General: Opinions and thoughts on Gearing on a Fixed Gear.

Bottom of Page

1 to 50 of 51

- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 2nd 2009 edited
I am currently riding a 44x16 gearing on a fixed gear and it's quite comfortable. I have to spin a little faster (which I hear can be a good thing) going down hills and it's comfortable for climbing. I have yet to find a hill in my area I could not handle.

I was wondering if there is a major and noticeable difference if say I wanted to upgrade to a 48t chainring.

I know you could also change the number of teeth on the cog or both the cog and the chainring. What options are best? At what point do the gearings make a significant difference? What gearing do you guys ride at etc...

Any thoughts on the matter is greatly appreciated. I apologize if I am starting too many threads asking seemingly stupid questions. Just have these questions that I couldn't find answers to. Hopefully the threads help less experienced fixed gear riders like myself.

Thanks again.
- CommentAuthorpatrickviolence
- CommentTimeMar 2nd 2009
i ride 49 x 17. its hard sometimes but i don't spin out as much as i did with 46 x 17. 48 x 16 is not a good ratio. 1 skid patch, really tall.
- CommentAuthorterrible_one49
- CommentTimeMar 3rd 2009
I also ride a 49x17, after riding a 46x14. The 46x14 was good for long distance rides and track races, but for street/traffic riding, I much prefer 49x17. Larger gears have less friction and run smoother.
- CommentAuthorAaron C
- CommentTimeMar 3rd 2009
well just think about it this way: every three teeth that you add to the chain ring is approximately equivalent to adding 1 tooth to the cog you are rocking (i.e. adding one tooth on the cog is about +6 gear inches, one tooth on the chainring adds about 2 gear inches).

if you plus up your chainring to a 48 and leave your cog at 16 you are going to notice a significant difference in how big your gear feels. if you like where your gearing is at now if you do decide to go with a 48t chainring also move up to a 17t cog. its a slightly bigger gear (2 inches) but you are not going to notice a hug change, and you will have more skidpatches.

personally on my everyday bike i ride 44x17 and couldn't be happier. i'm pretty much certain (and sure one of you tec/sciecnce/engineering guys can back me up on this) that pounding large gears on a commuter doesnot increase the size of your penis.
- CommentAuthordeermatt
- CommentTimeMar 3rd 2009
Its just stupid riding a chainring that small. The more teeth , the less friction, and a smoother ride. I ride a 49x16 and its pretty hard, but I also ride 49x17 and its perfect .
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 3rd 2009 edited
I really appreciate the time taken to respond to the thread. Getting a lot of very useful information so far.

What I am trying to do is possibly go a little bigger while not having to buy new parts if I don't have to. I am currently at 44x16. Since I am going to be getting a new crankset (with new chainring) I'm trying to find a good ratio while still being able to keep my 16t cog in the rear (trying not to spend money on places where I really don't have to) and also have a good number of skid patches.

I am happy with my gearing now. I live in a pretty hilly area. But I figure I go a little bigger if I am upgrading the crankset anyways.

What would your guys take be on something like 46x16...or 49x16?

Thanks again.
- CommentAuthordeermatt
- CommentTimeMar 3rd 2009
well a 49x16 gives you a 2.8 ratio, and 49x16 gives you a 3.0 ratio, so not nearly the same. Run a 49 17
- CommentAuthorthe rabbi
- CommentTimeMar 3rd 2009
hilly. go for the 46/16.
- CommentAuthoro_O
- CommentTimeMar 3rd 2009
Posted By: the rabbihilly. go for the 46/16.

