Fixed Gears

Fixed gear bikes?
Are those bikes these kind of bikes where you cant shift gears?
But why no brakes? o.O
Well as far as i see, the only benefit is that the pedaling power has the minimum loss of energy(hub gear has mostly more than derailleur gear)
No brakes = i rather run across a speedway blind than riding this.

At least in my case, I dislike fixiefags because they're assholes on the road. They disregard every rule, ride against traffic, smash mirrors and scratch cars, plus they can't stop in time in emergency situations (brakelessfags). They just give cyclists a bad rep.

Of course I'm generalizing, but most fixiefags I've met meet that criteria.

File: 3817805042_2fe1aa6cf4[3].jpg (93KB, 500x372px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 500x372px

makes no fucking sense to force your feet to spin constantly when you could just slap on a freewheel and coast when you don't need to pedal.

enjoy your pedal strike.

also, there is an entire thread on fixies already with >100 posts on it.

>>933603
I like them, but I prefer single speed.

Cleaner look less maintenance.

/n/ doesn't know much about bikes other than riding to high school on a Schwinn varsity off Craigslist

File: 1399868139963.jpg (86KB, 600x607px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 600x607px

ITT: No fun allowed

>>933612
I like the feeling of pedaling through turns, I've finally got to learn my entire crank/pedal reach by riding fixed so if I'm in a crit or any type of race I can mash through that turn. If pedal strike is what your worried about get a tighter clearance and smaller crank arms if you can ride with them, simple. Also thats why track bikes have a higher bottom bracket so you won't get pedal strike.

>>933610
I see how most people under the fixed community come off a bit edgy hah. There are a bunch of riders like that but you just gotta avoid them like any other ass hole drivers on the road. There's gonna be those people that do that.

>>933606
study up anon. Just look up fixed gears and what there about. Widen your bike knowledge.

>>933634
>why do you guys hate fixies so much?
>procees to explain why
>lol u just hate fun

Every time

>>933640
No brakes seem suicidal to me. Maybe only okay for 5 km/h lol

>>933667
first off, learn to fucking ride idiot. second, do you know how your brakes work? they slow your wheels down. you can do that with a fixed gear. third, are your brakes built into your derailleurs? no? then what makes you think you can't put brakes on a fixed gear bike?

>>933700

actually many fixed gear riders , espcially the obnoxious ones , ride brakeless and take pride in it.

riding fixed has a bad rep , because of idiots and pseudo tough guys and all that , everybody knows that.

riding fixed gear is also fun and helps improve your pedaling habits.

you can own a fixie and other bikes.

you don't have to be a dick to ride fixed.

most people probably don't hate fixies , they hate terrible people.

don't be a terrible person , just ride you're bike and have fun.

>>933603

You did not live through the fixmeme wars. 2006-2009

It was a dark time.

You are playing with fire

I don't hate them, I don't even mind them in the correct application (track and gymnastics, polo too I guess) but outside of that they're simply a dumb choice of bicycle. Forcing yourself to constantly pedal is stupid when you could just use a freewheel and it has the aforementioned issue of pedal strikes, the only reason to do so would be if you want to ride brakeless in which case you're an even bigger idiot.

>>933718
>>933705
A high speed fixed gear bike can be great for long distance traveling and mid distance deliveries if you master running starts.

File: kuva3.jpg (127KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 640x640px

>>933603
I have a fixed gear bike for road / training.

It doesn't have Bozo the Clown colors, or Deep-V rims, or cards in the spokes with adverts for Bernie or vegan/gluten-free coffee shops.

It wasn't purchased with a trust-fund check, nor was it purchase whole from some posturing "fixed gear only" hipster boutique in Greenpoint or Williamsburg or Portlandia or Asheville. It was instead built from left-overs and spares from bikes used at Trexlertown.

The wheels were built with traditional two-cross spoke patterns and high-flange Suzue hubs. Cranks are 165mm length for minimal pedal strike. It has brakes that work, because I ride on the road and obey traffic rules.

I don't give occupants of cars the finger, even when they cut me off, nor do I look down on them because I think "ONE LESS CAR" is going to Save the Planet from anthropogenic global warming or some shit.

>>933723
A freewheeling bike would work just as well if not better. The only thing fixed bikes are good for is skids and trackstands.

>>933700
Funny, the fixie riders I've ever run across can't ride for shit. These are the same posturing assholes that claim their bikes don't need brakes and that they are fully-capable of skid-stopping in heavy traffic in an emergency. Sure you can, Zachary.

Also worth considering here is that these little kidults take the bikes to the local boutique whenever they crack an aerospoke wheel from their dumb-ass riding habits. But it's only on those occasions when the bikes can barely be ridden at all. Which is why so many of them run into cars, and why drivers hate them.

>>933727
nice anon.

>>933714
haha alright anon. Thanks for the chuckle.

>>933727
at least you managed to preserve the smug sense of superiority

File: 112109_bike_400.jpg (49KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 400x300px

>>933793
No, you've mistaken actual competence for posturing and bullshit.
Assuming that post describes you, though - QED.

So I'm recently unemployed and I'm thinking of buying a cheap fixed gear and throwing a rack on it and doing some food delivery. Always been something I've wanted to do, am a university student.

The idea of riding for hours a day is very appealing to me.. I dunno - I'm pretty much depressed whenever I'm not on a bicycle.

File: Josephine-Reitzel-2013-bike-messenger-worlds.jpg (131KB, 615x442px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 615x442px

>>933817
Do you have any experience riding fixed gear?
If so, do you have experience commuting with a heavy load on that same fixed gear?
Are you willing / able to adjust the bike to accommodate the courier company's requirements?
Do you have your own set of bike tools to repair the bike if something goes wrong?
Are you willing to work variable hours for marginal wages, in often hazardous conditions (traffic/smog)?
Does the courier work tie in with other cycling activities?
If the answer to most of the above questions is "NO" you'd be better off in work study.

File: 125828171609.jpg (87KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1200x1200px

>>933811
>QED
Found the smartest guy in the room. Everybody look out.

File: 1987_Ciocc_Enemy-SLX_Red1.jpg (227KB, 1200x798px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 1200x798px

>>933603
i hate fixiefags but love nice photos of track bikes; please post more

>>933823
None of the above, I'm also fat. But most of the stuff I see are people riding flat roads delivering food. I'd be game to give it a try. Also we don't have that big of a culture here.

>>933603
They're for hipsters who live in flat cities.

>>933953
your the hipster

File: 1430733578422.jpg (31KB, 456x320px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 456x320px

>>933961
>not riding a fixie makes you as hipster because everyone rides a fixie these days

[spoiler]I haven't actually seen a fixie irl yet[/spoiler]

>>933727
>I don't give occupants of cars the finger, even when they cut me off

Why wouldn't you if that's what they deserve for their behavior?

>>933603
can't brake
don't want to

What about coaster brakes? That's some scary shit right there. People bombing hills on granny bikes not giving a fuck bout no shit checking their instagram sippin on some latte doing mad skids cause holy shit where did these other folks teleport in front of me from what the fuck.

>>933969
>what they deserve

>HA I SURE SHOWED HIM

How sad do you have to be that you go around doing that to strangers even if they've done something wrong. No wonder people hate cyclists.

>>933981
What the fuck? Middle finger to a driver that almost kills you makes you a sad person? Whatever.

>>933986
You wouldn't do it in a car so why do you feel the need to do it on a bike?

>>933991
>never seen a road raging driver give the finger
What

>>933992
I don't live in burgerland

>>933991
>>933993
Shits pretty universal. You telling me there's absolutely no situation that might make you feel like non verbally telling someone to kindly fuck off.

>>933980
Shit, that's how mountain biking started.

>>933953
I live in a hilly city and see a decent number of them. The hills can be pretty hard on a derailleur for a commuter. Most of them do opt for a front brake.

>>933999
Of course, but I don't actually tell them to fuck off. What's the point in starting arguments with strangers?

Only once have I had an argument with someone on my bike and it was when some chavvy cunt called me a prick as I went past him and I told him to fuck off.

>>934005
Well that's one more fight then I've been in. And the chavvy cunt didn't even do anything that actually threatened your well being. No wonder people hate cyclists.

>>934007
I never said you can't tell someone to fuck off if they have a go at you. I just think starting arguments with strangers is fucking stupid, the twat who had a go at me was an example of that.

One day you'll get your arse kicked mate because you thought it's sensible to tell random people to fuck off just because they cut you off.

>>933603
Because they're fake. They take on the image of a track rider, but only in appearance, they don't have real track bikes, they never see a velodrome or even know where the closest one is, and they don't do any of the training that a track rider would do; they're poseurs. They make a mockery of real track riders and the effort they go to for their sport.

>>933612
To be fair, intentionally forcing yourself to have to spin pedals constantly, over time, has an awesome effect on your pedaling mechanics, improving the overall efficiency, which in and of itself improves your endurance and speed because you don't have your muscles fighting with each other. You can do the same thing on a bike with a freewheel but it requires a degree of discipline to not allow yourself to stop pedaling and coast; most riders won't do that. Knowing all this you can now intentionally do this when you're riding, concentrating on pedaling in smooth circles throughout the entire rotation of the cranks. You can also spend 5 or more minutes at a time during your rides pedaling at the same road speed in a lower gear, so you're spinning the cranks faster, still concentrating on spinning smoothly. If you do this during many of your rides it'll also improve your pedaling mechanics.

>>933613
>/n/ doesn't know much about bikes other than riding to high school on a Schwinn varsity off Craigslist
MANY of them don't. Some of us do and are mocked for it regardless.
>being young and stupid
Mock me, I mock right back.

>>933636
>so if I'm in a crit or any type of race I can mash through that turn
Uhh.. you don't want to do that. You corner *fast* in a crit, and it takes a specific skill-set to pedal through a fast 90 degree corner without the inside pedal hitting the pavement and making you crash. Far from every rider can learn to do it. Good luck with that though.

>>933667
>>933700
Riding on public roads or paths with no brakes is not only monumentally stupid, it's illegal in many places.

>>934017
I don't see you bagging on all the faggot roadies that wear kits just because they're going to get coffee. They're just as much as a mockery. Plus half the people on a road bike these days or a bike in general don't know what they're doing.

>>934017
Also practice makes perfect anon. I just feel strongly about the way people see the fixed gear. Even though it's hard to look pass all the enormously huge faggot that ride them. Serous fixed riders definetly deserve respect though. Track riders have the meanest legs in the game, why do you think that's so. Crazy training on a fixed bike with ridiculous ratios...

>>934027
>I don't see you bagging on all the faggot roadies that wear kits just because they're going to get coffee.
Maybe because that's not what the subject of this thread is?
For the record, wearing replica kit from some pro team is kind of try-hard in my book. Of course I also think wearing a jersey with anything on it at all is kind of lame, but that's just my opinion.

>>934028
Again: the subject of this thread is the poseurs on faux-track bikes, not actual track riders who happen to be out training on public roads on their track bikes (or maybe a fixed gear with clinchers, or maybe their track bike with a clincher wheelset, so they don't fuck up their tubulars or put excess wear on their carbon wheelset).


Really, the two of you sound suspiciously like you're fixie riders who are now all righteously indignated because you've been called out. Either own up to who and what you are, or GTFO of my face.

>>933606
Riding brakeless isn't hard.

File: Capture+_2016-03-14-19-56-03-1.png (2MB, 1440x753px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x753px

>>933953
Fuck you too.

>>933603
>get a job doing bike delivery
>have to deal with a triple crankset

Now I understand why couriers use the fixed meme. I fucking hate this shit. Still I won't use fixed because I don't live in NYC where it's a fucking pancake. There's plenty of hills here

File: 2016_No22_SilverWing_Black1.jpg (135KB, 1335x890px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1335x890px

This thread seems lacking in photos of fixed-gear bicycles.
Here is a photo of a fixed-gear bicycle.

>>935580
there are quite a few hills in nyc, they just happen to be far from where the bike messenger jobs are

File: 2016_LOW_MkII_Black1.jpg (139KB, 1335x890px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1335x890px

Another photo of a fixed-gear bicycle.

File: 2016_ChrisBishop_custom_ButterflyWing1.jpg (1001KB, 3000x2003px) Image search: [Google]

1001KB, 3000x2003px

Yet another photo of a fixed-gear bicycle.

>>935612
T I T E G A P S
I
T
E

G
A
P
S

What's wrong with you people?

I unironically need some tite gap approved bars, does anyone know where to get them?

also a short reach/ramp/drop would be rad, basically all I want is sl70's but thinner

>>935617
>implying that's not just a wall decoration

>>935663
Nitto B123 NJS approved

File: kMdEl.jpg (168KB, 750x1000px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 750x1000px

>>934243
You seem pretty flustered yourself mate.

>Let me mention that this board is dedicated to transportation, not cycle sports. and fixed gear bikes, for all of their hipster associations and faggotry, make excellent commuter rides.

I was going to enumerate reasons but I don't really give a fuck. Suffice to say I live in big boy mountains and commute in all weather on fixie because again, fuck it, it's a fun alternative to driving and safer in blizzards than my suzuki.

>>936063
>handlebars backwards

>>936064
suck his balls, hater (:

>>933603
I like going fast, I'll always out-ride a fixie on my roadie. I like having options for hills, I like not fucking my knees and ankles under high pressure. I also like not dying.

>>935617
What does this mean?

>>934254
h----hey
I love riding lookout mountain. How is it on fixed though, I've never taken anything but my roadbike up there.

>>933833
why ARE track bikes SS?

>>933991
i had a cager give me the finger because i was just riding to work the other day on a route i take almost every day

why should i not return the favor to shitheads who don't know how to drive and endanger my livelihood?

>>934007
>being THIS much of a pushover

>>935580
why not just lose the front and go to a 1x setup?

>>936130
Because the rules say so. Why are drop bars ubiquitous on roadbikes? Same reason - the UCI rules say you have to have "classic" drops to race in sanctioned races, so that's what people think bikes should have. Even if aerobars are faster and more comfortable.

>>933636
>I like the feeling of pedaling through turns
Nobody is stopping you from pedaling through turns with a freewheel.

>>936136
Aerobars don't steer as well. Aerobars are used in UCI races as only as you aren't on the course with any competitors.

Also anyone on the bike path with aerobars looks like a tridork

>>936243
It is different tough.
>>936130
It's lighter, and on a controled enviroment there is no need to shift gears.

>>933613
Based sieg

>>936260
>hurr lighter durr
Spoken like a true fixie fag who's never ridden on a track in his life and all knowledge about cycling come from café gossip.

No. Track bikes are often heavy as fuck, but that doesn't matter because the energy you put in going up the bank is put straigh back in when you go down. Since you don't brake until the race is over, weight doesn't matter. Unlike road racing.
In fact, weight is an _advantage_ if you're allowed a 'high' start.

This is also why velodrome cyclists look like Förestemann and not Quintana; the muscle and body mass is an advantage, where it's a hindrance on the road.

But 'muh acceleration' you say? That is one area where gears would be an _enormous_ advantage. Notice how track sprints and starts are complete shit compared to road racing attacks and finishes where the sprinter will put a 150m gap between him and the peloton in seconds.

Velodrome bikes are fixed (not only SS) because that's what the rulebook says. End of story.
Just like why cyclocross tyres are the way they are, or bikes have double diamond frames, or any other anachronism that doesn't realy make sense from a 'go faster' perspective. But it makes the sport what it is.

>>936439
That's not how wheight comparison works. You can say the same thing about mudgards and chainguards. You compare the wheight of the same bike with and without brakes and gears.
>But 'muh acceleration' you say?
I never said that. The inicial sprint is the only time where gears are an advantage, after that they provide no performace improvement, only setbacks.
I don't know why you are so upset about this.

>>936685
weight*

File: not_buying_it.jpg (27KB, 350x335px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 350x335px

>>936685
>mfw you're flailing wildly to save face while calling others buthurt
It's OK, young grasshopper. It's an anonymous board. None of your cool friends saw it happen.
>I never said that.
But we both know that'd be your first excuse, so I pre-empted it. All in the interest of saving time. You're welcome.

>>936699
Are you ok?

>>936701
>mudguard
>chainguard
>sides in orbit

>>936439
eh, my aluminum track bike is just around only 6.9 kg, even with a hefty 2100+ g wheelset (Deep Vs on Formula hubs)
The frameset is 1500 g on the nose, so that isn't light by aluminum standards

>>936708
That kind of proves my point though, don't you think? This gear is almost twice as heavy as the much lighter roadbike gear. Track gear end up that way because weight is not a concern on the track, and even less so for the 90kg+ mountain of muscle that makes a good track sprinter. But stiffness is.

>>936704
You are a very dense person. If weight and aerodynamics did not matter there would be no reason to not put those useless things, just like there is according to you no reason not to put gears on a track bike.

There is a reason for the weight, adding more than that would not be ideal otherwise they would be heavier than they are now.

>>936714
Of course there's a reason. They're banned. Just like there's a reason speedway bikes don't have brakes. Just like there's a reason golfers smack that ball around with silly-looking clubs, when shooting it with a potato gun would be much more efficient. Like there's a reason the F1 motors are capped in both power and fuel flow. Just like there's a reason track bikes don't have an engine; it would be faster, but it's not allowed.

Rules define the sport. You're the only one living under the delusion sportsmen use the best tool for the job. They don't. They use the tools the rules stipulate.

>>936714
>implying the hour record wouldn't be set in a recumbent/velomobile, with gears, if the rules allowed it
>wat is graeme obree
>wat is superman
>wat is merckx

I was going to make a thread for this...

What happens when you're on a fixie going down a big hill and your feet pop off the peddles? SOL?

>>936725
You use the brake. If you ride brakeless you die. Same if the chain drops/breaks, your cleats comes off your shoes or what ever.
Brakeless is dumb. Very dumb. Fixed is only a preference.

File: 1450988160522.gif (987KB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

987KB, 200x150px

>>936725
Like what >>936727 said.

Use your brakes and keep yourself calm.

I on the other hand am one of those can't stop one stop autists and I just do a little prayer and hope my retardation dosnt kill me on that particular day. I'm not against brakes. If anything I'm very for brakes.

>mfw riding down anything steeper than 6% and my strap won't hold my feet.

bike noob here

why would you ride a bike with no brakes? seems dangerous

>>936754
just wear a helmet noob

>>933823
>>933817

Very, very dependant on where you're located and for what kind of company you work.

