Bike Anti-Porn - When Things Go Wrong

that's what anti- is all about, right?

It's definitely in it's rightful place!

More people saying you can ride faster with a front brake, don't get why they say this, you can ride as equally fast without it.........

The front brake cuts the air, but has a lower profile than the area of fork behind it, so less drag. The fork then effectively drafts the brake, hence faster speeds. This is why they were banned on track in the early days, they gave an unfair advantage over those who couldn't afford brakes. Nowadays almost everyone can afford one, but the rule has remained.

You get about 1.8mph extra on most 'standard' setups.

^For real?

I was always led to believe that brakes where banned on tracks for:

1) Preventing a rider from suddenly stopping, thus eliminating the possibility of a chain reaction crash/pileup
2)For the same reason unused levers are not allowed as they can cause harm to the rider/others if they where to crash and become insert less severe word than impaled here on them

But your suggestion is cooler.

1.8mph!!

Maybe even 1.9mph with the right brake!

Balls. I've just wasted $150 on a more aero brake, when all that will happen is that the fork will now not be so well hidden from the wind, cancelling out the advantage.

Can someone please point out the clearances... THE CLEARANCESSS!!!!!

just remembered I got a retrobike account...

"I agree it should have a front brake but I've also seen fixies for sale in Evans at Mcr Velodrome with no brakes"

wac etc

Balls. I've just wasted $150 on a more aero brake, when all that will happen is that the fork will now not be so well hidden from the wind, cancelling out the advantage.

[/tester world problems]

which $150 brake?

TriRig Omega

wow looks really nice, want one now.

I can't get your sarcastic tone.

that being said those frames seem like good value for money.

TriRig Omega

yeah but that looks like all kinds of cool

for sale

^'Oi,I'm bidding on that.

^ want to sell me the wheels? fingers crossed

The front brake cuts the air, but has a lower profile than the area of fork behind it, so less drag. The fork then effectively drafts the brake, hence faster speeds. This is why they were banned on track in the early days, they gave an unfair advantage over those who couldn't afford brakes. Nowadays almost everyone can afford one, but the rule has remained.

You get about 1.8mph extra on most 'standard' setups.

The problem wasn't only not being able to afford them when you start getting above 25mph the fork, because of its greater aero advantage, can start moving faster than the brake I have seen pics where the fork has actually overtaken the brake completely and the rider has been thrown over the front.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/71724998/TREK%2069r/Trek%20%2069r/IMG_1925.JPG

is that a 29er frame?

Well, some people like it weird.

The problem wasn't only not being able to afford them when you start getting above 25mph the fork, because of its greater aero advantage, can start moving faster than the brake I have seen pics where the fork has actually overtaken the brake completely and the rider has been thrown over the front.

Yep, I followed Chainbreaker on that day.
His first time using a front brake during a bunny hop.

I wouldn't mind it at all with Moscow bars and a Concor.

Well, some people like it weird.

The fuck?

69er innit.
26" rear 29" front.

i always wanted one.