Rim brakes live for another 4 years - INEOS re-sign with Pinarello

[Ypuh]

What are those obvious reasons? The teams with rim brakes have the strongest riders?

Exactly .

Here's a proposition. What about allowing the bike weight limit correlate to the rider's body weight? An 80kg rider has a minimum weight limit that's 33% more than a 60kg rider's.

I don't think that's fair. The wattage needed to climb a mountain scales according to W/Kg, but the absolute wattage output of a human body doesn't.

Let's say for example Bernal at 58kg pushes 6.5 W/Kg for one hour. That's nearly impossible for a rider like Dumoulin who weighs 69kg. If you then also add an additional 1.25 Kg's to his bike, he needs to push 456w vs Bernal's
377w to finish. Power doesn't scale that easily. Since you don't win Grand Tours on the flat or down hill, the heavier rider needs make up all that extra weight in a time trail which is why riders like Wiggins and Dumoulin could win a Grand Tour, but overall lighter riders already have a minor advantage even with the relatively heavier bike.

I believe Marcel Kittel only had an FTP of 4,9 W/Kg (438 Watts/90 Kg). He did win a fair amount of stages and probably would also have on a heavier bike, but it goes to show there is kind of a limit to absolute wattage, even if you're a heavier rider.

[alcatraz]

Ok, that's interesting.

What about the unfair situation of lighter riders on flats and descents? Sure, there they don't need the lighter bike, but wouldn't that be a fair compromise to give them a boost on climbs?

I'm just brainstorming out of curiosity... I'm not really invested in the discussion really. Thanks for commenting.

[bilwit]

tbf they never said they are comitted to rim brakes...

[smokva]

What I don't understand is why would pro peleton needs be relevant to us, mortals who pay parts with our money.
I'm 190 cm and 115 kg guy who can climb two Stelvios in one day and noone can assure me that I would reach bottom of the mountin alive. I don't believe that:
- 160 mm rotors are big enough for me and that they won't melt
- that hydraulic oil won't boil inside system
- that pads won't be completley worn out after 1st descent

In my case road disc brakes is an idiotism that is trying to solve problem of another idiotism (carbon clinchers). So, instead of admitting that carbon clinchers are no go for mountains they are reinventig brakes just to keep sales of expensive carbon clinchers.

In reality....for flat roads carbon clinchers with calipers are ok, but for mountains there is still no disc brake I would use. So, to conclude...there is no need for disc brake.

Just to share my experiance of disc brakes on my touring bike here I have 180 mm e-bike rotors and mechanical-cable actuated Spyre brakes...I went with my 3 yo son in child seat on a local 7% 4,5 km mountain. When we went down by the end of descent new pads were so worn that I had no more braking power. If I had hydraulical system I'm not sure whould we still be in one piece...even though hydro brakes self allign which solves the problem of brake pull once the oil boils....

At the end, the only problem that disc brakes solve is melting of carbon clincher brake tracks during hard descents...but they introduce completley new sets of problems which in my case are life threating...too small rotrs that melt, quick pad wear and possibilty of loosing hydraulic pressure due to oil temperature.

Please just give me back my good old calipers and alu brake tracks that have served me well for my whole life...I don't need better wet braking, if it's wet I'll just stay home or ride careful.

[pkaro]

It depends so much on how you descend. If you are dragging the brakes for 20 minutes to make sure you never hit over 40 kph, then you're placing huge demands on your brakes.
If you're comfortable hitting 70 kph and braking only when approaching a corner (and then only braking down to 45 or so) then the brakes won't be used as much.

The lighter you are the less power the brakes have to dissipate and the lower your terminal velocity is for a given gradient, obviously, so heavier riders are doubly punished.

But any braking system that's good enough for MTB is good enough for road - but 180 mm rotors on the front and 28 mm tires would definitely be welcome, however the current flat-mount standard isn't good for flexibility of rotor sizes.

[pkaro]

The weight limit made the transition to disc brakes possible. Without the limit there would be lots of 5kg bikes in the races.

What about time trials? That's where aero is king. Any chance of seeing disc brakes on the podium there?

Here's a proposition. What about allowing the bike weight limit correlate to the rider's body weight? An 80kg rider has a minimum weight limit that's 33% more than a 60kg rider's.

Heavier riders could then switch to disc brakes before the lighter riders do. Braking performance compares, and relative weight climbing compares.