I got a job as a bike delivery dude in a local restaurant this month: I was stressed as fuck, showed up trained, on point, bib under shorts etc.
Most of their guys have never ridden a bike since primary school, they go 15km/h on b'twin "city bikes", ride without helmets and the boss is still happy with them. I do 3x their amount of deliveries per hour and I'm not even pushing it.
Then again, I live in a "small" (275 000 population) town in France so that obviously plays a big role in the difficulty of the work, but delivering food outside of major cities is easy work.

>>936724
Yes recumbents can be way faster but it's a diferent category.
I'm talking about performace. A fixed gear on a track will be faster, even tough the inicial sprint will be slower, by not having those extra gears, that are uselesss after the sprint, and the derailleur to drag them down.
Outside a track they are much slower tough.
>>936723
Being banned doesn't mean they are faster.
You talk as if those things are banned randomly.

>>936725
Depends on the person.
Some pray, some think of their mothers, some live to tell the story...
You can also try to reach the pedal, but you probably learn how to fly if you that.

>>936758
>A fixed gear on a track will be faster
Because freewheels make you slower.
I didn't think this level of retardation was possible, but you've taken rationalizing, saving face and cognitive dissonance to the level of a fine art. Perhaps you'll get to ride a bike one day, and not just pose around the coffe shop with it.

This, people, is what hipsters actualy believe.

>>936762
Not a freewheel, but the things that go along with them, like the extra gears and the derailleurs.
Are you this dense? I already said that.

>>936763
>wat is single speed
>wat is fixed gear
>wat is difference
Come on now, you're just digging yourself deeper, inventing far fetched theories as to why muh fixxed gears are superior with no basis in reality. They're not "faster on a track" than a geared bike, and that doesn't even begin to explain why freewheels are forbidden.

Track bikes are fixed because that's the way it is. Yes, it's arbitrary, but so are all sports ultimately. Fixies are toys, and not muh supperior efficiency. Fucking deal with it.

>>936764
I never tried to explain why gears are banned.
The whole thing started because you said bikes with gears would be faster than a fixed gear.
Fixed gears are slower everywhere that is not a track, i said this before.
I never said anything abou fixies being superior either.
You are clearly upset about fixies and put words on my mouth. Jesus, calm down, you are not going anywhere by getting mad at strangers on the internet.

>>936765
>back pedaling this hard
Don't strain yourself, buddy

>>936766
Hey now, back peddling is a great little store.

>>936769
Peddling back is an ancient and honorable profession. Still common among randonneurs.

>>936725
you just maintain a speed where you know you can't spin out. If you need to skid a little here and there down the hill.

/n/ hates fixies because they all live in the suburbs with long commutes and they're scared of anything urban.

>>936769
this. I've bought my last five backs from the back peddler.

>>933613
fuck off sieg

>>938100
Right, because I stop riding my road bike the moment I enter downtown.

File: 1458637430410.png (150KB, 495x322px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 495x322px

When old ten speeds are so cheap, commonplace and useable why would anyone legitimately want to ride a fixie? What happens if you have to go up a hill lol?!

>>938119
Many people have this misconception that road bikes can only be used on glass-smooth pristine pavement when it's 70 degrees and sunny, it's very strange.
>>938115
Please don't reply to that guy, the last thing we need is him becoming a regular around here.

>>938202
I thought he had moved to /fa/ a long time ago

>>936764
you lost the argument about one gear vs. multiple gears and derailers so you started arguing semantics about fixed gear vs single speed. also, freewheels are less efficient than fixed gears, that's basic mechanics and a simple fact. go hang yourself with your 1/16" chain

>>938213
>freewheels are less efficient than fixed gears
There's absolutely no reason why that should be true. Once the pawls of the freewheel or freehub are engaged it's essentially one piece and will perform exactly as efficiently as a fixed setup with the same chain and tooth profiling.

can i put dura ace brifters on a nitto n123 handlebar?

>>938228
With love, anon, anything is possible.

>>938213
>basic mechanics and a simple fact
intredasting theory. i submit for peer review. tell me, how does a freewheel add losses when engaged? and how does pawl friction when coasting compare to the dead weight of your legs if you were to not perfectly match the spin cycle for even a fraction of a second?

>>938242
Even accounting for the pawl friction I would imagine it would be less than the energy exerted by continuously pedalling if you were able to perfectly match the rotational speed.

>>933603
I'm the president of a non-profit bicycle club who is affiliated with a major university. Part of what we do is offer free defensive rider courses for people who are not familiar with riding in traffic or those who need a refresher. Due to liability we cannot allow fixed gear riders into our lessons. They are a danger to themselves, other riders and drivers for obvious reasons. We don't even allow fixies into our shop for repair. We don't want to be affiliated with fixie riders in any way, shape or form.

I would say for a school with a modest amount of riders commuting to and from campus, at least five times a semester there is some hipster who wads up in traffic. I have yet to hear of a cyclist who is struck by a car or hits a car with their bike.

It's ultimately your choice to be a giant faggot and ride something that is fucking dangerous, but don't expect everyone to agree or for that matter, help you when you eat utter shit. Riding a bike designed for a secured race track on public roadways with every changing circumstances (often times w/o a helmet cuz muh fucking hair bruh) is setting you up to have your parents wipe your ass for the rest of your life because some car blasted you or you couldn't stop in time and got ran over.

File: 1458597994865.jpg (87KB, 425x450px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 425x450px

>>938264

>>938264
What if they are riding a fixed gear with brakes?

>>938233
all i have is grease and an alan key tho

>>938617
http://www.bikeforums.net/bicycle-mechanics/461208-moustache-handlebar-bar-end-shifters.html
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/dura-ace.html
Is all i can give you. Probably not helpful though.

>>938271
see >>933654

>>938200
U pedal harder

>>938264
>They are a danger to themselves, other riders and drivers for obvious reasons.
Which are?

>>938217
>>938242
Not him, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess it's something to do with >muh grams. Fixed gears are technically lighter than freewheels, right?

>>938761
A fixed cog is made of only one part, it doesn't have friction within itself.

>>938774
Literally has friction with the lock ring and the hub

>>938776
Those parts aren't whithin the cog though.
Both have friction with the hub.
I haven't thought of the lock ring but the area is smaller so i think it has less friction. Maybe i'm wrong though.

