UCI to trial disc brakes?

[Alpe d'Huez]

I think what I find most fascinating is the arguments against them, as if because of the way the rotor is placed, the first time riders are in a tight bunch, even without crashing, there's a seriously high risk of every other rider getting sliced & diced, then hot branded from the searing heat they put out.

Seriously?

I'm reminded of the arguments made for not using aero bars being they must somehow constrict your breathing; all the arguments against helmets, etc.

I'm in the age group as Cookster15, and making the jump to disc brakes was fairly easy for me, and I prefer them over rim brakes. I also feel zero threat from them when riding in groups, groups of amateurs I should add. Having said that, if you are happy with your rim brakes, then stick with them.

 

[42x16ss]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riders-demand-uci-ban-disc-brakes-until-complete-peloton-trial-is-held/

riders demand disc brakes ban

No, they demand a one in, all in trial. Bit different.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re:

I think what I find most fascinating is the arguments against them, as if because of the way the rotor is placed, the first time riders are in a tight bunch, even without crashing, there's a seriously high risk of every other rider getting sliced & diced, then hot branded from the searing heat they put out.

Seriously?

Exactly! Remember what Kostanza said: "Jerry, just remember. It's not a lie.. if you believe it."

It's almost like shooting fish in a barrel around here, seriously.

I'm reminded of the arguments made for not using aero bars being they must somehow constrict your breathing; all the arguments against helmets, etc.

I fully remember riders protesting against helmet use in the early 90's. Over 10 years later Andrei Kivilev had to die for the UCI to finally come to their senses. FFW to today and racers are getting killed by motos, and here we are debating the merits of disc brakes.

I'm in the age group as Cookster15, and making the jump to disc brakes was fairly easy for me, and I prefer them over rim brakes. I also feel zero threat from them when riding in groups, groups of amateurs I should add. Having said that, if you are happy with your rim brakes, then stick with them.

In 2007 I was working for a Trek dealer and bought a LeMond Poprad disc. Already had almost a decade with disc mtb, so it really only took about one hard brake into a corner to realize where this is all headed in the road realm. Been racing in mixed fields in cross since then, now road for a few and it's really interesting to watch the transition. This is all very reminiscent of the late 80's-early 90's with clipless pedals, people were making up all kinds of excuses before even laying their hands on the things. It's so weird man, so weird.

 

[42x16ss]

Re:

I think what I find most fascinating is the arguments against them, as if because of the way the rotor is placed, the first time riders are in a tight bunch, even without crashing, there's a seriously high risk of every other rider getting sliced & diced, then hot branded from the searing heat they put out.

Seriously?

I'm reminded of the arguments made for not using aero bars being they must somehow constrict your breathing; all the arguments against helmets, etc.

I'm in the age group as Cookster15, and making the jump to disc brakes was fairly easy for me, and I prefer them over rim brakes. I also feel zero threat from them when riding in groups, groups of amateurs I should add. Having said that, if you are happy with your rim brakes, then stick with them.

I'm currently using direct mount rim brakes on my road bike and they're good enough for me overall, but I certainly wouldn't complain if I had the extra stopping power. Thing is CA aren't allowing discs in mass start racing yet and I only upgraded my race bike last year so I have to stick with what I have due to budget.

After getting an extended fling (a good friend is a dealer) on a Cannondale Slate (probably the most fun bike in the world btw!) this summer, I'm a fan of discs. They let you ride like a lunatic escaping the asylum

 

[LaFlorecita]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riders-demand-uci-ban-disc-brakes-until-complete-peloton-trial-is-held/

riders demand disc brakes ban

No, they demand a one in, all in trial. Bit different.

Yes, and it'll take a long time to get all teams on disc brakes, even the (Pro) Conti ones. As Paul Voss said in that article, probably 2019.

 

[pastronef]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riders-demand-uci-ban-disc-brakes-until-complete-peloton-trial-is-held/

riders demand disc brakes ban

No, they demand a one in, all in trial. Bit different.

Yes, and it'll take a long time to get all teams on disc brakes, even the (Pro) Conti ones. As Paul Voss said in that article, probably 2019.

by Tokio 2020 the peloton will be on 100% disc brakes. the tide won't stop.
I am ok for the same braking system for all, I am very much against the mix rim+discs.

I am fully aware it does not only involve safety and braking performance (fair about that) but it's a planned commercial/marketing move from Shimano-Uci-producers

 

[DFA123]

Re:

I think what I find most fascinating is the arguments against them, as if because of the way the rotor is placed, the first time riders are in a tight bunch, even without crashing, there's a seriously high risk of every other rider getting sliced & diced, then hot branded from the searing heat they put out.

Seriously?

I'm reminded of the arguments made for not using aero bars being they must somehow constrict your breathing; all the arguments against helmets, etc.

