Cookster15
Moderator
- May 14, 2011
- 5,703
- 5,920
- 23,180
Re: Re:
I can still see Joseba Beloki rolling a tub and breaking his femur on a descent in a TdF a few years back. Not good.
Edit: just realised that was an old article, but news to me either way.
Wow, I hadn't seen that - disc brakes anyone?biker jk said:
I can still see Joseba Beloki rolling a tub and breaking his femur on a descent in a TdF a few years back. Not good.
Edit: just realised that was an old article, but news to me either way.
- Apr 8, 2012
- 840
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
I did the same thing during Superweek in Wisconsin. Not the Middle East, The Midwest.
Cookster15 said:
I did the same thing during Superweek in Wisconsin. Not the Middle East, The Midwest.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Here's something I think many haven't seen and certainly adds something to the "spinning blade" discussion. As usual, when Hope do something they do it right:
Now, who wants to pick between that rotor, bladed spokes or a chainring? I'll take my chances with that.
Now, who wants to pick between that rotor, bladed spokes or a chainring? I'll take my chances with that.
- Nov 7, 2010
- 8,820
- 246
- 17,880
Re:
The choice is between that rotor and rim brakes - and most, not surprisingly, prefer to take their chances with rim brakes. The fact that there are some potentially dangerous components already on the bike, is not a justification for adding more.
That's not really the choice available to pros though; unless there is a perfectly good alternative to chainrings and spokes?King Boonen said:Here's something I think many haven't seen and certainly adds something to the "spinning blade" discussion. As usual, when Hope do something they do it right:
Now, who wants to pick between that rotor, bladed spokes or a chainring? I'll take my chances with that.
The choice is between that rotor and rim brakes - and most, not surprisingly, prefer to take their chances with rim brakes. The fact that there are some potentially dangerous components already on the bike, is not a justification for adding more.
- Mar 13, 2013
- 4,857
- 903
- 17,680
Re:
Comments from Hope Technology & SRAM tests suggest 140mm can't dissipate enough heat. 160mm can with special design consideration for heat like isolating the seals and oil, cooling fins and not using organic pads etc.
You are correct though, if the manufacturers want to see discs in the peloton, it's not the UCI's fault it doesn't work yet, but really the UCI should be talking with the riders first, which again isn't happening. when 600 pro riders and teams are say they're not wanting discs and not being taken seriously, I would say that is a UCI issue when it's being ignored by both manufacturers and UCI going on the manufacturers side than the riders they are supposed to offer governance for.
My argument, is if cantilevered rim brakes were good enough for this years cx junior world champion, silver and bronze placings this year, rim brakes can't be that bad on the road lol!
King Boonen said:
Comments from Hope Technology & SRAM tests suggest 140mm can't dissipate enough heat. 160mm can with special design consideration for heat like isolating the seals and oil, cooling fins and not using organic pads etc.
You are correct though, if the manufacturers want to see discs in the peloton, it's not the UCI's fault it doesn't work yet, but really the UCI should be talking with the riders first, which again isn't happening. when 600 pro riders and teams are say they're not wanting discs and not being taken seriously, I would say that is a UCI issue when it's being ignored by both manufacturers and UCI going on the manufacturers side than the riders they are supposed to offer governance for.
My argument, is if cantilevered rim brakes were good enough for this years cx junior world champion, silver and bronze placings this year, rim brakes can't be that bad on the road lol!
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re: Re:
No alternative to bladed spokes? Wut?
Chainrings? How about belt drive and a Rolhoff/Pinion. Even gets rid of the cassettes!
I've ridden 140 and 160 on the road and found 140 fine, but that was cable brakes so I'll defer to Hope.
600 riders say they want all or nothing, not that they don't want them. Why are so many desperate to distort the facts. How many of them now come out with lines about helmets saving their lives in crashes? None of the pros at the time wanted helmets either. They are entitled to an opinion but that doesn't mean the opinion has to be treated equally with others. There biggest problem at the moment seems to be different braking distances. According to many in this thread and others and many pros there isn't a big difference. Which is it? Can't have it both ways. This also assumes stopping distances in the current peloton are not different, which is frankly rubbish.
As to the bold bit lets stop the tired old strawmen arguments.
Can you can remind me what Cant, Van Aert, Worst and Nieuwenhuis were riding..?
DFA123 said:That's not really the choice available to pros though; unless there is a perfectly good alternative to chainrings and spokes?King Boonen said:Here's something I think many haven't seen and certainly adds something to the "spinning blade" discussion. As usual, when Hope do something they do it right:
Now, who wants to pick between that rotor, bladed spokes or a chainring? I'll take my chances with that.