>>938777
I don't think you understand how friction works

>>938778
Please explain to me then.

>>938774
>friction within itself
Neither does an engaged freewheel. Freewheels are not friction couplings. Do you have any idea how retarded you sound calling others mechanically inept while spouting this bullshit?
Efficiency here relates to losses, and losses would mean slip or deformation. Using 'friction' the way you do it nonsensical.

File: main-qimg-743a0d0c0ba86b1effb7e5ea794b3868.jpg (20KB, 312x161px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 312x161px

>>938780
Of course it has, parts of it mover and parts remain still.
>Do you have any idea how retarded you sound calling others mechanically inept while spouting this bullshit?
What?

Anyway, friction was a stupid word to use. Being one solid piece is more efficient than having parts, in this case.

>>938785
>mover and parts remain still.
No. An engaged freewheel does not have internal movement parts you mong. A freewheeling freewheel has pawl friction that are many, many orders of magnitude less than even the most perfect imperfect round stroke.

>>938793
*movement between parts

>>938761
>Fixed gears are technically lighter than freewheels, right?
Potentially, but a freewheeling bike can definitely be lighter than a fixed bike.

>>938774
Neither does a freewheel/hub once engaged.

>>938264
you sound like a faggot. i bet you posted that on a macbook

>>938785
>this is what hipsters actualy believe
The level of dumb concentrated in the fixed gear community continues to startle me.

>>933603

Going down hills and turning corners. That's two reasons. They really don't have any advantages over a freewheel mechanism.

>>933603
>use bike in the city
>always ride at max speed
>long roads with pendence
>climbs
>never stop at red light unless I'm forced by traffic
>when people see you're traversing they accelerate to pass before you resulting most of the time in incidents

My shitty mountainbike is a miles better than one of those worthless pieces of shit. When I used a race bike, before they fucking stole it, I spent 90% of time on the bike without using hands as well.
That bike is for casuals.

>>935580
>triple crankset
What's the problem? Just use the rear gear. You hardly need to change the front gear.

Also
>live in an alpine region
>buy a fixed
Can't be more stupid than this.

>>939878
>energy is lost to metal deformation on contact between ratchet mech and teeth
oops yeah well efficiency is like it's really like all about the rider anyway though

File: hah.png (13KB, 679x427px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 679x427px

>>940058
>metal deformation in the rathet
youse funneh

File: simon_support_500x313-min.jpg.jpg (118KB, 500x313px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 500x313px

>>940060
>bicycle ratchets are the one component on earth made of completely rigid material

>>940078
Care to quantify said losses?
>being this buthurt

>>940078
>wat is incompressible medium
>wat is compressive load
Fuck off, hipster.

>>940081
do you mean the losses between
>energy being converted to metal deformation between 1 set of contact points
and
>energy being converted to metal deformation between 2 sets of contact points

"Non-zero"

>>940087
>citation needed

File: stress-strain.png (32KB, 574x627px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 574x627px

>>940086
>>940088
oh look, the only time metal isn't being strained or compressed is when you don't put any stress on it so the only time a single-speed is even equally as efficient as a fixed gear is when you aren't actually using it

>>936067
Look at the clearance of the front tire and fork.

I don't even know how that's possible as the tires look like 25mm.

>>940102
It's worse than that. GP Attack is a 22mm tyre. Someone went full retard designing that frame, and fans of it are even worse.

>>940058
So are you saying there's no deformation in a single speed drive train? Just because the pawl and ratchet are two separate pieces does not mean they deform any more than if they were one connected piece.

>>940119
deformation happens when any two separate components exert force on one another. on a fixed gear there is one such point of contact (cog and chain) but on a single-speed there are two (cog and chain plus ratchet and pawl)

>Just because the pawl and ratchet are two separate pieces does not mean they deform any more than if they were one connected piece.
see >>940088

>>940125
>deformation happens when any two separate components exert force on one another
No. Imagine you have a steel rod and you put it in a press and apply a certain amount of force, it will compress by a certain amount. Now imagine that rod is split in half and the two resulting rods are stacked end to end, put them in the press and apply the same force and they will compress by the same amount as the one solid rod.

>citation needed
No it isn't. Go educate yourself.

>>940125
>deformation happens when any two separate components exert force on one another.
Just when you thought the fixsters couldn't get any dumber...
Stop trying to rationalize your choice of drive train. You make even bigger fools of yourselves than by just admitting fix it for the lulz and street-cred. There is literally no point to fixies.

>>940092
>implying steel is a compressible element on an engineering scale where newtonian physics still apply
Please off yourself, m80.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulk_modulus#Selected_values

File: 1429381998663.jpg (14KB, 339x351px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 339x351px

>>940129
>imagine
lmao this argument is over now cause i imagined the press turned the rods into a bomb then shot you in the face for good measure because you're dumb

>>940130
lots of facts in this post, good job
>There is literally no point to fixies.
literally no point to single-speeds either by that logic

>>940132
>The bulk modulus (K or B) of a substance measures the substance's resistance to uniform compression
an engaged ratchet isn't uniform compression
>bulk modulus of steel isn't even 0 anyway
did you pick a fight just to lose it?

>>940144
Dunning–Kruger effect. You has it.

File: ironic.jpg (109KB, 373x327px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 373x327px

>>940146
lol please post a picture of your bachelors degree in psychology so i can be confident you actually know what you're talking about

>>940150
>You must have qualifications to be knowledgeable on a subject
I'm a qualified mechanic and I know plenty of guys with more knowledge than me with no formal education on the subject, and my self taught knowledge on photography is greater than most people qualified to teach the subject.

>>940144
Where saving face turns into an embarrasing display of being contrary. It would be sad if it wasn't so symptomatic of hipster culture.

>>940154
>
what is this post even

>>940155
>Where ad hominem is the only card you have left to play.
here friend, why don't you point out which post was yours and i'll do my best to explain in simple terms exactly why you're wrong

>>940157
>what is this post even
You asked for that guy's psychology qualification, implying that he must have one to be knowledgeable on the subject. I was pointing out how a qualification on something does not mean that you know everything nor is it a requirement to know anything.

