Why is no one using disc brakes in the tour?

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
JBeauBikes2
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 5:00 am

by JBeauBikes2

I really think guys just ride what they're given. The disc road bike is such a new market, and bike companies always use the "tested and refined with input from pro riders" line. I'm sure training is a part of the R&D manufacturers do.

As an amateur, I would want a disc bike for 3 reason.
1. Versatility to ride all kinds of terrain.
2. Safer braking in wet conditions
3. Greater longevity of carbon wheels.

The pros are only riding pavement and cobbles, and can choose from 2-3 bikes depending on your sponsor. 4 if you include the TT bike.

Pro's have the option to break out the disc-bike for wet conditions, but other than that they are constantly doing the opposite of braking.

Teams get new wheels every year, longevity isn't an issue for them. That's why you see mechanics blasting out the rear hub with high pressure water when cleaning; they only need that hub to stay greased for a season.

by Weenie


MoPho
Posts: 458
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:48 pm
Location: NorCal/SoCal

by MoPho

CrankAddictsRich wrote:From a performance standpoint, I actually think that quite a few pros like them and use them... it certainly seems that way based on training photos that I've seen. I suppose those could be staged for sponsor's sake, but I fold quite a few riders on instagram on even on rides when no official photographers are present, many of them are using disc brakes. IMO, it all comes down to the fact that disc brake wheels aren't easily swappable... They perform great, but the performance improvement is really only noticeable in wet conditions and to the pros, who make their lives based on winning races, none of them want to take the risk of not being able to get a speedy wheel change and get going again as quickly as possible. I had a disk brake road bike for a while and had 3 wheel sets... swapping wheels as a pain and always involved re-aligning the caliper to the rotor.



I have no issues swapping between my wheels with disc brakes, no re-alignment, no hassle. In fact it is WAY easier than what I had to do with my rim brake bike which required swapping pads (carbon/alloy), adjusting the brakes for the different wear and rim width, and setting the toe.
The braking performance is noticeable in the dry too, but in a race scenario you would have to take big risks to turn the benefits into time gain. Pros also have the benefit of descending on closed roads where they can use the brakes less and commit to good lines without fear of a car coming at them, so it's easy to see why they wouldn't think they need better braking for racing.



---


Calnago wrote:Exactly. I've got nothing against discs for a whole lot of applications. But when it comes to the pro ranks, they neither want them nor need them. I feel the same way about my road bikes. I don't need 'em, I don't want 'em... because for me the downsides outweigh the positives, especially when they start messing with my geometry in the form of longer chainstays, etc. I've listed the downsides many times and won't go into them again.


Good, because your "downsides" are always "fake news" :roll:
For example, I've told you many times already that chainstay length is not an issue (unless you really like cross-chaining) and here you are saying it again.



They are being pushed by the manufacturers. It is not a matter of the pros being slow to adopt or that change takes time. If the pros truly saw a benefit to them in their pro racing, they would be the first ones as a group to be all over it. But they don't. So, why the big deal then... who cares what the pros do or don't do. Well, the marketing people do, because they know if the pros are using them then it's an easy sell to that guy that walks into the bike shop with scads of money in his pocket yet little knowledge and says to the kid making minimum wage "I want the best ya got, what are the pros riding?". And when they look at the catalog with the top pros crossing the finish line in the Grand Tours... well... wouldn't it be good if they could show those disc brakes in there too. So, you can see the dilemma this causes the manufacturers, and if you can't, well than that's a whole 'nother conversation.


Kinda like people who go out and buy Colnagos... :mrgreen:


These days Pro Racing is more of a branding exercise, just like Ferrari doesn't need to sell F1 cars to the public to sell street cars and merchandise. Remember, the UCI rules force the riders to use what is sold to the public, I am sure the manufacturers would be more than happy to build custom bikes for the pros if they could.


.

Vieuxchnoque
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 9:36 am

by Vieuxchnoque

I would think that a pro would train on what he races. If disc brakes are as superior as we are made to believe, training with them would dull the reflexes, which you will need in a race.

bilwit
Posts: 966
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 5:49 am
Location: Seattle, WA

by bilwit

Vieuxchnoque wrote:I would think that a pro would train on what he races. If disc brakes are as superior as we are made to believe, training with them would dull the reflexes, which you will need in a race.


I think GCN did a video asking pros about exactly this and one (very curtly) responded that they're professionals and adjusting between the two isn't a big deal. I think the truth is that discs make more sense for bad weather commuters than the pros. Yes, braking is superior, but the benefit doesn't outweigh the need when rim brakes aren't that bad to begin with.

The industry would like us to think that it's some new revolutionary technology and we should all go out and buy new bikes--Specialized even claimed that everyone would be on a disc in the next 5-10 years which is laughable. Where are all the old bikes going to go? Everyone is just going to throw them in a garbage dump for a disc bike? I still see many, many riders with downtube shifters, toe clips, single speed, fixies, the occasional stem/friction shifter, etc on a daily basis. There may be more people on discs if that's all that's available but rim brake bikes won't be going anywhere.

jeffy
Posts: 1265
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2014 11:51 pm

by jeffy

Every now and again i think to myself "i'd love to buy and build up a lightweight rim braked climbing bike" .... and then it doesn't take too long to have an incident descending where a car / van comes out of nowhere and the modulation / control of the one fingered braking of Shimano hydraulics reminds me that i am being an idiot.

Until i am in a situation where I can't reasonably lose a kilo or two (not going to happen, and even then it is questionable) - a lightweight rim brake bike is a dangerous vanity. Even in the dry, simply the lack of strength needed to pull on your lever (apropos "with Dura Ace Calipers it is just as good") makes a significant difference regarding safety in traffic (i dont mean commuting - i mean bombing down narrow empty roads where an articulate truck can come round the bend at a moments notice) No doubt i am faster descending on disks than rim brakes because of increased confidence and performance of braking ..... as a well know and very famous car enthusiast has said "The fastest car is the one with the best brakes".

.. and that is not even mentioning Carbon Clinchers when you want to consider weight .....

I get it, many of you have a lot invested in your rim brake bikes. Cool, you dont have to move to disc until you want to - but it does sound like you are trying to convince yourselves more than convince anybody else.

bilwit
Posts: 966
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 5:49 am
Location: Seattle, WA

by bilwit

I live in Seattle and put in over 10k a year in my work commute alone in rain or shine even in the months where all the Amazon employees have their Dogmas stored away and there's only the same handful of cyclists on the road in the morning. I have done so with unbranded, no-name, chinese carbon clinchers with rim brakes. I'd love to have a disc brake bike some day and regulate it to rain/winter rides, but it's not a necessity.

Admittedly, I don't really see the benefit of having uber ultra powerful brakes when it's always safer to just brake earlier. Being able to suddenly stop a wheel sounds like asking to get launched over the handlebars.

Enda Marron
Posts: 351
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2002 6:03 pm
Location: Belfast

by Enda Marron

They ruin the line of a bike - they look crap and in the narcarcissic world of cycling and normal joes like me who ape the pros they are not a great image
I kniw helmets were once uncool but helmets dont ruin the line of a bike
Look... they're probably better than rim brakes, probably more advisable for normal joes and probably will become established within 10 years.... but they look crap

MoPho
Posts: 458
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:48 pm
Location: NorCal/SoCal

by MoPho

Enda Marron wrote:They ruin the line of a bike - they look crap and in the narcarcissic world of cycling and normal joes like me who ape the pros they are not a great image
I kniw helmets were once uncool but helmets dont ruin the line of a bike
Look... they're probably better than rim brakes, probably more advisable for normal joes and probably will become established within 10 years.... but they look crap




Image


I think they look great!



.

User avatar
Lewn777
Posts: 363
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:35 am

by Lewn777

Weird how all the people advocating disk brakes have recently invested in an expensive disk brake bike. The evidence for their 'superior' claims are mostly anecdotal and not very objective. Also they seem extremely oversensitive over this issue.

I've been riding Shimano hydraulic disk brakes on my mountain bikes for nearly ten years, I also live between very dry northern China and Britain. I'd absolutely love a winter disk brake training bike in the UK due to the often wet weather but in Northern China I'd be adding about 700 grams to my bike and a whole load of extra servicing headaches to my bike for very little reason.

