Not long ago, cycling enthusiasts took fixed-gear racing bikes out of velodromes and onto the streets, where they were a hit among bike messengers and hardcore urban cyclists. The appeal had to do with the stripped-down simplicity of the bikes. A skillful rider could bring a “fixie” to a stop just by resisting the forward rotation of the pedals, which eliminated the need for hand brakes. In some circles, fixie became a byword for hipness in modern urban life. Then the bikes edged into the mainstream, and that’s when the trouble started — in Berlin, at least. Police, citing safety concerns, have started a crackdown on fixies. Considering, as Jonah Berger writes, that “cultural groups abandon a taste when outsiders adopt them,” will the fixie crackdown, by stunting the growth of the trend, only reinforce the bikes’ street cred among the faithful? [%comments]
Berlin Bans Brakeless Bikes
and 
. You can also watch it on 
I agree with JohnO, I too am from Portland. While I do not commute by bike, I’ve been nearly clipped by these people more than once–while walking. These people are a nuisance and give bikers who do follow the rules a bad name.
It’s not really about “hate towards fixies” and their owners. Although, they tend to be the ones blowing through traffic stops and ignoring all rules of the road out of some recently-acquired hipster values. The fact is, that you’re now a vehicle on the road. All vehicles on the road have brakes… so people can stop… when they have to. Even horses have the “whoooOOaaa!” brake. Grow up, buy brakes. You can still act like you’ve been down with Breaking Away for your whole life. I’m talking to you, Portland.
Stephan, a coaster-brake that is applied by turning the pedals opposite the direction of normal forward motion is still a brake. What is being forbidden is bikes that have literally no mechanism to apply friction to the moving parts of the bicycle to slow the forward motion.
As far as if the rear hand brake fails, the experienced rider goes nowhere. I almost never use my rear brake – 80-90% of my stopping power is on my front brake. I have never even come close to flipping forward over my handlebars.
Aren’t you just dancing around what constitutes a brake? Hand brake, people agree this is a brake. Coaster brakes, which I also had before hand brake bicycles, people seemed to agree at some point this was a brake. Is it no longer?
So now, instead of whatever fancy mechanics you have in the rear hub for coaster brakes, you have “your legs stop the pedals from moving which stops the rear wheel from turning” breaks. Is this not a brake?
How about unicycles? Will we need to put brakes on those?
What will the compulsive hipsters do next ? Maybe bikes without tires are the next big thing among the painfully hip. Inflatable tires are for squares !
I can’t say I completely understand the logic here. If the problem is that a lack of brakes is unsafe for riders (which I am not saying it is) then shouldn’t helmets also be required? If the absence of brakes is problematic only at high speeds, then shouldn’t that be the issue? If it is the coincidental overlap of cyclists on fixed gear bikes and cyclists who break the traffic code while on the road, then they are already doing something wrong. For example, why regulate a fixed gear bike that stays on a sidewalk and acts appropriately with respect to fellow “pedestrians”. Without dedicated bike lanes, bikes either need to act like cars or act like pedestrians, it would seem to me. And, to the extent that a cyclist is not doing either of those, then he is already a problem. But to mandate this seems a bit weird to me, as person who rides a fixed gear bike and is well aware of the braking capacity. Further, I don’t understand why anyone vaguely knowledgeable on the issue of riding bikes would recommend using the rear brake. If you are more than 150 lbs and are going at any productive pace, you’ve just induced a skid. It is very difficult to go over your handle bars using your front brakes under normal conditions. I am not saying never use rear brakes, but they are hardly the *right* default.
I really don’t have a problem putting a brake on my bike if it became necessary per fiat, but would that change the recklessness (or lack there of) of my riding? Where is the causal chain there?
@reason, that is the least reasonable thing I’ve read in a while. Why are we debating the semantics of “braking”? I’ve ridden fixies, coasters, disc (mechanical & hydro), cantilever, etc, and everything els. But fixies are a problem. You cannot make sudden stops with a fixie, and you’re kidding yourself if you think you’re *that good* of a rider. These bikes were never meant for a closed course, not street riding. There’s no use pretending it’s anything other than a hipster fad, they are terrible to ride, nothing poetic or pure about it.
brakeless is fun, it makes riding more interesting. that, and the mechanical simplicity, is why messengers have been riding track bikes for 20+ years and will continue to. the present problem is the internet-driven “fixie” fad, which makes brakeless bikes the fashion accessory of 2009. so now we have thousands of new cyclists on bikes that are difficult to ride safely. soon enough people will put themselves in emergency rooms and the fad will fade. the berlin police will have forgotten about this in two years and some people will continue to choose to ride without brakes.