>>940159
>I was pointing out how a qualification on something does not mean that you know everything nor is it a requirement to know anything.
thanks man thats exactly what i was trying to say

File: saittomyface.jpg (7KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 200x200px

>>940144
>>lmao this argument is over now cause i imagined the press turned the rods into a bomb then shot you in the face for good measure because you're dumb ↓
>>940157
>>Where ad hominem is the only card you have left to play.
>i'm pretending to be a highly qualified engineer and will school you all
>thinks compression has anything to do with the number of contact points
Well lookie here. We got ourselves an educator.
Face. You've lost it.

>>940160
Well if you meant something else then please explain, because that's how I interpreted it.

>post a picture of your bachelors degree in psychology so i can be confident you actually know what you're talking about
>show me your qualification to prove you know what you're talking about

>>940171
Unrelated person here, anon 1, >>940146 introduced D-K effect to the table and, anon 2, >>940150 replied ironically asking for 1's papers implying 1 would also be sufering from D-K since he diagnosed 2 without showing any indication he actually a professional in the area.

>>940174
Unrelated person here.
Anon 1, >>940146, introduced D-K effect to the table and anon 2, >>940150, replied ironically asking for 1's papers implying 1 would also be sufering from D-K since he diagnosed 2 without showing any indication he actually a professional in the area.

Some day i'll start re-reading what i write... i'll make much more sense then.

>>940166
oh i'm not pretending to be a highly qualified engineer, only pointing out that you're wrong so here's what i'll do for you, i'll ctrl+f'd 'compress' on this page and categorize the posts into two categories:

list of posts that confuse compression and deformation:
>>940086
>>940129
>>940132
>>940166

list of posts that don't:
>>940092
>>940144

how many of these were (You)s?

File: 2016-03-04.png (29KB, 555x416px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 555x416px

>>940180
>talking out of his ass
I look forward to your estimate of the losses due to any type of deformation on a freewheel ratchet under compressive load.

>>940174
>>940176
that's pretty close anon, but the reality is that anon 2's post implied anon 1 could easily be the only one suffering from this donkey kong syndrome

>>940182
already gave it right here >>940087 which - should it hold correct (and it does) - suffices to prove that a fixed rear hub loses less energy in converting from torque to deformation and heat than a hub that has to also transfer the energy through a ratchet

>>940180
>list of posts that confuse compression and deformation:
Compression is a form of deformation and the one that is relevant to this discussion. If he meant permanent instead of elastic deformation then he's an idiot, as after the first time force is applied it wouldn't deform any more and there would be no efficiency loss.

>>940185
It's OK anon. We can assume you ment any type of deformation has anything to do with the number of contact points. That doesn't make you look less uneducated, or make you right. As several anons have pointed out by now.
This is obvous to most people with any relevant knowledge, hence D-K accusation. You just proved it right by confirming you're the >>940087 retard.

Also confirmed for being a one person sperg spree. Go cry to your mom that people on the internet contradicted your little conjecture.

>>940186
>Compression is a form of deformation and the one that is relevant to this discussion.
you mean torque

> If he meant permanent instead of elastic deformation then ... after the first time force is applied it wouldn't deform any more and there would be no efficiency loss.
and that additional elastic deformation between pawl and ratchet is exactly why fixed-gear is more efficient than free-wheel/hub

>>940188
>We can assume you ment any type of deformation has anything to do with the number of contact points
just like you assume this straw-man argument is actually right

>>940190
>you mean torque
What? No, what the fuck are you talking about? I don't think even you know, you're just spouting random words.

>and that additional elastic deformation between pawl and ratchet is exactly why fixed-gear is more efficient than free-wheel/hub
Permanent deformation is irrelevant as it is a one time thing. Elastic deformation happens regardless of whether the drivetrain is fixed or not, and there's absolutely no reason why a fixed one would deform less.

The amount of deformation (which is absolutely fucking tiny by the way and not worth considering in any way) is dependant on material choices and specific component construction, it's perfectly possible for a freewheeling drive train to be stiffer than a fixed one (not that it would actually matter).

>>940191
>there's absolutely no reason why a fixed one would deform less.
1) deformation occurs between chain and cog
2) no additional deformation occurs between a ratchet and pawl

>The amount of deformation
yes?

>(which is absolutely fucking tiny by the way and not worth considering in any way)
wrong, we're considering every last bit

>is dependant on material choices and specific component construction
most efficient freewheel vs most efficient fixed gear

>it's perfectly possible for a freewheeling drive train to be stiffer than a fixed one (not that it would actually matter).
like if you made the fixed gear out of rubber, sure - but overall pretty irrelevant to the question at hand

>>940190
>straw-man
>>940087
>>energy being converted to metal deformation between 1 set of contact points
>>energy being converted to metal deformation between 2 sets of contact points
Literally your fucking argument. You're approaching SI-guy levels of sperg tantrum here.

>>940194
go find a group of children your age and play this game of telephone with them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers

then later report back and tell me which amount yielded for more efficient communication, saying something directly or going through 2 or 5 or 10 people first

same exact concept applies

File: super_retard.jpg (28KB, 499x376px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 499x376px

>>940196
>this is what goes on in the mind of a hipster
>yfw

>>940193
>1) deformation occurs between chain and cog
>2) no additional deformation occurs between a ratchet and pawl
But the fixed cog is larger, to occupy the same space as the ratchet mechanism. You cannot make the assumption that the ratchet component deforms more than the larger cog, just as I cannot assume that the fixed cog deforms more. Which one does deform more depends on many factors and not solely on whether it's fixed or not.

>wrong, we're considering every last bit
If you really want to argue over a fraction of a percentage of a watt then go right ahead.

>most efficient freewheel vs most efficient fixed gear
That's a retarded argument. Both can always be made more efficient (less deformation). A freewheeling drive train can be made just as efficient as a fixed one. Saying fixed is always more efficient is down right retarded.

>like if you made the fixed gear out of rubber, sure - but overall pretty irrelevant to the question at hand
The fixed one doesn't have to be made less stiff, the freewheeling one just has to be made stiffer. This is possible and exists in the real world (not that you'll find measurements on this shit because it just doesn't matter).