Modern road disk brakes are really just mountain bike brakes ported across, for example the R785 caliper seems very similar to the XT M785. Hint is in the name!

I'd happily eventually go disk brake but I think the brakes need a ground-up redesign:
1. Weight has to come down to 300 grams extra vs rim brakes.
2. Clearance has to be increased. There's no greater sin than brake rub in road cycling, the clearance in my view is just too tight and poorly aligned or maintained brakes will rob bikes of watts.
3. Axles need to be standardised and wheel changes need to be as quick or nearly as quick as rim bikes.
4. More data especially with the rotors. What size of rotor is ACTUALLY better vs weight? 100mm? 140mm? 160mm? Also what would be the best materials and setup? Floating or semi floating rotors? Carbon inner and outer? Alloy inner and steel outer? Carbon inner and steel outer? 6 bolt or centerlock?

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 6615
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

MoPho wrote:
CrankAddictsRich wrote:From a performance standpoint, I actually think that quite a few pros like them and use them... it certainly seems that way based on training photos that I've seen. I suppose those could be staged for sponsor's sake, but I fold quite a few riders on instagram on even on rides when no official photographers are present, many of them are using disc brakes. IMO, it all comes down to the fact that disc brake wheels aren't easily swappable... They perform great, but the performance improvement is really only noticeable in wet conditions and to the pros, who make their lives based on winning races, none of them want to take the risk of not being able to get a speedy wheel change and get going again as quickly as possible. I had a disk brake road bike for a while and had 3 wheel sets... swapping wheels as a pain and always involved re-aligning the caliper to the rotor.
I have no issues swapping between my wheels with disc brakes, no re-alignment, no hassle. In fact it is WAY easier than what I had to do with my rim brake bike which required swapping pads (carbon/alloy), adjusting the brakes for the different wear and rim width, and setting the toe.
The braking performance is noticeable in the dry too, but in a race scenario you would have to take big risks to turn the benefits into time gain. Pros also have the benefit of descending on closed roads where they can use the brakes less and commit to good lines without fear of a car coming at them, so it's easy to see why they wouldn't think they need better braking for racing.
---
Calnago wrote:...Exactly. I've got nothing against discs for a whole lot of applications. But when it comes to the pro ranks, they neither want them nor need them. I feel the same way about my road bikes. I don't need 'em, I don't want 'em... because for me the downsides outweigh the positives, especially when they start messing with my geometry in the form of longer chainstays, etc. I've listed the downsides many times and won't go into them again.
Good, because your "downsides" are always "fake news" :roll:
For example, I've told you many times already that chainstay length is not an issue (unless you really like cross-chaining) and here you are saying it again.
They are being pushed by the manufacturers. It is not a matter of the pros being slow to adopt or that change takes time. If the pros truly saw a benefit to them in their pro racing, they would be the first ones as a group to be all over it. But they don't. So, why the big deal then... who cares what the pros do or don't do. Well, the marketing people do, because they know if the pros are using them then it's an easy sell to that guy that walks into the bike shop with scads of money in his pocket yet little knowledge and says to the kid making minimum wage "I want the best ya got, what are the pros riding?". And when they look at the catalog with the top pros crossing the finish line in the Grand Tours... well... wouldn't it be good if they could show those disc brakes in there too. So, you can see the dilemma this causes the manufacturers, and if you can't, well than that's a whole 'nother conversation.
Kinda like people who go out and buy Colnagos... :mrgreen:
These days Pro Racing is more of a branding exercise, just like Ferrari doesn't need to sell F1 cars to the public to sell street cars and merchandise. Remember, the UCI rules force the riders to use what is sold to the public, I am sure the manufacturers would be more than happy to build custom bikes for the pros if they could..