This is an awesome ratio, I've had it on both of my bikes.
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 3rd 2009
That's awesome news to hear. I'm about 99% sure I'll be going with that gearing. Thanks for the feedback so far. I hope any other opinions on gearing are voiced in here also. It's been very helpful. Hopefully it can help others too.
- CommentAuthorjam guy
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
I rock 48/18. I also have to climb a hill with a 6% grade everyday for a half a mile. Larger gears are alright and they make your legs huge and sexy but hard to stop and especially harder to skid. MY fixed gear has been on my wall for awhile thought because of the hills. I have my crosscheck set up with a huge granny gear. 1x9 with a 36x28. I can climb walls with that fucker.
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
Posted By: jam guyI rock 48/18. I also have to climb a hill with a 6% grade everyday for a half a mile. Larger gears are alright and they make your legs huge and sexy but hard to stop and especially harder to skid. MY fixed gear has been on my wall for awhile thought because of the hills. I have my crosscheck set up with a huge granny gear. 1x9 with a 36x28. I can climb walls with that fucker.

So many things to take into account. I am trying to watch my figure and make my legs sexier...haha.
- CommentAuthorthe rabbi
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
bigger gears will make your legs huge, and smaller gears will tone your legs.
- CommentAuthorSteven Bell
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
I am sure a lot of you are familiar with this link, but for those who are not...
http://software.bareknucklebrigade.com/
I found this helpful when I was doing my set up, although I wish I had talked to a few more people before selecting my gear. I ended up going with 52x17 because it had so many skid patches, but I didn't really realize that it was on the larger side of the spectrum for a month or so after I had been riding it. Now that I am use to it, I just assume keep riding with it, also I don't want to spend money on more parts to change it up. Whenever I get around to another build I think I will go a little shorter.
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
Posted By: the rabbibigger gears will make your legs huge, and smaller gears will tone your legs.

I was kidding rabbi. haha. Thank you for clarifying though. Really appreciate it!
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
Posted By: Steven BellI am sure a lot of you are familiar with this link, but for those who are not...
http://software.bareknucklebrigade.com/
I found this helpful when I was doing my set up, although I wish I had talked to a few more people before selecting my gear. I ended up going with 52x17 because it had so many skid patches, but I didn't really realize that it was on the larger side of the spectrum for a month or so after I had been riding it. Now that I am use to it, I just assume keep riding with it, also I don't want to spend money on more parts to change it up. Whenever I get around to another build I think I will go a little shorter.

Thanks for that website. It really breaks it down mathematically and visually for you.
- CommentAuthorArek82
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009 edited
Hi there,
sorry, dont know a lot about bikes,
what's the difference between fixed gear frame and ordinary racer frame? would i be able to make fixed gear bike out of old racer?
thanks 4 help
- CommentAuthorthe rabbi
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
are the dropouts horizontal or vertical?
- CommentAuthormrymeski
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
46/16 or 49/17 sounds like a good bet for you. I used to ride 46/16 and it was a fantastic gear, now I ride 49/15 track and 49/16 street and I love them both. The more teeth the better for sure. Don't simply put a 48 on your bike if you have a 16 cog because 16 into 48 is a perfect 3, meaning you will get patches and uneven tire wear.
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
I figure 46/16 will be good, plus I'm an ambi skidder when I do skid. Otherwise I just use leg power to stop. I'm glad I am getting a lot of affirmation on the 46/16 gearing.
- CommentAuthoro_O
- CommentTimeMar 5th 2009
46/16 and 47/19 are basically the same gear.
larger ratios = less friction (more chain)
small ratios = better power transfer (less chain)
- CommentAuthoradriano
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
Posted By: o_O46/16 and 47/19 are basically the same gear.
larger ratios = less friction (more chain)
small ratios = better power transfer (less chain)

wouldnt less friction transfer more power?
- CommentAuthorPisuto
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
38/17 for trick mode & 44/17 for trick mode hehe
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
i am totally new to fixed gears and i ride the same ratio as tangsuto. i messed around with a couple different ratios but settled on this one because of my terrain and so forth. seems to be perfect for hitting hills and i dont spin out on the way down. i am sure that once i get a little bit stronger ill be moving up the gear inch. one thing to also take into consideration tangsuto, you can always sell or trade your old parts if they arent completely warn out and if they are completely warn out, its probably good you switch them out anyway ;)