The choice is between that rotor and rim brakes - and most, not surprisingly, prefer to take their chances with rim brakes. The fact that there are some potentially dangerous components already on the bike, is not a justification for adding more.
No alternative to bladed spokes? Wut?
Chainrings? How about belt drive and a Rolhoff/Pinion. Even gets rid of the cassettes!
samhocking said:King Boonen said:
Comments from Hope Technology & SRAM tests suggest 140mm can't dissipate enough heat. 160mm can with special design consideration for heat like isolating the seals and oil, cooling fins and not using organic pads etc.
You are correct though, if the manufacturers want to see discs in the peloton, it's not the UCI's fault it doesn't work yet, but really the UCI should be talking with the riders first, which again isn't happening. when 600 pro riders and teams are say they're not wanting discs and not being taken seriously, I would say that is a UCI issue when it's being ignored by both manufacturers and UCI going on the manufacturers side than the riders they are supposed to offer governance for.
My argument, is if cantilevered rim brakes were good enough for this years cx junior world champion, silver and bronze placings this year, rim brakes can't be that bad on the road lol!
I've ridden 140 and 160 on the road and found 140 fine, but that was cable brakes so I'll defer to Hope.
600 riders say they want all or nothing, not that they don't want them. Why are so many desperate to distort the facts. How many of them now come out with lines about helmets saving their lives in crashes? None of the pros at the time wanted helmets either. They are entitled to an opinion but that doesn't mean the opinion has to be treated equally with others. There biggest problem at the moment seems to be different braking distances. According to many in this thread and others and many pros there isn't a big difference. Which is it? Can't have it both ways. This also assumes stopping distances in the current peloton are not different, which is frankly rubbish.
As to the bold bit lets stop the tired old strawmen arguments.
Can you can remind me what Cant, Van Aert, Worst and Nieuwenhuis were riding..?
- Nov 7, 2010
- 8,820
- 246
- 17,880
Re: Re:
FWIW, there were similar safety concerns about bladed spokes, and after study, the most dangerous wheels (i.e. with only 4 or 8 spokes) have been banned.
Not really sure where you're going with this straw man. The issue, as far as the pros are concerned, is whether disc brakes present more of a danger than rim brakes. The fact that chainrings may or may not be dangerous isn't really relevant to that discussion. Even hypothetically, if chainrings were found to be much more of a danger than discs, that still wouldn't offer support to bringing in discs, if discs represented a greater danger than rim brakes.King Boonen said:DFA123 said:That's not really the choice available to pros though; unless there is a perfectly good alternative to chainrings and spokes?King Boonen said:Here's something I think many haven't seen and certainly adds something to the "spinning blade" discussion. As usual, when Hope do something they do it right:
Now, who wants to pick between that rotor, bladed spokes or a chainring? I'll take my chances with that.
The choice is between that rotor and rim brakes - and most, not surprisingly, prefer to take their chances with rim brakes. The fact that there are some potentially dangerous components already on the bike, is not a justification for adding more.
No alternative to bladed spokes? Wut?
Chainrings? How about belt drive and a Rolhoff/Pinion. Even gets rid of the cassettes!
FWIW, there were similar safety concerns about bladed spokes, and after study, the most dangerous wheels (i.e. with only 4 or 8 spokes) have been banned.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re: Re:
You said there were no safer alternatives to chainrings and bladed spokes. I countered that with safer alternatives.
To the bold, If the discussion is about the relative safety of available alternatives then it is highly relevant. Just look what a chainring/cassette did to Ventoso. Wouldn't happen with a belt-drive/gearbox. If you are arguing that they should not move to disc brakes because a safer alternative exists (and there's no proof for that, in fact the only person in this thread who has any real experience of racing in a mixed bunch says the complete opposite) then surely you also think they should do away with bladed spokes and chainrings/cassettes?
DFA123 said:Not really sure where you're going with this straw man. The issue, as far as the pros are concerned, is whether disc brakes present more of a danger than rim brakes. The fact that chainrings may or may not be dangerous isn't really relevant to that discussion. Even hypothetically, if chainrings were found to be much more of a danger than discs, that still wouldn't offer support to bringing in discs, if discs represented a greater danger than rim brakes.King Boonen said:DFA123 said:That's not really the choice available to pros though; unless there is a perfectly good alternative to chainrings and spokes?King Boonen said:Here's something I think many haven't seen and certainly adds something to the "spinning blade" discussion. As usual, when Hope do something they do it right:
Now, who wants to pick between that rotor, bladed spokes or a chainring? I'll take my chances with that.
