# Disks Will Be Big for 2011 CX Bikes



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

I saw this Specialized Engineer-- identifiable by his _engineering orange_ kit and newtonian physics equation (F=ma / motion resistance) on his ass -- at CCCX.

He is using a disk only Specialized bike that is not available to the public yet in the C race. 

Boy, disk only stays and forks are sexy, but maybe that is the mountain biker in me.  

Internal Cable routing anyone?


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

Killroy said:


> I saw this Specialized Engineer-- identifiable by his _engineering orange_ kit and newtonian physics equation (F=ma / motion resistance) on his ass -- at CCCX.
> 
> He is using a disk only Specialized bike that is not available to the public yet in the C race.
> 
> ...


Well, if the bike is as good as his barrier technique disc brakes have a long way to go.

EDIT; And what's with the MTB thing, I always hear guys brag about their MTB background when pushing discs brakes on cross bikes. I've been riding/racing MTB's for 20 years, have 3 disc equipped bikes and I'm still not sold on them for cross.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

^outch (but that is what I was thinking)


----------



## perttime (Jun 27, 2005)

OnTheRivet said:


> Well, if the bike is as good as his barrier technique disc brakes have a long way to go.


Judging by my MTB skills and overall fitness ... I should still be using coaster brakes for trails riding too 

I am not sure discs are a great step forward for CX racing either but I am happy to see them for more general purpose riding, which lots of CX bikes end up doing :thumbsup:


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

OnTheRivet said:


> Well, if the bike is as good as his barrier technique disc brakes have a long way to go.
> 
> EDIT; And what's with the MTB thing, I always hear guys brag about their MTB background when pushing discs brakes on cross bikes. I've been riding/racing MTB's for 20 years, have 3 disc equipped bikes and I'm still not sold on them for cross.


why arent you SOLD on them?

being able to brake later and with more confidence is faster in any venue. there will be a advantage to run disc from a braking a stand point even in dry conditions, in wet conditions the advantage will be huge!

modulation and power are both going be better. weight wont be much more as the rim braking surface doesnt need to be there. Plus if weight was the only determining factor for how fast a bike will go, why dont we all ride rigid fixed gears with no brakes ? that would be the lightest bike out there lets run them!

I got news for you, adding weight in this case will actually make the bike faster, but most people(especially roadies) cant wrap their heads around that concept of more weight = faster.


----------



## CouchingTiger (Mar 5, 2007)

I agree and can't wait for discs on the CX bikes. I wore through the brake surface of my DV46 rear in the muck on the ski slope course at Night Weasels, rendering it worthless. That after having near zero braking at the race. My Ksyrium SL rear clincher brake track is just about ready to explode as well. Keep in mind that both wheels are multiple years old but wearing away a structural component to the bicycle via the critical act of braking seems, stupid.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

I like what I see. I'm thinking I'll need a new CX bike in about 2 years which should coincide with a new wave of Disc Cx bikes. 

Looks like a Ritchey fork?


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

88 rex said:


> I like what I see. I'm thinking I'll need a new CX bike in about 2 years which should coincide with a new wave of Disc Cx bikes.
> 
> Looks like a Ritchey fork?


Yeah, looks like this fork. It may be a surrogate for the prototype like the Easton wheels. Looks like at least new graphics on Specialized crank. I wonder what the bandage on the down tube is all about. He dnfed, hope it was not the bike.


----------



## rockdude (Apr 3, 2008)

Disk Brakes may become popular in the next few years but on the majority of courses the only time I use brakes is to scrub a little speed. Big disk power is not needed in Cyclocross.


----------



## jroden (Jun 15, 2004)

we need to get him out for tuesday night cross practice, his barrier work can use a little brush up.

I'd love to have a disc brake bike with clincher tires of some sort that works even 95% as well as my current bike with more reliability. Perhaps it's still not there yet. I was really pulling for the tubeless but it's just not quite ready for prime time.


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

rockdude said:


> Disk Brakes may become popular in the next few years but on the majority of courses the only time I use brakes is to scrub a little speed. Big disk power is not needed in Cyclocross.


scrub just alittle bit of speed? 

I think your perception is way off. On dry course with hairpins you can go from 20-10 pretty quickly with disc brakes. tenths of second faster than cantis. tenths adds up to placing by the end of the race.


----------



## krisdrum (Oct 29, 2007)

Maybe the Engineer is really short, so needs to grab downtube to comfortably get the bike up and over. I've been thinking about doing the same thing, as my 5'6" frame doesn't get the bike too far off the ground when I suitcase.