any one think about skid patches? there is a lot of opinions on here but im surprised no one really brought up skid patches! i have a front brake and dont really believe in skidding out as a form of stopping but many do and if you are planning to do the same, it would probably be wise to also factor that into your ratio. for example, switching your cog up to a 17t will just about double your skid patch.
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
With a 46x16 gearing you get 16 skid patches if you're ambidextrous. Switching up just the cog to a 17t and keeping a 46t ring would only produce 17 skid patches (only 1 more), so it's not really worth it. The only way to double your skid patches with an odd number of teeth in the cog is to also have an odd number of teeth in the chainring.

I suppose you could change up the ring to like a 45x17 or something, but that leaves you with a lower ratio and I'd have to buy a new ring and cog. I'm good =P
- CommentAuthorOtto Rax
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
are you sure "friction" is the word you're looking for?

"46/16 and 47/19 are basically the same gear."

surely you're kidding.

46/16 is 11.2 gear inches higher than 47/19.

46/16 is almost equal to 47/16. there is a ~1.5 gi jump there. same with 46/19 and 47/19.
- CommentAuthorOtto Rax
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
and in theory, 46/16 would give you 23 skid patches. skid patches should not determine your ratio
- CommentAuthoradriano
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
Posted By: tangsutoWith a 46x16 gearing you get 16 skid patches if you're ambidextrous. Switching up just the cog to a 17t and keeping a 46t ring would only produce 17 skid patches (only 1 more), so it's not really worth it.

isnt 46x16 only 8 skid patches, ambidextrous or not?

Posted By: Otto Raxare you sure "friction" is the word you're looking for?

is this directed at me? a larger set up of the same ratio will run less tension and less friction, but we are splitting hairs here.

Posted By: Otto Raxskid patches should not determine your ratio

i vouch.
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
of course skid patches, just like cost of parts shouldnt completely determine your ratio. obviously how well it suites your gear inch in the terrain you are trying to tackle and what you can do is the most important feature. and yeah, if you run 42/16 verses 42/17 thats twice the skid patches. if you notch that chainring up to 44 (44/16 vs 44/17) its almost 5 times as many skid patches. i personally dont do skids, it wastes your tires in my opinion but hey, if you are going to skid around town, you should at least consider it, you know?
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
Posted By: tangsutoWith a 46x16 gearing you get 16 skid patches if you're ambidextrous. Switching up just the cog to a 17t and keeping a 46t ring would only produce 17 skid patches (only 1 more), so it's not really worth it. The only way to double your skid patches with an odd number of teeth in the cog is to also have an odd number of teeth in the chainring.

I suppose you could change up the ring to like a 45x17 or something, but that leaves you with a lower ratio and I'd have to buy a new ring and cog. I'm good =P

46/16 gives you 16 skids, 46/17 gives you 34 (more than twice the skids) not 17.
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
46/16 gives you 16 skids, 46/17 gives you 34 (more than twice the skids) not 17.

I refer you to Sheldon Brown:
http://sheldonbrown.com/fixed.html
Go down to skid patches. Brown breaks down the calculations for number of skid patches, but for quick reference:

Examples:

44/16 simplifies to 11/4, so there would be 4 skid patches.

45/15 simplifies to 3/1 so there would only be 1 skid patch.

42/15 simplifies to 14/5, so there would be 5 skid patches.

43/15 can't be further simplified, so there would be 15 skid patches.

This is based on the assumption that you always skid with the same foot forward.

If you are an ambidextrous skidder, and the simplified ratio has an even numerator or denominator, your number of skid patches will be the same.

If you are an ambidextrous skidder, and both the numerator and denominator are odd, the number of possible skid patches will be doubled.

I want you to focus your attention on the last two sentences. After simplification, if either number in the numerator or denominator is even, then the number of skid patches is the same (i.e. represented by the denominator).

