I'll ask this here in case there's something to it other than bike fit. I'm not talking mountains here just up and down the caprock--short but steep. When riding the fixed gear bike I can stand and power up the whole way without sapping my legs of everything.

Fixed bike= 53 TT and 100mm stem with 60mm drop cowhorns
Geared bike= 54 TT and 100mm stem reach to hoods about = to end of cowhorns

When climbing the same hills on the geared bike I really suck (one reason I wanted a fixed is to get stronger at climbing). Typically our uphills follow a downhill and I always hit the base hard and keep spinning til I'm 1/2 up and geared down well. Standing on the geared bike drains the legs almost instantly (and yes I shift up several gears to drop cadence). Using the attack the bottom of the hill strategy on the fixed gear I hit it fast and whenever it feels like time to stand, about 1/2 way up, I stand and just ride to the top.

This is repeatable and somewhat puzzling. I believe it's more a bike fit issue than anything else but thought I'd see what some opinions might be. Only significant difference in position is that frame angles have me a bit farther forward on the fixed bike.

IMO your aproach is your issue. We apparently live in areas with similar terrain...I would say there is no flat here that lasts longer than half a mile, eveyrthing is up and down. On either bike I think you should attack the hill the same...go in with as much speed as possible and then as you slow stand (if that is how you want to do it). IMO your killing your legs by going to taller gears when you stand...part of what the fixed gear has brought to my riding is LESS shifting...just keep riding the gear you are in be that spinning or mashing. Now of course on the geared bike you will shift (otherwise why ride it) but I find myself shifting much less than before and I wind up going faster.

One thing the fixed gear gives you is the momentum of the wheel helping you to keep getting the pedals over on the climb.

So ride into that hill with speed and when you can't sit and spin up it anymore get out of the saddle and mash it...but don't go a couple harder gears...one at most but I would probably not shift until I needed an easier gear.

Once you stand up you are quite free to hit whatever posture feels best on the bike you're on. With that freedom, why would geometry matter very much?

A simple test would be to put your geared bike in the gear closest to your fixie, hit the same hills the same way you do on the fixie and compare times. In theory, the lighter weight and reduced chain drag should make you slightly faster on the fixie.

Fwiw, I find it hard to hit the same posture and motion climbing on a geared bike that I use on my fixie. Climbing on a fixie feels kind of like running. Climbing on a geared bike my legs feel more like pistons unless I shift into an easy gear I can spin. The hills in CT are often short enough to discourage shifting so I tend to roll up small hills by pushing harder rather than downshifting the way I would for a long climb.

Have you timed yourself? It could be a question of perception. It might seem like you're killing it on the fixie and not on the geared bike when in reality you're going faster and putting out more watts on the geared bike. I've had this happen to me.

I've tryed getting close to the same gearing on the geared bike. Wears me out big time. No stop watches put into play but on group rides I pass riders who normally pass me. They keep telling me it's new bike syndrome and/or the geared bike is slow, not that the fixie is fast. I suppose it's just variance in the rider.

Jumping back and forth between the fixie and the geared bike can really affect my riding style in that after riding the fixie a bunch I don't shift enough.

you're shifting up a couple of gears when standing, that itself will do it... this is not related to bike fit... ride like you do on the FG and I bet you notice no difference

I've had similar issues in switching from a fixed gear to a geared bike. My sense of the problem is two-fold. One part for me has been that I ride a fixed gear bike more often than a geared bike. I hit hills fairly hard, standing. With the one gear my body has a very linear response to the hill. I slow as the hill steepens or continues. There are no quick changes in pace one way or the other.

When I switch to a geared bike the first thing I used to do was to start a climb too fast. The range of gears on the geared bike threw-off my sense of how hard I should be riding up the hill. In short, an easier gear or two, relative to my usual fixed gear set-up, meant that the hill felt alot easier, so I rode it that much harder. The problem was that I ride my fixed gear at near-full sustainable effort. Starting a hill even harder because it feels easier meant that I went into my red zone and would be thrashed for the rest of the climb.

A similar, but slightly different issue, has been finding the right style/gear for sustained climbing. When I rode just geared bikes, I knew which gear to ride for a hard, sustained effort. I sometimes forget that now with all the fixie riding I do. SO I might be in too stiff a gear, grinding pre-maturely, or too easy a gear, spinning more than I want.

Another issue I find on rolling terrain is that it feels easier to me to spin down one hill on the fixie and start climbing the next than to switch from coasting to climbing on a geared bike - so long as I'm not spinning too fast on the descent. It might just be in my head, but I think it has something to do with my legs preferring the switch from some activity (spinning) to climbing over the switch from inactivity (in coasting).

I think there are alot of physiological subtleties that arise in fixed gear riding.

I bet your issue is one of technique... balancing the effort & gear you want to start a climb & how/when to shift down. You can eliminate the fit issue by figuring out which gear combo matches your fixed gear bike and climbing on that gear.

great post - plenty to think about

It's good to hear I'm not completely out of line with this observation. I'll keep riding and conducting research.

I've noticed one thing for sure, on my fixed, I spend a LOT more time climbing off of the saddle.

My fixed is a Langster and the geometry is WAY different than my Bianchi road bike, when I am standing on the Langster, I am way more forward and over the bars, it may have to do with the higher bottom bracket lifting me higher off the seat while standing ...I don't know.... One thing I do know is that I don't find hills or wind easier on the fixed.

I haven't ridden with bull horns in a while, but I seem to remember it provides pretty good leverage for climbing. This may aid your perceived advantage to fixed climbing.

My (and the wifes bikes too) Fixte and Gearie are set up EXACTLY the same, heck they are both Waterford RS22s with exactly the same model bars, pedals, saddle, seatpost and brake levers with exactly the same length stem.

Any ride that we can do fixed we are 1 or 2 mph faster than when we ride the same route with the gearies.

I think it is because we pace ourselves better riding fixed.

I suggest that you just enjoy the ride no matter which bike you are on and don't let the speed thing bother you. FWIW I haven't had a computer on either of my Waterfords ever-the Mrs still sort of keeps track of miles and speed, I just use my wrist watch.

I've noticed one thing for sure, on my fixed, I spend a LOT more time climbing off of the saddle.
I keep thinking about the psycological aspect.

On certain climbs (short and not too steep), I think I may climb faster on the fixie because I need to punch it, out of the saddle and otherwise to stay ontop of the 48 x 16 gear I use. With a geared bike, there's an option to pace yourself at a far more reasonable heart rate.

And there's also the fact that you feel so much more bad ass climbing on a fixed gear bike. Hmmm.

I've been sick and not riding since Sunday but I'll be out tonight. Thanks for the replies.