I'm in the age group as Cookster15, and making the jump to disc brakes was fairly easy for me, and I prefer them over rim brakes. I also feel zero threat from them when riding in groups, groups of amateurs I should add. Having said that, if you are happy with your rim brakes, then stick with them.

I have yet to see an argument that claims the first time riders are in a tight bunch there is a seriously high risk of injury - it sounds like you've made that up. The issue is whether there is a greater chance of injury in a pile up than there are with rim brakes. Most pros certainly believe that there is, and quite rightly want more studies and more safety precautions taken before they are comfortable to ride with discs in a peloton.

The only way its comparable with the argument for not using aero bars is in the fact that aero bars have also been banned from the peloton for safety reasons. How is it remotely similar to the argument against helmets - the safety issue is completely different in each case?

Of course, soon some disc evangelist will say that they are no more dangerous than chainrings in crashes. As if the fact that there is already one potential dangerous part of a bike in a pile up, is justification for adding another. The difference being that there is no decent alternative for chainrings; whereas discs are simply offering a solution to a problem that does not exist in the pro peloton.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re: Re:

discs are simply offering a solution to a problem that does not exist in the pro peloton.

So heat build up, brake fade, and poor wet weather performance doesn't exist with rim brakes in road racing? Well, at least you've mastered the art of ignoring facts for the sake of your argument, so there's that.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

discs are simply offering a solution to a problem that does not exist in the pro peloton.

So heat build up, brake fade, and poor wet weather performance doesn't exist with rim brakes in road racing? Well, at least you've mastered the art of ignoring facts for the sake of your argument, so there's that.

Heat build up and brake fade are not an issue in the pro peloton. And, as has been said many times, the limiter in wet weather is tyre traction. Why is there a need to force disc brakes on pro riders who simply don't want them and don't need them? It's pretty understandable why pro riders, who can do everything they need to on rim brakes, don't want a potentially dangerous replacement.

I suggest specialized put a big plastic case around discs so that they are covered in the event of a pile up. But of course, putting safety first like that would look ugly and wouldn't have the Freds queuing up to buy them, so it's never going to happen.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

You're circling back to the performance debate again, and it's all to clear you have zero experience on the matter. Ignore facts all you want, it doesn't change anything.

 

[DFA123]

Re:

You're circling back to the performance debate again, and it's all to clear you have zero experience on the matter. Ignore facts all you want, it doesn't change anything.

The performance debate is half of the point. If the performance is not significantly better, then there is no argument for introducing something that is potentially dangerous. To be honest though, even if it is significantly better, then there is still no argument for introducing something dangerous.

You are correct, that I don't have experience riding with disc brakes in the middle of a peloton during a professional bike race. Nor do you. The professionals who are best placed to judge don't want them.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Re: Re:

I have yet to see an argument that claims the first time riders are in a tight bunch there is a seriously high risk of injury - it sounds like you've made that up.

I did, based on what I read. Hence my words "as if..."

Is there a chance someone will be cut from a rotor in a major crash? Yes. Perhaps more than in cross and MTB races, though perhaps less than all the charity rides where heaps of amateurs ride together. But the way the pros are acting is as if it's a serious threat, and thus must be banned. To me this is a total overreaction, the same overreaction the peloton had to clipless pedals, helmets, aero bars, etc. The entire reaction to me seems one of resistance to change, as if it's an absolute ordeal. Not one based on any research.

As to chainrings, guards could be mandated for them to curb injury from the rings from crashes. Should the sport do that?

As to having all or nothing on brakes, this I somewhat understand because disc brakes work better. But even this I don't fully comprehend the reaction to in that there are plenty of anti-disc brake people out there who will tell you they can stop just as well on rim brakes as disc brakes, and they tend to be the same people who insist on no disc brakes in races. So what's their logic?

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I have yet to see an argument that claims the first time riders are in a tight bunch there is a seriously high risk of injury - it sounds like you've made that up.

I did, based on what I read. Hence my words "as if..."

Is there a chance someone will be cut from a rotor in a major crash? Yes. Perhaps more than in cross and MTB races, though perhaps less than all the charity rides where heaps of amateurs ride together. But the way the pros are acting is as if it's a serious threat, and thus must be banned. To me this is a total overreaction, the same overreaction the peloton had to clipless pedals, helmets, aero bars, etc. The entire reaction to me seems one of resistance to change, as if it's an absolute ordeal. Not one based on any research.

As to chainrings, guards could be mandated for them to curb injury from the rings from crashes. Should the sport do that?

As to having all or nothing on brakes, this I somewhat understand because disc brakes work better. But even this I don't fully comprehend the reaction to in that there are plenty of anti-disc brake people out there who will tell you they can stop just as well on rim brakes as disc brakes, and they tend to be the same people who insist on no disc brakes in races. So what's their logic?

Fair enough. I do agree that pros perhaps are over-stating the dangers of discs; it's not like riding with grenades attached to the wheels. But at the same time it's them racing and going into a potentially dangerous situation with them, not us. It doesn't matter if discs have no impact on the first pile up or the first hundred; if someone gets badly injured on the thousandth crash it's still too much. Especially for something that is largely marketing driven and not really needed. I can fully understand why pros who have ridden hundreds of thousands of kms on rim brakes with no problems, and who know how rim brakes act in every single situation, have no interest in something that is a complete change as well as potentially dangerous.

Regarding chain rings, I remember there was a push ages ago for guards to be fitted. I'm pretty sure a study was done on it and found out that bad injuries from chainrings (i.e. something more than the odd scratch) in the pro peloton are extremely rare. Basically because the chain acts as a guard on the large chainring, and not many high speed pile ups happened while riders were spinning a long in the small ring. I can't find the reference now unfortunately, think it could have been in a magazine somewhere. With disc brakes there's no chain to get in the way and protect from injury.

Regarding stopping better on rim or disc brakes. The issue in the pro peloton is whether that extra stopping power is necessary. A lot of riders say that it isn't needed; that they can stop well enough to lock the wheel on rim brakes. Even if discs theoretically allowed them to brake slightly later in some conditions, would that really be the case for riders who are extremely skilled on state of the art rim brakes, and relative novices on discs?

 

[Tim B]

Serious question - if pros are so worried about discs providing a differential in brake performance, how did they allow carbon wheels into the peloton? When they were introduced they barely worked in the dry and rarely worked in the wet. Even now there is still a differential between alloy and carbon brake tracks (mainly in the wet) yet nobody seems to mind that. Throw in differences in pad compounds and caliper effectiveness between manufacturers and the excuse that discs are different just seems a little odd.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re: Re:

The performance debate is half of the point.

Not at all. There is absolutely no question which is the better system. Only somebody with no experience or an agenda can say otherwise. It's irrefutable. This isn't some esoteric thing that only a few people know, it's common knowledge.

If the performance is not significantly better, then there is no argument for introducing something that is potentially dangerous. To be honest though, even if it is significantly better, then there is still no argument for introducing something dangerous.

They are significantly better, but you can''t play both sides of the coin here then with Alpe basically concede that the pros are blowing that out of proportion a bit. The aggregate effect if everybody is on them at the same time can only mean a reduction in accidents and better avoidance capabilities. You want safety? There you go. Even in the mixed fields what I've been racing in for years I have yet to see a rotor cut anybody, and I've clearly seen rotors in the crashes, unlike Ventoso. Not a cut, never even a complaint.

You are correct, that I don't have experience riding with disc brakes in the middle of a peloton during a professional bike race. Nor do you. The professionals who are best placed to judge don't want them.

2017 will be my 4th season on road disc in Masters. Not pro, a little older, but not too far off in the grand scheme of things. I regularly train with and race against friends in mixed fields with both rim and disc brakes that either were pro, or very well could have been but wanted normal careers. Some of these guys are quite famous by US standards, couple even popped for doping (the wrong kind of famous, but it is what it its). The only real difference between all of us and a pro is a couple more thousand km training miles and the unwillingness to take on a PED regiment.

This notion that a professional can't benefit from disc and is more suited to appease "Freds" is one of the most absurd things you and some others keep bringing up. Sounds like a cop out, like you just gave up trying to think this though and all you can do is resort to that bullschidt. And no, pro roadies are absolutely not best placed to have an opinion on this when we've been racing disc for years now and most top pros are just now starting to train on them once in a while, if at all yet for some. This unfolded the exact same way in cross. Vast majority absolutely did not want anything to do with disc because of ill-conceived prejudgements about performance and weight, basically giving credence to what the trolls say on the internet. Right up until they tried them in a few race situations, then oops! Format makes no difference either. To say that disc is only good for mtb or cross, and that the tire/surface relationship in road cycling is the limiting factor regardless of brake is complete nonsense. If I have superior modulation in every circumstance in any kind of weather with disc, then I'm able to push that grip to its limit much easier, more consistently, and with more control without sliding out or locking up. This last response of yours to Alpe was way off again, so he should be the one to point out where you're dead wrong.. again. I've only done it a dozen times now. It's not that hard, really. We could tell you 100 times that it's not about "stopping power", and you're still going to bring it up as a main sticking point. Good luck Alpe, a brick wall is more absorbent.

Here's a thought that could clear all this up; maybe the critics should just finally suck it up and start to ask questions like a normal person seeking knowledge or treat it like investigative reporting, rather than try to come off like you know something that the rest of us with the experience don't.

