# Prediction: We will see many CX bikes with disc front only this season



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

I can really see people experimenting with a disc in the front (easy to change the fork to a disc fork) this season. People wouldn't have to invest in new frames (if running 2 bikes) and they can see what this new disc stuff is all about. Anyway, that's what I think we'll see this year.

With the obsession about bike weight, probably a lot of people trying out the various MTB aluminum and uber-light discs already available instead of the boat anchor stuff that comes OEM. Also, there's a thread on mtbr where this guy shaved his BB7 way down and removed something like 1/2 the original weight from stock, caliper only.


----------



## Sojourneyman (Jun 22, 2007)

What with their reputation for being very tight brakes, I could see that having hilarious outcomes.


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

gticlay said:


> I can really see people experimenting with a disc in the front (easy to change the fork to a disc fork) this season. People wouldn't have to invest in new frames (if running 2 bikes) and they can see what this new disc stuff is all about. Anyway, that's what I think we'll see this year.
> 
> With the obsession about bike weight, probably a lot of people trying out the various MTB aluminum and uber-light discs already available instead of the boat anchor stuff that comes OEM. Also, there's a thread on mtbr where this guy shaved his BB7 way down and removed something like 1/2 the original weight from stock, caliper only.


Why wouldn't they have done this before this year?


----------



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

OnTheRivet said:


> Why wouldn't they have done this before this year?


This is the first year uci, the rules body for "serious" cross racing has allowed disc brakes. Personally I have mixed feelings about it but I don't want to be an annoying curmudgen.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*I predict you are wrong*

this seasons new rides were already being built when the rule was changed. We might see some more next year, we might see some forks this year but I don't think it will be some massive shift. Second, the weight needs to come down, we'll see some lighter disc systems being experimented with this season or early next year


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

On the local level, nobody has cared about the disc brakes rule since I've been racing in this area. There have always been a few disc rigs, although I don't think I've seen any disc/canti mixed setups.

I predict this season is more of the same. If a few super-light disc brakes start to become commercially available, I could see it changing. And if the manufacturers decide to offer some "serious" 'cross bikes with them, I think it would change things. But nothing this Fall.


----------



## c-lo (Sep 30, 2008)

while I have disc brakes on my full suspension and do see the value in them I've no desire to put them on my cross bike.


----------



## Dajianshan (Jul 15, 2007)

FYI: The tightness can be adjusted with a quick turn of a hex wrench for the desired strength.


----------



## c-lo (Sep 30, 2008)

depends on what you are running. Avid mechanicals have a knob adjustment. regardless, stopping power is much better compared to rim brakes, especially in wet conditions.


----------



## krisdrum (Oct 29, 2007)

gticlay said:


> This is the first year uci, the rules body for "serious" cross racing has allowed disc brakes. Personally I have mixed feelings about it but I don't want to be an annoying curmudgen.


And that only impacts the elites. The rest of the fields have been free to go disk for years and you only see a handful. Maybe the rule change will put the option on the front of some people's minds, maybe it won't.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

atpjunkie said:


> this seasons new rides were already being built when the rule was changed. We might see some more next year, we might see some forks this year but I don't think it will be some massive shift. Second, the weight needs to come down, we'll see some lighter disc systems being experimented with this season or early next year



x2

.....and I run full disc. I'm excited to see what new stuff comes out in the next year or two.


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

c-lo said:


> while I have disc brakes on my full suspension and do see the value in them I've no desire to put them on my cross bike.



+1 :thumbsup:


----------



## euro-trash (May 1, 2004)

I don't think we'll see a change. 
#1. There aren't that many disk forks you'd want to run.
#2. Retro-fitting would be pricey. Fork + wheel + brake = $500 easy
#3. Most of us already have our race wheels
#4. Most of us like to swap wheels with our road bikes
#5. The weight penalty

I'm not even going to mention the fact there is no need for discs in cross since cantis modulate well, provide clearance, and, even though they aren't super powerful, have stopping force that exceeds the traction you get with 32mm tires......whoops.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

I think there will be a ton of them.
Which equals out to 6 fat guys on disc equipped Surleys.


----------



## jroden (Jun 15, 2004)

it's tempting to run a hydraulic front with the lever top mounted, but the thought of owning all those extra front wheels makes me woozy. Hydraulic braking with integrated wireless electric shifting would be perfect for cross and mtb, so would a lightweight internal hub for that matter. 

If UCI made all bikes weigh 20 pounds for road and cross, there would be a lot of innovation in a hurry as the weight issue would be nullified.


----------



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

euro-trash said:


> I don't think we'll see a change.
> #1. There aren't that many disk forks you'd want to run.
> #2. Retro-fitting would be pricey. Fork + wheel + brake = $500 easy
> #3. Most of us already have our race wheels
> ...


Maybe with the new more narrow tire rule, but I doubt it. That statement has a lot to do with rider weight, tire, type of surface, wet or dry, etc.

Anyway, I'm enjoying the discussion.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

euro-trash said:


> I'm not even going to mention the fact there is no need for discs in cross since cantis modulate well, provide clearance, and, even though they aren't super powerful, have stopping force that exceeds the traction you get with 32mm tires......whoops.



Run what you want but quit your ball babying and false claims. The rants are old and no one really cares that you don't like discs. No one is forcing you to run'em.


----------



## Doctor Who (Feb 22, 2005)

I see a front-only disc being pretty unnecessary. In CX I tend to use my rear most of the time to scrub speed for the barriers or loosen the rear wheel up for a tight corner. 

I'd actually be scared to have that much braking power available in CX.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Disc brakes aren't an all-or-nothing proposition, in general, although some people like to set them up that way. They tend to modulate quite well, and much more predictably than rim brakes in muddy conditions. I've had the experience of grabbing some brake and having nothing happen for a rotation while the pads cleaned the rim, or going down a short, steep hill squeezing my brakes and not being able to stop. Discs wouldn't help on a flat or a dry course, but I think that with a disc front end, on a muddy day I could do technical descents a lot faster.


----------



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

AndrwSwitch said:


> Disc brakes aren't an all-or-nothing proposition, in general, although some people like to set them up that way. They tend to modulate quite well, and much more predictably than rim brakes in muddy conditions. I've had the experience of grabbing some brake and having nothing happen for a rotation while the pads cleaned the rim, or going down a short, steep hill squeezing my brakes and not being able to stop. Discs wouldn't help on a flat or a dry course, but I think that with a disc front end, on a muddy day I could do technical descents a lot faster.


That is my experience as well. I'm a clyde now but have placed pretty high at nationals a long time ago.


----------



## Slonie (Feb 26, 2007)

I'm making the prediction that we'll soon see Avid announce a new "BB9" Cyclocross Disc Brake setup, weighing 10% less, and costing 50% more than a BB7... You heard it here first!


----------



## euro-trash (May 1, 2004)

88 rex said:


> Run what you want but quit your ball babying and false claims. The rants are old and no one really cares that you don't like discs. No one is forcing you to run'em.


Christmas has come early!!! 

The claims aren't false. I can (though I generally don't want to because locking up your wheels is rarely beneficial in a race) lock both my wheels with Paul's Cantis with FMB tubbies anywhere, anytime.

I'll counter that no one really cares that you like discs. No one has forced you not to run'em...


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

Top pros may eventualy start to use them has companies start making decent options, they will probably be forced or convingly persuaded by sponsors to use them... but not the boat achors with crappy modulation that are BB5-BB7, these suck IMO. You wont see Stybar, Nys or Tim Johnson using those... But I read somewhere that SRAM have started working on hydraulic road brake levers, think Red levers that can be connected to Avid XX calipers... Current option are not working that well and they're too heavy so it could take a little while.

