# Future of disc brake road bikes



## solospeedster (Mar 6, 2012)

I would like to invite members to post images and discuss the topic of 
the future of road bike disc brakes, hydro and mechanical. 
I have posted a few pics of the new COLNAGO C59 :thumbsup::thumbsup:
THANKS SOLOSPEEDSTER


----------



## tigoat (Jun 6, 2006)

I am all in for disc brakes on a road bike. 

One of my future road bikes with disc brakes is already here per the following. :thumbsup:

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/custom-builders/my-jim-kish-custom-ti-bike-273748.html


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

This has been discussed often. The viability of disc road bikes is going to be based on whether race bikes can continue to have light weight, aerodynamics and a smooth ride with the addition of stouter wheels, stiffer forks and rotors capable of absorbing the heat from very long mountainous descents.

The C59 pictured has what are probably dangerously small rotors for use in the mountains, and no one knows what kind of ride it has.

This is obviously a prototype, with the wheels laced incorrectly.


----------



## JimP (Dec 18, 2001)

The rims and spokes for the front wheel will have to be much stronger to take the torque created by the disk brake. The rear wheel will also have to be beefed up, maybe not as much as the front, because the torque created by the disk brake can be greater than the torque of the rider pedaling. I can't see the pros using something in the mountains that will cause their wheels to be heavier.


----------



## Scott in MD (Jun 24, 2008)

Road bike discs are a solution looking for a problem. Check back in a few years.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Kontact said:


> The C59 pictured has what are probably dangerously small rotors for use in the mountains, and no one knows what kind of ride it has.
> 
> This is obviously a prototype, with the wheels laced incorrectly.


A couple of the newest introduced disc equipped CX bikes come with 140mm. It really shouldn't be all that hard to switch to 160 if needed. Time will tell if 140 will work well enough. It will definitely work in most of the US. 

But what do you mean "what kind of ride it has"? 

What's incorrect about the lacing of the wheels? It's kind of hard to tell from the pics.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Kontact said:


> This has been discussed often. The viability of disc road bikes is going to be based on whether race bikes can continue to have light weight, aerodynamics and a smooth ride with the addition of stouter wheels, stiffer forks and rotors capable of absorbing the heat from very long mountainous descents.
> 
> The C59 pictured has what are probably dangerously small rotors for use in the mountains, and no one knows what kind of ride it has.
> 
> This is obviously a prototype, with the wheels laced incorrectly.


I question whether the UCI will allow them given that a large part of their assessment for road wheels comes down to their safety in the event of a crash. Given that I have personally been at an MTB race where a lady lost part of her finger when it was caught in a rotor during a crash, I have to wonder how they can possibly allow them if they are at all serious about their own rules.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

88 rex said:


> A couple of the newest introduced disc equipped CX bikes come with 140mm. It really shouldn't be all that hard to switch to 160 if needed. Time will tell if 140 will work well enough. It will definitely work in most of the US.
> 
> But what do you mean "what kind of ride it has"?
> 
> What's incorrect about the lacing of the wheels? It's kind of hard to tell from the pics.


Given that MTB'ers generally only need 160mm and some weight weenies will use 140mm on the rear I have to wonder what possible reason a sub 7kg road bike will have for 160mm rotors.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

FTR said:


> Given that MTB'ers generally only need 160mm and some weight weenies will use 140mm on the rear I have to wonder what possible reason a sub 7kg road bike will have for 160mm rotors.


Some will argue that larger rotors are needed on mountains to help with heat dissipation. Also, that 7kg bike will probably have a 200lb dude on it. 

I personally run 160/140 on my MTB's and CX bike. All my wheels are set-up this way for ease of interchangability.

Regarding safety, if the UCI is OK with pointy cogs, gears, or even splintered carbon, then I think they'll be ok with discs. They are legal in CX afterall, where one is more likely to crash and bumping elbows is the norm.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

88 rex said:


> Some will argue that larger rotors are needed on mountains to help with heat dissipation. Also, that 7kg bike will probably have a 200lb dude on it.
> 
> I personally run 160/140 on my MTB's and CX bike. All my wheels are set-up this way for ease of interchangability.
> 
> Regarding safety, if the UCI is OK with pointy cogs, gears, or even splintered carbon, then I think they'll be ok with discs. They are legal in CX afterall, where one is more likely to crash and bumping elbows is the norm.


Which, to me proves that they are not truly serious about their "safety" rules.
The wheels have to meet a fracture test from my understanding and no sharp pieces are to occur as a result.
I personally dont see how this happens with any CF wheel.
Add a sharp rotor into the mix at what can be close to 100km/h and I have to seriously question that it can comply.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

Scott in MD said:


> Road bike discs are a solution looking for a problem. Check back in a few years.


+1.....I agree.


----------



## testpilot (Aug 20, 2010)

I plan on upgrading my biopace chainringed, kevlar spoked, tubeless tired road bike with disc brakes.


----------



## fiataccompli (Jul 27, 2008)

I have a rather heavy (certainly by weigh weenie standards) steel road bike that has disc brakes. it's a Kona Honky Inc. I was intrigued with the idea of disc brakes for an urban/commuter/all-weather road bike. I like the HI fine, but I have to agree with the comments above about a solution looking for a problem. I mean, in my case I've been riding bikes long enough that I remember (and still have some like this) when you had chrome steel rims and had to pretty much ride with the brakes on all the time in wet weather in order to have any braking ability at all...so, getting function out of modern brake pads, aluminum rims & machined braking surfaces ought not to be too tricky. For CX it seems like a good deal though, I'd think. Interesting stuff, but more conversational than essential IMHO.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

88 rex said:


> A couple of the newest introduced disc equipped CX bikes come with 140mm. It really shouldn't be all that hard to switch to 160 if needed. Time will tell if 140 will work well enough. It will definitely work in most of the US.
> 
> But what do you mean "what kind of ride it has"?
> 
> What's incorrect about the lacing of the wheels? It's kind of hard to tell from the pics.


If it rides like it has an oversized, super stiff aluminum fork, it is going to transmit an unacceptable amount of road noise and shock to the rider, and have poor cornering traction.

The valves are under crossing spokes.


----------



## Dajianshan (Jul 15, 2007)

I just got back from the Taipei Cycle Exhibition and saw two Colnago C-59 disc prototypes among other disc equipped road and cx bikes. 

Disc brakes on road bikes are poised to be the big thing. 

Several disc brake road and CX bikes on display. 

The Formula 1 Rep I talked to said the road disc brakes would be "lighter" than conventional rim brakes. He said they would keep the ISO standard and was not sure on the hub spacing.


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

Disc brake road bikes, like the one pictured, will be big with the Fred crowd. They will fill the bike paths with their awesomeness.
.
.
.
I can't believe that any racer would have the guts to line up on something like that.
.
.
.


----------



## Retro Grouch (Apr 30, 2002)

+2

That and electronic shifting.


----------



## Lotophage (Feb 19, 2011)

I spent all winter riding my Pugsley, which has disc brakes. When the roads first thawed out, I switched over to my drop-bar rigid 29er, which also has disc brakes. 

Never really thought of braking at all- it just worked, every time.

Took my custom road bike out today for the first time of the year. it does not have disc brakes. After 4 months on nothing but discs, regular brakes seemed... weak. 

They seemed weak at first, and after about ten minutes I forgot all about it and they felt completely normal.

BUT: you can't argue that discs aren't easier to use- one finger on the brake lever will stop you dead. And you can't argue that they aren't more powerful. 

And "more powerful" and "easier to use" are the buzzwords that sell new bikes. They sold you on STI levers, even though they were and still are heavier than downtube shifters, they sold you on so many other "not really an improvement" improvements that made you buy a new frame.

So disc road bikes are going to sell like hotcakes. because we love improvements that we don't actually need.


----------



## Bullvine (Sep 9, 2009)

Scott in MD said:


> Road bike discs are a solution looking for a problem. Check back in a few years.


This...

I've hit 50mph on downhills I've navigated technical descents I've never needed disc brakes.

But then agen I've never needed battery powerd shifting ether. Wait I still don't


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Kontact said:


> If it rides like it has an oversized, super stiff aluminum fork, it is going to transmit an unacceptable amount of road noise and shock to the rider, and have poor cornering traction.
> 
> The valves are under crossing spokes.



Doesn't the Colnago have a carbon fork???? Where'd you read/hear anything about an aluminum fork?

Agreed on the valve, but that would have no effect on performance.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

88 rex said:


> Doesn't the Colnago have a carbon fork???? Where'd you read/hear anything about an aluminum fork?
> 
> Agreed on the valve, but that would have no effect on performance.


It has a carbon fork - I made a comparison to a stiff aluminum fork because carbon forks stiff enough to work with discs don't ride like what we think of as carbon road forks.

The valve is just a sign that this isn't production - it is embarrassing enough on a prototype.


----------



## Keski (Sep 25, 2004)

Bullvine said:


> This...
> 
> I've hit 50mph on downhills I've navigated technical descents I've never needed disc brakes.
> 
> But then agen I've never needed battery powerd shifting ether. Wait I still don't


Mountain bikers thought the same thing about cantilevers. Until they tried v-brakes. Mountains bikers thought the same thing about v-brakes. Until they tried disc brakes......


----------



## laffeaux (Dec 12, 2001)

Keski said:


> Mountain bikers thought the same thing about cantilevers. Until they tried v-brakes. Mountains bikers thought the same thing about v-brakes. Until they tried disc brakes......


This afternoon I rode down a hill on my road bike that was about 4 miles long and speed varied from 30-42 MPH the whole way down. The only time I used my brakes was to briefly feather the rear brake with one finger on the lever to avoid running up on a buddy's wheel. Otherwise I never touched the brakes.

Yesterday I did a mountain bike ride with about 3,000 of climbing. I used my brakes a lot. The trail has loose rocks, water, bars, sand, and lots of tight turns. Even keeping my speed in the mid-20s the bike went air born off a few water bars. Several times I had to go scrub 50% of my speed immediately. The brakes got a huge work out when I dropped 700 feet of elevation in just over a mile on rough trail.

Again, on the road bike I feathered my rear brake.

I completely understand why mountain bikers prefer disc brakes (the bike I was on had cantis, but I own bikes with disc brakes). I'm not sure why a road bike needs them. Touring bike, cyclocross bikes, and commuters kind of make sense. But road bikes? Really? I'll pass.


----------



## Gimme Shoulder (Feb 10, 2004)

The typical contemporary caliper brake is a elegant little mechanism - simple and effective. I don't see how a heavier, and relatively more complicated system, requiring a machined rotors and hydraulically actuated calipers is going to do a better job. I'm sure the industry marketing machine will do their best to promote it, though. But the pros have got to buy into it first, or the cycling community won't go there.


----------



## Keski (Sep 25, 2004)

laffeaux said:


> This afternoon I rode down a hill on my road bike that was about 4 miles long and speed varied from 30-42 MPH the whole way down. The only time I used my brakes was to briefly feather the rear brake with one finger on the lever to avoid running up on a buddy's wheel. Otherwise I never touched the brakes.
> 
> Yesterday I did a mountain bike ride with about 3,000 of climbing. I used my brakes a lot. The trail has loose rocks, water, bars, sand, and lots of tight turns. Even keeping my speed in the mid-20s the bike went air born off a few water bars. Several times I had to go scrub 50% of my speed immediately. The brakes got a huge work out when I dropped 700 feet of elevation in just over a mile on rough trail.
> 
> ...


For the simple fact they provide more stopping power for less effort at the lever. Everyone from Phillipe Gilbert to Creakyknees WILL benefit from that.


----------



## Keski (Sep 25, 2004)

Take this quote from Chris Horner from TA....

Horner Makes Triumphant Return To Racing At Tirreno-Adriatico | Cyclingnews.com

"In the final to the line I accidentally shifted from the big chain ring to the small one and *my hands were cramping up *so I couldn't get it back up to do the sprint, leaving me to just spin the cranks at 130rpms to the finish, all the while losing ground," said Horner with a laugh. "Even if I could've shifted back I wouldn't have won the sprint, but maybe I would have been up a little further."

Mind you it was an uphill finish. But had there been a flatter finish with a series of techinal corners. A descent with some technical corners that required some hard braking. Situations like this is where disc brakes would provide a real benefits with cramping hands.

I have small hands. Not particularly strong. I've raced my fair share of 2.5 plus hour long Canada Cup Series mountain bike races in the 1990's. I was racing during the switch from Canti's to v-brakes to disc brakes. Each improvement was a god send to my hands and my ability to brake confidently and safely late into the races.

More braking power for less effort at the levers is good for everyone and safer at that.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Keski said:


> For the simple fact they provide more stopping power for less effort at the lever. Everyone from Phillipe Gilbert to Creakyknees WILL benefit from that.


Sorry, but I am going to bite.
Less effort than what exactly?
I already only need 1 finger on my brakes.
What will discs give me?
I will be able to brake just by thinking about it?
And what about the decrease in control by adding additional power to a system reliant on tyres that are about 10mm wide or so?
Plus the additional strength needed in the wheels to allow the use of these brakes and the change to the hubs. Of course all of this beefing up adds even more weight. It is not as simple as just adding discs and having to worry about that weight. There is a reason that MTB wheels are much heavier than road wheels nad that reason is not just the weight of the rotor.

Plus nobody has answered my question yet about how it is going to work with non-standard wheels and the UCI safety tests.
If the non standard wheels are then not approved for use with disc brakes then do we see racers having to use rim brakes on their non-standard wheels but can use discs on their standard wheels?


----------



## Keski (Sep 25, 2004)

FTR said:


> Sorry, but I am going to bite.
> Less effort than what exactly?
> I already only need 1 finger on my brakes.
> What will discs give me?
> ...


 You only sqeeze the lever as hard as required to get the needed rate of deceleration. If you feel impending lock-up you ease off the lever. Modulation, threshold braking. Pretty basic cycling skills.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Keski said:


> You only sqeeze the lever as hard as required to get the needed rate of deceleration. If you feel impending lock-up you ease off the lever. Modulation, threshold braking. Pretty basic cycling skills.


Again you have chosen to pick on the point you are trying to push without actually answering any of the points brought up.
If I 1 finger brake with normal road calipers then how much do I need to squeeze with a disc??
I also 1 finger brake on my much heavier MTB with hydro discs (160mm rotors).
And I am nowhere near the limits with either of these braking systems.
You are proposing to put a similar system on a bike that is probably 5kg lighter and with wheels and tyres not designed for this use.


----------



## Keski (Sep 25, 2004)

FTR said:


> Again you have chosen to pick on the point you are trying to push without actually answering any of the points brought up.
> If I 1 finger brake with normal road calipers then how much do I need to squeeze with a disc??
> I also 1 finger brake on my much heavier MTB with hydro discs (160mm rotors).
> And I am nowhere near the limits with either of these braking systems.
> You are proposing to put a similar system on a bike that is probably 5kg lighter and with wheels and tyres not designed for this use.


Ask any racecar driver if he would ever refuse better braking with superior modulation and left effort required. "No. My brakes are good enough." You would never hear this. 

Continue to squeeze with one finger, but with less effort. Especially in the rain and dirty, grimey conditions.

Yes they currently heavier. Would that matter for Paris-Roubaix? Hell no. For a muddy edition they could be a distinct advantage.

Does it really matter for any recreational rider? Hell no. Only in their minds and to their fragile egos.

Of course wheels and frames would need redesigns. Will take a few years to work all the nuances out. And I'm not suggesting that they will replace standard road brakes anytime soon. Although I believe they will eventually.

They will be an option and alternative. Do you not like options? 

I could just see it in the tour de france. A lone rider on a solo breakaway during a mountain stage in the wet. After the final mountain climb it's an all downhill run to the finish line. It's cold and wet. His hands are so cold he can barely shift and brake. He gets to the top of the climb and switches from his climbing bike to a bike with disc brakes........

it will happen. You just wait.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

IF the UCI approves it.
Massive IF.
As I said, IF they are serious about their own rules for non complying wheels they cannot approve them.
In fact they should not have approved them for any non standard cross wheels.
But I am starting to think that approval for non-standard wheels comes down to $$$$$.

Your question about choice.
If I want to choose between standard road calipers vs discs I will choose between my road bike and my MTB.
I see absolutely no reason for discs on my roadie.


----------



## yeti fan (Feb 26, 2012)

having riden mtb for a long time i have seen the changes in braking evolve over the last 20 years... and i personally think disks are one of the best things to have happened to mtb

as far as road disks go im sure they will only get better over time and there weight will come down.....for now im sticking to my ultegra calipers


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

FTR said:


> I question whether the UCI will allow them given that a large part of their assessment for road wheels comes down to their safety in the event of a crash. Given that I have personally been at an MTB race where a lady lost part of her finger when it was caught in a rotor during a crash, I have to wonder how they can possibly allow them if they are at all serious about their own rules.


Where does this idea of sharp edges come from? I see it often, go out to the garage and run my finger around the edge of my mountain, cross and road bike disks - NADA. Have you ever actually seen a disk brake? – TF


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

TurboTurtle said:


> Where does this idea of sharp edges come from? I see it often, go out to the garage and run my finger around the edge of my mountain, cross and road bike disks - NADA. Have you ever actually seen a disk brake? – TF


Sure have and it would be sharper than any carbon rim I have seen too.
As I said I have also been at an event where one cut a girls finger off as a result of a crash.
That was at say 20km/h and not at the speeds that can easily be reached on a road bike.

Actually you could say that a stationary cut off wheel is not sharp too.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Kontact said:


> It has a carbon fork - I made a comparison to a stiff aluminum fork because carbon forks stiff enough to work with discs don't ride like what we think of as carbon road forks.




I'm not sure if you are making this stuff up out of speculation or you heard it some where, but all of the above are not true. First, Calfee modifies an Enve fork to run discs. It has been tested and it passes all tests. Now, I have not ridden one, but I would assume the ride characteristics of that fork were not altered due to the addition of a disc tab. There is no good reason to assume the fork would ride any harsher. Again, we are talking carbon here, it inherently eats up road vibrations. I have countless miles on a carbon disc fork on my CX bike with road tires and it rides fantastically. I would not say it rides any better than my steel fork, but just as smooth. So, to claim we "don't really know how it rides" is an illogical assumption.


----------



## Goodbarsix (Aug 5, 2009)

Keski said:


> Take this quote from Chris Horner from TA....
> 
> Horner Makes Triumphant Return To Racing At Tirreno-Adriatico | Cyclingnews.com
> 
> "In the final to the line I accidentally shifted from the big chain ring to the small one and *my hands were cramping up *so I couldn't get it back up to do the sprint, leaving me to just spin the cranks at 130rpms to the finish, all the while losing ground," said Horner with a laugh. "Even if I could've shifted back I wouldn't have won the sprint, but maybe I would have been up a little further."


Sounds like Chris could have benefited from electronic shifting!

Being a traditional steel frame lover, disc brakes just do not look right! 

They look just fine on my Trek 69er though!


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

FTR said:


> Sure have and it would be sharper than any carbon rim I have seen too.
> As I said I have also been at an event where one cut a girls finger off as a result of a crash.
> That was at say 20km/h and not at the speeds that can easily be reached on a road bike.
> 
> Actually you could say that a stationary cut off wheel is not sharp too.




The problem isn't that discs can cut off a finger, it's that wimmens shouldn't be racing. I mean just think of all the danger we are putting these ladies in. We give them exploding carbon fiber devices, full of sharp and pointy metallic devices, then we send them down an asphalt road wearing nothing but a skinsuit! It's a catastrophe waiting to happen. As a gentleman, I would like to recommend that in order to protect all the pretty lady fingers, we deny women the right to race altogether for their safety.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

FTR said:


> Sure have and it would be sharper than any carbon rim I have seen too.
> As I said I have also been at an event where one cut a girls finger off as a result of a crash.
> That was at say 20km/h and not at the speeds that can easily be reached on a road bike.
> 
> Actually you could say that a stationary cut off wheel is not sharp too.


So you are saying a disc brake was the cause of her finger loss, but no other part of a bicycle?

Some of the bladed spokes are pretty dang sharp and have a better chance of slicing a finger off than a disc brake. 

How about getting your finger stuck between the chain and big ring?
How about getting your leg sliced open by a chain tooth?
How about getting your finger stuck in a rear derailleur?
How about getting it stuck between a wheel and a brake caliper?

Just to name a few situations that could happen...Heck, I about ripped my finger off in a road crash and it had nothing to do with the bike...it was the asphalt that did the job :idea:

All would be freak accidents...and all would do the job of slicing/ripping your finger off. Blame the disc all you want, but there are many more points on a bicycle that will do the job just as well or better than a disc...but you don't see it often because they are all freak accidents.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

For all those against discs on road bikes...some questions for you!

Why do you care? It seems to me if you don't like them...don't buy them. 

It's not as if the caliper option is at risk of disappearing any time soon and likely won't before you die...so why care?

Why try and dissuade others from riding them if that's what they want?

Why even comment on the looks of the bike if you are a retro-grouch? You won't like anything unless it's lugged steel!!!

The simple fact is they could be the greatest thing since sliced bread...but you wouldn't ride them because you care about aesthetics more than performance...which is fine if that's what you want. 

They may also make "Zero" difference in the performance of the bike, but I might still want them on the bike. 

The simple fact is everybody buys what they want and everybody has their own reason...if you don't like it, good for you, but why comment on a thread when you have no desire to purchase said product in the future and try and dissuade others from doing so based on your preferences?

Sounds like a bunch of grumpy old guys that hate progress and wish we could go back to "Pre" Computer days when things were simple and we didn't have to wear helmets because things were "Soooo" much safer, better, simple, elegant, etc. back then.

Ride what you like...if you don't like it, don't ride it...pretty simple concept eh?  :idea:


----------



## Goodbarsix (Aug 5, 2009)

Wookiebiker said:


> For all those against discs on road bikes...some questions for you!
> 
> Why do you care? It seems to me if you don't like them...don't buy them.
> 
> ...


Because if we all just agreed life would be boring.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Goodbarsix said:


> Because if we all just agreed life would be boring.


Who said anything about agreeing?

There are so many options out there nobody has to agree about anything and still buy what they like/want without trying to dissuade others from making purchases or hinder development because they don't like it.

I don't go around commenting on lugged steel bike threads trying to tell people it's dead technology and to go buy carbon because it's the future...The reason I don't post in those threads is because I don't care and am not going to every purchase a lugged steel frame!

Some people seem to feel their opinion is the only opinion worth listening to and they have a thousand reasons why they are right...even though 999 of those are wrong! They post in every thread and make sure they are heard...I guess it's a popularity contest (in which case they should be out riding instead of posting :thumbsup

I have posted in this thread...not because I'm ever going to purchase a Colnago (their geometry doesn't work for me)...but because I'm all for disc brakes on road bikes, having had them on a road bike before. I also live in the Pacific Northwest where developments like this are an "AWESOME" thing due to the amount of rain we get here in the winter/spring. I love the idea and look forward to further development and love to see a "Big Name" manufacturer come out with a high end, hydraulic disc equipped road bike that is designed to be raced, not just ridden!


----------



## bike981 (Sep 14, 2010)

MR_GRUMPY said:


> Disc brake road bikes, like the one pictured, will be big with the Fred crowd. They will fill the bike paths with their awesomeness.


"The Fred crowd", of which I am a member, by and large use whatever components the manufacturer installs on the bike we buy from the LBS. Not many Freds bother changing components unless something breaks. So if the MUTs are filled with Freds on disc-braked bikes, it's because that's what Trek/Specialized/Giant/etc. decided to use, not because we Freds willingly decided we wanted them for their awesomeness.




Lotophage said:


> They sold you on STI levers, even though they were and still are heavier than downtube shifters, they sold you on so many other "not really an improvement" improvements that made you buy a new frame.


I disagree about STI levers; they *are* awesome compared to downtube shifters, heavier or not. And I say that having recently switched from a downtube shifter equiped bike to one with STI levers.


----------



## Gimme Shoulder (Feb 10, 2004)

Wookiebiker said:


> .....if you don't like them...don't buy them. ......if you don't like it, don't ride it...pretty simple concept eh?


Of course. Oldest blow-offs in the book. The OP invited "members to post images and discuss the topic of the future of road bike disc brakes....". Seems like that's what's happen'n. I, for one, like the "look" of the disc brake. High tech and machine looking. I just don't think they're necessary in 99% of applications.


----------



## tigoat (Jun 6, 2006)

Wookiebiker said:


> For all those against discs on road bikes...some questions for you!
> 
> Why do you care? It seems to me if you don't like them...don't buy them.
> 
> ...


Oh I so agree with your note above. I bet that these retro-grouch grumpy old guys like high tech stuff too like using integrated shifters, expensive wheels, Super Record componentry, etc. and the list goes on. The fact that big players like Shimano, SRAM, Colnago and others are coming out with disc brakes means they will be a reality whether any of these guys like it or not.


----------



## tigoat (Jun 6, 2006)

bike981 said:


> "The Fred crowd", of which I am a member, by and large use whatever components the manufacturer installs on the bike we buy from the LBS. Not many Freds bother changing components unless something breaks. So if the MUTs are filled with Freds on disc-braked bikes, it's because that's what Trek/Specialized/Giant/etc. decided to use, not because we Freds willingly decided we wanted them for their awesomeness.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well I guess that I will have to join the Fred club too. Like others here, I have mulitple bikes, and a couple of my "fast" road bikes have full Record groupy and of course with Record rim brakes, and you know what, I am in the process of digging these road bikes so I can replace them with new ones with disc brakes. It is an expensive process but eventually I will get there. It sounds like some of these disc brake haters are insecure because they are fearing to replace their bikes and expensive wheels should dics brakes come on board. All I will say is doing whatever foats your boat. :mad2:


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

tigoat said:


> Well I guess that I will have to join the Fred club too. Like others here, I have mulitple bikes, and a couple of my "fast" road bikes have full Record groupy and of course with Record rim brakes, and you know what, I am in the process of digging these road bikes so I can replace them with new ones with disc brakes. It is an expensive process but eventually I will get there. It sounds like some of these disc brake haters are insecure because *they are fearing to replace their bikes and expensive wheels should dics brakes come on board.* All I will say is doing whatever foats your boat. :mad2:


Or we're not a bunch of lemmings that go out and buy whatever the market tells us to.

But to each their own. I'll be perfectly happy watching them surge and then disappear, and I'll be the first to say "I told you so" when you complain about the lack of disc wheels/frames/ parts.


----------



## bikemech (Sep 15, 2004)

*So what about this thought?*

180 or so guys in the pelton riding with disk brakes.... 360 smoking hot disk rotors sharp as anything in said pelton... crash in the pelton... doesn't that sound like a terrible idea? All so they can ride carbon hoops? Innovation driven by marketing isn't always the best way to go. Just my two cents.


----------



## speedyg55 (Jun 11, 2009)

Whether or not you agree with the need for disc brakes on road bikes, it's going to happen. Why? Because it's a way to sell new products. The industry is realizing that new disc compatible frames and wheels will sell and they will push the idea on consumers. 

Again, whether or not discs on road bikes is necessary is irrelevant. It's all about making money.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Wookiebiker said:


> So you are saying a disc brake was the cause of her finger loss, but no other part of a bicycle?
> 
> Some of the bladed spokes are pretty dang sharp and have a better chance of slicing a finger off than a disc brake.
> 
> ...


Wookie
I agree with you a zillion% that all of these things are just as dangerous.
But the UCI has not singled any of those things out for its attention.
Frames and non-standard wheels have been.
As the rotor will be bolted to the wheel, I am going to say it is part of the wheel.
Non-standard wheels for the most part are deeper carbon wheels and carbon wheels are the ones that most people seem to think are the ones that will benefit most from disc brakes.
As I said, if they are serious about their own rules (which I wonder whether these are just a money grab) then they should not allow them IMO.

And yes I probably are considered a retro grouch as I am still running 10 speed cable shifting on a titanium bike.


----------



## Lotophage (Feb 19, 2011)

robdamanii said:


> Or we're not a bunch of lemmings that go out and buy whatever the market tells us to.
> 
> But to each their own. I'll be perfectly happy watching them surge and then disappear, and I'll be the first to say "I told you so" when you complain about the lack of disc wheels/frames/ parts.


As long as there are 29ers, there will not be a problem getting wheels. And as long as manufacturers just switch to 135 rear hubs for disc road bikes, no one will ever run out of parts.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Lotophage said:


> And as long as manufacturers just switch to 135 rear hubs for disc road bikes, no one will ever run out of parts.


Which could easily happen regardless of disc brakes with the proliferation of 11 spd drivetrains.


----------



## johnlh (Sep 12, 2008)

speedyg55 said:


> Whether or not you agree with the need for disc brakes on road bikes, it's going to happen. Why? Because it's a way to sell new products. The industry is realizing that new disc compatible frames and wheels will sell and they will push the idea on consumers.
> 
> Again, whether or not discs on road bikes is necessary is irrelevant. It's all about making money.


Spot on. I think this is what _might_ eventually bring disc brakes to the pro peloton. No way that I would want to race on the road with disk brakes, but technology can come a long way in just a few years.


----------



## laffeaux (Dec 12, 2001)

Wookiebiker said:


> For all those against discs on road bikes...some questions for you!
> 
> Why do you care? It seems to me if you don't like them...don't buy them.


I love the disc brakes on my mountain bike. I've had several different brakes over the past 8-9 years. While I think they have good applications for some bikes (touring, tandems, CX, commuting, etc), I don't see them being particularly valuable on a road (racing) bike.

Pros:
- If a rider breaks a spoke, they'll be more likely to be able to limp home without having to spend as much time using their spoke tool.
- On a few incredibly tight twisty or rough roads riders will appreciate them.

Cons:
- Wheels (particularly the rear) are harder to mount in the frame. For most of us this is a non-issue, but a pro rider losing 5-10 extra seconds trying to get a disc aligned properly is a big deal.
- Mechanical discs require a lot of adjustments to keep them adjusted properly - more so than the current road calipers and much more than hydraulic discs. 
- Pad replacement is much more expensive ($25 per wheel) than current pad replacement, adding to the recurring cost of bike maintenance. (I burn through disc pads on my mountain bike much more quickly than I ever did with linear pull or canti pads.)
- IMO, modulation on mechanical discs is inferior to the current road caliper. (I know others don't feel this way.) Hydraulic does improve modulation a lot over mechanical systems - although I can't say that I've ever had much of an issue with modulation on a road caliper.

I think it's great that companies are exploring what's possible. And I think that in some applications discs currently make sense. However, for general road use, right now it seems like people are getting excited about spending money on something that offers little improved performance. Once hydraulic systems are available I think that they will grow rapidly in popularity with CX and touring crowd because they make sense - and maybe even on the super rough spring Classics courses for the pros. On a typical racing bike, I still see them being a solution that offers added costs without adding a lot of value. But for those who "need" them I really hope that they become available.


----------



## PRB (Jun 15, 2002)

speedyg55 said:


> Whether or not you agree with the need for disc brakes on road bikes, it's going to happen. Why? Because it's a way to sell new products. The industry is realizing that new disc compatible frames and wheels will sell and they will push the idea on consumers.
> 
> Again, whether or not discs on road bikes is necessary is irrelevant. It's all about making money.


And there you have it. Whether you think discs are the greatest idea in years or whether you think they're a solution looking for a problem (as I do), the fact that manufacturers will be able to sell a bunch of new parts is the real reason behind it all. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves. 

Actually, it's probably not a bad thing. When everyone starts to buy new frames/brakes a lot of older, nicer stuff will hit the market and I'll be waiting to scoop it up. Those of you ready to replace your Deltas with discs can just go ahead and PM me now, I have cash in hand.


----------



## dinosaurs (Nov 29, 2011)

With hydraulic disc brakes and Di2/EPS already out there, how long before we get ABS as an option?


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Wookiebiker said:


> For all those against discs on road bikes...some questions for you!
> 
> Why do you care? It seems to me if you don't like them...don't buy them.
> 
> ...


It is worth discussing because a well informed consumer votes with their dollars right along with the uninformed consumer. If there are downsides, people should know about them before they read "discs are better" and buy an expensive bicycle that won't meet their expectations outside of braking ability.

Plenty of stuff changes very quickly in cycling, and talking about calipers being around forever sounds like someone who hasn't tried to replace a 1" carbon fork or buy a frame for down tube shifters very recently.

Ultimately, consumers are going to decide if disc road race bicycles are useful, like STI, or stupid, like Dura Ace AX oversized pedal spindles. The expectation that Dura Ace, Red and Record are going to be offered in a dozen flavors of brakes is not in line with history or reality. So if we are the ones who influence the compromises the component makers turn into standards, it's kinda silly to act like it shouldn't be topic of discussion.

The debate isn't about whether people should ride disc road bikes - lot's of people already do. The real debate is whether discs should replace calipers, because frame makers and group manufactures aren't going to offer two standards for more than a season or two on their competitive offerings.


----------



## solospeedster (Mar 6, 2012)

*WOW this is fantastic I am really impressed with the member insight on this topic.
*
I am a mechanical design engineer and I freelance in the cycling industry.

I agree that if you build it they will buy it, especially when it comes to items like 
brakes and wheels. I will say based on the data I have been privy to, road disc
brakes is a tsunami brewing in open waters. When frame manufactures push it 
the game is over, Look what happened with the 29er craze.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Kontact said:


> It is worth discussing because a well informed consumer votes with their dollars right along with the uninformed consumer. If there are downsides, people should know about them before they read "discs are better" and buy an expensive bicycle that won't meet their expectations outside of braking ability.


This I agree with...other than the fact there are 3-4 threads already started, that are exceedingly long, that have everybody saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over....

As for the rest of what you had to write...Some faded, some is outdated...but most you can still find if you look. 

BTW...I never said manufacturers would offer two models of the same bike, one disc one caliper as Colnago is doing. I just stated that caliper braked bikes will be around for quite a while...likely as long as they are making bikes...and there is always the custom market.

However...at this point, there isn't much to argue until people actually start looking to "Purchase" the bikes. When that time comes, then we can say whether the discs add or detract from the bikes performance, because at this time...the reality is nobody really has a clue unless they have ridden road bikes with discs (of which I have...a custom Curtlo).

What we do know for sure...The arguments stated by the detractors are the same ones laid out by those not wanting them on MTB's in the past.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Wookiebiker said:


> This I agree with...other than the fact there are 3-4 threads already started, that are exceedingly long, that have everybody saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over....
> 
> As for the rest of what you had to write...Some faded, some is outdated...but most you can still find if you look.
> 
> ...


And we've tested Vologi's in the shop, and found them lacking. 

Road bikes are the seemingly simplest bicycles, but the most nuanced. People will pay $8000 more for one 1100 gram carbon frame over another 1100 gram frame, because they fully believe that bicycle frames and forks have properties that go beyond fork rake and paint color. Those expensive nuances don't go out the window the moment someone decides that a different kind of brake might be fun.

The current state of affairs for road brakes, especially with carbon wheels, is a little bit lacking. But the jump from one problem to a different set of problems by going to discs shows binary thinking. Road bikes function best with rim brakes for a number of reasons, so developing better rim/brake interfaces makes more sense than applying a mountain bike solution to a road bike problem. That sort of thinking is why the first suggestion everyone makes when the stiff fork thing is brought up is to go to fat tires. But a bike with a super rigid fork and fat tires is no longer a road racing bike, it is another kind of bike that already exists, and doesn't need to be defended (Rando, cross, adventure, backroads, 29er, commuter, etc.)

Discs have a weight penalty 'budget' that can be spent lots of different ways. All someone has to do is build a rim/brake combination that increases leverage and modulation to disc levels while coming in below disc wheel/brake/fork weight and the whole idea of completely redesigning road bikes to accomodate disc brakes starts to look silly. I would keep an eye on rim hydraulic brakes, and maybe some of the titaniuml/carbon weaves for elegant solutions to the problem.


----------



## Gimme Shoulder (Feb 10, 2004)

Nicely explained.

In the end, I suppose it will be the vigor with which the cycling industry marketing machine pushes this, that will determine the future of it. Obviously there is already some buy-in. Upcoming trade shows might be interesting.


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

FTR said:


> Wookie
> I agree with you a zillion% that all of these things are just as dangerous.
> But the UCI has not singled any of those things out for its attention.
> Frames and non-standard wheels have been.
> ...


In other words sharp disk= straw man. - TF


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Kontact said:


> And we've tested Vologi's in the shop, and found them lacking.
> .


You're claiming that you tested some BB7's IN THE SHOP and you found them "lacking?"




Kontact said:


> Road bikes function best with rim brakes for a number of reasons,


Name them.



Kontact said:


> That sort of thinking is why the first suggestion everyone makes when the stiff fork thing is brought up is to go to fat tires. But a bike with a super rigid fork and fat tires is no longer a road racing bike, it is another kind of bike that already exists, and doesn't need to be defended (Rando, cross, adventure, backroads, 29er, commuter, etc.).


You're the only person even remotely suggesting a "stiff fork" issue. Of all the lenghty threads revolving around disc brakes, you're the only one claiming this. "Everyone" is not making this claim or is concerned.




Kontact said:


> Discs have a weight penalty 'budget' that can be spent lots of different ways. All someone has to do is build a rim/brake combination that increases leverage and modulation to disc levels while coming in below disc wheel/brake/fork weight and the whole idea of completely redesigning road bikes to accomodate disc brakes starts to look silly. I would keep an eye on rim hydraulic brakes, and maybe some of the titaniuml/carbon weaves for elegant solutions to the problem.


Is that all, huh?


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Kontact said:


> Road bikes are the seemingly simplest bicycles, but the most nuanced. People will pay $8000 more for one 1100 gram carbon frame over another 1100 gram frame, because they fully believe that bicycle frames and forks have properties that go beyond fork rake and paint color. Those expensive nuances don't go out the window the moment someone decides that a different kind of brake might be fun.


Nuanced is not what I would call it...perception is a better word. If you take two exact frames and slap Scattante on one and Piranello on the other...people will pay 4x's the cost (or more) for the Piranello even though they are the "EXACT" same frame.

It has nothing to do with nuance and everything to do with branding.

As for your other points...I'll wait for your responses to 88Rex.

One addition...people seem concerned about weight...though MTB's became lighter after discs were introduced. With that said there will be a few bumps along the way as with all technologies.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

88 rex said:


> You're claiming that you tested some BB7's IN THE SHOP and you found them "lacking?"
> 
> 
> Name them.
> ...


1. BB7s are brakes. Vologi is a frame making company. The bikes had some cornering issues, apparently due to the shock absorbing frame design.

2. Fork flexibility, heat dissipation on very long and fast descents, weight and front wheel aerodynamics. Rim size braking surfaces deal with heat better than little rotors do, and have more leverage on the wheel. Also, you can't retrofit a disc to a non-disc wheel or fork.

3. I'm certainly not the "only person" concerned about fork design. The industry article on the subject mentions the same. I think it was the Shimano rep. I'm just the first person you've noticed.

4. "Huh"?


----------



## Lotophage (Feb 19, 2011)

I think it's funny watching people get mad about components that affect them.

I love quill stems. I think they're more adjustable and if the idiot who owned the bike before me had a short quill, it doesn't mean I'm stuck at that height forever- I don't have to buy a whole new fork, I just get a longer quill. 

People think I'm old fashioned for loving quills- "they're just not as good as threadless", etc.

Same with brakes. There is every reason in the world for manufacturers to push them- they require a new frame, they require new wheels... anything that can make your entire stock of old parts obsolete overnight is a good thing to a manufacturer. And, going to a 135 rear hub means they only have to make one rear hub design- less parts to make=more money. 

So, figure it's a foregone conclusion. Bike mags will soon be touting the increased performance, explaining away any gains in weight by saying it's low and it's not rotating mass and really, what's a couple ounces? And there will be articles about how brakes are about the only part on the bike that hasn't been completely redesigned in 100 years.. _"I mean, those calipers aren't much different than the ones your grandfather used!" _And the UCI will cave and racers will race on whatever the manufacturers give them and someone will win a mountain stage with discs and that's all she wrote.

And then, you will all know what it is to be called a retro grouch for simply preferring a system that wasn't broken and didn't need replacement.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Here's what I'm thinking. There will be a lot of dudes who will buy into the hype (initially) and run out and get the latest disc-equiped bike, and in their task, they are going to have to sell their latest last year rim-equiped brake bike.

We could be entering a sweet time for awesome deals on used bike on fleabay and craigslist. This period will probably be sweetest in the first year when the disc mania will be strongest and when actual results/review about whether rim-brake or disc-brake bike would be best for the road. I will be keeping a keen eye open looking to score a deal.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Kontact said:


> And we've tested Vologi's in the shop, and found them lacking.
> 
> Road bikes are the seemingly simplest bicycles, but the most nuanced. People will pay $8000 more for one 1100 gram carbon frame over another 1100 gram frame, because they fully believe that bicycle frames and forks have properties that go beyond fork rake and paint color. Those expensive nuances don't go out the window the moment someone decides that a different kind of brake might be fun.
> 
> ...


Nicely put. If someone comes up with a better process to integrate a metallic braking surface onto a carbon rim and allow braking to feel like an aluminum rim. That should get the "carbon wheel has no braking at all" to shut up. Now throw in hydralic rim brake, that should get the "cable operated brake has no modulation" to shut too. 

But we know they'll come up with other ideas to say disc equiped road bike is the newest awesomeness. But boy these folks who think disc will make them a fast descender is gonna look silly when I pass them on my old school rim brakes lol.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

The big impact will be in wheel and rim design. Carbon clinchers will especially benefit from not having to deal with heat and brake track issues. Additionally, no brake rub issues from wheel flex or frame flex.

And for cross there are major benefits around better all weather braking, wheel durability, and slightly out of true wheels not affecting your race. 

TT bikes may benefit as well if designed with them in mind.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

solospeedster said:


> *WOW this is fantastic I am really impressed with the member insight on this topic.
> *
> I am a mechanical design engineer and I freelance in the cycling industry.
> 
> ...


Cycling is a fad, and lots of folks who will buy into hype. This is shown to happen in life, including marriage too. Don't like the old? dump it, get the new one.

But back to your mtb post. There are still PLENTY of 26er mtb full suspension bikes. Small folks, especially women, are best on a 26er bike. The reason why the 29er craze took off is because of several factors. For example, people who buy 29ers are considered as or looked upon as "roadie" at heart, most of these folks are looking for a bike to go fast on mostly low-technical tracks. They don't jump, huck, and prefer to roll over small drops, and avoid all big drops. Also, 29er right now is the HOTTEST and most profitable segment of the MTB industry right now, and everyone from manufacturer to the local bikeshop is milking this thing before it goes away.

But in case you haven't noticed, the 29er craze will soon be replaced by the "69er" trend. This is the next tsunami! Who would have thought that a roadie wheel would be a craze on mtb wheel? But when all is said and one, my 26er full suspension will still be here years from now while the 69er folks will be chasing the next craze. I'm hearing hydraulic shifting might be the next craze! Hehe on and on and on....


----------



## Lotophage (Feb 19, 2011)

aclinjury said:


> Cycling is a fad, and lots of folks who will buy into hype. This is shown to happen in life, including marriage too. Don't like the old? dump it, get the new one.
> 
> But back to your mtb post. There are still PLENTY of 26er mtb full suspension bikes. Small folks, especially women, are best on a 26er bike. The reason why the 29er craze took off is because of several factors. For example, people who buy 29ers are considered as or looked upon as "roadie" at heart, most of these folks are looking for a bike to go fast on mostly low-technical tracks. They don't jump, huck, and prefer to roll over small drops, and avoid all big drops. Also, 29er right now is the HOTTEST and most profitable segment of the MTB industry right now, and everyone from manufacturer to the local bikeshop is milking this thing before it goes away.
> 
> But in case you haven't noticed, the 29er craze will soon be replaced by the "69er" trend. This is the next tsunami! Who would have thought that a roadie wheel would be a craze on mtb wheel? But when all is said and one, my 26er full suspension will still be here years from now while the 69er folks will be chasing the next craze. I'm hearing hydraulic shifting might be the next craze! Hehe on and on and on....


Nah, 26" MTTBs will be replaced by fatbikes. Who needs a suspension when you can just roll over anything?

Cross country racers will go to 29ers, fatbikes will take over everything else and all your 135 spaced wheels will have to be replaced with 170 spaced hubs. 

Just kidding. Sort of. If trek ever makes a fatbike, regular 26" mtbs are doomed.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Kontact said:


> 1. BB7s are brakes. Vologi is a frame making company. The bikes had some cornering issues, apparently due to the shock absorbing frame design.
> 
> 2. Fork flexibility, heat dissipation on very long and fast descents, weight and front wheel aerodynamics. Rim size braking surfaces deal with heat better than little rotors do, and have more leverage on the wheel. Also, you can't retrofit a disc to a non-disc wheel or fork.
> 
> ...



1) Yea, brakes, the whole premise of this thread. I'm not concerned with the Volagi. When you say the Volagi was underwheling I assumed you meant the brakes, not the whole bike. That's quite a bit different. 

2) Manufacturers can tune forks to do all kinds of thing. No issue here. Also, Calfee does modify a stock Enve road fork, so there are some exceptions. 

3) I couldn't find the article.

4) I think your whole premise that "all you have to do is change the lever length/pivot point/ hydraulics/etc" goes counter to what others in the anti-disc crowd have been arguing. You sound like you think it'll be easy to add stopping power to rim brakes. Most anti-disc brake folks think discs will have TOO MUCH stopping power. You're advocating something new and different. Discs potentially already have the ability to modulate better, be consistant, and have ample power. You basically want your caliper brakes to do what disc brakes do. 

I have no issue with calipers or cantis, where as the anti-disc crowd somehow fears some kind of forced revolution in which their bikes will be stolen from them. Lotophage likes quill stems, good for him. I don't want to steal his quill or forks. This "anti-disc" phenomenon is just weird. I don't like carbon bikes, but I don't advocate their uselessness. I don't trump around proclaiming that steel is reel, and plastic bikes suck. 

AND, Robdamanii.........grow up. Don't sit on the sidelines and spread your negative rep, especially in a conversation you aren't even involved in. This negative rep thing is freaking childish. If you don't agree or don't like my opinion, fine, click on another thread. This whole rep system should eliminate the neg rep feature altogether.


----------



## MotoGreg (Feb 26, 2007)

I'm heavier than the typical cyclist and in MTB I've broken some some rims (pre disc days) and I could never find cantis or vee-brakes strong enough. I always suffered with severely fading brakes on longer descents. Disc brakes were a revelation for me, they are plenty strong enough and even offer better modulation than rim brakes. As a bonus, rims got stronger and lighter since their design wasn't compromised by designing around a braking surface. Since switching to disc I've got better brakes, lighter wheels, no more broken rims, and no complaints what so ever. Looking forward to the evolution of brakes on road bikes as well since the braking on my carbon rims feels stone age in comparison to the rest of the state of the art performance of the bike.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

88 rex said:


> 1) Yea, brakes, the whole premise of this thread. I'm not concerned with the Volagi. When you say the Volagi was underwheling I assumed you meant the brakes, not the whole bike. That's quite a bit different.
> 
> 2) Manufacturers can tune forks to do all kinds of thing. No issue here. Also, Calfee does modify a stock Enve road fork, so there are some exceptions.
> 
> ...


The premise of this thread is whether disc brakes, which mount on the end of the fork, are appropriate on racing bikes that are designed to ride on 23c high pressure tires. We already know that discs work well for certain things, but disc racing bicycles are still a big question mark.

The only dedicated disc racing type bike I know of is Vologi, and when my co-workers tested them they noted handling problems because of a very flexible front end. If the choice is an excessively stiff ride, poor cornering or a caliper, what would you race on?

There are many disc forks available, but none of them ride like a regular road fork. They can't, because regular carbon road forks break if you simply add disc mounts to them. The braking forces stress the fork in ways a rim brake does not, and you currently have to choose between a nice riding caliper fork or a stiff disc fork. There is no free lunch. Volagi seems to be attempting to circumvent this issue by building flex into the frame design, and that's what my second paragraph was about.


The "anti disc" crowd has three points:
The extensive modification to road bikes necessary for discs is unnecessary. There are other bikes if you want to ride in mud and rain.
The modification of road bikes for discs will decrease the finer ride features of road bikes and forks, and is undiserable.
Discs require heavier and less aero forks, brakes and wheels. This makes the bikes "slower", which is the opposite of what race bikes are built for.

I think cross/adventure/touring bikes with huge rotors and 30c road tires might be perfect for many riders. But race bikes are necessarily not for doing everything, and that's why they are limited in tires size, the ability to take racks, etc. They are finely tuned bicycles for the explicit purpose of going fast on pavement. The mods for discs may not serve that goal. So I mentioned other ways of addressing the pro-disc people's complaints that wouldn't leave the rest of us out.

You'll just have to ignore Rob. He's neg repped me something like 5 or 6 times. You can see the big impact that has.


----------



## Lotophage (Feb 19, 2011)

Kontact said:


> The premise of this thread is whether disc brakes, which mount on the end of the fork, are appropriate on racing bikes that are designed to ride on 23c high pressure tires. We already know that discs work well for certain things, but disc racing bicycles are still a big question mark...
> (edit)
> I think cross/adventure/touring bikes with huge rotors and 30c road tires might be perfect for many riders. But race bikes are necessarily not for doing everything, and that's why they are limited in tires size, the ability to take racks, etc. They are finely tuned bicycles for the explicit purpose of going fast on pavement. The mods for discs may not serve that goal. So I mentioned other ways of addressing the pro-disc people's complaints that wouldn't leave the rest of us out.
> 
> You'll just have to ignore Rob. He's neg repped me something like 5 or 6 times. You can see the big impact that has.


Yer making a distinction that most people don't actually see. I'm seeing "adventure" bike features appearing on more and more road bikes. Features that 30 years ago, were pretty standard on any road bike- clearance for larger tires, ability to get more upright, etc.

For your average consumer- call them a fred, call them whatever you want, bikes are becoming less specialized. A down economy and no huge prospects for it returning to it's pre-crash heights means that having a bike for every specific kind of weather and terrain is unlikely. Folks want one bike that will do it all. 

My guess is that in 5 years, you won't be able to buy a bike with rim brakes. 

It'll be just like STI and threadless stems, 1 1/8 steerers, tapered steerers, carbon and everything else.

Just resign yourself to fate on this one. My guess is that the full-court press from manufacturers is gonna be spectacular.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Lotophage said:


> Yer making a distinction that most people don't actually see. I'm seeing "adventure" bike features appearing on more and more road bikes. Features that 30 years ago, were pretty standard on any road bike- clearance for larger tires, ability to get more upright, etc.
> 
> For your average consumer- call them a fred, call them whatever you want, bikes are becoming less specialized. A down economy and no huge prospects for it returning to it's pre-crash heights means that having a bike for every specific kind of weather and terrain is unlikely. Folks want one bike that will do it all.
> 
> ...


I don't agree at all. When people come in to buy a road racing bike they ask performance questions and want to know about the component group on the bike. SRAM Force doesn't have cantis, discs or long reach brake options - those have never been part of racing group offerings. While multiuse bikes are getting some press lately, they don't sell in numbers even remotely approaching race type bikes. Probably less than 1%.

But hydraulic rim brakes are being seen on more TT racing bikes, and that might be a hint.


----------



## Lotophage (Feb 19, 2011)

Kontact said:


> I don't agree at all. When people come in to buy a road racing bike they ask performance questions and want to know about the component group on the bike. SRAM Force doesn't have cantis, discs or long reach brake options - those have never been part of racing group offerings. While multiuse bikes are getting some press lately, they don't sell in numbers even remotely approaching race type bikes. Probably less than 1%.
> 
> But hydraulic rim brakes are being seen on more TT racing bikes, and that might be a hint.


Racers didn't like indexing, either...

And who am I to argue the merits of disc brakes? I had a bike built around mafac racers.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Kontact said:


> The only dedicated disc racing type bike I know of is Vologi, and when my co-workers tested them they noted handling problems because of a very flexible front end. If the choice is an excessively stiff ride, poor cornering or a caliper, what would you race on?



Curious on why you think the Volagi is any way a race bike by design? There is nothing "racy" about it. It's a long distance comfort bike. A flexy front end would be a design issue. I mean afterall, if disc forks are super stiff and burly like you claim, then wouldn't the Volagi be overly built on the front end? It's just not adding up.

Now the Colnago in question....That's a race bike! It will be curious to see a final weight on that thing. It's also a great idea, IMO, to include the caliper mounting points. It makes it more marketable, or it gives folks options for some kind of "mullet" set-ups (Disc up front/ super light caliper in the rear).


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Lotophage said:


> And who am I to argue the merits of disc brakes? I had a bike built around mafac racers.





This thing sounds interesting!


----------



## Scott in MD (Jun 24, 2008)

Risk = severity x probability. 

I do not have accurate access to all information, so I have to make the decision on my experience. For me, the severity and probability of boiling brake fluid (here in dry, sunny, hot Arizona) outweighs all other considerations. I love my discs on my trail bike. I'd give up full (rear) suspension .... and maybe even front suspension before I have up discs (hmmm have to think about front suspension) .... 

.... But I would not put hydraulic discs on my road racer right now for any reason, especially better modulation. 

( and neither will Trek, Spesh, Cannondale or any other mainstream road racing bike manufacturer.)


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

88 rex said:


> Curious on why you think the Volagi is any way a race bike by design? There is nothing "racy" about it. It's a long distance comfort bike. A flexy front end would be a design issue. I mean afterall, if disc forks are super stiff and burly like you claim, then wouldn't the Volagi be overly built on the front end? It's just not adding up.
> 
> Now the Colnago in question....That's a race bike! It will be curious to see a final weight on that thing. It's also a great idea, IMO, to include the caliper mounting points. It makes it more marketable, or it gives folks options for some kind of "mullet" set-ups (Disc up front/ super light caliper in the rear).


Sub 100cm wheelbase, 57mm of trail, carbon frame and fork with no rack eyelets and Dura Ace? It might be more of an endurance bike, but the Volagis are as racy as most any Lemond bike racing ever was. They are certainly not cross or rando bikes.

I think that Volagi is attempting to soften the front end of the frame up to make up for the overly stiff fork blades and crown. It is either that, or these former Specialized guys suddenly don't know how to make a bike frame.

For now, the Volagi is the only non-Frankenstein racy road bike you can buy. The C59 is a theory, not a bike.


----------



## Lotophage (Feb 19, 2011)

88 rex said:


> This thing sounds interesting!


It's pretty awesome. 

If you want to talk lightweight brakes, there's little in the world that rivals mafac racers post-mounted to the frame- excellent stopping power AND modulation AND $50 on ebay.


----------



## fiataccompli (Jul 27, 2008)

meh! I've been running 622mm disc brakes for years.


----------



## WTFcyclist (Jan 17, 2012)

Disc brake road bike? No, thanks, I don't buy it. I will get more cyclocross disc frame or bike.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Kontact said:


> Sub 100cm wheelbase, 57mm of trail, carbon frame and fork with no rack eyelets and Dura Ace? It might be more of an endurance bike, but the Volagis are as racy as most any Lemond bike racing ever was. They are certainly not cross or rando bikes.
> 
> I think that Volagi is attempting to soften the front end of the frame up to make up for the overly stiff fork blades and crown. It is either that, or these former Specialized guys suddenly don't know how to make a bike frame.
> 
> For now, the Volagi is the only non-Frankenstein racy road bike you can buy. The C59 is a theory, not a bike.



If you work in a bike shop then how can you not realize a whole section of bikes designed around comfort and endurance yet still sporty? The Volagi is NOT a race bike. It is very clear on their web page that it was designed as an every day century and double century bike. By your definition of race bike, you would consider the Synapse a race bike. When I think race bike, I'm thinking crits and road races. Something along the lines of a CAAD10 or Super Six. Shorter headtubes, aggressive geometry and aggressive positioning. The Volagi is not that bike, and that's not what it was designed to do. Being a stiff sprint machine is not what it was designed for. 

Overly stiff fork blades? Have you seen the front ends on some of these latest wonder bikes? Talk about stiff, strong, and light! And hardly a complaint from anyone. My CX bike with road wheels, and carbon fork is very comfy. If there is anything noodly, it's the steel frame.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

88 rex said:


> If you work in a bike shop then how can you not realize a whole section of bikes designed around comfort and endurance yet still sporty? The Volagi is NOT a race bike. It is very clear on their web page that it was designed as an every day century and double century bike. By your definition of race bike, you would consider the Synapse a race bike. When I think race bike, I'm thinking crits and road races. Something along the lines of a CAAD10 or Super Six. Shorter headtubes, aggressive geometry and aggressive positioning. The Volagi is not that bike, and that's not what it was designed to do. Being a stiff sprint machine is not what it was designed for.
> 
> Overly stiff fork blades? Have you seen the front ends on some of these latest wonder bikes? Talk about stiff, strong, and light! And hardly a complaint from anyone. My CX bike with road wheels, and carbon fork is very comfy. If there is anything noodly, it's the steel frame.


Yes, I work in a bike shop, have a saddle line and have done some frame design over the past 21 years of bike industry work. So I don't understand why you think I'm an idiot.

A Synapse is as much of a race bike as many bikes have been. There is no single thing that defines a race bike, there are just things that exclude bikes from the definition. If you show me a light, quick handling bike with drop bars, that is pretty much what racers have always ridden, until the '80s crit bike boom. The only thing that makes a Synapse much different than a "race" bike is the ability to take larger tires. It is not as sporty as a CAAD10, but it isn't at all outside the range of what people consider a road race bike. Take a look at Merlin, Calfee and Lemond geometry charts and you'll start wondering if you know what you think you know about racing machines.

"Comfy" is pretty relative. But none of the "stiff, strong, and light!" forks you're talking about would work with a disc if that was the only modification. You might not be able to tell, but there is a difference between a really stiff fork and the ones that come on road bikes. All of them are much more compliant than a typical steel racing fork.


----------



## 4joseluis (Feb 17, 2012)

Was just at the Sacramento, CA hand built bike expo. Many examples of disk brakes...fluid ones will be on the way as soon as the weight issues dissipate. Japan in in major economic flux...could get some nice innovations out of them in the past. US entrepreneurs are quite impressive...little shops with their passion for biking fueling the way!


----------



## bernatv (Jul 30, 2011)

When disc brakes become standard, because brands need to sell new bikes, new components, even if we don't need it, we all will have disc brakes...


----------



## Bullvine (Sep 9, 2009)

Modulation, disk brakes, electronic shifting, but where's the gizmo that makes the pedals go round and round for you 

Just like my index brake/shift finger gets tired so do me legs.
Road biking sure would be more enjoyable if you didn't haft to pedal so dang much :mad2:

Carbon airbags on the hoods would also be a positive step forward :idea:


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Bullvine said:


> but where's the gizmo that makes the pedals go round and round for you


It's on Fabian Cancellara's bike


----------



## gordy748 (Feb 11, 2007)

There's a little elephant in the room that nobody's mentioned yet. More power from a disc might make it easier to brake, but it also makes it easier to lock up a front wheel when you panic.

And panic you do, regardless of how experienced you are. Going into a corner at 30 mph in a criterium is all well and good but when a rider spills in front of you, you lose focus on the corner and instead look at him/ her. Equally so for commuters, you're pedalling along and a car door opens in front of you, or Toto runs out onto the street. Suddenly you're on the brakes trying desperately to stop.

Here is where more power becomes a problem. When I learned to ride a motorbike, I was taught to beware of grabbing the front brake, because as soon as the front locks up, you've crashed. And they're right... In panic situations you grab a little bit too much of the front, and on sport bikes with 320 mm rotors, if you don't know what you're doing then down you go.

The motorcycle industry has done a good job with ABS to cure the problem. But it adds a lot of weight. On a 500 pound bike that's acceptable. On a sub-20 pound bicycle, though, it's just not an option

Now I do believe that disc brakes are the future. It will allow manufacturers to make lighter and lighter frames (LOOK! A 482 gram frame that you must buy) that still pass the UCI weight limit. And it will allow carbon clinchers to become more mainstream (LOOK! Carbon wheels that you must buy). But putting something that's more powerful in the hands of people that don't know what they're doing is going to cause a lot of grief. When disc brakes first become popular, I don't doubt that there will be a lot of front ends washing out until riders (especially casual ones) learn how to use them.


----------



## rochocinco (Mar 24, 2012)

Gimme Shoulder said:


> The typical contemporary caliper brake is a elegant little mechanism - simple and effective. I don't see how a heavier, and relatively more complicated system, requiring a machined rotors and hydraulically actuated calipers is going to do a better job. I'm sure the industry marketing machine will do their best to promote it, though. But the pros have got to buy into it first, or the cycling community won't go there.


"elegant" is not the word I would use for something that destroys your rims.

I much prefer changing rotors than having to buy new rims/have wheels re-built.


----------



## rochocinco (Mar 24, 2012)

gordy748 said:


> There's a little elephant in the room that nobody's mentioned yet. More power from a disc might make it easier to brake, but it also makes it easier to lock up a front wheel when you panic.
> 
> And panic you do, regardless of how experienced you are. Going into a corner at 30 mph in a criterium is all well and good but when a rider spills in front of you, you lose focus on the corner and instead look at him/ her. Equally so for commuters, you're pedalling along and a car door opens in front of you, or Toto runs out onto the street. Suddenly you're on the brakes trying desperately to stop.
> 
> ...


If you slam on only your front caliper brakes, you're probably crashed too. Nobody should ever slam on only their front brake on anything unless you're trying to do a trick...obviously, I'm not saying anything new here. Locking is not that big a problem - you can modulate easily, and sometimes locking is what you need.

I've been running disc brakes on a hybrid bike for 7 years. It saved my bones at least once. An oncoming Suburban busted a U-turn right in front of me. The Suburban was too big to make the U turn in one attempt, so there was just this huge vehicle stopped perpendicular to traffic right in front of me, out of nowhere. I was probably going 20 MPH (downhill). I slammed on both brakes, tires skidded, back wheel popped to the right, and my hip came inches away from the corner of this A-hole's rear bumper (I had to swerve to the middle of the road since this guy took up the whole side of the street I was on). I didn't crash - nor did I fall. I was probably 200 lbs then, on 700c tires.

I think even with the cleanest pads + rims on a caliper system, I'd have broken some bones, or at least ripped some skin off as a result of the fall.

When I ride discs, I either
a) apply both brakes lightly (moderate to high speed)
b) alternate taps on front and back (slower speeds e.g. city)


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

rochocinco said:


> "elegant" is not the word I would use for something that destroys your rims.
> 
> I much prefer changing rotors than having to buy new rims/have wheels re-built.


How many rims have you "destroyed" with your rim brakes?

We service bikes by many long distance cyclists, including a RAAM winner. The number of wheels replaced from brake wear on the rims is tiny. 

Frames wear out, too. And 1500 mile 10 speed chains cost more than most alloy rims. 

This is not an issue.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Scott in MD said:


> .... But I would not put hydraulic discs on my road racer right now for any reason, especially better modulation.
> 
> ( and neither will Trek, Spesh, Cannondale or any other mainstream road racing bike manufacturer.)


The UCI turned down a request from a team (presumably Pro Tour) to enter disc equipped bikes. This indicates that one of the major manufacturers already have something ready to roll. If the SRAM stuff works, I would bet every piece of bike gear I own that the big brands will jump on board, along with Shimano answering with a competing product. Shimano is already expanding their mechaincal offerings and Formula has pirated the Di2 switch gear to offer their own hydraulic disc setup on Colnago's new rig.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

The UCI has bigger fish to fry.
Like sock height and re-assessing already approved TT saddles.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

rochocinco said:


> "elegant" is not the word I would use for something that destroys your rims.
> 
> I much prefer changing rotors than having to buy new rims/have wheels re-built.


My 1993 Casati with original Mavic rims has probably close to 20,000 miles on it (I've lost track of the milage though). Rims are still intact, although the rear rim is out of true now, and I can't seem to get it to perfect true.

Sadly, the bike also has been crashed and cracked the downtube (but since it's steel, I was able to get it welded with a plate).

My point? Chances are, you are more likely to damage the frame or ding or bent the wheels before you'll wear out the brake tract! It would take a LONG time (think decade) before the brake track would wear to the point of making a wheel un-usable. And furthermore, good used quality wheelsets can be had for cheap on a decade old bike.

The concern for wearing out the brake tract for an average cyclist should be last on the priority list of things to worry about for a bike. Personally, my number 1 worry is always crashing my bike and ending its life prematurely.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

FTR said:


> The UCI has bigger fish to fry.
> Like sock height and re-assessing already approved TT saddles.


Should be funny to see the new sock rules in action.


----------



## Social racer (Mar 23, 2012)

The bike looks amazing so many haters on this site if you like the idea go for it, if you don't then stick with what you know...

I love cycling as a sport but why do so many people judge you for getting something that YOU like or can afford???


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Social racer said:


> The bike looks amazing so many haters on this site if you like the idea go for it, if you don't then stick with what you know...
> 
> I love cycling as a sport but why do so many people judge you for getting something that YOU like or can afford???


What are you talking about? Who is "judging" people for their brake choice?

Are you trying to make this into something it is not?


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

fiataccompli said:


> meh! I've been running 622mm disc brakes for years.


Thank you.:thumbsup:


----------



## cochise (Mar 26, 2012)

Kontact said:


> This has been discussed often. The viability of disc road bikes is going to be based on whether race bikes can continue to have light weight, aerodynamics and a smooth ride with the addition of stouter wheels, stiffer forks and rotors capable of absorbing the heat from very long mountainous descents.
> 
> The C59 pictured has what are probably dangerously small rotors for use in the mountains, and no one knows what kind of ride it has.
> 
> This is obviously a prototype, with the wheels laced incorrectly.


I am new to building bikes, so I can't say much about the stouter wheels, but as far as rotors are concerned, the technology is out there for cars (I used to modify all of my cars... until I ran out of money and time). Other than venting (which they are obviously already doing), they have carbon-ceramic rotors that are build to withstand breaking from 200 mph along with heavy street-circuit track racing. Here's hoping they make it over to bikes!


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

cochise said:


> I am new to building bikes, so I can't say much about the stouter wheels, but as far as rotors are concerned, the technology is out there for cars (I used to modify all of my cars... until I ran out of money and time). Other than venting (which they are obviously already doing), they have carbon-ceramic rotors that are build to withstand breaking from 200 mph along with heavy street-circuit track racing. Here's hoping they make it over to bikes!


Cars also have front wheel drive, traction control and suspension. You can have all of that on a bike, it just won't be 16 pounds anymore.

I think some people believe that you can just add stuff to something very basic and it will only get better. But there is not such thing as a winter T-shirt, track shoes with ankle support for hiking, pocket machetes, deep draft kayaks or 10 ounce full face helmets. Most sporting goods are compromises between weight, function and features. Road bikes are about the leanest example of those compromises in the bike world, and making a rash of changes to them for one feature is a perilous path.


----------



## SlowSpokes (Feb 26, 2012)

Far too many cons vs pros in doing this. Just what we need to see. A bunch of cat 5 crashes with people getting rotor rash. :nono:


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Social racer said:


> The bike looks amazing so many haters on this site if you like the idea go for it, if you don't then stick with what you know...
> 
> I love cycling as a sport but why do so many people judge you for getting something that YOU like or can afford???


The person who refers to others as "haters," apparently as a way to attempt to shut down discussion, is the one who is judging others.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Kontact said:


> Road bikes are about the leanest example of those compromises in the bike world, and making a rash of changes to them for one feature is a perilous path.


Doom and Gloom!! Keep preaching it. Just a bunch of moreons those engineers are. 



SlowSpokes said:


> Far too many cons vs pros in doing this. Just what we need to see. A bunch of cat 5 crashes with people getting rotor rash. :nono:


Yep, when I hit that nice fluffy tarmac I'm always worried about those darn rotors. 



trailrunner68 said:


> The person who refers to others as "haters," apparently as a way to attempt to shut down discussion, is the one who is judging others.


Why is it apparent? Their is a distinct group that does not want to discuss the topic, nor do they have any interest in the topic. They bash the topic at every avenue. It's one thing to not be a fan of disc brakes, but the constant barage of nonsense against discs is rediculous. There's some fear that in the middle of the night the bike monster is going to sweep through everyone's garage and replace everyones bikes with disc brakes. Doom and gloom!


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

SlowSpokes said:


> Far too many cons vs pros in doing this. Just what we need to see. A bunch of cat 5 crashes with people getting rotor rash. :nono:


One time on my all-mountain bike, I crashed out on the steep with the bike landing on top of me and its front wheel pinning down on my elbow/arm. Front wheel had an 8" rotor. Luckily I was wearing a long sleeve and hardshell elbow-forearm protector. If not for the long sleeve and elbow protector, I was looking a piece of my arm being sliced or cooked. Yummie!!


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

88 rex said:


> Why is it apparent? Their is a distinct group that does not want to discuss the topic, nor do they have any interest in the topic.


What is apparent is that there's a distinct group that believe all that the marketing department has to say about the need for disc brakes.

The thing is, as has already been alluded to by someone, we are all already using disc brakes. Look at the operation of conventional brakes and it's easy to see.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

88 rex said:


> Why is it apparent? Their is a distinct group that does not want to discuss the topic,


Yup, the group that labels everyone who has a different opinion as haters.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

88 rex said:


> Doom and Gloom!! Keep preaching it. Just a bunch of moreons those engineers are.


The engineers appear to be pretty smart. That's why there aren't any actual road race type disc bikes. I'm on the side of the engineers.

Something more moronic would be insisting that something is perfectly easy to do, even though no one has yet to do it.


The owner of Clement tires was in the shop last week, and asked what we thought about road discs. We were all pretty much in agreement that the most fervent proponents don't seem to understand how large a thermal load mountain road descents create, and that making a nice fork that brakes at the tip is no picnic.

I'm certainly not alone in thinking what I do. Just a little out of familiar company on this board. But I am very happy to discuss it - I just have to put up with the "haters" telling me I'm being "doom and gloom" for not taking their point of view.


----------



## Mark Kelly (Oct 27, 2009)

My wife and I are planning to ride the east coast of Tasmania next summer.

On road bikes.

With disc brakes.

I'll let you know how it goes.


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

Kontact said:


> The engineers appear to be pretty smart. That's why there aren't any actual road race type disc bikes. I'm on the side of the engineers.
> 
> Something more moronic would be insisting that something is perfectly easy to do, even though no one has yet to do it.
> 
> ...


At the risk of starting another pissing contest/argument with you...no disrespect to your view, only trying to understand.

The fact that there aren't any road race type disc brakes cannot be an answer to the question of why disc brakes shouldn't be applied to road cycles. The very fact of the matter is that no company has thrown any amount of money at the application since pros are/weren't allowed to ride them. There's no money in it for them to make high end components if pros can't ride them for advertising. 

As to the question of whether or not fade will be a problem? I've only seen one article or any piece of writing online regarding brake fade on a road disc which is hardly a huge stream of evidence against discs on road...in addition, who says this was not user error, water/air in the lines, improper fluid for the application, improperly bed pads...etc? (I don't want to get into this on the article, we'll have our opinions on it...) If you want to do long high speed decents, it would be prudent not to use mineral oil and rather use a high performance brake fluid...even perhaps something for motorsports racing? There's absolutely no way that stuff will boil on a bicycle. There are many many options to reduce tempurature without a great introduction of weight. We can add heat sinks to the pads similar to shimano trail brakes. Use bimatal rotors. Use floating rotors with alu hats and fins to fan the swept area. Incorporate designs into the fork to make it more aero while at the same time directing air over the caliper...Just because heat my be an issue, does not mean it won't work. 

Regarding the forks not riding the same way. I'll go out on a limb and say there are many non-disc forks that many riders use here made of carbon/steel/aluminum and that one could potentially find a fork made out of each material that would satisfy the rider. You commented in another thread that there are many carbon forks about with disc tabs and they all suck because they're too stiff. I would ask, have you ridden them all? I would also ask, do you believe that these carbon disc forks are at the pinnicle of their design? Meaning, have they been engineered to the point that our technology can take them? I would argue no, they haven't, for the same reason that race disc brakes are not yet available. Why would someone put the R&D into a nice race disc fork if the brakes aren't even available? The simple answer is they wouldn't and as such, we do not have a well engineered disc fork for us to compare to our many available standard forks. 

I do not think what we have available is good. I do, on the other hand, think that there is a possibility that we may be able to engineer something that will work. I'm more of a glass half full kind of guy. IMO, it seems that many here are more glass half empy people, stating all the ways that discs should fail instead of figuring out how they could possibly get them to work. 

Just curious, and, not to offend you in any way, but do you really have that much experience with disc brakes, hydraulic, in high temp/demand conditions, or materials science, such that you can comment with such authority that what disc advocates want cannot be accomplished?


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

kalare said:


> At the risk of starting another pissing contest/argument with you...no disrespect to your view, only trying to understand.
> 
> The fact that there aren't any road race type disc brakes cannot be an answer to the question of why disc brakes shouldn't be applied to road cycles. The very fact of the matter is that no company has thrown any amount of money at the application since pros are/weren't allowed to ride them. There's no money in it for them to make high end components if pros can't ride them for advertising.
> 
> ...


I think there is an issue here that you might have missed: The rotors themselves will get so hot that the fade is a pad on disc problem, not a fluid problem. And several downhill MTB riders I know are pretty adamant that fade is a real concern at MTB speeds - switch backs in mountains (where I'm coming from) at road bike speeds will be worse.

The fork issue is simple - the fork has to be stiffer than a road fork is to handle hub braking torque. The need to resist torque happens in the same plane as the suspension effect of road forks, so you'll pardon my simple-mindedness in thinking that making a fork that flexes from bumps but not braking is going to be difficult, because they are pretty much the same thing.

You are right in thinking that if enough engineering where thrown at the problem, a solution could be found. But I'm saying the same thing - make a real effort to improve rim braking and whatever road bike braking criticisms could be dealt with in a way that doesn't involve re-engineering the whole bicycle.

My "issue" is simply that most of the proponents of discs don't even believe in brake fade or the importance of a nice riding fork, so they don't even think that building a road race bike with discs is a problem. But if it wasn't a problem, Volagi wouldn't be the only ones offering a product. The brakes exist, forks exist, frames are easy enough to modify. Anyone could build a disc road bike today. I wouldn't want to ride in down a mountain or on a century with 23c tires, though. The reason we only see prototypes and hear discussion is because the real engineers see similar problems to what I'm seeing, and don't have answers ready to sell.


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

Kontact said:


> I think there is an issue here that you might have missed: The rotors themselves will get so hot that the fade is a pad on disc problem, not a fluid problem. And several downhill MTB riders I know are pretty adamant that fade is a real concern at MTB speeds - switch backs in mountains (where I'm coming from) at road bike speeds will be worse.
> 
> The fork issue is simple - the fork has to be stiffer than a road fork is to handle hub braking torque. The need to resist torque happens in the same plane as the suspension effect of road forks, so you'll pardon my simple-mindedness in thinking that making a fork that flexes from bumps but not braking is going to be difficult, because they are pretty much the same thing.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the well written/thought out response! 

Rotors being too hot is an issue, however not so much as boiling fluid. The issue would be pads off gassing and or depositing on the rotors. This can be avoided simply by using different pads with different rotor materials. Rotors in motorsports routinely get red hot, however they still work with the correct pads so long as the fluids are still fluid. 

As far as forks go, I still maintain that the flex you're talking about isn't as important as some might think. If one were to ride both stiff and slightly less stiff carbon forks back to back I'm sure most wouldn't be able to tell the difference. This, as well as the fact that many people chose to ride forks of other materials tell the tale. Different strokes for different folks, some may not care if their forks are a tad stiffer. Also, to be fair, the torque induced by the brakes would not act in the same manner as any torque or force induced by bumps in the road, and meterial could be added to the fork in such a manner to take this into account. I am however in agreement that forks, in general, would need to get a bit stiffer.

Your last point I am in agreement with, to a degree. We don't have the high end disc capable components because there are some issues to be worked out, however these issues also require money, and only until recently has money been thrown in this direction. Believe me, if the engineers had a chance, they would be working on it, it's an engineers dream (me being one of them) to tinker and play with things to get them to work. Give it a chance, you may enjoy what happens, or not. In the end, I don't think you need to fear calipers going away, I don't see that happening at all...people will always want to be the lightest and calipers will bring them there. That said, disc is coming, I just don't think it's going to be what you think it is.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Kontact,

I've been following this thread and I have to give you A LOT of credit for having the patient to explain to all those who call you out as a doom and gloom kinda guy.

Disc brakes have been in use in the mtb world for what a decade now. So if disc is so great in the road racing (I'm talking about road racing, not gramp's commuter or Timmy's hybrid's), then why haven't the engineers figured this out by now? Maybe the engineers did all the pro- and con- analysis 10 years ago and figured out disc on a road racer just don't benefit much? and that perhaps it is the marketing department idea more than the engineers that are now today pushing disc. Hmmm.



Kontact said:


> I think there is an issue here that you might have missed: The rotors themselves will get so hot that the fade is a pad on disc problem, not a fluid problem. And several downhill MTB riders I know are pretty adamant that fade is a real concern at MTB speeds - switch backs in mountains (where I'm coming from) at road bike speeds will be worse.
> 
> The fork issue is simple - the fork has to be stiffer than a road fork is to handle hub braking torque. The need to resist torque happens in the same plane as the suspension effect of road forks, so you'll pardon my simple-mindedness in thinking that making a fork that flexes from bumps but not braking is going to be difficult, because they are pretty much the same thing.
> 
> ...


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

aclinjury said:


> Disc brakes have been in use in the mtb world for what a decade now. So if disc is so great in the road racing (I'm talking about road racing, not gramp's commuter or Timmy's hybrid's), then why haven't the engineers figured this out by now? Maybe the engineers did all the pro- and con- analysis 10 years ago and figured out disc on a road racer just don't benefit much? and that perhaps it is the marketing department idea more than the engineers that are now today pushing disc. Hmmm.


Discs have been on MTB for far longer than a decade (I can remember seeing them around maybe 20 yrs ago?), they took a very long time to catch on though (only in the last 8 yrs or so), as I believe they will for road sooner or later as well. 

This whole, "why haven't engineers designed it if it's possible" question is not a good argument however. Like I stated above, engineers can only design what there is a project for. Since UCI has never allowed disc in CX or road racing, there has been no marking and thus no reason for any disc projects to be given to them to engineer. Only recently has UCI lifted the ban on discs for CX and now more companies are giving them thought. It makes absolute horrible business sense to design a product before pros (the main marketing tool) are allowed to use it. 

As a side note, of course it's the marketing people that are pushing discs, they want something to sell. With no marketing, there is no development. If nobody is pushed into buying anything, then there's no point in making the product. This has absolutely no bearing on whether or not the product is good and/or an advancement in the particular segment it's being released. For example...SONY TV's. They are marketed quite well, this doesn't mean they are an inferior product to say...Vizio, just because there's a huge marketing department behind them.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

kalare said:


> Thanks for the well written/thought out response!
> 
> Rotors being too hot is an issue, however not so much as boiling fluid. The issue would be pads off gassing and or depositing on the rotors. This can be avoided simply by using different pads with different rotor materials. Rotors in motorsports routinely get red hot, however they still work with the correct pads so long as the fluids are still fluid.
> 
> ...



Here is the problem with Kontact's stance. The ONE article where somebody lost his brakes was apparently due to him boiling his fluid. Cable actuated disc brakes on the road have been around for awhile, heck they are the brake of choice for tandems. How often do you hear those guys complaining about overheating pads and rotors? Never. I have discs and have never overheated them. Never. They are cable actuated and I have never had an issue, even with weight weenie rotors. Purely anecdotal since I am but one statistic. I will agree with the potential to boil hydraulic fluid, but with cable.....I don't see pads being that big of an issue. Or at a minimum, pad material is an easy fix. 

Forks, They already exist. They are rare, but there are plenty of them out there to know that Kontact's worries can be put to rest. My carbon fork on my CX bike rides fine on the road. The irony of the "forks are stiff worry" is that he claims to have ridden a Volagi and claimed it was too noodly. Go figure. Better yet, he uses his best speculation to assume that Volagi overbuilt their fork and thus the headtube and frame were purposly designed weaker. Talk about a speculative nonsense. 

And to the arguement of "why haven't they been built already"..........because they are ILLEGAL in UCI races. Simple. What company is going to invest in race rigs that can't even be raced at the highest level. No one. Small niche companies like Volagi have tapped into long distance riding and just casual riders. There are already plenty of commuters with discs. Discs aren't super new to road bikes, it's just been given a shot of adrenaline with the UCI opening up discs to CX racing, and with companies asking the UCI to allow them in road racing. 


This really is simple. Making a bike with discs really is simple. This is not rocket science and it is not "perilous."


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

I meant to say hydraulic disc brake. Cable disc brake been in existence longer.

Does the UCI take inputs from the major manufacturers into considerations? Does this happen in cycling? I know in motoGP and Formula1 and pretty much all sanctioned motorsports, the sanctioning bodies work hand-in-hand with manufacturers. Maybe in the cycling world the sanctioning body and the manufacturers are in completely different universe? If that's the case, then why don't the manufacturers threaten to take their ball and go play elsewhere? (This sort of threat has been done in motorsports). I just don't believe it's all up to the UCI. UCI will cease to have power if manufacturers go play elsewhere, and judging by the hate for UCI around on every bike forum, I wonder why is the UCI still having so much power if they don't have the support of the major manufacturers??




kalare said:


> Discs have been on MTB for far longer than a decade (I can remember seeing them around maybe 20 yrs ago?), they took a very long time to catch on though (only in the last 8 yrs or so), as I believe they will for road sooner or later as well.
> 
> This whole, "why haven't engineers designed it if it's possible" question is not a good argument however. Like I stated above, engineers can only design what there is a project for. Since UCI has never allowed disc in CX or road racing, there has been no marking and thus no reason for any disc projects to be given to them to engineer. Only recently has UCI lifted the ban on discs for CX and now more companies are giving them thought. It makes absolute horrible business sense to design a product before pros (the main marketing tool) are allowed to use it.
> 
> As a side note, of course it's the marketing people that are pushing discs, they want something to sell. With no marketing, there is no development. If nobody is pushed into buying anything, then there's no point in making the product. This has absolutely no bearing on whether or not the product is good and/or an advancement in the particular segment it's being released. For example...SONY TV's. They are marketed quite well, this doesn't mean they are an inferior product to say...Vizio, just because there's a huge marketing department behind them.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

People who ride tandems and commuters don't go any where or do anything nearly as aggressive as a road racer, agree? Until it's tested on a road racer in some aggressive environment, it's not safe. The way testing and safety work is you test in the most extreme enivronment first, than say it's safe in lesser extreme environment. Not the other way around. And please don't tell me that you see plenty of the Jones & Janes on their tadems or Timmy's on his commuter taking 35-40 mph sweepers regularly down a mountain.

Now I have actually raced downhill and all-mountain, and I can tell you that pads do get glazed, at a MUCH slower speed (albeit more frequent braking). Does my experience count? or am I just another doom and gloom guy too?

Note: I'm not saying disc won't work on a road, but I'm saying that disc on that stupid Colnago C59 Disc every disc fanboy has been using as an example of disc... ain't gonna fly if you go over 40 mph. Of course if you're "slow" then ok maybe it'll work. But I'm ahead of myself. The Colnago is still vaporware, so maybe I shouldn't pick on it so much! 

Slap some 180/160mm front/rear rotors on that C59 biatch and then we'll talk.
Let's see some tests. Enough vaporware talks.



88 rex said:


> Here is the problem with Kontact's stance. The ONE article where somebody lost his brakes was apparently due to him boiling his fluid. Cable actuated disc brakes on the road have been around for awhile, heck they are the brake of choice for tandems. How often do you hear those guys complaining about overheating pads and rotors? Never. I have discs and have never overheated them. Never. They are cable actuated and I have never had an issue, even with weight weenie rotors. Purely anecdotal since I am but one statistic. I will agree with the potential to boil hydraulic fluid, but with cable.....I don't see pads being that big of an issue. Or at a minimum, pad material is an easy fix.
> 
> Forks, They already exist. They are rare, but there are plenty of them out there to know that Kontact's worries can be put to rest. My carbon fork on my CX bike rides fine on the road. The irony of the "forks are stiff worry" is that he claims to have ridden a Volagi and claimed it was too noodly. Go figure. Better yet, he uses his best speculation to assume that Volagi overbuilt their fork and thus the headtube and frame were purposly designed weaker. Talk about a speculative nonsense.
> 
> ...


----------



## Wildewinds (Mar 12, 2012)

Disc brakes are better. However, if you don't ride on hills, you probably won't need them. 

The whole "good enough" argument is silly if you think about it. A horse was good enough before they invented cars.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

88 rex said:


> Here is the problem with Kontact's stance. The ONE article where somebody lost his brakes was apparently due to him boiling his fluid. Cable actuated disc brakes on the road have been around for awhile, heck they are the brake of choice for tandems. How often do you hear those guys complaining about overheating pads and rotors? Never. I have discs and have never overheated them. Never. They are cable actuated and I have never had an issue, even with weight weenie rotors. Purely anecdotal since I am but one statistic. I will agree with the potential to boil hydraulic fluid, but with cable.....I don't see pads being that big of an issue. Or at a minimum, pad material is an easy fix.
> 
> Forks, They already exist. They are rare, but there are plenty of them out there to know that Kontact's worries can be put to rest. My carbon fork on my CX bike rides fine on the road. The irony of the "forks are stiff worry" is that he claims to have ridden a Volagi and claimed it was too noodly. Go figure. Better yet, he uses his best speculation to assume that Volagi overbuilt their fork and thus the headtube and frame were purposly designed weaker. Talk about a speculative nonsense.
> 
> ...


You aren't paying attention. I am not basing the brake fade thing on that article. Brake fade with discs is a real problem, not related to fluids, and is experienced by MTBs. The fact that you haven't experienced it means that you simply haven't ridden the kind of descents where it matters. And if you haven't ridden those descents, then you certainly would have no reason to complain about any brake.

As far as my Volagi "nonsense", the fork wasn't flexing. The frame was flexing, causing the front wheel to track poorly in corners. It wasn't the front to rear flex that we associate with forks, it was something else. I was merely giving credit to the Volagi guys for building in such awful handling for reason other than incompetence.

I have already stated, ad nauseum, that there are plenty of disc road bikes out there. They work perfectly fine for most road riding, as long as you aren't trying to descend mountains or ride a fast cornering line with 23c tires. Those are things that you do with race bikes, which is really what this is about, not whether they can be used at all.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Wildewinds said:


> Disc brakes are better. However, if you don't ride on hills, you probably won't need them.


Most ridiculous thing I have read (in the past 30 seconds anyway).


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

Wildewinds said:


> Disc brakes are better. However, if you don't ride on hills, you probably won't need them.
> 
> The whole "good enough" argument is silly if you think about it. A horse was good enough before they invented cars.


And there are places in the world where a horse is still better than a car. "Better" is not a universal quality. Discs are better for some things, poorer for others. Just like horses.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

aclinjury said:


> I meant to say hydraulic disc brake. Cable disc brake been in existence longer.
> 
> Does the UCI take inputs from the major manufacturers into considerations? Does this happen in cycling? I know in motoGP and Formula1 and pretty much all sanctioned motorsports, the sanctioning bodies work hand-in-hand with manufacturers. Maybe in the cycling world the sanctioning body and the manufacturers are in completely different universe? If that's the case, then why don't the manufacturers threaten to take their ball and go play elsewhere? (This sort of threat has been done in motorsports). I just don't believe it's all up to the UCI. UCI will cease to have power if manufacturers go play elsewhere, and judging by the hate for UCI around on every bike forum, I wonder why is the UCI still having so much power if they don't have the support of the major manufacturers??


The UCI is nothing like the sanctioning bodies in motoGP or F1. And there is a breakaway league in the works. The UCI makes the rules and the manufactures are forced to work around those rules. Teams and manufacturers can't just "go play somewhere else." It's not that easy, as the breakaway league is finding out. For one, it takes a crap ton of money. Their is more to the UCI than just bike design, but bike design/requirements is a big stickler with the UCI (and sometimes it's a moving target).



aclinjury said:


> People who ride tandems and commuters don't go any where or do anything nearly as aggressive as a road racer, agree? Until it's tested on a road racer in some aggressive environment, it's not safe. The way testing and safety work is you test in the most extreme enivronment first, than say it's safe in lesser extreme environment. Not the other way around. And please don't tell me that you see plenty of the Jones & Janes on their tadems or Timmy's on his commuter taking 35-40 mph sweepers regularly down a mountain.
> 
> Now I have actually raced downhill and all-mountain, and I can tell you that pads do get glazed, at a MUCH slower speed (albeit more frequent braking). Does my experience count? or am I just another doom and gloom guy too?
> 
> ...


No, we don't agree. You've never seen tandems climb mountains? They do have to get back down. Probably use the brakes more too since they are more cautious coming down. 

You guys are impossible to follow. First it was boiling fluids, now it's glazing pads. What next? 

Your experience doesn't make you a doom and gloom guy, unless you think it makes bike riding "perilous." However, you sure like to post how awesome you are and how horrible everyone else is. Let's see that uber resume of your Super D and Downhill skills. 




Kontact said:


> You aren't paying attention.............I have already stated, ad nauseum, that there are plenty of disc road bikes out there. They work perfectly fine for most road riding, as long as you aren't trying to descend mountains or ride a fast cornering line with 23c tires. Those are things that you do with race bikes, which is really what this is about, not whether they can be used at all.


Well crap. Someone should let my brakes know they aren't suppose to work next time I'm out racing or on a hammerfest. I can tell you haven't been paying attention at all. I have done it, been there, still do it. Still alive. Wookiebiker had a purpose built bike with discs and he has bigger "hills" than I do. Heck he weighs far more than I do too. I think he's still breathing. In fact, I think he loved it.......ad nauseum.

This thread is toast.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

aclinjury said:


> People who ride tandems and commuters don't go any where or do anything nearly as aggressive as a road racer, agree? Until it's tested on a road racer in some aggressive environment, it's not safe. The way testing and safety work is you test in the most extreme enivronment first, than say it's safe in lesser extreme environment. Not the other way around. And please don't tell me that you see plenty of the Jones & Janes on their tadems or Timmy's on his commuter taking 35-40 mph sweepers regularly down a mountain.
> .


No, I don't agree. A tandem is harder on brakes than any sub-250lb racer is. You're stopping twice the weight with the same two brakes and wheels, usually from higher speeds. This is why most tandems don't have road calipers. While they weren't "Janes", I've had the "pleasure" of doing group rides with a multi-time national champion tandem duo (the captain was also an age-graded Natl. crit champ). Riding with them in the group was faster than any cycling I've done other than mountain descents. The only thing I ever heard them complain about on their beautiful Calfee tandem was the brakes.

The others are right. The reason there has been no development until now is because there has been no market. This is for the same reasons that TT bikes have two wheels the same size and seat tubes and seat stays (the configuration the UCI requires).


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

Kontact said:


> I have already stated, ad nauseum, that there are plenty of disc road bikes out there.


No there aren't, and the ones that are available are entry level or a mis match of components because nothing high level is available. Save for the Colnago that's not even been shipped...

What we currently have on the market cannot be used as a measure of whether or not discs on RACE bikes is possible or a good idea, cannot be done.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

kalare said:


> No there aren't, and the ones that are available are entry level or a mis match of components because nothing high level is available. Save for the Colnago that's not even been shipped...
> 
> What we currently have on the market cannot be used as a measure of whether or not discs on RACE bikes is possible or a good idea, cannot be done.


And you wont see them until the UCI approves them for use on race bikes.
And judging by some of the UCI's recent regressive reviews of previously approved TT saddles and their focus on what sock height is allowed, I question whether they ever will,


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

kalare said:


> No there aren't, and the ones that are available are entry level or a mis match of components because nothing high level is available. Save for the Colnago that's not even been shipped...
> 
> What we currently have on the market cannot be used as a measure of whether or not discs on RACE bikes is possible or a good idea, cannot be done.


What is "high level"? Wound Up makes disc forks, and Wound Up has a fantastic reputation. The brakes themselves can be taken from high end mountain groups, and paired with road levers. This is no different than putting any aftermarket brake caliper on a nice bike. Any hub can be laced to a road rim.

What exactly do you want? If I bought a Ti frame with a Wound Up fork and put aftermarket calipers on it, I wouldn't feel like I had a compromise bike in any way. What is different about doing that with disc parts? 

(Clearly, I think there is a difference for the reasons I've stated, but you don't agree that the problems I see exist, so I don't get your objection.)


----------



## gordy748 (Feb 11, 2007)

Speaking as an ex motorcycle racer who's spent a lot of time with extreme disc braking...

Brake fade is not a real problem until you get into extreme situations, then it becomes a significant issue. For racing we'd go with the biggest discs that would fit (300 - 320mm), and most often with a cast iron rotor (grips better than stainless steel), and steel braided lines. Even then brake fade was inevitable, usually by fluid heating or pads failing to bite properly. The way it was fixed was through a dial (or thumb screw) on the brake lever itself, which would let the lever out and allow more travel.

Disc brakes offer more braking power but are complicated and heavy. By contrast, rim braking offers several significant advantages. Firstly, it's much lighter and simpler. Secondly, the amount of rim relative to the brake zone allows the brake surface (i.e. the rim) to stay cooler much longer in extreme situations. Thirdly, it's more aerodynamic.

While bicycles are usually much less extreme than bikes, there is no doubt that in a long, sustained downhills (in alpine conditions) there is a significant risk of heat build-up leading to brake fade or failure if you use discs. It comes down to a simple trade-off; do you want more braking power, or more sustainable, reliable braking? 

For everyday riding discs don't have the problem of brake fade. But they're very complex compared to side pull brakes, let alone cantilevers. It again comes down to a simple trade-off; do you want more braking power, or simpler, easier maintained braking?

Not to say that discs aren't the future of the cycling world. They are... eventually. But there are inherent drawbacks to them that make them questionable in terms of advantage to roadbikes: a little more complex, heavy, aero, consistent performance fade. And all for a bit more braking power. The drawbacks are not much, but put them together and it's easy to see why discs have another few years before they become standard.


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

Kontact said:


> What is "high level"? Wound Up makes disc forks, and Wound Up has a fantastic reputation. The brakes themselves can be taken from high end mountain groups, and paired with road levers. This is no different than putting any aftermarket brake caliper on a nice bike. Any hub can be laced to a road rim.
> 
> What exactly do you want? If I bought a Ti frame with a Wound Up fork and put aftermarket calipers on it, I wouldn't feel like I had a compromise bike in any way. What is different about doing that with disc parts?
> 
> (Clearly, I think there is a difference for the reasons I've stated, but you don't agree that the problems I see exist, so I don't get your objection.)


Speciaized makes good frames with a great reputation...does that mean everything they make is top of the line? Absolutely not. The wound up forks are not high end, they are heavy and haven't been redesigned for years. 

You absolutely cannot take brakes from high end mountain groups and pair them with road levers because road levers are cable pull and there are NO cable pull disc calipers that are in the top component groups. Avid BB7 is the best you can get and they are boat anchors and haven't been redesigned since teh dawn of time. Hubs I am in agreement with you, there are plenty and they are compatible between platforms, but we're talking about forks and brakes, not hubs.

I didn't say problems do not exist, I just think it's stupid to say discs aren't suitable if they haven't been given a chance to work...at all. THERE IS NO HIGH END DISC BRAKE FOR ROAD BIKES (capitalized for emphasis, not yelling). Period. This applies to forks as well. BTW, I have a token 29er carbon rigid fork on my bike and it absorbs road vibrations quite well...and this was designed for MTB. I can imagine that forks specifically designed for road, with money to research, will be that much better.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Enough talk about disc on mtb, disc on a tandem, disc on gramp's commuter. I already know how a 203mm/180mm disc behave like on my Enduro, and frankly I don't care for tandems (circus bikes good for getting tagged by cars) and utilitarian commuters.

I'm most waiting to see a test of that awesome C59 Disc versus the regular C59 on the Alps.
Until then, blah blah blah.... vaporware. Let's see.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

kalare said:


> THERE IS NO HIGH END DISC BRAKE FOR ROAD BIKES (capitalized for emphasis, not yelling). P


Really?
I will let my mate who is running hydro's on his cross bike know.
You might not be able to buy them straight from the shop at the moment, but you can get them.


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

FTR said:


> Really?
> I will let my mate who is running hydro's on his cross bike know.
> You might not be able to buy them straight from the shop at the moment, but you can get them.


Then it lends absolutely nothing to the conversation if only 5 people in the world can get their hands on them and nobody has reviewed or released information on said hydros and their capabilities. 

I know of two that may be available in the near future, SRAM Red and Formula. Nobody has them yet, meaning not available to the public. Nobody has reviewed or tested (independantly). They are also first generation, so I can bet there will be kinks and bugs that will need to be worked out in future generations as with any new model of anything.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

kalare said:


> Then it lends absolutely nothing to the conversation if only 5 people in the world can get their hands on them and nobody has reviewed or released information on said hydros and their capabilities.


Absolutely, positively untrue.


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

kalare said:


> Speciaized makes good frames with a great reputation...does that mean everything they make is top of the line? Absolutely not. The wound up forks are not high end, they are heavy and haven't been redesigned for years.
> 
> You absolutely cannot take brakes from high end mountain groups and pair them with road levers because road levers are cable pull and there are NO cable pull disc calipers that are in the top component groups. Avid BB7 is the best you can get and they are boat anchors and haven't been redesigned since teh dawn of time. Hubs I am in agreement with you, there are plenty and they are compatible between platforms, but we're talking about forks and brakes, not hubs.
> 
> I didn't say problems do not exist, I just think it's stupid to say discs aren't suitable if they haven't been given a chance to work...at all. THERE IS NO HIGH END DISC BRAKE FOR ROAD BIKES (capitalized for emphasis, not yelling). Period. This applies to forks as well. BTW, I have a token 29er carbon rigid fork on my bike and it absorbs road vibrations quite well...and this was designed for MTB. I can imagine that forks specifically designed for road, with money to research, will be that much better.


Wound Up forks are heavy, but their road fork is still one of the best riding forks you can buy. It sounds like you don't think a disc road bike would be worth riding unless it is both comfortable and works well, and is 13 pounds.

That C59 everyone keeps flashing is not all that light, either - even the normal version. And discs are supposed to be so good, I don't understand the objection to trying it with a cable brake.


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

Kontact said:


> Wound Up forks are heavy, but their road fork is still one of the best riding forks you can buy. It sounds like you don't think a disc road bike would be worth riding unless it is both comfortable and works well, and is 13 pounds.
> 
> That C59 everyone keeps flashing is not all that light, either - even the normal version. And discs are supposed to be so good, I don't understand the objection to trying it with a cable brake.


I don't know where you get the idea that I think a disc road bike wouldnt be worth riding unless it's super light? I'm just saying that well designed and engineered components are not available since they've not been around long enough and/or even designed yet for reasons I've posted above. You're the one who is compaining about fork comfort, I like my token fork very much...and as I said above, if most here blind tested two carbon forks one for disc and one standard, I believe most wouldn't be able to tell the difference. 

As to your second point, I already made a long description of why hydraulic is better than cable pull...based on the laws of physics (in some other thread on this board somewhere). Can't argue with it, it is what it is. I don't want cable pull because it's inferior, simple. I have BB7 on my current CX, they're freaking heavy and need to be adjusted for pad wear and cable stretch and modulation is no comparison to hydraulic. Hydraulic is lighter and performs better.

As to FTR, it is absolutely, positively true. Your statement lends nothing to the conversation except the fact that some guy somewhere has a hydraulic road lever. That was established when canyon came out with their prototype years ago. Who cares? It means nothing if the masses can't buy it because otherwise why are we even having this discussion? The title of the thread is "future of disc brake road bikes" not "future of disc brakes that only one guy can somehow get a hold of"...


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

kalare said:


> I don't know where you get the idea that I think a disc road bike wouldnt be worth riding unless it's super light? I'm just saying that well designed and engineered components are not available since they've not been around long enough and/or even designed yet for reasons I've posted above. You're the one who is compaining about fork comfort, I like my token fork very much...and as I said above, if most here blind tested two carbon forks one for disc and one standard, I believe most wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
> 
> As to your second point, I already made a long description of why hydraulic is better than cable pull...based on the laws of physics (in some other thread on this board somewhere). Can't argue with it, it is what it is. I don't want cable pull because it's inferior, simple. I have BB7 on my current CX, they're freaking heavy and need to be adjusted for pad wear and cable stretch and modulation is no comparison to hydraulic. Hydraulic is lighter and performs better.
> 
> As to FTR, it is absolutely, positively true. Your statement lends nothing to the conversation except the fact that some guy somewhere has a hydraulic road lever. That was established when canyon came out with their prototype years ago. Who cares? It means nothing if the masses can't buy it because otherwise why are we even having this discussion? The title of the thread is "future of disc brake road bikes" not "future of disc brakes that only one guy can somehow get a hold of"...


I still don't understand your fork objection. Wound Up has developed a road specific disc fork. What is your problem with it?


Also, I don't know if hydraulic discs are necessarily what you'll see if Shimano came out with disc DA tomorrow.


----------



## trailrunner68 (Apr 23, 2011)

Face it, dudes. Disc brakes will become standard. Even though 95% of riders don't ride in bad weather, have never had to replace brake pads, and never worn through a rim, they will be convinced that they need disc brakes. That they offer no advantage in dry weather will not matter. The big manufacturers will crank up their marketing BS machines and most people will believe everything they are told. Once most people have disc brakes, the people who don't will look outdated, so they will switch also. Just look at the people who will swear that they can feel a difference with ceramic bearings, stiffer head tubes, vibration damping of seat posts, or idiocy like faster shifting with DI2 when in fact it shifts slower. BS works. It seems to work spectacularily well in cycling.


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

trailrunner68 said:


> That they offer no advantage in dry weather will not matter. The big manufacturers will crank up their marketing BS machines and most people will believe everything they are told.


Disc brakes do in fact offer advantages in dry weather...as discussed in many other threads. People just chose to ignore those advantages in favor of the "we don't need them" argument. Whether or not you WANT discs is a different story.



Kontact said:


> I still don't understand your fork objection. Wound Up has developed a road specific disc fork. What is your problem with it?


I've already stated this before...heavy as hell. 660g, that's 200 more grams than my damn MTB fork, how can an MTB fork that withstands much harder hits come in at 200g ligher while a CX fork that is supposedly one of the best disc road forks be 200g heavier? Doesn't make sense. This, and the fork is freaking spectacularly ugly, IMO. 

I'm not the one with the problem with forks. I am saying forks can most likely be designed that will satisfy ride requirements while also providing a place to mount disc calipers, I've been saying this all along. Others are the one's that've been saying disc forks will suck and that can't change as they'll always be too stiff. I don't know how this flip flopped into me not liking forks?


----------



## Kontact (Apr 1, 2011)

kalare said:


> Disc brakes do in fact offer advantages in dry weather...as discussed in many other threads. People just chose to ignore those advantages in favor of the "we don't need them" argument. Whether or not you WANT discs is a different story.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Okay, I'll try to explain this again:

If you want a nice disc road bike, you can build one TODAY, since Wound Up and others have disc carbon road forks available. You already said that you don't care about the total bike weight, so I'm not sure why you keep bringing up the Wound Up fork's weight. Save 200 grams somewhere else and the bike will still be light enough.

I don't understand what you think Colnago or whoever is going to do that can't already be done, except make it lighter or prettier. But you don't care about having super low weight.

Disc road bikes are a reality, go out and build one up. There is nothing to wait for.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

trailrunner68 said:


> Face it, dudes. Disc brakes will become standard. Even though 95% of riders don't ride in bad weather, have never had to replace brake pads, and never worn through a rim, they will be convinced that they need disc brakes. That they offer no advantage in dry weather will not matter. The big manufacturers will crank up their marketing BS machines and most people will believe everything they are told. Once most people have disc brakes, the people who don't will look outdated, so they will switch also. Just look at the people who will swear that they can feel a difference with ceramic bearings, stiffer head tubes, vibration damping of seat posts, or idiocy like faster shifting with DI2 when in fact it shifts slower. BS works. It seems to work spectacularily well in cycling.


This.

/thread


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

Kontact said:


> Okay, I'll try to explain this again:
> 
> If you want a nice disc road bike, you can build one TODAY, since Wound Up and others have disc carbon road forks available. You already said that you don't care about the total bike weight, so I'm not sure why you keep bringing up the Wound Up fork's weight. Save 200 grams somewhere else and the bike will still be light enough.
> 
> ...


I never said can't build a disc bike today, you just can't build one with better than mediocre brakes. BB7's are not that great. Period. 

I've never, ever, in any thread ever said that I don't care about weight, I do. What cyclist doesn't care about weight at all? I didn't bring up Wound Up at all, someone else did. I didn't bring up that there are forks available, someone else did. I responded by saying what is available is not the best we can achieve with today's technology, true. Someone else said forks will not ride the same, I responded with the above statement again. 

Disc road brakes are a reality, I'm waiting for hydraulic cause I hate my BB7's compared to my other numerous hydro setups. Why is this discussion now turned towards what I'm wanting or waiting for when the debate is whether or not discs belong on road bikes and what the future of them are? Nobody here that is against disc has yet to come up with a good argument except the "we don't need them" argument. You've stated forks and frames will need to be redesigned and won't ride the same. Moot point, like I stated above, with composites design what it is, we can decide how and where to layup the fibers to achieve what we need, it just needs to be tested and FEM modelled. With regards to frames not being compatible...well, neither are all the different BB sizes, seat tube sizes, head tube sizes, tapered head tubes, and different rear hub spacings. Discs aren't going to make everything else obsolete...end of argument. 

Marketing telling me what to buy BS. Marketing tells everyone what to buy what they buy, that's their job. Like I said above, this has no bearing on whether or not discs are an appropriate addition to road bikes. Instead of arguing that I'm falling to marketing BS, why not refute why discs are inferior with facts?

That's it, I've said what I've said, over and over and over again. Unless there's a new and well thought out opinion or argument, you'll find my replies to the same arguments over and over again in all the other posts I've posted.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

trailrunner68 said:


> Face it, dudes. Disc brakes will become standard. Even though 95% of riders don't ride in bad weather, have never had to replace brake pads, and never worn through a rim, they will be convinced that they need disc brakes. That they offer no advantage in dry weather will not matter. The big manufacturers will crank up their marketing BS machines and most people will believe everything they are told. Once most people have disc brakes, the people who don't will look outdated, so they will switch also. Just look at the people who will swear that they can feel a difference with ceramic bearings, stiffer head tubes, vibration damping of seat posts, or idiocy like faster shifting with DI2 when in fact it shifts slower. BS works. * It seems to work spectacularily well in cycling*.


So what you're saying is that... cyclists are suckers for all the new and latest and greatest stuff even though they will never use the stuff to its fullest capability, but rather "just to have it"?? Hmmm... you work for the bike industry as a marketer by day or something??


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

kalare
You can get a hydro disc brake right now that will run with your roaf calipers. You need an adapter but it works right now and has been available for a while. Just because the big 3 dont offer it yet does not ymean it is not there.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

Spoke to a rep for an "S" Brand that makes brakes at my LBS and he said there is little appetite among pro teams for disk brakes due to most, if not all of the anti disk reasons already stated in this thread. 

FWIW.....


----------



## kalare (Oct 10, 2008)

FTR said:


> kalare
> You can get a hydro disc brake right now that will run with your roaf calipers. You need an adapter but it works right now and has been available for a while. Just because the big 3 dont offer it yet does not ymean it is not there.


And the hydro adaptor is actuated by what? Cables. Totally defeats the purpose of hydro. If there is no mater cylinder that is in direct control of the users hands then the advantages are lost.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Kalare
You are obnviously far too knowledgeable for me and everyone else here.
No use arguing with you as whatever is said you will find some reason that it is not true, not good enough, useless because of, whatever.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

FTR said:


> Kalare
> You are obnviously far too knowledgeable for me and everyone else here.
> No use arguing with you as whatever is said you will find some reason that it is not true, not good enough, useless because of, whatever.


Well, yea the TRP adapter is available and it is an option. I wouldn't list it as ideal, but a good option. Some folks would prefer to not run some kind of an adpater hanging from under their stem. From what I've heard though, the Parabox works pretty darn well. 

I think Kalare is thinking something along the lines of the SRAM Red prototype and the Formula prototypes. Something that is an all inclusive purpose built package. 

My only worry is how much these initial Red shifters might cost.


----------



## al0 (Jan 24, 2003)

"my road bike that was about 4 miles long" - quite a long for a bike, yeh?


laffeaux said:


> This afternoon I rode down a hill on my road bike that was about 4 miles long and speed varied from 30-42 MPH the whole way down. The only time I used my brakes was to briefly feather the rear brake with one finger on the lever to avoid running up on a buddy's wheel. Otherwise I never touched the brakes.
> 
> Yesterday I did a mountain bike ride with about 3,000 of climbing. I used my brakes a lot. The trail has loose rocks, water, bars, sand, and lots of tight turns. Even keeping my speed in the mid-20s the bike went air born off a few water bars. Several times I had to go scrub 50% of my speed immediately. The brakes got a huge work out when I dropped 700 feet of elevation in just over a mile on rough trail.
> 
> ...


----------



## eriku16 (Jul 27, 2011)

88 rex said:


> I think Kalare is thinking something along the lines of the SRAM Red prototype and the Formula prototypes. Something that is an all inclusive purpose built package.
> 
> My only worry is how much these initial Red shifters might cost.


So much so that they are staying as prototypes .


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

eriku16 said:


> So much so that they are staying as prototypes .


Very possible! Although, folks were throwing down good money for Di2 when it initially came out.


----------



## epicus07 (Aug 3, 2009)

Is there a weight penalty?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

RkFast said:


> Spoke to a rep for an "S" Brand that makes brakes at my LBS and he said there is little appetite among pro teams for disk brakes due to most, if not all of the anti disk reasons already stated in this thread.
> 
> FWIW.....


Who's this S brand? Just say it, why the need to be discreet?


----------



## Patsanno (Mar 29, 2012)

Good dialogue here. The issue of braking power with carbon wheels would seem to be eliminated with the inclusion of disc brakes so, refine and bring them on!


----------