Well Mr. Mopho... normally I'd just let idiotic comments go unanswered, but when you called out "fake news" to the downsides of discs, I guess I just have to reiterate some things once again.... so thank you for the introduction...
So, here's a little list of some things we don't have to worry about with rim brake systems
- No need to beef up frames and forks and rear stays with associated added weight.
- No need to change frame geometries and extend chainstays to the detriment of tight handling
- No need to redesign drive trains to accommodate altered chainlines
- No need to change the basic wheel design through use of no radial lacing, beefier hubs, spoke beds, stronger spokes and/or more spokes etc...
- No significant added complexity that comes with having rotors etc and all the related hardware added on.
- No significant weight penalty to speak of
- No worries about neutral support in races and aligning neutral wheel rotors with pads etc.
- No added ugliness to an otherwise beautifully engineered piece of perfection

Now, aside from the subectiveness of the last point on my little list, each and every other point in that list is definitely not "fake news". There isn't a manufacturer out there that isn't trying to address these issues. Chainline being a big one. Shimano has specified minimum chainstay lengths in order to properly run their drive trains in the wider rear spacing required for discs. They have also, with the new 9100 crankset, increased the spacing between the chainrings to further help with this issue. Campagnolo, with their new disc compatible drivetrain has done something similar. Cervelo came out with a proprietary crank to address it. Specialized came out with their own proprietary hub design to address it, since dropped. There is nothing fake about these issues. Are they being addressed... absolutely, but they most certainly are not "fake news". To make such a statement you'd have had to have your head stuck deeply in the sand for a good long while.

Having said that, discs have their place, for sure... two specific examples I can think of are:
1) when the rim is completely covered in mud etc., aka mtn biking.
2) If you want to run really big tires (like 30+mm), in which case rim calipers just won't allow that.

And then there's a 3rd, and very valid for road biking as well as mtn biking, which @jeffy alludes to, but is not disc specific. He talks about the ease of actuation of a hydraulically actuated brake... but that has nothing to do with the disc rotor and everything to do with how it is being actuated. You can have hydraulically actuated rim brakes as well. In fact, I have exactly that on a touring bike of mine that I set up many years ago. The ease of braking is marvelous and I did it because there were times descending slowly down a very steep grade (going fast would have been ludicrous), with a 95lb loaded touring bike and myself that I thought I might actually break a brake cable, and the effort I had to exert at the hand was indeed tiring. Hence the hydraulic road lever, which Magura made for all but one or two years but never took off due to the fact that it was strictly a brake lever and that was at a time when the brake levers and shifting were being consolidated into one unit. And we know which one won out.

But fast forward to now, and we have levers that can do both shift and hold a reservoir of hydraulic fluid, so I could easily see that application being applied to rim brakes as easily as disc rotors, without any of the downsides to existing road bike design in my list above. Magura already has made some for Cervelo... there's no reason this technology couldn't become more widespread. Plus, the diameter of a rim, say 622mm or whatever it is the biggest disc you could possibly get, and puts a 160mm disc rotor to shame. Wearing out of carbon rims?... well... carbon is much more durable in that regard than aluminum, and when I posed the question somewhere else as to how many people have actually worn out their carbon rims due to normal brake wear, the response was pretty minimal.

I suspect that the riders in the peloton, the vast majority of which, through their latest polls on the subject, explicitly do not embrace the use of discs, were to be presented with this option instead, the acceptance rate by the pros might be very different than it is now. But I think it would be more of a "Hmmm, I don't really care" kind of adoption rather than a large scale "No way, we don't want discs in the peloton" kind of response.

Also Mr. Mopho, your response to @CrankAddictsRich statement that swapping wheels is a pain in the ass is also idiotic as it is pretty common knowledge that rotor and pad alignment is quite susceptible to even the most minor misadjustment. We're not talking swapping brake pads here, as no one does that during a wheel swap in the peloton, we're talking about a simple fast wheel change, with no ensuing brake rub etc. Try throwing 10 random disc wheels into your bike and see how they all work out.

And regarding Pro Racing as being a "branding exercise" for the manufacturers... well duh... of course it is. That's the whole point of sponsorship, to have your stuff shown, being ridden by the pros, which filters down to "want" in the consumers. Basic marketing, and as I said earlier, if you don't understand that much, then that's a whole 'nother conversation. And it's also the heart of why manufacturers are so adamant to get discs into the peloton. They are being "pushed" as opposed to being "asked for". There is not any doubt about that.

At this point in time, I have no want for disc brakes on my road bikes, period. And it's not because I have a stable of nice rim braked road bikes. Trust me, if I truly wanted a disc braked road bike, I would have one, or two, or however many I wanted. I have tried them out. Again, on the road, for me, the downsides outweigh the upsides. Just my preference. Once again, those "downsides" that I have now listed again above, are not "fake news". I'm glad you like yours. But don't call out "fake news" when it just makes you look foolish in light of what's going on in the industry.

:beerchug:
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

User avatar
ergott
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:03 am
Location: Islip, NY
Contact:

by ergott

Point of information.

Trek Madone chainstay length is 41cm. Most race bikes are 40.5-41cm.
My Endpoint Coffeegrinder has 41.8mm chainstays and clears 50mm knobbie tires (27.5). Hardly a big difference in bike handling.

Disc brakes aren't increasing chainstay length, bike designers are.

If you put 10 wheelsets into your bike you will have to adjust your brakes at least half the time to get them right. Grabbing a spare wheel in a race? How many people does that effect here? I can swap wheels in the same amount of time as with my rim brakes because each system works better if you take the extra minute to center the calipers and with rim brakes adjust width. In fact rim brake changes usually take longer since I want the pads to contact the correct part of the rim and many rims have varying track heights.

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 6615
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Disc brakes, due to the added width of the rear, have altered the chainline and hence Shimano's enhanced "minimum chainstay" recommendation, along with the redesign of their chainring spacing. Will they work with shorter chainstays, of course... but the chance for rub is greater. And yes, while cross chaining isn't recommended there are times when that's what you're in, even by choice occaisionlally (a brief foray into the big/big comes to mind). I can run any combination of gear without any rub on derailleur or front chainrings with my Campy stuff set up properly. But the tolerance is very very tight where increasing that chainline angle would undoubtedly cause a bit of rub. Which is why all the drivetrain changes are occurring. I agree that chainstays are also getting longer to accommodate the trend towards bigger tires which definitely need more clearance up front just to remove them. And Shimano's new 9100 rear derailleur really needs some extra space up there to make wheel removal as easy as before.

And you're right, wheel removal and replacing in a race environment probably doesn't affect many people here; it certainly doesn't affect me. But look once again at the title of this thread. Changing wheels in the grand tours are often accomplished by team cars first, if available, and neutral support second. The team cars are equipped with the same wheels as are on the bikes. Thus the brake tracks are in the same place from wheel to wheel. But yes, if I were switching between different brands of wheels at home, I would for sure check, and likely adjust the position of the brake pads as they hit the track. As it is, most of my wheels are the same brand and completely interchangeable from bike to bike. But I'd bet that if two bikes, one rim and one disc, were each given 10 random wheels to change in and out, there would be less fiddling with the rim brake versions that had to be done.

And @Ergott, you build and service way more wheels than I will ever see. So I'll ask you this question... how often have you seen carbon brake tracks worn through due to normal braking, in comparison to alloy. I haven't seen that yet, but I know that a good wet gritty season on an alloy rim, which is much softer, can cause some serious wear.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

User avatar
ergott
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:03 am
Location: Islip, NY
Contact:

by ergott

I can run little/little with no chain rub. No crazy offset in design, just 135mm rear.

I have seen one carbon rim wear out extremely fast. I'd call that an outlier. Normally, carbon rims last longer than alloy although any rim is succeptable to contaminated pads. On a wet day you can ruin any rim if grit gets in there. I'd steer clear of carbon if I know I'm using bike extensively in the wet.

9/10 times, pros take a new bike rather than swap wheel these days. It's faster and the can sort out rest later.

I already mentioned my stance with regards to disc brakes in pro races. I just wanted to clear up some facts.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

User avatar
ergott
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:03 am
Location: Islip, NY
Contact:

by ergott

Calnago wrote:But I'd bet that if two bikes, one rim and one disc, were each given 10 random wheels to change in and out, there would be less fiddling with the rim brake versions that had to be done.
.


I'd disagree here. I'm always changing wheels in my bikes and I ride both systems.

To swap a new set of wheels into rim brake bike you have to adjust width of brakes (easy and fast) as well as pad height. That's 4 brake blocks that need to be loosened and squared up.

When I swap in a new set of wheels on my disc bike it's 2 bolts for each caliper. I loosen them, grab the brake and retighten. Takes less time do double about it.


I agree that grabbing a neutral support wheel is easier with rim brakes since you can just leave brake cam open and at least continue riding if you get any brake rub. Can't fix that on the fly with discs.

by Weenie


MoPho
Posts: 458
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:48 pm
Location: NorCal/SoCal

by MoPho

Calnago wrote:.


Well Mr. Mopho... normally I'd just let idiotic comments go unanswered, but when you called out "fake news" to the downsides of discs, I guess I just have to reiterate some things once again.... so thank you for the introduction...
So, here's a little list of some things we don't have to worry about with rim brake systems


It's truly amazing how you keep making the same arguments over and over again despite repeatedly being shown they are not exactly true. You see this is the problem and why I tongue in cheek brought up "fake news" because when people keep repeating false or exaggerated information it becomes "fact" to people like you trying to perpetuate your confirmation bias.


- No need to beef up frames and forks and rear stays with associated added weight.


So? Not a big deal The additional weight is minimal and they can remove material from other areas

- No need to change frame geometries and extend chainstays to the detriment of tight handling


Again, this is not necessary, get it though you head already

- No need to redesign drive trains to accommodate altered chainlines


Well, there is no need, they are choosing to do it

- No need to change the basic wheel design through use of no radial lacing, beefier hubs, spoke beds, stronger spokes and/or more spokes etc...


Uh, the way disc brake wheels are laced is basic wheel design. Radial lacing is not.

- No significant added complexity that comes with having rotors etc and all the related hardware added on.


A hydro disc caliper is not complex. And there is not that much added hardware

- No significant weight penalty to speak of


350-500g is not significant. My bike weights 370 grams more than my friends identical rim brake version. There are already disc brake bikes below the UCI minimum

- No worries about neutral support in races and aligning neutral wheel rotors with pads etc.


Ok, sure. Personally think neutral support should be eliminated, but thats another topic. Has no relevance to consumer purchasing of bikes.

- No added ugliness to an otherwise beautifully engineered piece of perfection


Again, I think they look great, but I am into cars and motorcycles, so I like the race machine look that disc adds


None of the issues you bring up are a big deal and hardly deal breaking downsides, if you're making the switch, you're likely buying a whole new bike (people do that sometimes) so it's not like any of these things are something to worry about or keep someone from buying a disc brake bike.





Now, aside from the subectiveness of the last point on my little list, each and every other point in that list is definitely not "fake news". There isn't a manufacturer out there that isn't trying to address these issues. Chainline being a big one. Shimano has specified minimum chainstay lengths in order to properly run their drive trains in the wider rear spacing required for discs. They have also, with the new 9100 crankset, increased the spacing between the chainrings to further help with this issue. Campagnolo, with their new disc compatible drivetrain has done something similar. Cervelo came out with a proprietary crank to address it. Specialized came out with their own proprietary hub design to address it, since dropped. There is nothing fake about these issues. Are they being addressed... absolutely, but they most certainly are not "fake news". To make such a statement you'd have had to have your head stuck deeply in the sand for a good long while.


Again, I have 405mm chain stays on my bike and there are no adaptations made to accommodate the short chainstays. I have thousands of miles on my bike and the shifts are fantastic. The only [non] issue is if you cross chain from the small ring to the 11t/12t cogs the chain will rub a bit on the big ring. Solution is easy, don't cross chain!!
Shimano specified longer chain stays because they want to be able to say that their drivetrains work perfectly in every combination because people like to get their panties in a wad and complain on the internet if it doesn't.
I've been riding my TCR for nearly a year and thousands of miles, and I have yet to run into a situation where this has been an issue


And then there's a 3rd, and very valid for road biking as well as mtn biking, which @jeffy alludes to, but is not disc specific. He talks about the ease of actuation of a hydraulically actuated brake... but that has nothing to do with the disc rotor and everything to do with how it is being actuated. You can have hydraulically actuated rim brakes as well. In fact, I have exactly that on a touring bike of mine that I set up many years ago. The ease of braking is marvelous and I did it because there were times descending slowly down a very steep grade (going fast would have been ludicrous), with a 95lb loaded touring bike and myself that I thought I might actually break a brake cable, and the effort I had to exert at the hand was indeed tiring. Hence the hydraulic road lever, which Magura made for all but one or two years but never took off due to the fact that it was strictly a brake lever and that was at a time when the brake levers and shifting were being consolidated into one unit. And we know which one won out.
But fast forward to now, and we have levers that can do both shift and hold a reservoir of hydraulic fluid, so I could easily see that application being applied to rim brakes as easily as disc rotors, without any of the downsides to existing road bike design in my list above. Magura already has made some for Cervelo... there's no reason this technology couldn't become more widespread. Plus, the diameter of a rim, say 622mm or whatever it is the biggest disc you could possibly get, and puts a 160mm disc rotor to shame. Wearing out of carbon rims?... well... carbon is much more durable in that regard than aluminum, and when I posed the question somewhere else as to how many people have actually worn out their carbon rims due to normal brake wear, the response was pretty minimal.


A hydro rim caliper brake is a band aid solution. It still doesn't address the heat put into the rims that affects tire pressure and potential delimitation of a carbon rim. (I have seen people blow tires off alloy wheels under hard braking.) And I've also seen people wear out alloy wheels. A disc rotor is way cheaper than a wheel set.
It also doesn't address that the rim and brake pads are compressible and the calipers/mount flex adding to a loss of efficiency and feel.


Also Mr. Mopho, your response to @CrankAddictsRich statement that swapping wheels is a pain in the ass is also idiotic as it is pretty common knowledge that rotor and pad alignment is quite susceptible to even the most minor misadjustment. We're not talking swapping brake pads here, as no one does that during a wheel swap in the peloton, we're talking about a simple fast wheel change, with no ensuing brake rub etc. Try throwing 10 random disc wheels into your bike and see how they all work out.


My response was to his experience with his own bike, had nothing to do with racing. His comment insinuated that this is an issue for all disc wheel changes and that has not been my experience.
Swapping wheels with my rim brake bike was far more fiddly. Even if you had to adjust a disc caliper for rubbing, it is very easy and less work/time than adjusting brakes/pads on rim brakes.


And regarding Pro Racing as being a "branding exercise" for the manufacturers... well duh... of course it is. That's the whole point of sponsorship, to have your stuff shown, being ridden by the pros, which filters down to "want" in the consumers. Basic marketing, and as I said earlier, if you don't understand that much, then that's a whole 'nother conversation. And it's also the heart of why manufacturers are so adamant to get discs into the peloton. They are being "pushed" as opposed to being "asked for". There is not any doubt about that.


You miss my point, branding is more about name recognition than selling a particular product. Specialized cares more that you remember their name than you saw the rider on disc brakes.
Again, the UCI requires the pros to ride what consumers are being sold, how do you know they are not trying to get disc into the peloton so they don't have to continue designing and building bikes both ways?

You and others act as if coming up with new tech is some nefarious plan by the bike manufacturers, but that is just how most businesses work, it's innovate or die. No one is forcing you to buy any of it.
It's funny that you're so cynical about the marketing and motives, yet you bought an overpriced Colnago

At this point in time, I have no want for disc brakes on my road bikes, period. And it's not because I have a stable of nice rim braked road bikes. Trust me, if I truly wanted a disc braked road bike, I would have one, or two, or however many I wanted. I have tried them out. Again, on the road, for me, the downsides outweigh the upsides. Just my preference. Once again, those "downsides" that I have now listed again above, are not "fake news". I'm glad you like yours. But don't call out "fake news" when it just makes you look foolish in light of what's going on in the industry
.

It's fine that you don't want disc, and you keep saying you don't care what other people buy, but yet you seem to be on a crusade to try and convince people they are bad (while you hide behind these racing discussions), the problem is you keep passing off exaggerated and/or misinformation.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post