UCI to trial disc brakes?

Feb 4, 2010
524
0
0
Disk brakes for bikes - all kinds of bikes - are a pretty well sorted out technology. Compatibility issues between brands for neutral support aside, I'd think the risk of failure wouldn't be any larger than any other piece of new gear that's being used in any races.
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,165
0
0
luckyboy said:
At the Ronde van Vlaanderen :eek: :rolleyes:

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/01/tour-of-flanders-to-trial-disc-brakes/

Doesn't seem certain that it will happen due to Sram and Shimano not having a same size disc for neutral support, but ****ing come on - One of the biggest races of the year is where you want to test this out?

Same old UCI ****
I suspect they like the ronde or even paris roubaix because of the smaller groups? it is a test so don't expect very many riders to have them. they are not being required to participate.

That they are testing is hardly the same old UCI ****.

Same old UCI bashing.
 
Oct 9, 2014
187
0
0
Master50 said:
I suspect they like the ronde or even paris roubaix because of the smaller groups? it is a test so don't expect very many riders to have them. they are not being required to participate.

That they are testing is hardly the same old UCI ****.

Same old UCI bashing.
What difference do smaller groups make?
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,165
0
0
nhowson said:
What difference do smaller groups make?
Crashes! Fewer riders in a crash might reduce risks of disk burns or cuts. That said chainrings are pretty sharp too and we don't get as many cuts from them as you might imagine.

One reason CX got disks earlier was the fact they tend to race linear so we don't get big pile ups except for the first lap or so. I just think smaller groups reduces the complexity of potential crashes so if the disks have an effect it will be easier to analyze the effect. OF course f you inly have 8 or 10 riders on disks it might be a Moot point.
 
When you see the destruction a QR lever not tucked into the rear triangle or inline with the fork can do to flesh in a crash, I dread to think what steel rotors will do. Modulations means nothing when flesh on tarmac is always going to stop more quickly than any braking system would.
 
Oct 9, 2014
187
0
0
samhocking said:
When you see the destruction a QR lever not tucked into the rear triangle or inline with the fork can do to flesh in a crash, I dread to think what steel rotors will do. Modulations means nothing when flesh on tarmac is always going to stop more quickly than any braking system would.
Yet again, I think there are bigger things to worry about.
 
I like the idea that riders today use a braking system comparable to their heroes of yesterday and the romanticism maintained. Today's rim brakes are already so much better than what we raced on in the 80's anyway - why create difference with a new technology when the primary cause for crashing is the width of the road not the stopping power or lack of it!
 
samhocking said:
I like the idea that riders today use a braking system comparable to their heroes of yesterday and the romanticism maintained. Today's rim brakes are already so much better than what we raced on in the 80's anyway - why create difference with a new technology when the primary cause for crashing is the width of the road not the stopping power or lack of it!
Agree with this, and also increased stopping power will not necessarily enhance safety. Where dozens of riders are cycling within a few inches of each other, it could easily create more problems, at least in the beginning.

Add in the relatively slow wheel changes and it's obvious why the pro's aren't convinced. Shimano and Sram must be putting a lot of pressure on the UCI though - imagine how much money they can see rolling in when tens of thousands of amateurs update their entire wheel set and braking system, just to copy the proforessionals.
 
Sep 21, 2009
2,808
0
0
DFA123 said:
Agree with this, and also increased stopping power will not necessarily enhance safety. Where dozens of riders are cycling within a few inches of each other, it could easily create more problems, at least in the beginning.

Add in the relatively slow wheel changes and it's obvious why the pro's aren't convinced. Shimano and Sram must be putting a lot of pressure on the UCI though - imagine how much money they can see rolling in when tens of thousands of amateurs update their entire wheel set and braking system, just to copy the proforessionals.
UCI should turn the pressure back on the manufacturers and tell them that UCI will consider disk brakes only if all manufacturers agree to a compatible system.
 
Sep 21, 2009
2,808
0
0
King Boonen said:
You mean like before 11 speed came about? And like they have done with rim widths?:rolleyes:
Yes, please, and stick a camera to the neutral service so we can enjoy their chat with riders like Cadel Evans in Sierra Nevada during the Vuelta 2009 :D
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,165
0
0
DFA123 said:
Agree with this, and also increased stopping power will not necessarily enhance safety. Where dozens of riders are cycling within a few inches of each other, it could easily create more problems, at least in the beginning.

Add in the relatively slow wheel changes and it's obvious why the pro's aren't convinced. Shimano and Sram must be putting a lot of pressure on the UCI though - imagine how much money they can see rolling in when tens of thousands of amateurs update their entire wheel set and braking system, just to copy the proforessionals.
I think almost everyone agrees this is not about stopping power but modulation and predictability. wet roads, carbon wheels and even aluminum rims all are different in their performance, any top line road brake has enough ultimate stopping power but even they are different when wet versus dry.

As for risk? less easy to quantify as there are already some very dangerous rings on bikes and I imagine there are a few black scars on more than few legs from chainrings.
 
Master50 said:
I think almost everyone agrees this is not about stopping power but modulation and predictability.
I don't think this is true. Modulation and predictability is no different on disk brakes than on hydraulic rim brakes. The major difference is that disk brakes decelerate the bike more quickly than any rim brake (significantly more quickly in some conditions), because of their greater stopping power. This reduces the reaction time of anyone following the rider to apply his own brakes, making it more likely that they won't brake in time. So the ability to stop more quickly has drawbacks as well as benefits.

It certainly has to be all or nothing though. Everyone has to use disk brakes or no-one in a professional peloton. It would be carnage descending a high mountain at the sharp end of a race if half the peloton were able to brake much later going into corners than the other half.
 
Apr 11, 2010
154
0
0
DFA123 said:
I don't think this is true. Modulation and predictability is no different on disk brakes than on hydraulic rim brakes. The major difference is that disk brakes decelerate the bike more quickly than any rim brake (significantly more quickly in some conditions), because of their greater stopping power.
What are you on about? Larger rotor = more stopping power. A 700c wheel is essentially a 622mm rotor as opposed to 140/160 (albeit, made of carbon as opposed to steel).... The greater predictability and modulation from discs, as previously stated, is the stardardization and compaction of the braking surface (the rotor).
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,165
0
0
DFA123 said:
I don't think this is true. Modulation and predictability is no different on disk brakes than on hydraulic rim brakes. The major difference is that disk brakes decelerate the bike more quickly than any rim brake (significantly more quickly in some conditions), because of their greater stopping power. This reduces the reaction time of anyone following the rider to apply his own brakes, making it more likely that they won't brake in time. So the ability to stop more quickly has drawbacks as well as benefits.

It certainly has to be all or nothing though. Everyone has to use disk brakes or no-one in a professional peloton. It would be carnage descending a high mountain at the sharp end of a race if half the peloton were able to brake much later going into corners than the other half.
I have to disagree at least on wet rims or rims that have gotten dirty. Rims are much more variable than disk rotors. to your quicker to grab, disks are generally much faster to grab when wet than rim brakes but among rim brakes carbon and aluminum rims are vastly different now under certain conditions. I always increase my spacing on wet decents as I have experienced the delay wet rims have when the guy in front of me did not.

Hydraulic systems can add precision but rim brakes regardless of how they are actuated are not as predictable in all conditions as disk can be. For almost all the riding we do I suppose rim brakes are all we need. The need for disk brake technology on the road is in my opinion a minority condition where on MTB they are clearly the best system. Do we need them on our road bikes? not most of us and not most of the time but I do believe they are a better system, have fewer weaknesses and certainly can work with any rim. It might serve to move some small mass away from the rim and make a livelier feel? As to implementation at the pro tour level? I don't think at this level the neutral support issue is as big a deal as most teams only want them to help when the team car cannot be there. As we go down the line to national racing where neutral support can be the primary support if not a local mechanic in a pick up truck to a wheels in wheels out support.
For racing bikes I wish for standards on parts like cog spacing and in the case of disks 1 standard for thru axle or QR, disk spacing and size, although now we have to adjust for wide or narrow rims too. Are mechanics going to have to rebuild the bikes on the fly?
 
DFA123 said:
It would be carnage descending a high mountain at the sharp end of a race if half the peloton were able to brake much later going into corners than the other half.
That already happens, riders with skills break much later and descend quicker. Just because people are able to brake later doesn't mean they're suddenly going to start crashing into the back of other riders, that's ridiculous.
 
King Boonen said:
That already happens, riders with skills break much later and descend quicker. Just because people are able to brake later doesn't mean they're suddenly going to start crashing into the back of other riders, that's ridiculous.
Well,Taylor Phinney - one of the best descenders in the peloton - doesn't think it's ridiculous

"We?re all just waiting for the UCI, or somebody, to let us race on disc brakes. But I think it?s something you have to do all at once, to make sure everyone is all on disc brakes. Not so much in the dry, but in the wet. ? It changes a lot of ability to brake, slow down, and so if you have 30 percent of the peloton without disc brakes and you?re going down a wet descent and you?re braking for a turn and the person in front of you brakes a lot faster, and more efficiently, and you don?t have disc brakes, you?re going to go slamming into the back of them. It?s a safety thing ? but I think we?re all ready and waiting for it."
 
nepetalactone said:
What are you on about? Larger rotor = more stopping power. A 700c wheel is essentially a 622mm rotor as opposed to 140/160 (albeit, made of carbon as opposed to steel).... The greater predictability and modulation from discs, as previously stated, is the stardardization and compaction of the braking surface (the rotor).
I think you're getting mixed up between braking force and stopping power. I know that disc brakes don't offer any more braking force as such, but they stop the bike more quickly than any rim brake - especially in wet conditions - so they have greater stopping power. A hydraulic rim brake offers similar modulation to a hydraulic disk brake - it just doesn't stop the bike so quickly.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY