I'm Shunning discs.

meanredspider

Fork me, this thread is depressing. After 6 years of disc debate, the same old same old is being trotted out.

Take "locking up" for instance. WTF has that got to do with anything? Locking up is a Bad Thing to be avoided at all costs. It's absolutely no measure of how good brakes are. In fact, the better the brakes, the far less likely you are to lock up.

As for people that struggle with setting up disc brakes, they're just mechanically incompetent.

Stiff forks? Really? Please!

Sorry to be blunt but there's 6 years of disc threads to read that go over this stuff constantly.

Jal_

Using Campy Veloce rim brakes on the road bike which are fine, a bit easy to lock up mind (probably my fault). I think the the hydro discs on my hybrid are a bit more confidence inspiring and easier to modulate. Fence sitter.

smokey_bacon

meanredspider wrote:

Fork me,

As for people that struggle with setting up disc brakes, they're just mechanically incompetent.

Sorry to be blunt but there's 6 years of disc threads to read that go over this stuff constantly.

No need to apologise, this is absolutley me. Give me a set of cables, pads and calipers and I'll give you a lovely mangled mess in return.

j_mcd

This is pretty interesting as I am considering an N+1 or just upgrading my existing bike*.

Option 1 is to get a new bike with Di2 and discs but the prices are fairly high (2.5k at the lowest from what I can see, for a nice looking Boardman)
Option 2 is to replace my 105 with Ultegra Di2 on my existing frame (Giant Advanced Pro 0) and get some nice new wheels. That works out a lot cheaper but doesn't have the discs.

I've been asking myself if I really need discs on a bike that I'd like to only ride in dry conditions and that doesn't have carbon wheels. This thread is suggesting probably not and that I'd only be doing it as discs are new tech and I love that kind of thing.

*an N+1 will obviously still happen as I'll have a redundant 105 groupset that will have to be put on something. Something new, shiny and frame shaped...

essex-commuter

My new commuter arrived yesterday. It doesn't have discs. My previous one did.

rubertoe

My point is - do we really need discs. I just dont think we do.

veronese68

J_MCD wrote:

I've been asking myself if I really need discs on a bike that I'd like to only ride in dry conditions and that doesn't have carbon wheels.

As a huge fan of disc brakes I would say not really if it is only used in the dry.

veronese68

rubertoe wrote:

My point is - do we really need discs. I just dont think we do.

Need is perhaps a bit strong. But I far prefer them. I think hydraulics are a world better than cable though in terms of faff. Being reasonably competent mechanically cable weren't a huge issue, but they did need adjusting to compensate for wear and I did have to reposition them a couple of times. Now I don't have to do either of those things. Removing the wheel doesn't cause any issues at all. It goes back in easily and the brakes just work again, no problem with alignment.

hopkinb

rubertoe wrote:

My point is - do we really need discs. I just dont think we do.

We might not. But I and several others do!

90% of my measly 8500km a year are commuting in London in all weathers. So I've got something that in my experience works far better in traffic come rain or shine.

It's all down to personal preference really. I like how my bike looks with discs, I like how it stops. You like something else that looks different.

These threads are lolz.

meanredspider

If you are
a. The weight of an anorexic schoolgirl or
b. Ride exclusively on the flat or
c. Only ride in the dry or
d. A total mechanical numpty
(Preferably 2 of the above) then rim brakes are adequate.

My Foil had rim brakes and 53/39 crank 12-23 cassette. I rode in N Holland. I'm a huge fan of disc brakes - they ARE the future - but in those circumstances (i.e. Almost no need to brake) then I was fine with the Foil. Tried using it to commute in the Cotswolds - bought the Jamis.

Kittel has already won a race in the desert (dry and flat) on discs. There's no reason not to use discs.

kingpinsam

Depends where you ride and in what weather.

If you're a fair weather rider that sticks to the flat then rim brakes a fine.

I find I'm always wishing for better brakes when going down some filthy wet Surrey hill in the winter. I'm also cringing at the sound of my rims being torn away by the filth on the roads.

Still haven't bought a bike with discs, but I can see the appeal. With all things, if you go for cheap mechanical components then expect to have more problems. I'd expect an expensive set of hydraulics to work well with minimal maintenance although I have no experience yet.

jds_1981

Veronese68 wrote:

hopkinb wrote:

If I ever get a dry weather only "best" bike, I'd be indifferent between the two. For anything else, I'll have hydro discs please, because they just work, they never need adjusting, and being a heavier cyclist, they don't chew through rims.

This, even though I'm much* slimmer. I've got a Parabox hydraulic converter under the stem and since getting the fitting sorted I haven't had to do anything to them. I just have to remember to check the pads every now and then as there is no constant adjustment like with the cable discs.

*Well, maybe a smidge

I got some hope ones and they seem good.
Disc brake ones were a bit more faff but still better than rim brakes.

anonymousblackfg

No one ever mentioned what the subject brakes were> I had Avid BB7's and was always fettling (less than the mini V's I had before though). Am now on TRP Spyres and pretty well fettle free, pad replacement and winding out the cable tension occasionally while doing 8k a year on them.

Winter bike is Shimano 105's rim brakes, best bike is DA rim brakes. The replacement for the winter bike will be discs.

rubertoe

Maybe its me and the BB7s. I would definitly replace them with Hydraulics.

hopkinb

Veronese68 wrote:

hopkinb wrote:

If I ever get a dry weather only "best" bike, I'd be indifferent between the two. For anything else, I'll have hydro discs please, because they just work, they never need adjusting, and being a heavier cyclist, they don't chew through rims.

This, even though I'm much* slimmer.
*Well, maybe a smidge

Heh heh! Just seen this!

rick_chasey

meanredspider, to paraphrase wrote:

If you are the weight of an anorexic schoolgirl you don't need disc brakes
.

True story.

It's all marginal. Was out in the wet with a friend on a fast descent (60kph ish) and we both had to make an emergency stop at full pelt. He was on discs, I wasn't

With him at 78 kilos, and me at 56 kilos, guess who stopped first and in the shortest distance?

What people should be really thinking about is less what braking system they use, and instead, how they should spend less time braking, or not braking at all.

Ease of maintenance is also underrated by nerds on forums IMO, but what do I know.

veronese68

rubertoe wrote:

Maybe its me and the BB7s. I would definitly replace them with Hydraulics.

I changed to the Parabox ages ago but just sold my old BB7s for almost as much as I paid for a used Parabox. I had to faff a lot to get it fitted as it had been removed by a Neanderthal and one of the hoses was damaged. Braking power is broadly similar. Feel and faff is a world better. I should think full hydraulics would be a bit better again.

hopkinb

I think my legs on their own weigh 56 kilos or so.

ITB and Rick have implied people should brake less. While I can do a lap of RP when there are no cars and only touch the brakes for the roundabouts. How do I brake less in London, where there's traffic, nodders, & traffic lights? Yes, I'll coast if I can see there's a red light ahead, and I won't hare along like my arse is on fire if I'm in a cycle or bus lane alongside stationary or slow moving traffic. Despite this, surely frequent braking, sometimes heavy, is more or less a certainty in town?

rick_chasey

hopkinb wrote:

I think my legs on their own weigh 56 kilos or so.

ITB and Rick have implied people should brake less. While I can do a lap of RP when there are no cars and only touch the brakes for the roundabouts. How do I brake less in London, where there's traffic, nodders, & traffic lights? Yes, I'll coast if I can see there's a red light ahead, and I won't hare along like my ars* is on fire if I'm in a cycle or bus lane alongside stationary or slow moving traffic. Surely frequent braking, sometimes heavy, is more or less a certainty?

Nah.

Only time I hard to really slam on the brakes recently, was for a ped on a zebra crossing, and some geezer on disc brakes slammed into the back of me and put a hole in my tights.

I probably should have been going slower in the first place. He should have too, and not been so close to me.

Edit: also, it's not like you can't do heavy breaking on rims, is it? It's just you might stop 30cm sooner if it's wet on discs than you otherwise would.

essex-commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

.....and some geezer on disc brakes slammed into the back of me and put a hole in my tights.

hopkinb

I had to brake in a hurry twice yesterday - first some goon weaved in front of me whilst checking his phone riding no-hands. I was already coasting as he looked like he was going to do something stupid, but the wind caught him and shifted him a metre to the right, straight into my path. Then avoiding an unindicated left hook in Tooting.

anonymousblackfg

So are we to re title the thread ' I'm shunning BB7's'?

Also to add to the debate my comment on the SCR thread about having to replace my first disc rotor (much better than a new wheel such as the one which exploded from rim wear previously). I'd love to be 56kg and never brake but my commute and bulk demands that to stop my face print being adorned by various road users I need be able to drop the anchors when necessary.

rhodrich

meanredspider wrote:

If you are
a. The weight of an anorexic schoolgirl or
b. Ride exclusively on the flat or
c. Only ride in the dry or
d. A total mechanical numpty
(Preferably 2 of the above) then rim brakes are adequate.

My Foil had rim brakes and 53/39 crank 12-23 cassette. I rode in N Holland. I'm a huge fan of disc brakes - they ARE the future - but in those circumstances (i.e. Almost no need to brake) then I was fine with the Foil. Tried using it to commute in the Cotswolds - bought the Jamis.

I think you must be doing something wrong. Given that the vast majority of cyclists in the world use rim brakes of some description, and stop perfectly adequately, in the wet or the dry, then then there can be no question as to their adequacy. Even the rim brakes on my tandem do a perfectly good job, and that's with chrome rims.

bobbygloss

For what it's worth, I wouldn't choose rim brakes for a new bike. I have Deore hydraulic discs on the MTB, I get roughly 2000 miles on a set of pads and it was 14000 miles before the discs wore thin. Other maintenance has been for a sticky piston. BB7s on the CX, and they just need the adjusters winding in once every 2 months or so, when the lever travel is too much. 7500 miles done, and I've never had to move a caliper yet.
I can't really tell the difference between cable and hydraulic, to be honest. Both work well.
The road bike has frighteningly bad braking in the wet, it has Koolstop salmon pads but only Sora brakes with long drop calipers - probably a different world from Ultegra and Dura-Ace.

asprilla

My favourite bike to ride is my Endurace which has rim callipers, but for commuting I'll always take the Inflite with it's hydro discs. I've never had to adjust them and the only squeal occasionally (the odd cold damp morning and then only at the junction at the end of the road, after that not a dickie bird).

It's not that they brake harder or can / can't lock the wheel. It's that they are consistent and they are easier to modulate from the hoods with two fingers. It's a more linear response to pressure and they never grab. Also, they don't wear through my lovely rims or scape the anodised layer off.

rick_chasey

You can't really argue discs are worse than rim brakes performance wise.

The argument is more the benefit is too marginal to be worth the cost/hassle/weight.

itboffin

when i get to central London that part of my commute is neutralised regardless of weather, there's to many factors at play to make riding at anything more than tick over worthwhile, it adds 1-2 mins tops to my commute, i'm safer IMO and you could step right in front of me as i filter yeah i'd most like bump you but that'd be it.

No skid, locking up or any other such inappropriate speed for the conditions type event. sensible head on after too many accidents and broken bones.

Mind you this side of my commute all bets are off, balls out pedal mashing is the order of the day, and yet not once have I descended a 20% and thought damn i'm not going to stop (on the road).

Hold on a moment i'm off to call team gb I must be some kind of bike handling genius ....

hopkinb

Rick Chasey wrote:

You can't really argue discs are worse than rim brakes performance wise.

The argument is more the benefit is too marginal to be worth the cost/hassle/weight.

Cost - fair enough - to take my particular groupset as an example - looking at Bike24 I can buy a sram rival groupset with mechanical rim brakes for €473, the same with hydraulic discs is €735. That's quite a big difference. That said, I got the groupset, cheap finishing kit, cheap wheels and a Ti frame all built into a bike for £1,200.
Hassle - Hydro discs are no more hassle than rim brakes
Weight - Me and the bike are >95 kilos, 500g or so saving if I have rim brakes vs disc brakes isn't going to make a difference

apreading

Is everyone shunning disk brakes on cars and going back to drums too?

homers_double

I rode to Blackpool on Sunday in the wet, I might as well have scraped my cleats on the tarmac for all the good the rim brakes did.