Yep. As such, I don't need to reply directly to that.
New Specialized SHIV Disc
Moderator: robbosmans
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
-
mikemelbrooks
- Posts: 346
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:58 pm
Bingo.
When do you think disc brakes were invented?
History of Disc Brake
Early experiments
Development of disc brakes began in England in the 1890s.
The first caliper-type automobile disc brake was patented by Frederick William Lanchester in his Birmingham factory in 1902 and used successfully on Lanchester cars. However, the limited choice of metals in this period meant that he had to use copper as the braking medium acting on the disc. The poor state of the roads at this time, no more than dusty, rough tracks, meant the copper wore quickly, making the disc brake system non-viable.
The American Crosley Hot Shot is often given credit for the first production disc brakes. For six months in 1950, Crosley built a car with these brakes, then returned to drum brakes. Lack of sufficient research caused enormous reliability problems, especially in regions requiring the use of salt on winter roads, such as sticking and corrosion. Drum brake conversions for Hot Shots were quite popular. The Crosley disc was a Goodyear development, a caliper type with ventilated rotor, originally designed for aircraft applications.
Chrysler developed a unique braking system, offered from 1949 to 1953. Instead of the disc with caliper squeezing on it, this system used twin expanding discs that rubbed against the inner surface of a cast-iron brake drum, which doubled as the brake housing. The discs spread apart to create friction against the inner drum surface through the action of standard wheel cylinders. Because of the expense, the brakes were only standard on the Chrysler Crown and the Town and Country Newport in 1950. They were optional, however, on other Chryslers, priced around $400, at a time when an entire Crosley Hot Shot retailed for $935. This four-wheel disc brake system was built by Auto Specialties Manufacturing Company (Ausco) of St. Joseph, Michigan, under patents of inventor H.L. Lambert, and was first tested on a 1939 Plymouth. Chrysler discs were “self energizing,” in that some of the braking energy itself contributed to the braking effort. This was accomplished by small balls set into oval holes leading to the brake surface. When the disc made initial contact with the friction surface, the balls would be forced up the holes forcing the discs further apart and augmenting the braking energy. This made for lighter braking pressure than with calipers, avoided brake fade, promoted cooler running, and provided one-third more friction surface than standard Chrysler twelve-inch drums. Today’s owners consider the Ausco-Lambert very reliable and powerful, but admit its grabbiness and sensitivity.
Racing breakthrough
Reliable caliper-type disc brakes first appeared in 1953 on the Jaguar C-Type racing car. These brakes allowed the little company to win the 1953 24 Hours of Le Mans. These were developed in the UK by Dunlop. That same year, the aluminum bodied Austin-Healey 100S, of which 50 were made, was the first car sold to the public to have disc brakes. They were fitted to all 4 wheels.
Mass production
The first mass production use of the modern disc brake was in 1955, on the Citroën DS, which featured caliper-type front disc brakes among its many innovations. These discs were mounted inboard near the transmission, and were powered by the vehicle’s central hydraulic system. This model went on to sell 1.5 million units over 20 years with the same brake setup.
The Jensen 541, with four-wheel disc brakes, followed in 1956.
Disc brakes were most popular on sports cars when they were first introduced, since these vehicles are more demanding about brake performance. Discs have now become the more common form in most passenger vehicles, although many (particularly light weight vehicles) use drum brakes on the rear wheels to keep costs and weight down as well as to simplify the provisions for a parking brake. As the front brakes perform most of the braking effort, this can be a reasonable compromise.
Many early implementations for automobiles located the brakes on the inboard side of the driveshaft, near the differential, while most brakes today are located inside the wheels. An inboard location reduces the unsprung weight and eliminates a source of heat transfer to the tires.
Historically, brake discs were manufactured throughout the world with a strong concentration in Europe and America. Between 1989 and 2005, manufacturing of brake discs migrated predominantly to China.
Disc brakes in the U.S.
After a 10-year hiatus, America built another production automobile equipped with disc brakes — the 1963 Studebaker Avanti (the Bendix system was optional on some of the other Studebaker models). Front disc brakes became standard equipment in 1965 on the Rambler Marlin (the Bendix units were optional on all American Motors’ Rambler Classic and Ambassador models), as well as on the Ford Thunderbird, and the Lincoln Continental. A four-wheel disc brake system was also introduced in 1965 on the Chevrolet Corvette Stingray.
Motorcycle Applications
The first motorcycles to use disc brakes were racing vehicles. MV Agusta was the first to offer a front disc brake motorcycle to the public on a small scale in 1965, on their relatively expensive 600 touring motorcycle, using a mechanical brake linkage. In 1969 Honda introduced the more affordable CB750, which had a single hydraulically-actuated front disc brake (and a rear drum brake), and which sold in huge numbers.
When do you think disc brakes were invented?
History of Disc Brake
Early experiments
Development of disc brakes began in England in the 1890s.
The first caliper-type automobile disc brake was patented by Frederick William Lanchester in his Birmingham factory in 1902 and used successfully on Lanchester cars. However, the limited choice of metals in this period meant that he had to use copper as the braking medium acting on the disc. The poor state of the roads at this time, no more than dusty, rough tracks, meant the copper wore quickly, making the disc brake system non-viable.
The American Crosley Hot Shot is often given credit for the first production disc brakes. For six months in 1950, Crosley built a car with these brakes, then returned to drum brakes. Lack of sufficient research caused enormous reliability problems, especially in regions requiring the use of salt on winter roads, such as sticking and corrosion. Drum brake conversions for Hot Shots were quite popular. The Crosley disc was a Goodyear development, a caliper type with ventilated rotor, originally designed for aircraft applications.
Chrysler developed a unique braking system, offered from 1949 to 1953. Instead of the disc with caliper squeezing on it, this system used twin expanding discs that rubbed against the inner surface of a cast-iron brake drum, which doubled as the brake housing. The discs spread apart to create friction against the inner drum surface through the action of standard wheel cylinders. Because of the expense, the brakes were only standard on the Chrysler Crown and the Town and Country Newport in 1950. They were optional, however, on other Chryslers, priced around $400, at a time when an entire Crosley Hot Shot retailed for $935. This four-wheel disc brake system was built by Auto Specialties Manufacturing Company (Ausco) of St. Joseph, Michigan, under patents of inventor H.L. Lambert, and was first tested on a 1939 Plymouth. Chrysler discs were “self energizing,” in that some of the braking energy itself contributed to the braking effort. This was accomplished by small balls set into oval holes leading to the brake surface. When the disc made initial contact with the friction surface, the balls would be forced up the holes forcing the discs further apart and augmenting the braking energy. This made for lighter braking pressure than with calipers, avoided brake fade, promoted cooler running, and provided one-third more friction surface than standard Chrysler twelve-inch drums. Today’s owners consider the Ausco-Lambert very reliable and powerful, but admit its grabbiness and sensitivity.
Racing breakthrough
Reliable caliper-type disc brakes first appeared in 1953 on the Jaguar C-Type racing car. These brakes allowed the little company to win the 1953 24 Hours of Le Mans. These were developed in the UK by Dunlop. That same year, the aluminum bodied Austin-Healey 100S, of which 50 were made, was the first car sold to the public to have disc brakes. They were fitted to all 4 wheels.
Mass production
The first mass production use of the modern disc brake was in 1955, on the Citroën DS, which featured caliper-type front disc brakes among its many innovations. These discs were mounted inboard near the transmission, and were powered by the vehicle’s central hydraulic system. This model went on to sell 1.5 million units over 20 years with the same brake setup.
The Jensen 541, with four-wheel disc brakes, followed in 1956.
Disc brakes were most popular on sports cars when they were first introduced, since these vehicles are more demanding about brake performance. Discs have now become the more common form in most passenger vehicles, although many (particularly light weight vehicles) use drum brakes on the rear wheels to keep costs and weight down as well as to simplify the provisions for a parking brake. As the front brakes perform most of the braking effort, this can be a reasonable compromise.
Many early implementations for automobiles located the brakes on the inboard side of the driveshaft, near the differential, while most brakes today are located inside the wheels. An inboard location reduces the unsprung weight and eliminates a source of heat transfer to the tires.
Historically, brake discs were manufactured throughout the world with a strong concentration in Europe and America. Between 1989 and 2005, manufacturing of brake discs migrated predominantly to China.
Disc brakes in the U.S.
After a 10-year hiatus, America built another production automobile equipped with disc brakes — the 1963 Studebaker Avanti (the Bendix system was optional on some of the other Studebaker models). Front disc brakes became standard equipment in 1965 on the Rambler Marlin (the Bendix units were optional on all American Motors’ Rambler Classic and Ambassador models), as well as on the Ford Thunderbird, and the Lincoln Continental. A four-wheel disc brake system was also introduced in 1965 on the Chevrolet Corvette Stingray.
Motorcycle Applications
The first motorcycles to use disc brakes were racing vehicles. MV Agusta was the first to offer a front disc brake motorcycle to the public on a small scale in 1965, on their relatively expensive 600 touring motorcycle, using a mechanical brake linkage. In 1969 Honda introduced the more affordable CB750, which had a single hydraulically-actuated front disc brake (and a rear drum brake), and which sold in huge numbers.
Last edited by mikemelbrooks on Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Nefarious86
- Moderator
- Posts: 3669
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 4:57 am
How do you idiots manage to make this yet another pissing contest about disc brakes?
Rim brakes not being used on a 9" wide fork with manipulated aero tracks around the head tube should be a pretty clear indication that they pushed the aero based on the ability to not have a width limiter. Disc removes the issue of crappy cable routing on the base bar that would pinch cables when packed down. The "side winds" seen by the discs is what, 1/5 that of the water cell?
