UCI to trial disc brakes?

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

We are way past debating the performance of disc over rim. You're bringing up tired arguments that hold no water. It's not about breaking power.

 

[King Boonen]

Wait, GM, did your username change?

 

[DFA123]

Re:

We are way past debating the performance of disc over rim. You're bringing up tired arguments that hold no water. It's not about breaking power.

On that, and that alone we agree. Enhanced braking power just isn't needed on road bikes.

Somewhat back to the topic; the use in the pro peloton is surely going to be limited. Basically only riders who have accepted a wedge of cash or who are forced to by their teams. They are heavier, have an aerodynamic cost and result in painfully slow wheel changes - if neutral service even has the necessary wheel. All that for basically no advantage for a road rider.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

We are way past debating the performance of disc over rim. You're bringing up tired arguments that hold no water. It's not about breaking power.

On that, and that alone we agree. Enhanced braking power just isn't needed on road bikes.

Somewhat back to the topic; the use in the pro peloton is surely going to be limited. Basically only riders who have accepted a wedge of cash or who are forced to by their teams. They are heavier, have an aerodynamic cost and result in painfully slow wheel changes - if neutral service even has the necessary wheel. All that for basically no advantage for a road rider.

I'm pretty sure it's been shown that there is no aero cost when done right and wheel changes are no slower. As for weight, unless they remove the bike weight limit this really isn't an issue and we've seen that plenty of pro bikes are well over that number anyway.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re: Re:

We are way past debating the performance of disc over rim. You're bringing up tired arguments that hold no water. It's not about breaking power.

Enhanced braking power just isn't needed on road bikes.

Power braking is really only put into use coming down the mountain, and usually only in the switches. But My god man, why wouldn't you wan't better brakes? If I'm faster into a corner I exit first. I understand some people are perfectly fine with technological stagnation. I'm not.

....the use in the pro peloton is surely going to be limited.

If we're going to speculate, I say a few years from now everybody will be on disc. We'll just have to wait and see. So far I'm 2 for 2. I have this Vegas streak going and I just can't stop!

Basically only riders who have accepted a wedge of cash or who are forced to by their teams.

Right. And yet everybody that tries them has a forehead slapping V8 moment, like why didn't this happen years ago. Let's not kid ourselves, generally speaking roadies are the most conservative and slowest to adopt change out of all the genres of cycling. Sometimes also the most stupid. These are the same people who scoffed at clipless pedals, STi, carbon, and even protested helmet use. We're a fickle bunch but somehow we muddle through.

They are heavier, have an aerodynamic cost and result in painfully slow wheel changes - if neutral service even has the necessary wheel. All that for basically no advantage for a road rider.

Typical old wives' tales. For the 2017 model year there are about a half a dozen or more road disc bikes that are at, or even below the UCI weight limit. 6.8kg+/-. Is that still to heavy? Seems Boonen and Kittel are winning races on quite possibly the heaviest bike in the peloton. The only aero disadvantage found was in extremely high cross winds and marginal at best. Put 200 riders together and there's none. Advantage grossly outweighs the disadvantage. More myth with the wheel change speed. There's a few designs that are very fast, my R.A.T. axles make for a quicker change than any QR. Suggest you take one for a proper ride then come back here and we'll see how motivated you still are for making the case for staying with rim brakes.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re:

Wait, GM, did your username change?

Yep. Started with RDV4ROUBAIX (retired), Giuseppe Magnetico, MWC, now back to GM. No sockpuppets, all approved by the cops here. This one stays

 

[Tim B]

Re: Re:

I don't get the fuss with disk brakes. So much innovation and brake makers can't seem to design a safe protection to prevent some issues that may arise in crashes and that.

Indeed. I think the fuss is largely generated by manufacturers who see it as a big cash cow. And then that is perpetuated by a few riders whose use cycling mostly as a vehicle for their main hobby - which is shopping.

I think you should get yourself a disc roadie and then go bomb a few technical descents at 100kph and let me know what you think. It might be a bit of a lightbulb moment for you.

 

[spalco]

Re: Re:

On that, and that alone we agree. Enhanced braking power just isn't needed on road bikes.

Somewhat back to the topic; the use in the pro peloton is surely going to be limited. Basically only riders who have accepted a wedge of cash or who are forced to by their teams. They are heavier, have an aerodynamic cost and result in painfully slow wheel changes - if neutral service even has the necessary wheel. All that for basically no advantage for a road rider.

I have no experience with racing, and have never had equipment nearly as advanced as what the pros ride, but the first time I rode a bike with disc breaks was very memorable, you can definitely slow down much better even without the wheels locking up. The difference is really, really impressive actually.

And of course the professionals' equipment is a technology model as well. It makes no sense for the pros to use stuff that clearly will soon be near obsolete (above a certain price point), since of course the manufacturers put money into the sport to sell their stuff too.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I don't get the fuss with disk brakes. So much innovation and brake makers can't seem to design a safe protection to prevent some issues that may arise in crashes and that.

Indeed. I think the fuss is largely generated by manufacturers who see it as a big cash cow. And then that is perpetuated by a few riders whose use cycling mostly as a vehicle for their main hobby - which is shopping.

I think you should get yourself a disc roadie and then go bomb a few technical descents at 100kph and let me know what you think. It might be a bit of a lightbulb moment for you.

I've ridden a road bike with disc brakes several times - so am well aware of what it can and can't do. I have also never ridden a 'techincal descent' at close to 100kph - as I doubt anyone in the world has. So if that is all that disc brakes are better for, then I think it's safe to say that they are not really necessary.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

We are way past debating the performance of disc over rim. You're bringing up tired arguments that hold no water. It's not about breaking power.

Enhanced braking power just isn't needed on road bikes.

Power braking is really only put into use coming down the mountain, and usually only in the switches. But My god man, why wouldn't you wan't better brakes? If I'm faster into a corner I exit first. I understand some people are perfectly fine with technological stagnation. I'm not.

....the use in the pro peloton is surely going to be limited.

If we're going to speculate, I say a few years from now everybody will be on disc. We'll just have to wait and see. So far I'm 2 for 2. I have this Vegas streak going and I just can't stop!

Basically only riders who have accepted a wedge of cash or who are forced to by their teams.

Right. And yet everybody that tries them has a forehead slapping V8 moment, like why didn't this happen years ago. Let's not kid ourselves, generally speaking roadies are the most conservative and slowest to adopt change out of all the genres of cycling. Sometimes also the most stupid. These are the same people who scoffed at clipless pedals, STi, carbon, and even protested helmet use. We're a fickle bunch but somehow we muddle through.

They are heavier, have an aerodynamic cost and result in painfully slow wheel changes - if neutral service even has the necessary wheel. All that for basically no advantage for a road rider.

Typical old wives' tales. For the 2017 model year there are about a half a dozen or more road disc bikes that are at, or even below the UCI weight limit. 6.8kg+/-. Is that still to heavy? Seems Boonen and Kittel are winning races on quite possibly the heaviest bike in the peloton. The only aero disadvantage found was in extremely high cross winds and marginal at best. Put 200 riders together and there's none. Advantage grossly outweighs the disadvantage. More myth with the wheel change speed. There's a few designs that are very fast, my R.A.T. axles make for a quicker change than any QR. Suggest you take one for a proper ride then come back here and we'll see how motivated you still are for making the case for staying with rim brakes.

Absolute nonsense and full of projections and straw man arguments. The fact is they are unnecessary and take the bicycle further away from being a simple piece of technology. Why does a bike need a hydraulic system and a battery pack? Obviously it doesn't. Any you have completely fallen for the manufacturer's stick - although the way some posters like to vehemently defend and promote disc brakes, I wouldn't be surprised if they're in on the marketing strategy as well.

 

[King Boonen]

Why does a bike need a derailleur?


Anyway, hows about we don't just turn this into the same thread in the gear section...

Wait, GM, did your username change?

Yep. Started with RDV4ROUBAIX (retired), Giuseppe Magnetico, MWC, now back to GM. No sockpuppets, all approved by the cops here. This one stays

I knew about the first change but hadn't tiwgged the GM, MWC change

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re: Re:

Absolute nonsense and full of projections and straw man arguments. The fact is they are unnecessary and take the bicycle further away from being a simple piece of technology. Why does a bike need a hydraulic system and a battery pack? Obviously it doesn't. Any you have completely fallen for the manufacturer's stick - although the way some posters like to vehemently defend and promote disc brakes, I wouldn't be surprised if they're in on the marketing strategy as well.

It's painfully clear you have zero experience with this subject, so why even bother? People are promoting and defending disc because they're better(fact), but you wouldn't know anything about that because you're perfectly fine on your dandy horse.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re: Re:

I've ridden a road bike with disc brakes several times - so am well aware of what it can and can't do. I have also never ridden a 'techincal descent' at close to 100kph - as I doubt anyone in the world has. So if that is all that disc brakes are better for, then I think it's safe to say that they are not really necessary.

More BS. What "can't" they do, make you a sandwich? I'm hitting almost100kph every weekend every time I come off the mountain, according to strava there's about 1200 people other than myself that are tickling those speeds on a particular road around here. If you don't need better brakes then what's the point of telling people that do why they don't?

 

[DFA123]

Re:

Why does a bike need a derailleur?


Anyway, hows about we don't just turn this into the same thread in the gear section...

Well, a derailleur is a bit of a straw man. Disc brakes aren't a completely new component, they are just a replacement. Rim brakes already exist and work fine; if you are asking why a bike needs an electric derailleur then that would be a better comparison. And, imo it certainly doesn't.

But anyway, I completely agree about not turning this into another thread about the merits of discs or not. That one in the other subforum seemed to bring out the worst in a lot of people - this topic seems to bring out some of the zealots. It's the new politics thread.

Back to topic, as far as the UCI and pros using discs; I think this battle between safety concerns and the lobbying from manufaturers still has quite a way to run. All it will take is a rider demonstrably getting burnt by a disc, or a big pile up because some riders are on discs and some are on rims and they will be banned again for a short time. Then, manufacturers will convinve the UCI they have been improved and are better, and the cycle will continue again. I think eventually they'll need some kind of shield on them for safety, but then that's going to raise a lot more doubts about their aerodynamics or time to change a wheel.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I've ridden a road bike with disc brakes several times - so am well aware of what it can and can't do. I have also never ridden a 'techincal descent' at close to 100kph - as I doubt anyone in the world has. So if that is all that disc brakes are better for, then I think it's safe to say that they are not really necessary.

More BS. What "can't" they do, make you a sandwich? I'm hitting almost100kph every weekend every time I come off the mountain, according to strava there's about 1200 people other than myself that are tickling those speeds on a particular road around here. If you don't need better brakes then what's the point of telling people that do why they don't?

Whatever, I'm not interested in getting personal here. If you regularly do technical descents at 100kph and disc brakes make you feel safer, then good on you.

 

[spalco]

Re: Re:

Well, a derailleur is a bit of a straw man. Disc brakes aren't a completely new component, they are just a replacement. Rim brakes already exist and work fine; if you are asking why a bike needs an electric derailleur then that would be a better comparison. And, imo it certainly doesn't.

Bikes made from steel also work fine, that's not the point.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re: Re:

I think eventually they'll need some kind of shield on them for safety, but then that's going to raise a lot more doubts about their aerodynamics or time to change a wheel.

Then there should be shields on chainrings and spokes too. Why don't we just wear kevlar head to toe?

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Why does a bike need a derailleur?


Anyway, hows about we don't just turn this into the same thread in the gear section...

Well, a derailleur is a bit of a straw man. Disc brakes aren't a completely new component, they are just a replacement. Rim brakes already exist and work fine; if you are asking why a bike needs an electric derailleur then that would be a better comparison. And, imo it certainly doesn't.

But anyway, I completely agree about not turning this into another thread about the merits of discs or not. That one in the other subforum seemed to bring out the worst in a lot of people - this topic seems to bring out some of the zealots. It's the new politics thread.

Back to topic, as far as the UCI and pros using discs; I think this battle between safety concerns and the lobbying from manufaturers still has quite a way to run. All it will take is a rider demonstrably getting burnt by a disc, or a big pile up because some riders are on discs and some are on rims and they will be banned again for a short time. Then, manufacturers will convinve the UCI they have been improved and are better, and the cycle will continue again. I think eventually they'll need some kind of shield on them for safety, but then that's going to raise a lot more doubts about their aerodynamics or time to change a wheel.

A derailleur was just a replacement. We could discuss No. of gears too then if you want, but lets not do it here. It's all about progress.

To the bold section:
I don't think burns are much of a worry to be honest. It takes a lot of braking to heat up a disc which is unlikely in most big pile-ups and the idea that discs will cause crashes because of faster braking surely goes against your claim that rim brakes work just as well? In reality different braking distances exist throughout the peloton already with a myriad of different systems and rider weights/styles/ability etc. Just because someone is riding discs doesn't mean they lose all road sense and people will still judge stopping distances for themselves and what they are riding.

I think the front disc is the only one that might cause concern. The rear disc, especially if they go to 140mm like they should, is basically hidden in the rear triangle. The front disc is the most exposed and likely to be hottest. I don't think it will be a problem but if anything is going to be it's that.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Why does a bike need a derailleur?


Anyway, hows about we don't just turn this into the same thread in the gear section...

Well, a derailleur is a bit of a straw man. Disc brakes aren't a completely new component, they are just a replacement. Rim brakes already exist and work fine; if you are asking why a bike needs an electric derailleur then that would be a better comparison. And, imo it certainly doesn't.

But anyway, I completely agree about not turning this into another thread about the merits of discs or not. That one in the other subforum seemed to bring out the worst in a lot of people - this topic seems to bring out some of the zealots. It's the new politics thread.

Back to topic, as far as the UCI and pros using discs; I think this battle between safety concerns and the lobbying from manufaturers still has quite a way to run. All it will take is a rider demonstrably getting burnt by a disc, or a big pile up because some riders are on discs and some are on rims and they will be banned again for a short time. Then, manufacturers will convinve the UCI they have been improved and are better, and the cycle will continue again. I think eventually they'll need some kind of shield on them for safety, but then that's going to raise a lot more doubts about their aerodynamics or time to change a wheel.

A derailleur was just a replacement. We could discuss No. of gears too then if you want, but lets not do it here. It's all about progress.

To the bold section:
I don't think burns are much of a worry to be honest. It takes a lot of braking to heat up a disc which is unlikely in most big pile-ups and the idea that discs will cause crashes because of faster braking surely goes against your claim that rim brakes work just as well? In reality different braking distances exist throughout the peloton already with a myriad of different systems and rider weights/styles/ability etc. Just because someone is riding discs doesn't mean they lose all road sense and people will still judge stopping distances for themselves and what they are riding.

I think the front disc is the only one that might cause concern. The rear disc, especially if they go to 140mm like they should, is basically hidden in the rear triangle. The front disc is the most exposed and likely to be hottest. I don't think it will be a problem but if anything is going to be it's that.

I don't necessarily disagree, I think the 'danger' of disc brakes is overplayed, probably because a lot of pros just don't want them. But you can be sure that any incident involving them is going to be blown up - and with so many televized pro races nowdays, its only a matter of time before someone gets burnt by one and then the UCI will be forced into making another decision.

Another indirect consequence of disc brakes could be the effect on neutral service. They are already at the limit carrying numerous different groupsets, casette configurations etc.. Throw in the need for twice as much again (possibly more if riders are running different sized rotors) and suddenly a lot more motos and support vehicles are going to be needed. The UCI should really be trying to standardize equipment as much as possible if only to reduce the dangers posed by having more vehicles trying squeeze past riders.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Well, a derailleur is a bit of a straw man. Disc brakes aren't a completely new component, they are just a replacement. Rim brakes already exist and work fine; if you are asking why a bike needs an electric derailleur then that would be a better comparison. And, imo it certainly doesn't.

Bikes made from steel also work fine, that's not the point.

I don't think these comparisons are really relevant. Carbon fiber is a relatively new technology and has a huge effect on the weight of the frame. It changes little in the way a bicycle operates; the frame is still in the same place. Disc brakes have been around for over one hundred years and only in the last decade or so have they begun appearing on bikes. Basically because manufacturers have run out of things that they can genuinely upgrade each year, and so are resorting to gimmicks that are pretty unnecessary.

If they had a clear performance benefit, all teams would have adopted them immediately and would be at the UCI's door demanding for them to be introduced. Especially so given the lobbying by manufacturers. They are essentially providing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist on road bikes.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re: Re:

Well, a derailleur is a bit of a straw man. Disc brakes aren't a completely new component, they are just a replacement. Rim brakes already exist and work fine; if you are asking why a bike needs an electric derailleur then that would be a better comparison. And, imo it certainly doesn't.

Bikes made from steel also work fine, that's not the point.

