Brakes - Are disc brakes better? and why?

12346

Comments

  • andrewjoseph
    andrewjoseph Posts: 2,165
    Inside, I'm crying.
    --
    Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,661
    rake wrote:
    powered motorbike, it goes much faster and is much heavier to stop. rim brakes wouldnt be viable, neither would the weight saying make any difference. you're equally a genius for comparing it to a pedal cycle :!: you should probably slow down too :lol:
    you could try taking one of the front discs off and see how you get on :wink:

    hang on, 3 pages ago, you were doing exactly the same thing comparing push bikes with racing cars. Do you think we would nt remember?

    Seriously rake, all of your posts since the bike rumour one (which has been shown to be a pretty poor effort by that writer) have been epic fails. Just stop! No one is forcing you to use anything, stick with whatever you like, but don't try and pretend you know some magic fact that means everyone else in the world is wrong.
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • rake
    rake Posts: 3,204
    ddraver wrote:

    the bike rumour one ( has been shown to be a pretty poor effort by that writer)No it hasnt but don't try and pretend you know some magic fact that means everyone else in the world is wrong.that doesnt mean everyones right :wink: i think youl find as many against as there is for so you've misconstrewed that
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,661
    Screw it I tried....
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • andrewjoseph
    andrewjoseph Posts: 2,165
    Seems a neutral prespective:

    http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/12/bikes-and-tech/the-torqued-wrench-disc-brakes-coming-soon-to-a-drop-bar-near-you_200057
    --
    Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails
  • rake
    rake Posts: 3,204
    surely theyl negate any aero benefits from carbon rims so its just a pointless expensive exercise. alloy rims have more weight and suface area than discs and act as a better heat sink. there is apiece on tandem riders descending a steep hill, some parts melting on discs brakes but the calipers showed no problems.
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,661
    11.jpg

    When everyone in the world is using disks, rake will still be here...making up stories...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • andrewjoseph
    andrewjoseph Posts: 2,165
    can't make out what the image about is meant to be. Can i have a clue please?
    --
    Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,661
    Clearly, its a facepalm montage, made up of lots of facepalm images.

    Derr...

    ;)
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • springtide9
    springtide9 Posts: 1,731
    ddraver wrote:
    Clearly, its a facepalm montage, made up of lots of facepalm images.
    Derr...
    ;)
    I tried to 'stop' myself from laughing when I saw the photo, but unfortunately I was using calliper brakes and the laughter just slipped out :lol:
    Simon
  • rake
    rake Posts: 3,204
    what about an engine to go with the discs. :o
    this is you :wink:
    article-2040048-0E096CED00000578-332_634x565.jpg
  • springtide9
    springtide9 Posts: 1,731
    rake wrote:
    what about an engine to go with the discs. :o
    this is you :wink:

    It seems to me that the need for better brakes comes at a time when you ride a bit quicker (especially on descents)

    e.g.

    1. This person will not benefit from disc brakes:
    photo26_1.jpg

    2. Where as this person would benefit from discs:
    9636.jpg


    Note that there is nothing wrong with being rider (1) - just pointing out that people have different requirements.
    Simon
  • andrewjoseph
    andrewjoseph Posts: 2,165
    rake wrote:
    what about an engine to go with the discs. :o
    this is you :wink:
    article-2040048-0E096CED00000578-332_634x565.jpg

    No disks on there.
    --
    Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails
  • andrewjoseph
    andrewjoseph Posts: 2,165
    ddraver wrote:
    Clearly, its a facepalm montage, made up of lots of facepalm images.

    Derr...

    ;)

    Cheeky git! :wink:

    Still can't see it though.
    --
    Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,661
    full size here - http://static.fjcdn.com/comments/quot+l ... a513ff.jpg
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • rake
    rake Posts: 3,204
    edited March 2012
    dp.
  • rake
    rake Posts: 3,204
    rake wrote:
    springtide9 wrote:
    rake wrote:
    what about an engine to go with the discs. :o
    this is you :wink:

    It seems to me that the need for better brakes comes at a time when you ride a bit quicker (especially on descents)

    e.g.

    1. This person will not benefit from disc brakes:
    photo26_1.jpg

    2. Where as this person would benefit from discs:
    9636.jpg


    Note that there is nothing wrong with being rider (1) - just pointing out that people have different requirements.
    maybe for some, but i still go down hill as fast as possible.maybe the feint hearted need them . is 50mph good enough:wink: bloke 1 doesnt look like he weight trains 4/5 times a week. double post.
  • springtide9
    springtide9 Posts: 1,731
    rake wrote:
    maybe for some, but i still go down hill as fast as possible.maybe the feint hearted need them . is 50mph good enough:wink: bloke 1 doesnt look like he weight trains 4/5 times a week. double post.

    You've missed the point... It's not about top speed or being feint hearted.

    It's about having the ability to stop within a shorter distance; this means you can brake later and hence descend faster.
    If you can't understand this then there is very little more to discuss. It really isn't rocket science.
    Simon
  • andrewjoseph
    andrewjoseph Posts: 2,165
    rake wrote:
    ... maybe for some, but i still go down hill as fast as possible.maybe the feint hearted need them . is 50mph good enough:wink: bloke 1 doesnt look like he weight trains 4/5 times a week. double post.


    Not particularly. I regularly do 60kmh down rocky lumpy forest roads on my mtb. 50mph on smooth tarmac is a doddle. It's the slowing down business we're concerned about, not the going fast bit. That's easy.
    --
    Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails
  • rake
    rake Posts: 3,204
    andrewjoseph wrote:
    rake wrote:
    ... maybe for some, but i still go down hill as fast as possible.maybe the feint hearted need them . is 50mph good enough:wink: bloke 1 doesnt look like he weight trains 4/5 times a week. double post.


    Not particularly. I regularly do 60kmh down rocky lumpy forest roads on my mtb. 50mph on smooth tarmac is a doddle. It's the slowing down business we're concerned about, not the going fast bit. That's easy.
    i was merely making the point i am not like the man in the picture like was suggested.i dont need to know who thinks they can handle a bike better ive ridden far in excess of what a cycle can do on sand.
  • springtide9
    springtide9 Posts: 1,731
    rake wrote:
    i was merely making the point i am not like the man in the picture like was suggested.i dont need to know who thinks they can handle a bike better ive ridden far in excess of what a cycle can do on sand.

    FWIW
    The photo wasn't meant to imply the first photo was you.. it was merely pointing out that not everyone has the same requirements (and these were at opposite ends of the scale).

    But you are really missing the point - it's not about who can handle a bike better.. to repeat:

    It's about having the ability to stop within a shorter distance; this means you can brake later and hence descend faster.
    Simon
  • rake
    rake Posts: 3,204
    id make it back on the level with less drag :lol: unless they overheat in which case youd be off the road. brake hard and you could veer left, or whichever side the disc is mounted.
  • Paul E
    Paul E Posts: 2,052
    springtide9 wrote:
    rake wrote:
    i was merely making the point i am not like the man in the picture like was suggested.i dont need to know who thinks they can handle a bike better ive ridden far in excess of what a cycle can do on sand.

    FWIW
    The photo wasn't meant to imply the first photo was you.. it was merely pointing out that not everyone has the same requirements (and these were at opposite ends of the scale).

    But you are really missing the point - it's not about who can handle a bike better.. to repeat:

    It's about having the ability to stop within a shorter distance; this means you can brake later and hence descend faster.


    I was shocked when I braked the first time on a road bike after coming from a hydraulic disc hardtail mtb, it took some getting used to, and it's worse in the rain, I never ever thought on my mtb, it's wet I need to brake earlier.

    So I will repeat the above statement for those unable to grasp it's simple message

    It's about having the ability to stop within a shorter distance; this means you can brake later and hence descend faster.
  • andrewjoseph
    andrewjoseph Posts: 2,165
    rake wrote:
    andrewjoseph wrote:
    rake wrote:
    ... maybe for some, but i still go down hill as fast as possible.maybe the feint hearted need them . is 50mph good enough:wink: bloke 1 doesnt look like he weight trains 4/5 times a week. double post.