>>940183
Yeah, 'also' was bad word to use.
Looks like i have to read my posts 3 times now.
Yaaaaay

File: Girls.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>940199
>freewheeling one just has to be made stiffer.
Which it is almost automatically by the pawls being flat and broad, placing all the material under a compressive load rather than the shearing load in a full disc.
All else being equal, meaning the same type and amount of material, the spoke-like ratchet mechanism will be stiffer than a sprocket.
>>940196
>mfw i refuse to believe anyone can be this retarded

>>940199
>two small pieces acting as one larger one
actually that one solid body is more resistant to deformation than two half-as-small solid bodies put together is an assumption i am very eager to make

>If you really want to argue over a fraction of a percentage of a watt then go right ahead
if you don't then you've already lost

>Both can always be made more efficient (less deformation)
you still can't escape deformation entirely

>>940204
>theres no torsion or shearing force inside of a hub
have you ever even seen a bicycle before? been near one maybe?

>>940206
>assumption
You are ever one step closer to understanding you have no clue what you're talking about.
>>theres no torsion or shearing force inside of a hub
>have you ever even seen a bicycle before? been near one maybe?
The _hub_ is the same in both cases - freewheel or fixed. Nice try at a red herring though, now that you're catching on to the fact that your autism is showing. And everyone has seen it.

>>940206
>actually that one solid body is more resistant to deformation than two half-as-small solid bodies put together
Believe that if you really want, but you're wrong.

>if you don't then you've already lost
Not really. Any difference there may be, in either drive train's favour, is negligible. It has absolutely no real world relevance and so cannot be used as an argument for choosing fixed over freewheeling, which is what this discussion was originally about until people started pulled the straw man out.

>you still can't escape deformation entirely
I never said you could, but nice straw man attempt. One can always be made stiffer than the other, and that stiffness is determined by many factors other than being fixed or freewheeling (I've said this before but I'll repeat it just in case you missed it).

>theres no torsion or shearing force inside of a hub
There is indeed, but it's irrelevant (as it this whole fucking argument) as it applies to both types of drive train.

File: 2012_Kalavinka_custom_Sunset1.jpg (888KB, 2048x1366px) Image search: [Google]

888KB, 2048x1366px

This thread has too much bickering and a distinct lack of aesthetically-pleasing fixed-gear bicycles.

>>933603
because they are wholly inferior to single-speeds

>>936725
I've seen you can rest a foot on the front tire to scrub speed. Friction between the sole of your shoe and the tire tread can cut it, possibly. What would you have to lose, at that point? Those with balls might try balancing on the top tube and doing the same on the rear tire... The rear tire bursting would be slightly less risk than the front tire, but you'd be really off-balance pulling crap like that. I dunno, man, get brakes?

That, and I've only seen these retarded maneuvers from retarded hipsters trying to look cool on YouTube, so. Just keep in mind no sane man would be caught dead on a downhill without some kind of brake. Get one, foo.

>>940341
Jamming your foot up against the front wheel is a bad idea, you're already in a panic situation as well as not being in good control of the bike (only points of contact are your arse and hands) so the likelyhood of locking up the front wheel is high.

Most cyclists should be flexible enough to get their foot up and to the rear tyre, putting the other foot on the downtube if need be.

>>936769
>back peddling
Please tell me this is an actual store. Please.

File: kekked.jpg (11KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 200x200px

>>940345
>>putting the other foot on the downtube if need be.
>shin hacked off by high rpm, toothed cage pedals
>muh urban platforms
>mfw

>>940350
Are you running 250mm crank arms? If you have regular sized ones then the pedals shouldn't even come half way up the down tube. Take a look at >>940245 , the pedal would be below the writing on the down tube, that gives you plenty of room to work with.

>>936439
>>936757
>>940102
>>940104
>>940356
>No space between the number and the unit symbol
Please re-read the SI Brochure.

>>940564
The use is well established and spreading. This is how the world will style it even in formal texts. You are powerless to stop it, and no-one cares. No-one will remember you when you're gone. Even the last shreads of your family will be relieved.

>>940572
The SI Brochure is quite clear on this point. If the use of SI units, prefixes and unit symbols contrary to what is prescribed by the SI Brochure is spreading, it's all the more reason to double down on insisting on proper use as prescribed by the SI Brochure. I assure you that BIPM cares deeply and remains steadfastly committed to promoting the proper use of SI units, prefixes and unit symbols as prescribed by the SI Brochure.

>>940727
Why is the space so useful?
Does it avoid big time confusion/misunderstandment?

>>940727
Rainman had a loving brother. When mom dies, who will look after you? You'll end up in an institution if you aren't already. I wonder if they'll even let you on the internet or if it'll just be tard storage. Enjoy your comming golden years, locked up wil drooling basket cases and no contact with the outside world.
>>940743
Just like the space between the sentence and certain kinds of punctuation (exclamation- or questionmarks f.e.) many people find it more difficult to parse and it interrupts the flow of reading.
>Why is the space so useful ?
↑ This would technically be the "correct" style, but has been all but abandoned long ago. Language and style evolves. 2cm is the new 2 cm, and is no more wrong than this!

>>940727
BIPM here, we don't actually give a shit. You can stop doing this now.

>>940743
>Why is the space so useful?
Please consult the SI Brochure. It is quite explicit on the meaning of the space between the number and the unit symbol.

>>940760
>2cm is the new 2 cm, and is no more wrong than this!
Incorrect. '2cm' is definitively incorrect. Please re-read the SI Brochure.

>>941062
>>Why is the space so useful?
>ohfuckohfuckohfuck i have no idea
>le pokerface and hope they dont call it
When you grow up, how do you think your life will be? Pretty wife, large family, house of you own, support and love of family and freinds instead of people legaly obligated to assist you?

>>933603
I have a cinelli mash I ride at a local velo

I don't like riding fixed in the street but I'll ride single speed

>>940012
Race bike?

No hands?

If it's sized properly for a race fit you'd be too far bent over to ride no hands

File: 1.jpg (143KB, 960x541px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 960x541px

I ride brakeless and I make a point to not ride like an asshole. Here's my bike. Roast me.

>>941103
>The numerical value always precedes the unit, and a space is always used to separate
the unit from the number. Thus the value of the quantity is the product of the number
and the unit, the space being regarded as a multiplication sign (just as a space
between units implies multiplication).

>>941146
>just as a space
between units implies multiplication
First time I've ever heard that one. So are you saying that
>5 2
and
>5*2
are the same? At least in algebra a number followed by a letter with no space (5y) implies multiplication.

>>941148
> When multiplying numbers only the multiplication sign, ×, should be used.
If you have any further questions, please consult the SI Brochure. It features some helpful examples which serve to plainly illustrate acceptable ways to indicate multiplication of both numbers and quantities.

>>941151
>SI
>Having anything to do with mathematical symbols
Nice try. My keyboard doesn't have a × key, usually I would use x but to avoid confusion I used * which is a common usage of the symbol.

>>941153
>Implying the SI Brochure is silent on the subject of mathematical symbols
Once again, I must direct you to read the SI Brochure. It is, as always, quite clear on this point.

>>941156
Whether it mentions anything about mathematical symbols is irrelevant, it has no authority over them nor has any business trying to define their proper usage. It only regards the seven base measurement units of the metric system, for anything outside of that you're going to have to come up with a new way to troll.

>>941160
>Answering questions on the SI Brochure is trolling
I don't think 4chan is for you.

>>941176
lol, suck a dick

>>938200
you don't be a pussy and climb that shit gears or not.

>>941151
I has queshun!
If E=mc2, what's metres times centi2, what's a centi2, why is there no space between the mtres and centi2s being multiplied and why is:
(SI-)E(Volt per metre) equal to (SI-)m(metre) times (SI prefix-)centi squared?
Please present mathematical proof, or concede that you have no power here. Useless autist.

>>941656
Stupid board turned my raised 2s into standard 2. Question still stands.

>>941654
>Implying that any non athlete could climb a ~10% grade for a few kilometres on a normal ratio fixie without almost dying.

It's almost as if we need some sort of way to make climbing easier, say a variable drive of some sort; but for bikes.

>>941127
Nice job on calling that liar out.
It is common knowledge that riders on race bikes with race fits can only unlock the ability to ride no hands when they win a race by 1+ seconds over 2nd place; they celebrate this rare, magic ability by throwing their arms up into a V as they cross the line, but they quickly lose their god-given power and return to the handlebars, never able to take their hands off the bars while riding again... until they are able to win another race.

>>933603
>Fixies
>Because screw that whole mechanical advantage thing that spurred the development of multisprocketed bikes

Fixies are the retarded hipsters of cyclists.

>>941889
>stop liking what i dont like

dont be so sour, child

>>941890
>Muh Walkman is better than your iPod!!!!!!
>I only use wooden cutlery

Its an objectively worse system which was phased out for a reason.

I can understand liking things that are outdated but there is no reason in Hell to claim that they are superior in any way to modern technology.

>>941892
>to claim that they are superior in any way to modern technology.
who the fuck is claiming that, why cant you lycrafags let others be, why does it always have to be about dropbars and gears with you faggots

>>941893
>Who the fuck is claiming that
>>933603
>>933700
>>933823
>>934017
>>936260
>>938744
>>941654

>>933636
>I like the feeling of pedaling through turns
This is the one thing I dislike about riding fixed. Everything else I can liken to driving a manual vs automatic transmission.

While single speeds are enjoyable, and potentially safer (depending on your setup), I feel like I'm in absolute control of my fixed gear.

I like being able to pedal backward and work muscles I otherwise wouldn't.

>>933603
If you're riding in a way that you can tell the difference between fixed gear and freewheel you:

1) Are turning
2) Are brakeless or braking
3) Are going downhill
4) Are not riding hard enough

>>941895
well, theyre probably fucking idiots

>>941892
fixed gear bikes will always be lighter than geared bikes, all else equal
whatever happened to it being "objectively worse"? but go ahead and quantify exactly what the benefit is of having multiple gears and I'll concede the argument

>>941971
>fixed gear bikes will always be lighter than geared bikes, all else equal
That is a fair and valid point, but not a very meaningful one. No one rides fixed or even single speed solely for the weight savings, which isn't even that great, it's just an added bonus. If we're talking about being competitive then there are weight limits which are easy to achieve with a geared bike, and also in a competitive event gears are going to be an immensely greater advantage than a little less weight.

>>941976
you realize that people ride bicycles outside of UCI sanctioned races, correct?

>>941976
>No one rides fixed or even single speed solely for the weight savings
Some hillclimb riders in the UK would say otherwise. Of course, which hills fixed gears work well for are limited by how much the grade varies
>competitive ... weight limits
Also, at least in the United States, USA Cycling events do not have weight limits, so hitting a lower weight limit isn't an issue

>>941981
Irrelevant, they're not going to ride fixed or SS just for the weight saving.

>>941991
>Some hillclimb riders in the UK would say otherwise.
If single speed is adequate for the hill then that's why they use it, if it requires multiple gears then they're not going to forgo them just for a bit of saved weight.

That is my point, the little bit of weight saved doesn't matter at all if you need multiple gears. Being lighter is not an advantage if it's not a viable alternative.

>>941995
most riders aren't fit enough to climb a hill

most road bike riders even use the hill oriented gears to ride flat at 5-7mph

>>941991
>USA Cycling
... is under the UCI umbrella and subject to the same 15 pound minimum weight rule as everyone else, no?

>look at pictures
>actually no brakes
I thought this was just a meme but it is true. If you drive brakeless please commit sudoku for the greater good

>>942150
No, it isn't. USA Cycling and UCI use some of the same rules, but not the weight limit.

>>941656
>Ascribing to the SI unit symbols which it does not prescribe
>Not being aware that the Latin lower case 'm' in italic font is the SI recommended symbol for the quantity of mass
>Not being aware that the SI Brochure notes that c subscript 0 (or sometimes simply c) is the symbol for the speed of light in a vacuum
>Implying that any random assemblage of SI prefixes and unit symbols must necessarily make sense
Please re-read the SI Brochure.

>>942894
>>Implying that any random assemblage of SI prefixes and unit symbols must necessarily make sense
Ah, finaly! This is exactly the mental lapse the SI autist keeps having. Perhaps this will trigger a teeny weeny bit of insight and selfawareness.

>>942924
I think it's a mental lapse on your part. How could I possibly offer guidance on the use of SI units, prefixes and unit symbols as prescribed by the SI Brochure if I didn't ascribe to that tenet?