 

[samhocking]

At the moment, the fragmented disc brake standards and sloppy mounting and hub tolerances in the bike industry simply is unable to service 200 random bikes from 18 different manufacturers in the peloton from Neutral Service and the teams. Many team mechanics will service other teams riders too when they need to in order and keep the race moving after big pile-ups so all riders get a wheel quickly enough to chase back in the slipstream of the convoy before it passes them. Discs brakes might be compatible with the peloton if there was a standard self-aligning/ quick release caliper design, but considering this is the bike industry who have a million different bottom bracket and crank mounting standards, chances of an homogonised disc brake set-up entering the peloton, even with an all or nothing implementation is zero. I can't see them ever being used myself apart from stuff like Roubaix or the early season races like Boonen has. Why would a team want to use a system where a puncture at the moment, could mean game over if your own mechanic can't service that rider and neutral service, 'might' have a wheel that fits from the 6 wheels on the car.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

There's already 4 or 5 different thru axles that are faster than QR, and that "self-aligning/ quick release caliper design" is already in development. But it's going to be years until we see the change over because that's just the pace of change in road cycling at the top level. Sure, standards are hardly standard at the moment, but when is the last time you saw somebody waiting to see if neutral had the right bottom bracket? Zero implementation if you have that little faith that problems can't be engineered out. It's not a matter of if, but when.

 

[ice&fire]

Re:

I understand the concern about standards and neutral support. But I can also recall neutral support not having a rear wheel with the then new campagnolo 11sp cog for Evans in the 2009 Vuelta; and more recently the 'cycling moment' of 2016 was Froome running up the Ventoux due to a mismatch in the pedal interface between his shoes and the neutral support bike. Standards? WTF!

 

[King Boonen]

The UCI have set a standard they will support, 12mm axles and 160mm discs I think (140mm would be better). If teams don't want to use that it's between them and their suppliers but the UCI can't be blamed for it.

 

[Netserk]

If there wasn't any minimum weight, how (much )long(er) would it take for disc brakes to be the preferred braking system?

As things are now, surely you lose more with the extra weight up the mountain than you gain by descending faster, no?

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

If there wasn't any minimum weight, how (much )long(er) would it take for disc brakes to be the preferred braking system?

As things are now, surely you lose more with the extra weight up the mountain than you gain by descending faster, no?

I think you'd just see more diversification, climbing bikes, flat bikes, cobble bikes, wet weather bikes for all these and so in. It's getting like that already. I'd actually much prefer more strict control over the bikes I think.

As things are now you can build a disc brake bike in the UCI weight limit I've heard. Might even have been in this thread. They were talking about removing the weight limit, not sure it'll happen though.

 

[42x16ss]

With the right components it could be done without going too crazy. Pro bikes also gain weight once the power meter, head unit, shift batteries and switches, number holder etc are all added. I wouldn't be surprised if the UCI reduced the weight limit to something like 6.3kgs in the near future with light frames getting more durable.

 

[Tim B]

Re:

If there wasn't any minimum weight, how (much )long(er) would it take for disc brakes to be the preferred braking system?

As things are now, surely you lose more with the extra weight up the mountain than you gain by descending faster, no?

As long as your bike weighs 6.8kg you lose nothing to non disc equipped bikes climbing and gain everything when descending, even if it's just easier, safer braking in all conditions than a balls out descent.

I have no doubt the disc systems we have TODAY will evolve into lighter more aero packages, manufacturers would be working on that NOW, so a lower UCI weight limit really shouldn't be a problem. I suspect they are also working on ways to deal with slight rotor misalignments during wheel changes (the new dura ace calipers already have wider pad spacing) and QR designs.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re:

If there wasn't any minimum weight, how (much )long(er) would it take for disc brakes to be the preferred braking system?

As things are now, surely you lose more with the extra weight up the mountain than you gain by descending faster, no?

The UCI is sure to drop the weight limit soon, it's only been on the table for over a decade. However, the weight difference between a rim and disc brake set up is on average less than a full bidon, and they just keep getting lighter. If you can't make up that up during a climb you're just going to have to train harder, eat better, don't drink beer in the summer, work on your position, and stay away from Eastern European escorts the night before a race.

 

[biker jk]

Re: Re:

discs are simply offering a solution to a problem that does not exist in the pro peloton.

So heat build up, brake fade, and poor wet weather performance doesn't exist with rim brakes in road racing? Well, at least you've mastered the art of ignoring facts for the sake of your argument, so there's that.

Heat build up and brake fade are not an issue in the pro peloton.

You've got to be joking.

http://www.velonews.com/2015/02/bik...-faq/technical-faq-hot-tires-rims-oman_361634