Disc is here, the industry gives absolutely 0.000 thought if you like it or not because existing customers are less marketable than than the 100s of people each brand has walking in and throwing money at the newest latest greatest first bike they ever bought every day.
The Rapha "road map to save cycling as a sport" should be an indication of the type of market research that these companies are doing. The world tour sponsorship is a formality nowadays as they know that the small amount of "legitimacy" they leverage off it on their to tier platforms is minor even when compared to the money Tri and Gravel folk are throwing at bikes and gear.
If any of you think that Tritards give a single iota of care to the "purity" some of you seem so hung up on with bike design you're delusional. Make it fast, make it easy to live and travel with using easy to obtain consumables and make it look over the top, boom, market needs satisfied.
Rim brakes not being used on a 9" wide fork with manipulated aero tracks around the head tube should be a pretty clear indication that they pushed the aero based on the ability to not have a width limiter. Disc removes the issue of crappy cable routing on the base bar that would pinch cables when packed down. The "side winds" seen by the discs is what, 1/5 that of the water cell?
Disc is here, the industry gives absolutely 0.000 thought if you like it or not because existing customers are less marketable than than the 100s of people each brand has walking in and throwing money at the newest latest greatest first bike they ever bought every day.
The Rapha "road map to save cycling as a sport" should be an indication of the type of market research that these companies are doing. The world tour sponsorship is a formality nowadays as they know that the small amount of "legitimacy" they leverage off it on their to tier platforms is minor even when compared to the money Tri and Gravel folk are throwing at bikes and gear.
If any of you think that Tritards give a single iota of care to the "purity" some of you seem so hung up on with bike design you're delusional. Make it fast, make it easy to live and travel with using easy to obtain consumables and make it look over the top, boom, market needs satisfied.
Using Tapatalk
-
Nefarious86
- Moderator
- Posts: 3669
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 4:57 am
Why? because I said pissing and called people out for sending yet another thread off on a "discs are bad coz I say they are" tangent?
Using Tapatalk
Id call it a picnic box as thats what it is.TobinHatesYou wrote: ↑Wed Oct 10, 2018 6:29 amShould call it the Camel Hump since it's a storage bin for a hydration bladder.
-
TobinHatesYou
- Posts: 12550
- Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm
Wonder if Cal is in all the threads about new disc tri bikes. Lord knows there are a ton of them. Diamondback and Cervelo had insane-o framed disc tri bikes last year.
And the rest! The Bolide TT is £11k for the frameset. €20k for the complete bike wouldn't be particularly difficult to achieve.
Add some cost for the disc redesign, hydration/storage parts on the frameset and the extra cost of a hydro groupset and the €20k barrier will be disappearing in the rear view mirror.
Set a PR up Alpe d'Huez on the new Shiv Disc last night! Bit weighty, but dropped a bunch of guys on Emonda SLR's with Lightweight wheels.
On Zwift
https://zwift.com/news/8174-zwift-at-kona/
On Zwift
https://zwift.com/news/8174-zwift-at-kona/
That's fair enough. I can't stand those derailing posts, esp. those without logic/ground.Nefarious86 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:36 amGo your hardest, I dont take issue with people calling out idiodic thread derailing, I take issue with the people derailing them or stirring the pot in the name of idocy.wingguy wrote:So we're all good on calling posters here idiots whenever we want?Nefarious86 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:07 amWhy? because I said pissing and called people out for sending yet another thread off on a "discs are bad coz I say they are" tangent?
Asking for a friend...
Bickering about "disc is bad" in a thread about a bike clearly designed in a manner that would never be able to accommodate any type of rim caliper while maintaining the design freedom that the placement of disc brakes allow is just complaining about change for the sake of complaining.
Rikulau V9 DB Custom < BMC TM02 < Litespeed T1sl Disc < Giant Propel Advanced SL Disc 1 < Propel Adv < TCR Adv SL Disc < KTM Revelator Sky < CAAD 12 Disc < Domane S Disc < Alize < CAAD 10
Jeez, wouldn't be surprised if Canyon becomes the most represented brand for TT and Tri bikes..wingguy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:05 pmAnd the rest! The Bolide TT is £11k for the frameset. €20k for the complete bike wouldn't be particularly difficult to achieve.
Add some cost for the disc redesign, hydration/storage parts on the frameset and the extra cost of a hydro groupset and the €20k barrier will be disappearing in the rear view mirror.
I mean, for 9.5k EUR you don't even get a Bolide frameset, while you can get this whole beast which has top-notch groupset and wheels: https://www.canyon.com/en-nl/triathlon/ ... -0-tt.html
-
TobinHatesYou
- Posts: 12550
- Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm
—
Steering back on topic, the Shiv Tri is the first bike with Specialized’s latest design language that I really like. It’s so utilitarian and to the point... sort of like how I loved the Earth Alliance cruisers in Babylon 5. No nonsense, designed to get the job done.
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