The choice is between that rotor and rim brakes - and most, not surprisingly, prefer to take their chances with rim brakes. The fact that there are some potentially dangerous components already on the bike, is not a justification for adding more.
No alternative to bladed spokes? Wut?
Chainrings? How about belt drive and a Rolhoff/Pinion. Even gets rid of the cassettes!
FWIW, there were similar safety concerns about bladed spokes, and after study, the most dangerous wheels (i.e. with only 4 or 8 spokes) have been banned.
You said there were no safer alternatives to chainrings and bladed spokes. I countered that with safer alternatives.
To the bold, If the discussion is about the relative safety of available alternatives then it is highly relevant. Just look what a chainring/cassette did to Ventoso. Wouldn't happen with a belt-drive/gearbox. If you are arguing that they should not move to disc brakes because a safer alternative exists (and there's no proof for that, in fact the only person in this thread who has any real experience of racing in a mixed bunch says the complete opposite) then surely you also think they should do away with bladed spokes and chainrings/cassettes?
- Nov 7, 2010
- 8,820
- 246
- 17,880
Re: Re:
Pro riders feel comfortable with chainrings and bladed spokes and are happy to take the risks involved with that. They are not happy to take the risks involved with using disc brakes. You could argue it's somewhat inconsistent, or you could accept that it's pros who are taking the risks and it is them who should have the final say on it.
Awful straw man and just a nonsense argument. The issue is not about chainrings and spokes. The issue is about disc brakes. If they are more likely to cause serious injury than rim brakes then they should not be allowed. The pro riders association is asking for assurances that is the case - and there has not been enough research done to say that they are safe enough.King Boonen said:
Pro riders feel comfortable with chainrings and bladed spokes and are happy to take the risks involved with that. They are not happy to take the risks involved with using disc brakes. You could argue it's somewhat inconsistent, or you could accept that it's pros who are taking the risks and it is them who should have the final say on it.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re: Re:
So you're against bladed spokes and chainrings/cassettes then?
Edit: Maybe I should expand my point.
You are using two different modes of risk assessment for the different cases here and I don't think that's an honest way to do it. For disc brakes you are exclusively looking at relative risk and saying if one is higher than the other then you must choose the lowest risk. For bladed spokes and chainrings you are looking at acceptable risk and risk management and saying that increased risk is ok as long as it is manageable.
This does change in your last paragraph so I'm guessing you're really talking about acceptable risk and risk management for both but this is why we end up in cycles or the same discussion.
Focussing just on risk of discs, ignoring weight, aero etc.:
Disc brakes are objectively better at stopping in all situations and in certain situations (wet, dirty etc.) provide much more consistent modulation which will almost certainly make them safer.
Decreased stopping distances may cause problems for riders not on discs. Personally I don't agree as stopping distances are not the same at the moment but this would seem like a possible valid argument.
Sharp discs are more likely to cause damage in a crash. This is off-set by the likelihood that disc riders have a shorter stopping distance so are less likely to go down in a pile up and that the rotors are no being rounded (not all are like the Hopes but I think they should be).
Discs get hot. This is a non-issue really. Pile ups happen in races at periods when prolonged braking has not been happening. The likelihood of a disc being hot in a pile up is very small and we still have to off-set this against the assumption that those on discs are more likely to avoid the pile up due to better braking.
If we look at it from a risk management point of view I struggle to see the case for maintaining rim brakes. I would argue improved braking negates most of the issues along with the other benefits stated. In other words I do not think this is a safety issue, I think it is something else (weight, aero, riders frustrated and lashing out at something they can etc.).
DFA123 said:
So you're against bladed spokes and chainrings/cassettes then?
Edit: Maybe I should expand my point.
You are using two different modes of risk assessment for the different cases here and I don't think that's an honest way to do it. For disc brakes you are exclusively looking at relative risk and saying if one is higher than the other then you must choose the lowest risk. For bladed spokes and chainrings you are looking at acceptable risk and risk management and saying that increased risk is ok as long as it is manageable.
This does change in your last paragraph so I'm guessing you're really talking about acceptable risk and risk management for both but this is why we end up in cycles or the same discussion.
Focussing just on risk of discs, ignoring weight, aero etc.:
Disc brakes are objectively better at stopping in all situations and in certain situations (wet, dirty etc.) provide much more consistent modulation which will almost certainly make them safer.
Decreased stopping distances may cause problems for riders not on discs. Personally I don't agree as stopping distances are not the same at the moment but this would seem like a possible valid argument.
Sharp discs are more likely to cause damage in a crash. This is off-set by the likelihood that disc riders have a shorter stopping distance so are less likely to go down in a pile up and that the rotors are no being rounded (not all are like the Hopes but I think they should be).