Personally, I get scared when I use my cross bike on the road if there are long steep descents or if a dog or car surprises me but for cross racing, cantis are fine for me.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

euro-trash said:


> Christmas has come early!!!
> 
> The claims aren't false. I can (though I generally don't want to because locking up your wheels is rarely beneficial in a race) lock both my wheels with Paul's Cantis with FMB tubbies anywhere, anytime.
> 
> I'll counter that no one really cares that you like discs. No one has forced you not to run'em...



Ah yes, I re-read your point that you were making that Canti's supply enough power to lock up your wheels and initially read it as something different. My whooops.....:thumbsup: 

I still stand by the fact that you anti-disc folk need to quit your ball babying.


----------



## Andrea138 (Mar 10, 2008)

I totally thought this thread was going to be about disc wheels.


----------



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

Andrea138 said:


> I totally thought this thread was going to be about disc wheels.


That is one of the reasons I think front disc will happen. It's easy to get a disc front wheel and still use your higher end rear wheel. Fronts are cheap to build, rears aren't.


----------



## Andrea138 (Mar 10, 2008)

Nooo.... I mean like this:


----------



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

Ahhhhh, gotcha. That's in the DH forum on mtbr 





Andrea138 said:


> Nooo.... I mean like this:


----------



## RRRoubaix (Aug 27, 2008)

krisdrum said:


> And that only impacts the elites. The rest of the fields have been free to go disk for years and you only see a handful. Maybe the rule change will put the option on the front of some people's minds, maybe it won't.


This. :thumbsup: 
Here in Oregon, our fields are absolutely gigantic.
Disc brakes have been allowed all along in our biggest series, the Cross Crusade.
You don't see them much.


----------



## Smoothy (Jul 6, 2006)

To be sufficiently light, the new disc systems aimed at cross will have to abandon the std 6 bolt interface and will likely use 140mm rotors. So your current front hub likely won't work, and I'm guessing cx riders won't have a 130mm-spaced disc hub in the quiver. Ideally, it will be a direct mount caliper to frame (disc adpaters and their bolts add weight), meaning a 140mm post-mount tab - how many frames or forks have this ? Zip. 

So all this special new XX-blackbox-XTRcx stuff is gonna mean all new equipment. The manufacturers aren't afraid to change up the standards - case in point: BB30 and the like. So here's a glimpse in the future:

New for 2013 Blue's NorcrossDisc "Page" Edition has:

- 140mm XX brakes front and rear with just 20g weight penalty
- Tapered headtube for less fork chatter
- New Zippy 303disc wheels with the Latest Greater spline std. 
- 700x33c tubulars


I mean, really, is this what everyone is asking for? This is what they'll give us too make some $$, but my take is that everyone posting up in favour of disc's doesn't want to shell out for new everything (heck, some think $8 for CrossVegas is steep), yet doesn't want the weight or performance penalty of current options. Sorry, but can't have cake & eat it too on this one. Stay tuned for next year's Eurobike where you'll see the first production versions of what I'm predicting....and none of it works with your current frame, fork, wheels or brifter.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Smoothy said:


> To be sufficiently light, the new disc systems aimed at cross will have to abandon the std 6 bolt interface and will likely use 140mm rotors.



Just run 3 bolts and make them titanium. I run 3 per rotor on my MTB and 140 on the rear of my MTB.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

If Shimano jumps in with Centerlock stuff early on, they might be able to grab a huge chunk of the market.

It's lighter, mostly. Mountain bikers distrust it some because of concerns about interoperability with non-Shimano disc systems they may already have or to which they have some brand loyalty. Of course, some other companies would need to make centerlock hubs.


----------



## hawss (May 23, 2007)

Smoothy said:


> meaning a 140mm post-mount tab - how many frames or forks have this ? Zip.


https://***************/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/2011-fixie-inc-pure-blood-cyclocross-3.jpg

Like this?

2011 Fixie Inc. Pure Blood


----------



## 2silent (Dec 26, 2009)

my jake the snake is set up bb7 front avid 6 rear...