While a sensible idea it and of itself, it would be very difficult to implement without weigh-ins. That adds a huge amount of complexity (do you have weigh-ins like boxing? what about if weight fluctuates during a GT?) and further puts a strain on the weight (and therefore health) of riders.

In practise, lowering the bike weight limit would lower the proportional disadvantage which lighter riders have. However, lighter riders already have a huge advantage when going up hills, so this would turn GC even more into a tiny rider's game. Unless they compensated this with longer time trials it would make heavier riders completely uncompetitive.

[alcatraz]

I don't think it's an unfair advantage. But it is too complex to implement.

An unfair advantage is letting a 90kg rider enjoy the same bike weight as a 55kg rider.

Basketball players tend to be tall. It wouldn't be fair to penalize them to get more short players into the game, would it?

[SixThirteen]

I don't think it's an unfair advantage. But it is too complex to implement.

An unfair advantage is letting a 90kg rider enjoy the same bike weight as a 55kg rider.

Basketball players tend to be tall. It wouldn't be fair to penalize them to get more short players into the game, would it?

Seems unfair to me how the genetic game plays out. Maybe can handicap based on VO2Max

[justonwo]

What I don't understand is why would pro peleton needs be relevant to us, mortals who pay parts with our money.
I'm 190 cm and 115 kg guy who can climb two Stelvios in one day and noone can assure me that I would reach bottom of the mountin alive. I don't believe that:
- 160 mm rotors are big enough for me and that they won't melt
- that hydraulic oil won't boil inside system
- that pads won't be completley worn out after 1st descent

In my case road disc brakes is an idiotism that is trying to solve problem of another idiotism (carbon clinchers). So, instead of admitting that carbon clinchers are no go for mountains they are reinventig brakes just to keep sales of expensive carbon clinchers.

In reality....for flat roads carbon clinchers with calipers are ok, but for mountains there is still no disc brake I would use. So, to conclude...there is no need for disc brake.

Just to share my experiance of disc brakes on my touring bike here I have 180 mm e-bike rotors and mechanical-cable actuated Spyre brakes...I went with my 3 yo son in child seat on a local 7% 4,5 km mountain. When we went down by the end of descent new pads were so worn that I had no more braking power. If I had hydraulical system I'm not sure whould we still be in one piece...even though hydro brakes self allign which solves the problem of brake pull once the oil boils....

At the end, the only problem that disc brakes solve is melting of carbon clincher brake tracks during hard descents...but they introduce completley new sets of problems which in my case are life threating...too small rotrs that melt, quick pad wear and possibilty of loosing hydraulic pressure due to oil temperature.

Please just give me back my good old calipers and alu brake tracks that have served me well for my whole life...I don't need better wet braking, if it's wet I'll just stay home or ride careful.

I've been riding hydraulic disk brakes on bikes for 17 years. I've also been riding rim brakes on road bikes for years. I have ridden with kids on the back of my bikes using both systems, including long descents. I have never experienced what you describe. While I wouldn't say disk brakes are essential for road bikes, they offer a lot of advantages. I also disagree that disk brakes addressed the problems of carbon clinchers. By the time they came out, there were plenty of carbon clinchers with great braking performance. I put 7,000 miles on a set of Zipp 303s with zero signs of wear and better braking power than any aluminum rim I've ever ridden. Carbon clinchers have eclipsed the performance of aluminum rims in all categories at this point.

[Mr.Gib]

What I don't understand is why would pro peleton needs be relevant to us, mortals who pay parts with our money.
I'm 190 cm and 115 kg guy who can climb two Stelvios in one day and noone can assure me that I would reach bottom of the mountin alive. I don't believe that:
- 160 mm rotors are big enough for me and that they won't melt
- that hydraulic oil won't boil inside system
- that pads won't be completley worn out after 1st descent

In my case road disc brakes is an idiotism that is trying to solve problem of another idiotism (carbon clinchers). So, instead of admitting that carbon clinchers are no go for mountains they are reinventig brakes just to keep sales of expensive carbon clinchers.

In reality....for flat roads carbon clinchers with calipers are ok, but for mountains there is still no disc brake I would use. So, to conclude...there is no need for disc brake.

Just to share my experiance of disc brakes on my touring bike here I have 180 mm e-bike rotors and mechanical-cable actuated Spyre brakes...I went with my 3 yo son in child seat on a local 7% 4,5 km mountain. When we went down by the end of descent new pads were so worn that I had no more braking power. If I had hydraulical system I'm not sure whould we still be in one piece...even though hydro brakes self allign which solves the problem of brake pull once the oil boils....

At the end, the only problem that disc brakes solve is melting of carbon clincher brake tracks during hard descents...but they introduce completley new sets of problems which in my case are life threating...too small rotrs that melt, quick pad wear and possibilty of loosing hydraulic pressure due to oil temperature.

Please just give me back my good old calipers and alu brake tracks that have served me well for my whole life...I don't need better wet braking, if it's wet I'll just stay home or ride careful.

I've been riding hydraulic disk brakes on bikes for 17 years. I've also been riding rim brakes on road bikes for years. I have ridden with kids on the back of my bikes using both systems, including long descents. I have never experienced what you describe. While I wouldn't say disk brakes are essential for road bikes, they offer a lot of advantages. I also disagree that disk brakes addressed the problems of carbon clinchers. By the time they came out, there were plenty of carbon clinchers with great braking performance. I put 7,000 miles on a set of Zipp 303s with zero signs of wear and better braking power than any aluminum rim I've ever ridden. Carbon clinchers have eclipsed the performance of aluminum rims in all categories at this point.

So much of this depends on the situation. There are many massive descents that require very little braking, and others where you just can't let the bike go. Scary steep shit with mediocre surface and switchbacks close together that just keep coming. On many occasions over the years I have stopped to let my alloy rims cool. And could you imaging descending if you weighed 115 kg . There should be a custom fork available so that 12the big guys could run MTB size front rotors. I know a tour leader who would run nothing less then 180mm up front. And a tip for the big guys - semi metallic rotors will help with the wear issue.

As for carbon clinchers, indeed the brake surfaces are excellent these days. They can heat up without melting, but I always worry about how the tire bead will take that heat. The answer to that of course is tubulars but that comes with other complications so...
On topic, I love that Ineos and some of the UAE guys ride rim brakes. It's fun to see some guys go against the trend. Tells you someting about equipment preference when earning a living is at stake. Also helps the rim brake crowd feel even better about their gear and less concerned about all those rim brake bikes/wheelsets in which they have invested.

[Rossin67]

We all know that most cyclists are poseurs, and like to emulate the pros, except for maybe tubular tires.

I go full poseur and have no shame. My favorite Pro, besides Bartali, is Pantani and I started climbing in the drops because I watched him do that. I started descending with my butt one inch above my rear tire because he did that and I recently read that he raced in a 54/44 so I'm ordering new rings

[hannawald]

What I don't understand is why would pro peleton needs be relevant to us, mortals who pay parts with our money.
I'm 190 cm and 115 kg guy who can climb two Stelvios in one day and noone can assure me that I would reach bottom of the mountin alive. I don't believe that:
- 160 mm rotors are big enough for me and that they won't melt
- that hydraulic oil won't boil inside system
- that pads won't be completley worn out after 1st descent

In my case road disc brakes is an idiotism that is trying to solve problem of another idiotism (carbon clinchers). So, instead of admitting that carbon clinchers are no go for mountains they are reinventig brakes just to keep sales of expensive carbon clinchers.

In reality....for flat roads carbon clinchers with calipers are ok, but for mountains there is still no disc brake I would use. So, to conclude...there is no need for disc brake.

Just to share my experiance of disc brakes on my touring bike here I have 180 mm e-bike rotors and mechanical-cable actuated Spyre brakes...I went with my 3 yo son in child seat on a local 7% 4,5 km mountain. When we went down by the end of descent new pads were so worn that I had no more braking power. If I had hydraulical system I'm not sure whould we still be in one piece...even though hydro brakes self allign which solves the problem of brake pull once the oil boils....

At the end, the only problem that disc brakes solve is melting of carbon clincher brake tracks during hard descents...but they introduce completley new sets of problems which in my case are life threating...too small rotrs that melt, quick pad wear and possibilty of loosing hydraulic pressure due to oil temperature.

Please just give me back my good old calipers and alu brake tracks that have served me well for my whole life...I don't need better wet braking, if it's wet I'll just stay home or ride careful.

I've been riding hydraulic disk brakes on bikes for 17 years. I've also been riding rim brakes on road bikes for years. I have ridden with kids on the back of my bikes using both systems, including long descents. I have never experienced what you describe. While I wouldn't say disk brakes are essential for road bikes, they offer a lot of advantages. I also disagree that disk brakes addressed the problems of carbon clinchers. By the time they came out, there were plenty of carbon clinchers with great braking performance. I put 7,000 miles on a set of Zipp 303s with zero signs of wear and better braking power than any aluminum rim I've ever ridden. Carbon clinchers have eclipsed the performance of aluminum rims in all categories at this point.

So much of this depends on the situation. There are many massive descents that require very little braking, and others where you just can't let the bike go. Scary steep shit with mediocre surface and switchbacks close together that just keep coming. On many occasions over the years I have stopped to let my alloy rims cool. And could you imaging descending if you weighed 115 kg . There should be a custom fork available so that 12the big guys could run MTB size front rotors. I know a tour leader who would run nothing less then 180mm up front. And a tip for the big guys - semi metallic rotors will help with the wear issue.

As for carbon clinchers, indeed the brake surfaces are excellent these days. They can heat up without melting, but I always worry about how the tire bead will take that heat. The answer to that of course is tubulars but that comes with other complications so...
On topic, I love that Ineos and some of the UAE guys ride rim brakes. It's fun to see some guys go against the trend. Tells you someting about equipment preference when earning a living is at stake. Also helps the rim brake crowd feel even better about their gear and less concerned about all those rim brake bikes/wheelsets in which they have invested.

I used to have a rim brake bike with tubulars for a short period of time when I had the weightweenie fever. I was happy with that bike except for I was afraid of braking going down extreme hills (yes, I am just too afraid to ride at 80-110km/h down the hill) and I was afraid of having a puncture. I had a spare Tufo tubular in my back pocket but still unsure I can manage the repair..Pros don´t have to be concerned about any of these issues..but for us mere mortals it´s great we have discs:) We will see with F14 if Pinarello was able to shed some weight and INEOS can make a transfer to discs..we will see how that rim brake strategy goes for Pinarello but I am not sure enough people will pay 6000 euros for new rim brake bike frameset in the future.

[bobones]

...

[smokva]

So much of this depends on the situation. There are many massive descents that require very little braking, and others where you just can't let the bike go. Scary steep shit with mediocre surface and switchbacks close together that just keep coming. On many occasions over the years I have stopped to let my alloy rims cool. And could you imaging descending if you weighed 115 kg . There should be a custom fork available so that 12the big guys could run MTB size front rotors. I know a tour leader who would run nothing less then 180mm up front. And a tip for the big guys - semi metallic rotors will help with the wear issue.

Exactly, it all depends on the situation. For example, down the Stelvio I was happy to hit speeds of 90 km, but there are some local roads with 300 m of total descend where I have to drag brakes the whole time. From my eperiance anything less than 2,3 mm thick 180 mm rotor is not enough for me. I use this model from Tektro http://tektro.com/products.php?p=221 and I'm very happy with them. I believe that you need material to disipate heat and these rotors are just about that. THe only problem is to fith them inside caliper, they are thicker so harder to setup.

As for carbon clinchers, indeed the brake surfaces are excellent these days. They can heat up without melting, but I always worry about how the tire bead will take that heat. The answer to that of course is tubulars but that comes with other complications so...
On topic, I love that Ineos and some of the UAE guys ride rim brakes. It's fun to see some guys go against the trend. Tells you someting about equipment preference when earning a living is at stake. Also helps the rim brake crowd feel even better about their gear and less concerned about all those rim brake bikes/wheelsets in which they have invested.

Brake surfaces are better these days, but you can still melt brake tracks...it' just the way epoxy is. You can optimize a thing or two to incrise temperature of the melting point, but they can still be melted in realistic scenarios. The fact is you must always be aware of your carbon clinchers and descend in a way not to overheat them....is it always possible, I don't believe so.
Maybe lighter riders just don't experience what we bigger riders do. When I was skinny with "only" 90 kg I was descending much faster, so carbon clinchers wouldn't be a problem. Now with 115 kg I descend much slower, but not because I forgot how do descend, because It's very hard to stop this additional mass if I let go. Entering the switchturn with the same speed now and before is not the same, I have to reduce speed (disipate energy - heat) much before now.
The fact is that weak point of carbon clinchers is what they are supposed to do, reduce kinetical energy by disipating heat. This energy must go somewhere. If it's not rim heating up than it must be pads heating up, but the surface and volume of pads is much smaller so their thermal capacity is not big.

[smokva]

Double post. Please delete.