Cyclist is riding a butchered road frame, set up to coast, and has a totally usable brake mount but no brake installed.... so that the bike "looks like" a track bike. Super dumb! More sacrifice for fashion's sake.

There are times when you want two brakes. First of all, two brakes are better than one, and will stop you faster. Period. Also, ever need to do a hard stop? Ever have to stop or slow rapidly on a steep descent? You're going to want a rear brake.

PS: The whole point of "fixies" is to grant some imaginary urban identity to pasty suburban kids let loose in the big city. Nothing says "mama's boy tryin' too hard" than a neon-colored track bike!

are fixed gear bikes inherently more dangerous? do people with two brakes use them simultaneously often? does one have to be both pasty AND a kid to ride a fixed gear? IS portland a big city OR urban?

When braking, most of the weight of the bike and the load are shifted forward, thus the front brake is most important. A rear coaster brake is more than sufficient, however, even without a front brake. Single speed is safer than multiple speeds, as the chain is much less likely to get derailed.