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

hawss said:


> https://***************/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/2011-fixie-inc-pure-blood-cyclocross-3.jpg
> 
> Like this?
> 
> 2011 Fixie Inc. Pure Blood


Yes...just like that. Too bad that bike didn't exist:idea:


----------



## FatTireFred (Jan 31, 2005)

long live the mullet!


----------



## jroden (Jun 15, 2004)

i'm waiting for someone to make the cogent argument that rim brakes are better because they work poorly and cyclocross doesn't require stopping power. I think removing the brake pads will make a person even faster, according to the internet.


----------



## hawss (May 23, 2007)

the mayor said:


> Yes...just like that. Too bad that bike didn't exist:idea:


"didn't"?

I don't get it. 

They'll be available shortly.


----------



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

jroden said:


> i'm waiting for someone to make the cogent argument that rim brakes are better because they work poorly and cyclocross doesn't require stopping power. I think removing the brake pads will make a person even faster, according to the internet.


Or maybe bags of mud constantly spraying mud on the rim/brake pad area for consistent non-braking.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

hawss said:


> "didn't"?
> 
> I don't get it.
> 
> They'll be available shortly.


I am going to get you a sarcasm detector for Christmas.


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

FatTireFred said:


> long live the mullet!



My foot itches


----------



## steve_e_f (Sep 8, 2003)

euro-trash said:


> I'm not even going to mention the fact there is no need for discs in cross since cantis modulate well, provide clearance, and, even though they aren't super powerful, have stopping force that exceeds the traction you get with 32mm tires......whoops.


I agree, and I'm not switching right now or in the foreseeable future.

That said, I think they could catch on more because there is a comfort factor (especially for newbs) that a nice powerful brake gives. 

Also, wheels out of true would no longer be a problem.

Either way, I'm not buying a new frame, fork, and wheels so that I can run them.


----------



## fallzboater (Feb 16, 2003)

2silent said:


> my jake the snake is set up bb7 front avid 6 rear...


Yup. I just built up a used Major Jake frame with a Wound Up disc fork, and DA 7800 levers actuating those calipers. I had some old XTR M965 Centerlock hubs that I laced up with Velocity A23 rims. Nice setup, although the BB7 is obviously much more powerful than the Shorty 6, so it takes a bit of getting used to. This will also be my winter road trainging bike, with fenders.


----------



## nony (Oct 26, 2008)

Smoothy said:


> To be sufficiently light, the new disc systems aimed at cross will have to abandon the std 6 bolt interface and will likely use 140mm rotors. So your current front hub likely won't work, and I'm guessing cx riders won't have a 130mm-spaced disc hub in the quiver. Ideally, it will be a direct mount caliper to frame (disc adpaters and their bolts add weight), meaning a 140mm post-mount tab - how many frames or forks have this ? Zip.


Having ridden disc (for the first time last year) and cantis CX, I would agree with your predictions. I felt that current disc calipers could be reduced in size and weight (smaller pads and pistons) while still maintaining power for cross. I've had to de-tune my disc power down to maintain modulation as defualt shop disc set-up was too powerful. IE, disc calipers engineered for cross and not mtn bikes or tandems. 

I ran 140mm rotors in the rear down from 160, and they were still plenty powerful. So yes, 140 in front also makes sense. To my surprise, rotor heat/overheating was absent even at 140mm. Also, another surprise that 140mm rotor was easier/faster to install wheel change than 160mm or 180mm. 

Agreed with disc adapters as I'm already seeing mtn bikes without adapters, and direct mount. 

Also agree that splined rotos are the way to go for weight reduction. I wouldn't even be surprised if there was a splined 120mm rear only cross specific rotor (140mm front). Paired with a smaller disc caliper, it could add to significant weight reductions. 

Much rather have mechanical discs over hydro for CX. I can replace cables faster than I can bleed lines. Hydros also contribute to less modulation, which mech disc and cantis has plenty of.


----------



## Miles E (Jul 31, 2003)

nony said:


> Hydros also contribute to less modulation


What hyrdaulic disc brakes have you used that would make you say that?  In the MTB world, hydros have proven to not only be lighter and more powerful, but by and large have excellent modulation as well. 