Discs get hot. This is a non-issue really. Pile ups happen in races at periods when prolonged braking has not been happening. The likelihood of a disc being hot in a pile up is very small and we still have to off-set this against the assumption that those on discs are more likely to avoid the pile up due to better braking.
If we look at it from a risk management point of view I struggle to see the case for maintaining rim brakes. I would argue improved braking negates most of the issues along with the other benefits stated. In other words I do not think this is a safety issue, I think it is something else (weight, aero, riders frustrated and lashing out at something they can etc.).
- Nov 7, 2010
- 8,820
- 246
- 17,880
Re: Re:
If you support forcing equipment on pro riders that they are not comfortable with and don't feel safe racing with, all so multinational companies can sell a few more bikes, then good for you. It's pretty easy sitting in an armchair making such demands. I think the riders should have the final say on what equipment they do and do not feel safe using.
Straw man again. Anyway, it's irrelevant what I am for or against. It's not me racing in a pro peloton and risking having my leg sliced open.King Boonen said:
If you support forcing equipment on pro riders that they are not comfortable with and don't feel safe racing with, all so multinational companies can sell a few more bikes, then good for you. It's pretty easy sitting in an armchair making such demands. I think the riders should have the final say on what equipment they do and do not feel safe using.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re: Re:
I'll pick up on these because the first is a flat out lie, no-one is being forced to race on discs, and the second is completely at odds with itself. Several riders what to race on discs because they think they are better, it is you who is advocating forcing them to abandon something they feel is objectively better than the other option. In reality it is you who is supporting forcing riders to use something they feel less safe on.
DFA123 said:
I'll pick up on these because the first is a flat out lie, no-one is being forced to race on discs, and the second is completely at odds with itself. Several riders what to race on discs because they think they are better, it is you who is advocating forcing them to abandon something they feel is objectively better than the other option. In reality it is you who is supporting forcing riders to use something they feel less safe on.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Apologises for the off topic post...
Which ones should I buy for a fixed wheel used for a lot of climbing and descending?
https://www.condorcycles.com/products/trp-rg957-deep-drop-brakes
https://www.condorcycles.com/collections/brakes/products/condor-pioggia-deep-drop-brakes
The Condors are rebadged Tektro 559s. Will I appreciate the difference if you know?
Which ones should I buy for a fixed wheel used for a lot of climbing and descending?
https://www.condorcycles.com/products/trp-rg957-deep-drop-brakes
https://www.condorcycles.com/collections/brakes/products/condor-pioggia-deep-drop-brakes
The Condors are rebadged Tektro 559s. Will I appreciate the difference if you know?
- Mar 13, 2013
- 4,857
- 903
- 17,680
I think it's important to understand, that what the teams and riders and CPA are saying to the press, is not necessarily what they are thinking behind closed doors, because they will upset their frame sponsors if they did. Many really don't want discs because of the increased risks/delays when puncturing compared to not using them from both their own mechanics and neutral service, especially if they're expected to race against some teams who are not using them, which is the situation at the moment. Clearly the UCI might listen if the riders make this a safety issue though and why the stopping distance safety issue. In the dry they stop the same, in the wet there could be an issue, but we'll soon find out in the spring classics if any are wet. At the moment, the races are all flat, no braking and dry, so nobody knows yet.
- Nov 7, 2010
- 8,820
- 246
- 17,880
Re: Re:
That is desperate stuff; it's like having a discussion with a child. I'm not advocating anything of the sort. I'm merely stating that the majority of pro riders wishes (voiced through the CPA) should take precedence over the wishes of multi-national companies like Specialized - or Quickstep as their marketing wing now seems to be called.King Boonen said:
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re: Re:
Sorry what? I have said the riders should be allowed to choose. You are the one who wants to remove the choice. Funny how you will dismiss the views that don't chime with your own and then mis-represent others so they do. You're right, this is like having a discussion with a child, they usually dislike change as well.
DFA123 said:
Sorry what? I have said the riders should be allowed to choose. You are the one who wants to remove the choice. Funny how you will dismiss the views that don't chime with your own and then mis-represent others so they do. You're right, this is like having a discussion with a child, they usually dislike change as well.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re:
Standards have already been discussed, that's a team issue if they don't comply. There is no objective proof that there are increased risks. There is only assumption. As I've said, the only one of us in this thread who has any real experience says there are no increased risks.
If it comes down to it and the only issue becomes stopping distance, do you think everyone should move to discs?
samhocking said:
Standards have already been discussed, that's a team issue if they don't comply. There is no objective proof that there are increased risks. There is only assumption. As I've said, the only one of us in this thread who has any real experience says there are no increased risks.