Also as further support I refer you to
http://software.bareknucklebrigade.com/rabbit.applet.html

Change the chainring to 46 and the cog to 17 and make sure to check the box "Ambidexterous skidder". Note the number of skid patches--17. Now try the same thing with 46 and 16. Note the skid patches--16. The skid patches box is the last box.

Now I urge you to also try 45 and 17. You will indeed get 34 skid patches.
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
Posted By: tangsuto
46/16 gives you 16 skids, 46/17 gives you 34 (more than twice the skids) not 17.

I refer you to Sheldon Brown:
http://sheldonbrown.com/fixed.html
Go down to skid patches. Brown breaks down the calculations for number of skid patches, but for quick reference:

Examples:

44/16 simplifies to 11/4, so there would be 4 skid patches.

45/15 simplifies to 3/1 so there would only be 1 skid patch.

42/15 simplifies to 14/5, so there would be 5 skid patches.

43/15 can't be further simplified, so there would be 15 skid patches.

This is based on the assumption that you always skid with the same foot forward.

If you are an ambidextrous skidder, and the simplified ratio has an even numerator or denominator, your number of skid patches will be the same.

If you are an ambidextrous skidder, and both the numerator and denominator are odd, the number of possible skid patches will be doubled.

I want you to focus your attention on the last two sentences. After simplification, if either number in the numerator or denominator is even, then the number of skid patches is the same (i.e. represented by the denominator).

Also as further support I refer you to
http://software.bareknucklebrigade.com/rabbit.applet.html

Change the chainring to 46 and the cog to 17 and make sure to check the box "Ambidexterous skidder". Note the number of skid patches--17. Now try the same thing with 46 and 16. Note the skid patches--16. The skid patches box is the last box.

Now I urge you to also try 45 and 17. You will indeed get 34 skid patches.

using sheldon as an example...

expert from: http://sheldonbrown.com/fixed.html

44/16 simplifies to 11/4, so there would be 4 skid patches.

45/15 simplifies to 3/1 so there would only be 1 skid patch.

42/15 simplifies to 14/5, so there would be 5 skid patches.

43/15 can't be further simplified, so there would be 15 skid patches.

of course doubling all of these if you are an ambidextrous skidder, you would take the ratio, simplify it and then take the simplified denominator as your skid patches. so 44/16 simplifies to 11/4 giving you 4 skids or 8 if you are ambidextrous. now, like the last example 46/17, the point here i was trying to make and also the key to the 17t cog is the fact that 17 is a prime number, meaning the only number that can go into it is one. so just like sheldons last example of 43/15, 46/17 cannot be simplified, meaning you get 17 skids or 34 if you are ambidextrous. 46/17 can be simplified to 23/8 giving you 8 skids or 16 ambidextrous. so the difference is 46/16 giving you 8 or 16 ambidextrous and 46/17 giving 17 or 34 ambidextrous, again being more than twice the skids from 46/16 to 46/17. my whole point is that by switching up to 17t cog, you get some awesome skids, its just math right?... no biggie!!!

again, i dont even do this stuff! hahaha i lightly skip stop from time to time. good luck though!
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
You still don't quite get it. The odd number in the cog doesn't double if the chainring number is even. The number in the cog will only double if the number of the chainring is ALSO odd. Ambidextrous or not.

Yes, 17 is a prime number. But what I am saying is that, 17 will be the most skid patches you can get. Not 34 even if you skid with both legs in both positions. Read carefully, the last two sentences of the example I cited from Brown.

"If you are an Ambidextrous Skidder, and the simplified ratio has an even numerator or denominator, your number of skid patches will be the SAME.

If you are an ambidextrous skidder, and BOTH the numerator and denominator are odd, the number of possible skid patches will be doubled."

BOTH not one or the other, the numerator and denominator are odd, then the odd number of the cog (denominator) will be doubled if you are ambidextrous. This is of course after you have simplified the fraction as far as it will go.

Exp. a 45x17 cog. You cannot simplify anymore. So you have 17 in the denominator. Because 45 is ALSO odd, making BOTH 45 and 17 odd, then you will have 34 skid patches being ambidextrous (17*2).

Exp. a 46x17 cog. You cannot simplify anymore. So you have 17 in the denominator. Because 46 is NOT odd, NOT making both 46 and 17 odd, your number of skid patches is not doubled.

This is simple logic according to those two rules supplied above.

Now if you also tried this out in the second link I sent you. You would have clearly seen this demonstrated.

You are going on the assumption that you just multiply the denominator by two just because you are an ambidextrous skidder. This is not the case as shown by those two rules. This is because the wheel is a circle, and you do the math (a little more complicated) yes you technically get 34 skid patches with a 46x17 ratio being ambidextrous. However, the extra 17 patches happen to overlap the already existing 17 patches. Thus, you only have 17 skid patches.
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
Posted By: tangsutoYou still don't quite get it. The odd number in the cog doesn't double if the chainring number is even. The number in the cog will only double if the number of the chainring is ALSO odd. Ambidextrous or not.

Yes, 17 is a prime number. But what I am saying is that, 17 will be the most skid patches you can get. Not 34 even if you skid with both legs in both positions. Read carefully, the last two sentences of the example I cited from Brown.

ok, i got what you are saying but the two ratios are still the same even applying those two sentences to your statement. heres what i got.

"If you are an ambidextrous skidder, and the simplified ratio has an even numerator or denominator, your number of skid patches will be the same.

If you are an ambidextrous skidder, and both the numerator and denominator are odd, the number of possible skid patches will be doubled."

so it only doubles when both the numerator and the denominator are odd and if there is even numbers in either the numerator or denomintor, your skid patch is the same. it does not state that if both are even, it doubles (as stated with odd). it only states that it doubles when they are both odd, note even. so because 46 (an even number) is in the numerator, both is set at the same, regardless if you are an ambidextrous skidder or not. meaning, 46/16 giving you 8 and 46/17 giving 17. even at these ratios, you are still incorrect in saying they are only one skid patch apart because you do not double the 46/16 ratio either. 17 skid patches is still more than double (double being 16) the amount of 8 skids, correct? you are going on the assumption that because both are even, like the odd ratios, also double, which is not stated within those two sentences. this being, not simple logic but bad logic. regardless, with those two sentences, my statement still holds true.

heh, this is good though i did not know that so, my calculations were a little off but the results are the same. it does seem to prove that using a 17t cog helps out the patches and thats all i was saying. further, i dont even really consider these skid patches because i dont really skid so please forgive my mistake! good luck with your ratios though.
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
So yes I concede the wording on the first rule is worded incorrectly. I did the calculations out myself personally. Basically it is this:

The number of skid patches is doubled if the denominator is even no matter what, because you will always have an odd numerator.

But my point I am trying to get across is that this isn't always the case with ODD denominators. In order for the odd denominator to be doubled, the numerator also has to be doubled.

I was just trying to state that a 46x17 can never amount to 34 skid patches.

Like I said, please try it out for yourself at:
http://software.bareknucklebrigade.com/rabbit.applet.html

You can argue with me all you like, however it's hard to argue when you have the actual mathematical model to use. You will see for yourself.
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
HERE ARE SOME QUOTES FROM YOU:

tangsuto Mar 5th 2009
"I figure 46/16 will be good, plus I'm an ambi skidder when I do skid. Otherwise I just use leg power to stop. I'm glad I am getting a lot of affirmation on the 46/16 gearing."

tangsuto 8 hours ago edited
"With a 46x16 gearing you get 16 skid patches if you're ambidextrous. Switching up just the cog to a 17t and keeping a 46t ring would only produce 17 skid patches (only 1 more), so it's not really worth it. The only way to double your skid patches with an odd number of teeth in the cog is to also have an odd number of teeth in the chainring.

I suppose you could change up the ring to like a 45x17 or something, but that leaves you with a lower ratio and I'd have to buy a new ring and cog. I'm good =P"

tangsuto 45 minutes ago edited
"So yes I concede the wording on the first rule is worded incorrectly."

so sheldons site is wrong?!

to correct you, you said exactly this, 46/16 is only one skid patch more than 46/17. not just that 46/17 doesnt double. now, quoting what you said and replying to those quotes, i was pointing out that 46/17 is more than double 46/16 in skid patches. you clearly stated that 46/16 is 16 skid patches, this is what myself and many others have said is incorrect. from what i know and from what others have also posted, this is incorrect. this is what i am saying and nothing else. i did not use a special calculator, i used the principles and the math. these are the only models needed. frankly, those calculators arent always correct, so i didnt even bother to look at it. am i wrong? perhaps but based on what is printed on sheldons website, what others have said here and what ive heard from various riders and so forth, you are incorrect. thats all im saying. here is another reference for you to check out. again, good luck and much respect!
- CommentAuthorbobbysiegs
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
that chart is awesome. thx.
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
Posted By: bobbysiegsthat chart is awesome. thx.

if you are into skids, check out the yellow highlights!
- CommentAuthorbobbysiegs
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
Yeah i did im currently running a 47/19 which gives me 19 skid patches. (i know its an easy gear, gimme a break im a kid living in San Fran)
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
oh no way man, no worries. its based on you as much as it is your terrain and what you have to deal with. san fran is pretty hilly and also pretty crazy as far as traffic goes so much respect to you for even taking on such a city. good luck and stay safe out there!!!
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
so, it is obvious from what i have said in this thread, i am somewhat of a "gear" head (pun definitely intended) but i am also very new to bikes and bike mechanics and i am still learning. i would like to invite all of you who enjoy discussing these types of ideas with me in my threads where i am trying to stir up dialog on everything and anything related to fixed gear bikes. so PLEASE JOIN ME IN MY THREADS!!!!

LET'S TALK TECH!!!
this one is a techie show off your bike and others type page

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!!! for the love of your fixed conversions.
this one is for fixed gear conversion enthusiasts specifically

_{disclaimer: this is NOT A DEBATE thread on the sanctity of fixed gear conversions!!! this thread is about sharing in the fun of converting bikes to fixed gears, not debating weather it is an abomination unto the bicycle gods.}
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
If I am wrong then I am wrong. I haven't gone over everything you've posted yet, however I have no problems admitting when I am wrong. I am trying to make the best sense of what is out there. I appreciate the lively debate and discussion these things spur up.
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
me either and it is obvious that you too are into the mechanics so i please join me on my other threads! ride on!
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
Definitely. Honestly you learn a lot more through this kind of discussion. I rather have someone respond like you do with something useful to say. Just hate it when people post for the sake of being dumb.
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
yeah, i do not do that for sure. and i actually do listen and take into consideration everything people are saying. speaking of which, i did the calculator biz and this is what i got...

make sense?
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
Lol, you forgot to click the Ambidextrous Skidder Box.
- CommentAuthorbobbysiegs
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
I just rejoiced because i have 38 skid patches instead of 19. yay. this thread is really awesome thanks.
- CommentAuthortangsuto
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
You can thank spacerockkid and the others who posted in this thread for making it great. ^^
- CommentAuthorbobbysiegs
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009
yeah thanks dude
- CommentAuthorspacerockkid
- CommentTimeMar 15th 2009 edited
yeah, you are right about the calculator. is it correct for sure? i do not know. but just as an example, i just found another calculator that does exactly what i did before, it doubles all the outcomes when figuring ambidextrous skidding. the outcome it gets is the skid patch ratio that we have already agreed is incorrect, doubling the 17t. hahaha check it out yourself...

skidpatch widget by glabbsor

so at any rate, the least you can do is be skeptical of these "skid patch calculators" good luck!

1 to 50 of 51