I don't think these comparisons are really relevant. Carbon fiber is a relatively new technology and has a huge effect on the weight of the frame. It changes little in the way a bicycle operates; the frame is still in the same place. Disc brakes have been around for over one hundred years and only in the last decade or so have they begun appearing on bikes. Basically because manufacturers have run out of things that they can genuinely upgrade each year, and so are resorting to gimmicks that are pretty unnecessary.

If they had a clear performance benefit, all teams would have adopted them immediately and would be at the UCI's door demanding for them to be introduced. Especially so given the lobbying by manufacturers. They are essentially providing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist on road bikes.

Tell the person who has been riding hydro disc on the road for the last five years this mumbo jumbo. Disc as we know them have been on bikes 20 years, and no pro has ever denied the fact that disc is better system. It's the logistics that have to be sorted out to get full emersion, which is eventually coming. Your entire argument is misrepresenting truth one after another, anyone can see it.

 

[blaxland]

With the introduction of disc brakes on road bikes,the simple answer to use them or not.should be left to the individual(not forced on anyone)just like carbon frames,di2 electronic etc.a;; these so called advances in technology can be enjoyed by those who chose to spend $$.As someone who also has ridden disc bikes for over 10 years,i can tell you in my opinion the only time i use my disc road bike is when its raining(better/more confident braking)when i race(regaurdless of weather)i still use my rim brake road bikes.As a side note here in australia(bike retail)we only sell 1 disc bike compared to 5 rim brake road bikes.

 

[Tim B]

Re: Re:

I don't get the fuss with disk brakes. So much innovation and brake makers can't seem to design a safe protection to prevent some issues that may arise in crashes and that.

Indeed. I think the fuss is largely generated by manufacturers who see it as a big cash cow. And then that is perpetuated by a few riders whose use cycling mostly as a vehicle for their main hobby - which is shopping.

I think you should get yourself a disc roadie and then go bomb a few technical descents at 100kph and let me know what you think. It might be a bit of a lightbulb moment for you.

I've ridden a road bike with disc brakes several times - so am well aware of what it can and can't do. I have also never ridden a 'techincal descent' at close to 100kph - as I doubt anyone in the world has. So if that is all that disc brakes are better for, then I think it's safe to say that they are not really necessary.

Many many mountain descents have long high speed straights into hairpins, switchbacks and junctions where you need to wipe off a lot of speed. Perhaps you don't ride downhill fast, but a lot of other people do and the benefit is welcomed.
I wrote a list of benefits bottom of page 6...

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Re:

With the introduction of disc brakes on road bikes,the simple answer to use them or not.should be left to the individual(not forced on anyone)just like carbon frames,di2 electronic etc.

Not really about the consumer on this thread, nobody's forcing anything on anybody. Not sure where that's coming from. If you look at it from the angle that over time there will be less high end bikes with a rim brake option, that I would agree with.

these so called advances in technology can be enjoyed by those who chose to spend $$.

When does a technology cease being labeled a "so called" advancement if the evidence was reveled long ago that this is a better system than the one it's replacing? As of right now if you're in the market to unload your $$ on a new bike purchase you have many things to consider including brake performance.

As someone who also has ridden disc bikes for over 10 years,i can tell you in my opinion the only time i use my disc road bike is when its raining(better/more confident braking)when i race(regaurdless of weather)i still use my rim brake road bikes.

I think this disc brake thing gets lost on people from a regional perspective too. I'm dealing with 4200m mountains so the benefit of better brakes in any weather isn't a tough decision to make.

As a side note here in australia(bike retail)we only sell 1 disc bike compared to 5 rim brake road bikes.

The wheel building business is averaging about 400 wheel sets a year for the last 8. I hit 50/50 disc brake to rim brake mark 4 years ago. Right now it's 80/20. This doesn't include mountain bike wheels, strictly road and cross. The shop I operate out of has two retail locations, they hit the 50/50 disc/rim ratio with complete bike sales last year. You and I are worlds apart, for the moment.

 

[Tim B]

Well, regardless of them being better or not, looks like the riders association is digging their heels in because the UCI isn't listening to them.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/disc-brake-debate-reignites-as-cpa-set-to-clash-with-uci/

Looks like the UCI is trialling a protective cover which should help with most issues, but one of the main concerns is that some riders wont be able to stop as well as disc equipped bikes and cause crashes etc, they want an "all or nothing" peloton, so until all the manufacturers get on board (and judging by Fausto Pinarello's comments recently about high end bikes not needing discs) I can't see that happening any time soon.