If it comes down to it and the only issue becomes stopping distance, do you think everyone should move to discs?
- Mar 13, 2013
- 4,857
- 903
- 17,680
Yes, everyone should move to discs when the manufactures come up with a system that allows any wheel on any neutral service vehicles or team car to fit all bikes in the peloton as is the case at the moment. For larger races, with longer race convoys, it might not be an issue with the extra minute or so, it might take to change a wheel, adjust the calipers and be on their way, but you can't have riders at risk of trying to rejoin after a puncture, already outside the convoy by the time they get serviced. In the smaller races, the only convoy is gone in 30 seconds after the race. It's not fair on the riders to be penalised when they might have spent the last 3 months working their nuts to be out the race just because they punctured.
- Mar 13, 2013
- 4,857
- 903
- 17,680
I honestly think it's up to the UCI to put their foot down and simply tell the manufactures to get their act together. Collectively they need to agree exact mounting point tolerances on frames and forks to be consistently within +-0.5mm of each other. Once you have the mounting points o nthe frame sorted, hub manufacturers need to have a similar exact standard rotor position in relation to the hub axle end points. At the moment they're all over the place. Once the rotor is in a consistent position, it should then just be a case for any manufacturer to make their calipers to the required specification to meet all the above, perhaps without any need to continue with a new auto-centering QR caliper technology to get around the tolerance issue. Everyone is then within 0.5mm no matter what equipment you use, everyone gets the benefit of disc braking, wide tyres and everyone can take any wheel knowing it will just work like the good old days of rim brakes.
- Apr 8, 2012
- 840
- 0
- 0
Re: Re:
This, I totally agree with. You've proven time after time on this subject that you haven't a clue.
DFA123 said:
This, I totally agree with. You've proven time after time on this subject that you haven't a clue.
- Apr 8, 2012
- 840
- 0
- 0
Re:
Good point. The major hinderance in all this is the UCI technical committee. In reality though, we're only looking for an extra 2mm on each side to mitigate these tolerance differences as they currently stand. Hydro calipers already do a pretty good job of self-centering, just need a bit more.
samhocking said:
Good point. The major hinderance in all this is the UCI technical committee. In reality though, we're only looking for an extra 2mm on each side to mitigate these tolerance differences as they currently stand. Hydro calipers already do a pretty good job of self-centering, just need a bit more.
- Mar 13, 2013
- 4,857
- 903
- 17,680
Calipers self-adjust for pad wear, but none centre themselves. To get a whole team with identical set-ups, shims would be needed so the spare wheels 'might' fit without messing around with a caliper to stop rubbing and allow a quicker wheel change. You can spread the pads to at least get the rotor into the caliper, but more often than not, you then have to loosen off the caliper and centre it. Imagine having to do all that within 30s in the rain with team cars passing by at 30mph. Not for me lol!
A good example would be say when a customer comes into a bike shop and he/she tests rides a bike by manufacture X, loves it, but notices a scratch on the rear wheel. The shop doesn't have an identical spare wheel to get the sale, so switches an identical wheel from another identical bike into the customers bike to keep the sale moving forward instead of saying come back next week when we have a new wheel the same. Even though that wheel and hub is identical, that replacement wheel can end up rubbing and you have to centre the calipers. That is how crap the standards and tolerances are. Ask any bike mechanic working with disc brakes all day everyday and it's a rare moment, you fit a new wheel and it just fits without having to adjust anything.
A good example would be say when a customer comes into a bike shop and he/she tests rides a bike by manufacture X, loves it, but notices a scratch on the rear wheel. The shop doesn't have an identical spare wheel to get the sale, so switches an identical wheel from another identical bike into the customers bike to keep the sale moving forward instead of saying come back next week when we have a new wheel the same. Even though that wheel and hub is identical, that replacement wheel can end up rubbing and you have to centre the calipers. That is how crap the standards and tolerances are. Ask any bike mechanic working with disc brakes all day everyday and it's a rare moment, you fit a new wheel and it just fits without having to adjust anything.
- Apr 8, 2012
- 840
- 0
- 0
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Tour de Suisse 2025 - Men's (June 15- June 22)- Started by Tricycle Rider
- Replies: 953
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 stage 20: Verrès – Sestrière, 205 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 1K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro D'italia 2025 Stage 16: Piazzola sul Brenta – San Valentino- Started by YavorD
- Replies: 1K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 31K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 Stage 17: San Michele all’Adige – Bormio, 155 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 742
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 32K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram