The Great Braking Debate Thread (Disc/Rim/Cantilever/Fixie/InsertNewTechHere)

[tomato]

ah disc brakes!

Disc-IMG_6001e-YES-450x300.jpg

Has that happened to you?

[Multebear]

ah disc brakes!

Disc-IMG_6001e-YES-450x300.jpg

Has that happened to you?

I don't think it happened to him. A quick reverse google search:

https://roadbikeaction.com/everything-y ... sc-brakes/

[dialtone]

I don't see how that changes anything... Is the bar to criticize disc brakes that you need to have been in a life threatening situation first and then you can post that they don't make you comfortable?

[FeartheGirth]

This graphic is piss poor


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[openwheelracing]

Disc Brake

[Multebear]

I don't see how that changes anything... Is the bar to criticize disc brakes that you need to have been in a life threatening situation first and then you can post that they don't make you comfortable?

It doesn't, and you are right.

Some prefer discs, and others prefer rim brake. Both types can coexist with eachother. It doesn't have to be a battle between the two types.

[mgrl]

I don't see how that changes anything... Is the bar to criticize disc brakes that you need to have been in a life threatening situation first and then you can post that they don't make you comfortable?

Going by the link, that picture is not the result of catastrophic failure but extreme wear due to running parts long past their intended lifespan.

[cveks]

Haha I just bought ONE MORE rim brake frameset Scott CR1 Pro from 2016 for bargain deal just 380 euros complete frameset.

I will put on it Campagnolo Potenza groupset, Kinlin XR200 wheels and FSA K-Force Light crankset and with that setup weight will be less than 6.8kgs.

Whole bike will cost me less than 1400 euros to assemble.

Friend of mine, in same time in same shop bought Scott Addict 20 on the other hand for 2100 euros and it comes with Shimano 105 groupset and weights 8.4 kgs.

So I will have much lighter bike for less .

New Scott bike in that weight range is Scott Addict Rc Pro and it costs around 8500 euros.

Insane price difference if you ask me.

[Singular]

I don't see how that changes anything... Is the bar to criticize disc brakes that you need to have been in a life threatening situation first and then you can post that they don't make you comfortable?

Going by the link, that picture is not the result of catastrophic failure but extreme wear due to running parts long past their intended lifespan.

Yep, that's the disc brake equivalent of this;

[OnTheRivet]

And I bet everyone of those names is (was) getting paid to race or at least has a few Masters stars and stripes jerseys in the closet. Were talking about every punter with with a skinsuit on here saying they do those numbers. Highly unlikeley.

Some have stars/stripes, some don't. Most have never been paid to race. There's >200 people at 17min on OLH, and a lot of riders from the East Bay and North Bay don't ever do OLH for times. Alas, I have only been as high as ~4.95w/kg. I used some decimals just for you.

And then of course there are a lot of really fast juniors, U23, random Stanford undergrads/grads, and random punters who are well under 17min. My clubmate just did a 13m37s two weeks ago at 6.4w/kg... multiply by maybe .93 for an estimated FT of 5.95w/kg.

5.0 is not as special as you think it is. I think the average human being has the genetic disposition to achieve 4.0w/kg with training and weight control. I think 4.5w/kg is just past the middle of the bell for genetic potential. I do think most people don't have it in them to reach 5.0, but there's already been a ton of self-selection and filtering in this space in the Bay Area cycling community, so it's not really that uncommon to ride with truly fast guys every single day. 5.5 is where I start salivating at people's power numbers.

5.0wkg is solid Cat 1 on the road. We're talking road race Cat 1 not sprinter. You are way off base. All your estimations are just bonkers and typical of people having no idea what actual power numbers are. Your random clubmate did numbers that would get him an instant ride on a Domestic pro team. sorry, nope.

[cveks]

Rim brake bikes are more aero and save 15% watts on speeds above 40 km/h.

[Lewn777]

And I bet everyone of those names is (was) getting paid to race or at least has a few Masters stars and stripes jerseys in the closet. Were talking about every punter with with a skinsuit on here saying they do those numbers. Highly unlikeley.

Some have stars/stripes, some don't. Most have never been paid to race. There's >200 people at 17min on OLH, and a lot of riders from the East Bay and North Bay don't ever do OLH for times. Alas, I have only been as high as ~4.95w/kg. I used some decimals just for you.

And then of course there are a lot of really fast juniors, U23, random Stanford undergrads/grads, and random punters who are well under 17min. My clubmate just did a 13m37s two weeks ago at 6.4w/kg... multiply by maybe .93 for an estimated FT of 5.95w/kg.

5.0 is not as special as you think it is. I think the average human being has the genetic disposition to achieve 4.0w/kg with training and weight control. I think 4.5w/kg is just past the middle of the bell for genetic potential. I do think most people don't have it in them to reach 5.0, but there's already been a ton of self-selection and filtering in this space in the Bay Area cycling community, so it's not really that uncommon to ride with truly fast guys every single day. 5.5 is where I start salivating at people's power numbers.

5.0wkg is solid Cat 1 on the road. We're talking road race Cat 1 not sprinter. You are way off base. All your estimations are just bonkers and typical of people having no idea what actual power numbers are. Your random clubmate did numbers that would get him an instant ride on a Domestic pro team. sorry, nope.

Hang on. I'm 3.2w/kg FTP and 16kg heavier than I should due to work commitments etc. At my ideal weight of 72k/kg I am 4.0,w/kg, and I've had a far higher FTP recently and could have gotten to 4.5w/kg but I'm 47. At my peak at age 30 I would have been easily over 5.0w/kg, so it can't be that much of something. Simply put, 6.0 is simply near to A+ on Zwift, sure some cheat to get those numbers, but 6.0 seems to be a thing for the best of the best.

In golfing terms:
5.0w/kg=Scratch player
5.5w/kg=Clubhouse pro teaching golfer.
6.0w/kg=World Tour Pro

[flying]

Haha I just bought ONE MORE rim brake frameset Scott CR1 Pro from 2016 for bargain deal just 380 euros complete frameset.

I will put on it Campagnolo Potenza groupset, Kinlin XR200 wheels and FSA K-Force Light crankset and with that setup weight will be less than 6.8kgs.

Whole bike will cost me less than 1400 euros to assemble.

Friend of mine, in same time in same shop bought Scott Addict 20 on the other hand for 2100 euros and it comes with Shimano 105 groupset and weights 8.4 kgs.

So I will have much lighter bike for less .

New Scott bike in that weight range is Scott Addict Rc Pro and it costs around 8500 euros.

Insane price difference if you ask me.

Nice deal


You will like Potenza it is quite flawless IMHO
The only thing that makes it better is swapping the crank for a H11 crank
173 grams lighter
Potenza crank was 809gr
H11 crank 636gr

[bikeboy1tr]

Didnt Armstrong use to say, if I am putting out 7W and have good luck at the tour I stand a good chance of winning. I am sure it wont take that much nowadays but certainly not far off.

[warthog101]

Rim brake bikes are more aero and save 15% watts on speeds above 40 km/h.

Sure. That is why every pro tour bike is rim brake.
I mean 15% less power to travel at the same speed.
Of course they are.