And as far as bleeding, it can be a bit of a pain when necessary, but I've had a pair of Magura Martas that haven't needed it in five years. Sure, you can keep a cable system pretty well sealed by running full housing, but the weight and friction definitely start to add up at that point. My next grouppo for my CX bike will be from whoever (Shimano or SRAM) comes out with an integrated hyrdaulic disc brake system first. Don't worry though, there will always be cable discs for the holdouts.


----------



## nony (Oct 26, 2008)

Miles E said:


> What hyrdaulic disc brakes have you used that would make you say that?  In the MTB world, hydros have proven to not only be lighter and more powerful, but by and large have excellent modulation as well.
> 
> And as far as bleeding, it can be a bit of a pain when necessary, but I've had a pair of Magura Martas that haven't needed it in five years. Sure, you can keep a cable system pretty well sealed by running full housing, but the weight and friction definitely start to add up at that point. My next grouppo for my CX bike will be from whoever (Shimano or SRAM) comes out with an integrated hyrdaulic disc brake system first. Don't worry though, there will always be cable discs for the holdouts.


Hey Miles, My experience is with older Hayes, Avid, and now Magura Martas and soon, Elixirs. What experience have you had with disc CX hydro or mech? 

I think you may be missing the point here: I'm not slamming hydro in any way. I do feel that hydro are more powerful, BUT at the cost of modulation. Mech disc is less powerful than hydro, but has more modulation (which is desired in CX). 

I see stopping power and modulation as trade-offs in a brake system. You have more of one or the other, not both. Kinda like Vs and canti, V's are more powerful, but canti has more modulation. Again, just an opinion.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

My experience is the opposite. I have used Shimano, Avid, Formula and other hydraulic disc brakes and they pretty much all have much better modulation than mechanical discs IMO. Mechanicals are feeling a bit too on or off for my tastes although their feel might depend on the lever used... and pad material also plays a role. But, I wouldn't use them anymore, apart from costing less, mechanicals offer only downsides I think...


----------



## 2silent (Dec 26, 2009)

Good hydros modulated way better than any current cable actuated. Ive got bb7 on front of cx bike and on my ssmtb, vs xtr hydro on race bike.


----------



## fallzboater (Feb 16, 2003)

Dan Gerous said:


> My experience is the opposite. I have used Shimano, Avid, Formula and other hydraulic disc brakes and they pretty much all have much better modulation than mechanical discs IMO.


Agreed. The poor modulation is my main problem with the Avid mechanicals, which I've used on a MTB, and now the front of my cross bike. All hydraulic disc brakes I've used have been better in this regard, and I like that they're self-adjusting for pad wear. I don't have any problem with the limited maintenance required, but I'm also used to working on my own motorcycle brakes, which are identical.


----------



## fallzboater (Feb 16, 2003)

2silent said:


> Good hydros modulated way better than any current cable actuated. Ive got bb7 on front of cx bike and on my ssmtb, vs xtr hydro on race bike.


Correct. I'm not sure anyone who disagrees understands what modulation means. I've never used a hydro brake that modulates worse than the Avid mechs.


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

jroden said:


> i'm waiting for someone to make the cogent argument that rim brakes are better .



Or maybe a cognisant arguement even.

Adj. 1. cognisant - (sometimes followed by `of') having or showing knowledge or understanding or realization or perception; "was aware of his opponent's hostility"; "became aware of her surroundings"; "aware that he had exceeded the speed limit" 


Here's the arguement
While YES disc would be more powerful with the conditions that exist in most CX races (narrow tires slick mud etc etc) it is unlikely that they would be much of an advantage anyway even at the highest levels of competition
The main people that will benefit from having discs become popular for cross is the big component companies Shimano SRAM Campy (well Shimano and SRAM anyway lol)
and Avid. They will make a ton of $$$ off of people who absolutely MUST have the newest greatest thing 
Personally I love CX for the "run whatcha brung" attitude of it and all the old beater touring bikes and stuff you see out there (Ive seen old road bikes with canti bosses welded on and they didn't even repaint it) the kind of grasroots thing is what makes it great to me an I get a sneaking suspicion that I am not the only one who thinks this way. Making it all super high tech will kill some of the joy of it
$0.02


----------



## Miles E (Jul 31, 2003)

nony said:


> What experience have you had with disc CX hydro or mech?


I don't think anyone has experience with a dedicated hydro CX disc system at this point, so obviously I'm extrapolating my experience with cable/hyrdo disc brakes on MTB (Avid BB7's for a couple years, then various Maguras for the last five), and cable discs for CX (BB7's). 

Based on that experience, I can say modulation is probably my single favorite things about hydros, with power/weight/ease of use in some order behind. I'm surprised you feel the opposite way (and apparently I'm not the only one), despite trying a fair number of brakes.



> I see stopping power and modulation as trade-offs in a brake system. You have more of one or the other, not both. Kinda like Vs and canti, V's are more powerful, but canti has more modulation.


I think your observation may hold some water when comparing apples to apples (i.e. between cable activated rim brakes), but IMO hyrdaulic brakes are a "game changer" (as much as I hate that term). To suggest that they must have less modulation than a cable disc simply because they have more power is akin to suggesting the same for disc vs. rim brakes. Two different technologies, even if they do share certain traits.


----------



## Miles E (Jul 31, 2003)

BikeFixer said:


> While YES disc would be more powerful with the conditions that exist in most CX races (narrow tires slick mud etc etc) it is unlikely that they would be much of an advantage anyway even at the highest levels of competition





BikeFixer said:


> Making it all super high tech will kill some of the joy of it


So which is it- are disc brakes "not much of an advantage", or are they such an indispensable asset that it will be impossible to be competitive without them? And where do you stand on carbon tubulars btw?


----------



## kata (Dec 12, 2005)

Miles E said:


> I'm surprised you feel the opposite way (and apparently I'm not the only one), despite trying a fair number of brakes.


I'm with nony, my experience with BB7 disc has been more modulation. It is interesting that we all have drastically different experiences with the same product. BB7 are being used on tandems (based on personal experience) as a drag brake and on/off brake because of its modulation properties.



Miles E said:


> I think your observation may hold some water when comparing apples to apples (i.e. between cable activated rim brakes), but IMO hydraulic brakes are a "game changer" (as much as I hate that term). To suggest that they must have less modulation than a cable disc simply because they have more power is akin to suggesting the same for disc vs. rim brakes. Two different technologies, even if they do share certain traits.


I respectfully disagree here, as an mechanical engineer, you always have to trade off something for another. In the case of brakes, more stopping power is directly proportional to modulation and joined at the hip, so to speak. One goes up, the other goes down. Simple physics.


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

Miles E said:


> So which is it- are disc brakes "not much of an advantage", or are they such an indispensable asset that it will be impossible to be competitive without them? And where do you stand on carbon tubulars btw?


I said they will be more powerful which obviously they will.... But more powerful is NOT necessarily an advantage in this instance
This thread isn't about carbon tubulars so I will leave that for an appropriate thread


----------



## Miles E (Jul 31, 2003)

kata said:


> I respectfully disagree here, as an mechanical engineer, you always have to trade off something for another. In the case of brakes, more stopping power is directly proportional to modulation and joined at the hip, so to speak. One goes up, the other goes down. Simple physics.


I don't think it's as simple as an equation where you're just increasing the mechanical advantage or something as a means of boosting the stopping power (if we were just talking about increasing the size of the discs I'd absolutely agree with you). You're replacing the entire medium of how force is transferred from your hands to the brake, going from a relatively crude method (wire being pulled through several feet of housing) to a much more efficient one (hydraulic pressure). 

Once the force actually reaches the caliper, then there's the whole issue of how the pistons are activated, and hyrdaulic pressure again has some clear advantages. Nevermind that in a mechancial brake (at least the BB7's) only one pad is pushed into the rotor, and the rotor in turn is pushed into the stationary pad. Frankly it's surprising that mechanical disc brakes come as close as they do to the performance of a good hydraulic, IMO.


----------



## Miles E (Jul 31, 2003)

BikeFixer said:


> I said they will be more powerful which obviously they will.... But more powerful is NOT necessarily an advantage in this instance
> This thread isn't about carbon tubulars so I will leave that for an appropriate thread


I don't necessarily disagree with the first part of your statement (and even if I did, it's been debated ad nauseum elsewhere). I was trying to point out the apparent disconnect between this statement and the idea that if disc brakes become more prevalent in cross the sport will somehow become less accessible to the masses. If they offer little to no advantage, what is to stop someone competing on old technology (i.e. rim brakes) from doing well? Either they are an advantage or they're not.

The tie in with carbon tubulars is that they are an indisputable advantage, and can have a very real impact on separating the haves from the have nots, yet most everyone seems okay with their prevalence in cross.


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

Miles E said:


> Either they are an advantage or they're not.
> 
> .



My point is that in the conditions of a CX race they are NOT an advantage... If you are mtn biking on a cross bike then it would probably be a different story.

And yes I like Carbon tubulars but alas even working in the bike industry cannot afford... (maybe working in the bike industry is WHY I can't afford but that is yet ANOTHER thread)


----------



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

BikeFixer said:


> Personally I love CX for the "run whatcha brung" attitude of it and all the old beater touring bikes and stuff you see out there (Ive seen old road bikes with canti bosses welded on and they didn't even repaint it) the kind of grasroots thing is what makes it great to me an I get a sneaking suspicion that I am not the only one who thinks this way. Making it all super high tech will kill some of the joy of it
> $0.02


I haven't seen many run whatcha brung kind of people running carbon tubulars, ti frames, 11 speed, etc.

The point being that disc brakes on the front of a bike is a very small change to the bike. A small change that ultimately will lead to a lot easier bike to maintain.

As far as the people saying a more powerful brake = less modulation consider rim vs disc for the surface, rubber vs sintered or fully metallic pads, lever pull, and other stuff I didn't really take the time to think about. Dunno if you have ever ridden a Magura hydro rim brake but they modulate extremely well and have TONS of power available. But that's so 1991.


----------



## canelupo (Feb 25, 2005)

Drool.
What was the topic here? 
Drool...Drool...Drool...


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

canelupo said:


> Drool.
> What was the topic here?
> Drool...Drool...Drool...



Pretty, but I bet that thing weighs 20lbs.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

OnTheRivet said:


> Pretty, but I bet that thing weighs 20lbs.



Ooohhhh.....I'll take your bet! A lot of these steel CX frames floating here weigh pretty darn close to 20lbs.

Heck, my MTB weighs 20 lbs.....and it's aluminum with a suspension fork. My CX bike weighs about 22 lbs But I really wouldn't change a thing.


----------



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

I lust for that Stevens.


----------



## gticlay (Nov 27, 2008)

I lust for that Stevens.


----------



## mvi (Jan 14, 2008)

One hydraullic disc on the rear only. No front brake.
Modulation, and still enough brake power. We are not pro's running 30 KPH average anyway.


----------



## EricN (Apr 9, 2009)

there's no rain here, so there will be no change..

looking forward to what comes of this however in a few months.........


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

canelupo said:


> Drool.
> What was the topic here?
> Drool...Drool...Drool...


Looks like hydraulic calipers mated to non hydro levers. Nice mock up/ vapor ware bike.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

It's apparently a prototype built for Hanka... No plans to sell disc brake models for 2011. They have not even developped a proper fork, they just slapped a Ritchey rigid mtb fork... Another pic here... probably not really functional.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

The Hydro hoses end at the bar tape.
Looks nice though.
Probably will happen....once somebody comes out with high end hydro shifters.

At which point I'll have to yard sale my C50's and a pile of carbon wheels to get the new cool stuff.


----------