    Not particularly. I regularly do 60kmh down rocky lumpy forest roads on my mtb. 50mph on smooth tarmac is a doddle. It's the slowing down business we're concerned about, not the going fast bit. That's easy.

    i was merely making the point i am not like the man in the picture like was suggested.i dont need to know who thinks they can handle a bike better ive ridden far in excess of what a cycle can do on sand.

    Why then did you start quoting figures? I assumed the 50mph figure you used in the post above was from your own experience, otherwise you were just plucking figures out of thin air.

    How can you ride far in excess of what the cycle will do? Were not on a cycle at the time? (in which case it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand) or had you parted company with the cycle? (due to poor braking perhaps?)

    If you are riding the bike, then you are not going in excess of what the bike will do.

    And what's sand got to do with it? or will I be sorry i asked?
    --
    Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,661
    rake wrote:
    id make it back on the level with less drag :lol: unless they overheat in which case youd be off the road. brake hard and you could veer left, or whichever side the disc is mounted.

    All of which is equally true of calipers.....
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • rake
    rake Posts: 3,204
    andrewjoseph wrote:
    rake wrote:
    andrewjoseph wrote:
    rake wrote:
    ... maybe for some, but i still go down hill as fast as possible.maybe the feint hearted need them . is 50mph good enough:wink: bloke 1 doesnt look like he weight trains 4/5 times a week. double post.


    Not particularly. I regularly do 60kmh down rocky lumpy forest roads on my mtb. 50mph on smooth tarmac is a doddle. It's the slowing down business we're concerned about, not the going fast bit. That's easy.

    i was merely making the point i am not like the man in the picture like was suggested.i dont need to know who thinks they can handle a bike better ive ridden far in excess of what a cycle can do on sand.

    Why then did you start quoting figures? I assumed the 50mph figure you used in the post above was from your own experience, otherwise you were just plucking figures out of thin air.

    How can you ride far in excess of what the cycle will do? Were not on a cycle at the time? (in which case it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand) or had you parted company with the cycle? (due to poor braking perhaps?)

    If you are riding the bike, then you are not going in excess of what the bike will do.

    And what's sand got to do with it? or will I be sorry i asked?
    the figures are irrelevant, but yes the 50 was my experience, as i said i was just highlighting the fact that i dont smoke a pipe and wear sandles while cycling. I have smoked a pipe though :lol:
  • andrewjoseph
    andrewjoseph Posts: 2,165
    rake wrote:
    ...
    the figures are irrelevant, but yes the 50 was my experience, as i said i was just highlighting the fact that i dont smoke a pipe and wear sandles while cycling. I have smoked a pipe though :lol:

    ok, now what about the riding in excess of the cycle, can you explain that? and the sand?
    --
    Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails
  • MattC59
    MattC59 Posts: 5,408
    Blimey, 9 pages and Rake's still spouting ill informed rubbish. Will it never end ?
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • andrewjoseph
    andrewjoseph Posts: 2,165
    MattC59 wrote:
    Blimey, 9 pages and Rake's still spouting ill informed rubbish. Will it never end ?

    probably only when hitler is mention or we stop responding. Unfortunately I seem to be the worst offender in that respect.
    --
    Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails
  • springtide9
    springtide9 Posts: 1,731
    Just a FYI and sorry to drag this up again.. but found this interesting....

    Formula Di2 road discs: Good enough for Nys
    http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/04/ ... nys_214347

    Rotors on the Formula setup are 140mm front and rear, which they’ve found to be the ideal size in their own testing.

    I tried 160mm, and to me it was a bit scary, to be honest,” said Vazzoli. “With the power, it is difficult to keep the front wheel from washing out.” When asked whether he or the rest of the Formula R&D department had encountered any overheating issues, the answer was an emphatic “No.”

    “We tested extensively on the big climbs in the Alps and the Dolomites. 2,000 meters straight down, dragging the brake: No problems.
    Simon

Categories