As many others have said, I'm not convinced that disks will be a drastic improvement.

To the point about being able to go into turns alot hotter, slam on your brakes and then accelerate out, that might be a valid point if this sport was an individual time trial with one rider on the course at a time. However, in a pack, moves like that could have some serious consequences for yourself and others. I can see the added braking power creating an overly aggressive jerky style of riding that could be more dangerous.


----------



## Dion (Dec 24, 2009)

I'll still be slow, regardless. It seems that your brakes are only as good as your tires + surface. If you're skidding and sliding with both, where's the advantage?

I guess braking without chatter would be nice...


----------



## Dion (Dec 24, 2009)

krisdrum said:


> Maybe the Engineer is really short, so needs to grab downtube to comfortably get the bike up and over.


Nope. My height (5'9" ish). 

Maybe he doesn't want to accidentally bang it on the barriers given that the bike is a one-off?


----------



## jroden (Jun 15, 2004)

Dion said:


> I'll still be slow, regardless. It seems that your brakes are only as good as your tires + surface. If you're skidding and sliding with both, where's the advantage?
> 
> I guess braking without chatter would be nice...


plus not having to dink around when changing wheels. I'm sure the great experts of the internet have no issues, but I always have to fiddle with the brakes when i swap wheels


----------



## weltyed (Feb 6, 2004)

jroden said:


> plus not having to dink around when changing wheels. I'm sure the great experts of the internet have no issues, but I always have to fiddle with the brakes when i swap wheels


i have to fiddle even with discs.

but i still like discs on cx frames.


----------



## bluedog18 (Aug 19, 2006)

what no one got any pics?


----------



## Grivooga (Mar 22, 2009)

Discs are so much quicker to fiddle. On my MTB with my Elixir CRs and the Juicy 3s before those so long as the disc was true - loosen two bolts, squeeze lever, tighten two bolts, release lever. Didn't even have to really look at it or pay attention to do it.

Hydro brake/shift levers are probably still several years out I would guess.

I can't wait. My Norco is already disc ready. I just don't have a 130mm spaced 700c wheelset that is disc ready. If I could replace the front hubs on my Aksium clinchers and Ksyrium tubbies with disc-ready hubs I might consider doing mullet brakes with a BB7 road. Don't think I want to invest in two new wheelsets for the marginal benefits right now though so I don't see full discs in my future any time soon.


----------



## FTM (Feb 4, 2005)

That wasn't a very good course to test brakes. There were only two spots on the whole course where I can remember needing my inferior cantis - the sharp rights at the beginning and end of the fun-but-not-very-cross-ideal singletrack. OK, maybe a turn f two on the grass but if I tried to brake any later, I would have already been through the apex.


----------



## gospastic (Nov 8, 2008)

i got a disc equipped frame mainly because i just think discs looks cool. there is a weight penalty i guess but at the end of the day discs won't perform any _worse_ than cantis so why not go with em?


----------



## ZoomBoy (Jan 28, 2004)

I don't have a problem with discs for cross but for myself the change is cost prohibitive. All my wheels are for rim brakes only and nevermind the cost of a new frame. People just entering the sport or who have deep pockets will probably love that bike.


----------



## mtbbmet (Apr 2, 2005)

Shimano has confirmed that they are releasing a Cross specific group next year. As they are the ones who pressured the UCI to legalize disks in the first place, I think it's safe to say that Shimano will push the market hard with disks. My guess is a road lever with hydro disk brakes is only one year away. I am also guessing that we will see someone in Europe riding Di2 hydraulic disk brake prototypes before the end of this cross season. That lever is empty, why not make it hydraulic?


----------



## cx_fan (Jul 30, 2004)

I was at the show just 3 weeks ago. DId not see alot of 2011 bikes with disc brakes. All had either TRP or the new Avid Shorty Ultimates.

Think about this, how many pairs of wheels do you own for cross? 
Now you buy a new bike that works with disc brakes only. None of those wheels work, you have to sell them at a loss and then start replacing them with newer wheels.

Now you have 2 or 3 sets of wheels but each have a disc that is different thicknesses and you will have to adjust that brake before you can start riding after having a flat tire. 

With canti's you can run them a little wider but they still line up without issue. Disc's will have to be adjusted


----------



## cx_fan (Jul 30, 2004)

*Just say no to discs*

double post..sorry


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

Dion said:


> I'll still be slow, regardless. It seems that your brakes are only as good as your tires + surface. If you're skidding and sliding with both, where's the advantage?
> 
> I guess braking without chatter would be nice...


you wont be skidding as much with disc brake since the modulation is better. cantis in bad condtions are like on off switches. With road BB7(and eventually hydro) the modulations will be tons better than Canti or even linear pulls rim brakes.



krisdrum said:


> To the point about being able to go into turns alot hotter, slam on your brakes and then accelerate out, that might be a valid point if this sport was an individual time trial with one rider on the course at a time. However, in a pack, moves like that could have some serious consequences for yourself and others. I can see the added braking power creating an overly aggressive jerky style of riding that could be more dangerous.


dude again its racing. Pretty soon you going to see these tactics against riders with cantis by riders with disc brakes. I am for it. What good is an advantage if you dont exploit the weakness of the other riders status quo setup. Heck I run linear pulls right now, I can already out break people into turns and make up positions because ot it. You betch you when I get a disc bike I am going to use whatever advantage I have to pass canti riders.

Also the danger issues your talking about dont happen in Short track mountain bike races where disc are the only thing being used and the cornering speeds can be higher. 

whats funny is people are so adverse to change they will say anything illogical for why their way is better. IE road biking there was hold outs on STI stuff, with MTBing there are still people who dont think 29er are faster XC bikes. In skiing people dont like fat skis for a number of illogical reasons. Just because something was good enough for however many years doesnt mean there isnt anything better.


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

cx_fan said:


> I was at the show just 3 weeks ago. DId not see alot of 2011 bikes with disc brakes. All had either TRP or the new Avid Shorty Ultimates.
> 
> Think about this, how many pairs of wheels do you own for cross?
> Now you buy a new bike that works with disc brakes only. None of those wheels work, you have to sell them at a loss and then start replacing them with newer wheels.
> ...


so you justification is you spent to much on wheels on a unsuperior but at the time only legal setup. So that why disc brakes arent good? is this really logic at all?

on the adjustment thing. First flat tires should be a rare, and disc thickness barely varies. Lastly the hot mechanical disc right now(road BB7) is adjustable literally in seconds by hand. Hydro disc will self adjust.


----------



## Dion (Dec 24, 2009)

Bushwacka said:


> What's funny is people are so adverse to change they will say anything illogical for why their way is better.


 I'm not as hardcore as many racers on this board. I'm "attached" to my own website . I use a commuter style frame with a riser bar and a 1X8 set-up and a $5 thumbie friction shifter. My bike is so old school it's ridiculous.

I usually place in the back of the pack, but I finish every race and I've never been lapped! :aureola:

I think for somebody like me (and there are a ton of us out there), switching to discs isn't much of an issue because I am MUCH weaker in other areas. In fact, coming from a freestyle BMX background, braking, cornering, bunnyhopping and maintaining speed is my strength - overall endurance and hills? Not so much 

Maybe CX frames will go the same direction MTB's did where discs are the standard. Who knows? I'm open to new trends


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

Bushwacka said:


> so you justification is you spent to much on wheels on a unsuperior but at the time only legal setup.


 Discs have always been legal for 99.9% of racers. Just not Pros racing UCI events...which accounts for .1% of cross bikes.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

cx_fan said:


> Think about this, how many pairs of wheels do you own for cross?
> Now you buy a new bike that works with disc brakes only. None of those wheels work, you have to sell them at a loss and then start replacing them with newer wheels.
> 
> Now you have 2 or 3 sets of wheels but each have a disc that is different thicknesses and you will have to adjust that brake before you can start riding after having a flat tire.
> ...


Well, I'd argue that good portion of new participants in CX have a MTB background and already have wheels ready to go. Probably a few. I know I do. Regarding disc width, never had a problem amongst three different types of discs. All plug and play. Only time I fiddle with my BB7's is when changing between hub manufacturers. For some reason my SRAM and Shimanos are off just a tad. But the SRAM X9 hubs are so darn cheap and reliable it's hard to beat them and cheap enough to build two sets of wheels. When I rebuild my one set of wheels I will have both sets on the SRAM X9 on the rear.

No one is making you buy new wheels, and if I were you I wouldn't switch either. But for the new guys or guys looking to try something new, it's a solid way to go. You also don't have to worry so much about ruining the braking track on your nice cheap carbon ebay rims.


----------



## jroden (Jun 15, 2004)

wait now, I have not yet seen my favorite argument for cantis, they help you go faster because the braking is so lousy. And that in cross you just need to "scrub off a little speed".

I'm thankful the internet has this resource where the great know it alls of the sport of cyclocross can gather and insult people.


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

jroden said:


> wait now, I have not yet seen my favorite argument for cantis, they help you go faster because the braking is so lousy. And that in cross you just need to "scrub off a little speed".
> 
> I'm thankful the internet has this resource where the great know it alls of the sport of cyclocross can gather and insult people.


that was actually used . Its ok I am only posting is this thread as a record that I was ahead of the curve......and I really dont take it seriously its just some of the response "for" cantis are pretty funny.


----------



## Henri65 (Nov 24, 2008)

Singular had to delay introduction of the Kite in order to keep up with demand for their current production frames. There definitely will be a Kite in time for the 2011 cross season and disc or canti is still up in the air. But it will be either or, not both. 
Marty likes cantis better for cross.
I'm new to cross, but I'm kind of thinking if stopping power was such an issue why aren't there more people running v-brakes?


----------



## Rouleur (Mar 5, 2004)

*My problem...*

Stopping isn't the problem for me. Going faster is.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Henri65 said:


> I'm new to cross, but I'm kind of thinking if stopping power was such an issue why aren't there more people running v-brakes?


I'm guessing lever pull problems and they are not traditional.


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

88 rex said:


> I'm guessing lever pull problems and they are not traditional.


lever pull problem can be solved with this.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...f606ba9&itemid=300475035122&ff4=263602_304642

which before someone says it cost 30 bucks for a bike. Id say that th cheapest V brakes stop better than the best Canti's.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

When is some one going to mention Unicorns?
This thread has already gotten boring with out them.


----------



## Jim311 (Sep 18, 2009)

The cross world is about 8 years late to this debate. I remember how embroiled the debate got on MTBR. I found the link in the archives a while back and checked it out just to laugh at how many people said they'd never abandon vbrakes and how they were perfectly adequate even in the wet. It's the exact same debate, verbatim, as the debate here.


----------



## krisdrum (Oct 29, 2007)

Henri65 said:


> I'm new to cross, but I'm kind of thinking if stopping power was such an issue why aren't there more people running v-brakes?


I think most would say mud clearance and the already mentioned lever pull (which can be rectified with a pulley).


----------



## jroden (Jun 15, 2004)

Bushwacka said:


> lever pull problem can be solved with this.
> 
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...f606ba9&itemid=300475035122&ff4=263602_304642
> 
> which before someone says it cost 30 bucks for a bike. Id say that th cheapest V brakes stop better than the best Canti's.


I tried one of those years back and found i still had to set the pads close to the rims and often did not have much brakes left by the end of the race, plus that big thing stuck out to the side.

I used the "mini" type v brakes a few years back, they were very good brakes but sat close to the rim, collected mud on the top and required the tire be deflated to remove. I know the last problem can be solved, so they are an OK option, especially if it's not real muddy. They would be great for non-racing use especially, plus very cheap.


----------



## cx_fan (Jul 30, 2004)

I still dont think discs are the way to go for me for the following reasons:

I live in CO...we have only 2-3 races a year in snow or mud so discs aren't going to do much here. My Avid Shorty Ultimates stop on a dime, why have the extra weight of that setup?

We have these things called goathead thorns. They give people flat tires all day long on the courses we race on so most have at least one set of wheels in the pits in case of flats
.
I have multiple sets of clincher wheels. You pick them up cheap at veloswap, CL or ebay. You put on a cassette and tires and wham, a back up set of wheels for 175.00 bucks.

Almost all cross bikes are spaced at 130mm and currently there are few choices of road hubs with disc mounts. MTB hubs are spaced at 135mm and pulling on that carbon rear end of your cross bike will do some serious damage while trying to make that work. You can cut down the axle to make this work.

There are little in production wheelsets that work. Plus you need to shell out at least another 40 bucks for a set of disc rotors for each set of wheels that you may want to use. I dont have that expense with my current setup.

As for rotor thickness, if you have your avid BB7's adjusted to the "race wheels" or primary wheels and you change wheels, you will have to rotate either the inside or outside knob to accommodate for that change, again depending on how used the rotors are. You are already trying to do a 10 second wheel change during a race and then take another 10 seconds or more to make that adjustment and then get back in. The average racer participation for the 35 B's in CO is 120 guys week in and week out. If I have to sit in the pits for 20 seconds muking with my brakes, 50 guys go by me and I might as well drop out at that point.

I am not saying that discs are a bad thing. I mearly stated that there were hardly any at the Interbike show, I have not seen anyone in my race series use them and with multiple wheelsets already owned or given to me I see no reason to change. Now if Shimano or Avid do come out with a road lever that is hydraulic, that could be a game changer.

The old adage of race what you brought is what you do.....


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

Bushwacka said:


> lever pull problem can be solved with this.
> 
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...f606ba9&itemid=300475035122&ff4=263602_304642
> 
> which before someone says it cost 30 bucks for a bike. Id say that th cheapest V brakes stop better than the best Canti's.


You could always go with a flat bar, grip shift and linear-pull brakes rather than add a gadjet and save 200g, for the weight weenies.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

cx_fan said:


> Now you have 2 or 3 sets of wheels but ...



I thought you were on the verge of the reason that cyclocross will evolve to disk brakes, but no. 

Racing exist to advertize and sell bikes. The bicycle industry will take advantage of the rule change and put there pros on disks brakes, whether there pros like it or not, to sell bikes. 

A sport of tradition like Cyclocross will grumble, but mere mortals will see the top pros on disk equipped factory machines and they will ditch there old bike to be cool like the pros. The advantages of disks will be remembered and the disadvantages forgotten or compensated for. 

Above it was mentioned that you have 2-3 sets of wheels. Good, the bike industry will be happy to sell you some more, up-to-date wheels.


----------



## cx_fan (Jul 30, 2004)

Killroy said:


> I thought you were on the verge of the reason that cyclocross will evolve to disk brakes, but no.
> 
> Racing exist to advertize and sell bikes. The bicycle industry will take advantage of the rule change and put there pros on disks brakes, whether there pros like it or not, to sell bikes.
> 
> ...


Nicely put...it is all about advertising to those companies. 

Me, I will probably be the 21st century "old school" guy running canti's while everyone else is on discs just like the 20th centruy "old school" guy was running 7/8 speed while everyone else is running 9/10 speed stuff.


----------



## TWD (Feb 9, 2004)

I hesitate to even post in this thread (same tired old disc debate), but I'll offer my experiences take it or leave it, as I've raced and trained a lot on cross bikes both with canti's and discs.

Background Disclosure to put my experience in context: 
- 20+ years racing mtb (cat 1/expert) starting with cantis (5+ years), linear pull (~5 years) and discs (10 years).
-9 years racing cross, currently Cat 2 and race either A or A/Elite Masters. 6 seasons racing w/cantis, ~2+ seasons racing with discs, maybe 1/2 season on linear pull, but currently racing cantis. I've won a number of races and I've been lapped too, but generally finish top 1/3 in Elite/A Masters races barring mishap or mechanical. ~15-20 cx races per season.
- 15+ years racing road
-several years racing BMX as a kid (expert, early 80s)....rear U brake only...HA!!!!

Location: Oregon

Here is my experience racing discs vs cantis on an issue by issue basis. 

1. Braking power. The discs get the nod over cantis obviously. The more technical the course, and the bigger the elevation change the more of an advantage discs become. On flat/less technical and dry courses, I don't miss the discs at all (most courses I don't miss discs much at all). On a course with steep/rough fast descents into a hairpin going back uphill, I'll take the discs any day. Discs aren't ever a must have on any course I've raced, but there are situations where you can really open it up on a downhill or fast section knowing you've got the ability to scrub the speed quickly before a tight turn. With cantis, particulalry in wet conditions, I have to hold back a bit on a section like that to make sure I can make the turn at the bottom. Generally speaking, you want to conserve every bit of momentum you can in a cross race, but there certainly are situations where added braking power and late braking can gain time. Think of it this way, your tires and technique will dictate the maximum speed you can negotiate the apex of the turn regardless of what brakes you have on your bike, but if you can carry more speed further down a straight and brake later, you will be faster overall. I think most racers tend to ease up and coast into tight turns, rather than pedaling into/through the turns. You may not be braking hard into most turns, but subconciously, you may be easing up a lot more/sooner than you think you are. 

2. Modulation: Properly set up canti's get the nod over discs here. I'm running Pauls NeoRetro/Touring cantis w/Kool stop salmons and Avid BB7 discs. However, I don't find the modulation of the discs to be an issue at all. As a matter of fact, I've found one of the biggest advantages to discs in cross is that you have enough braking power (in all conditions) to brake with one finger, which means you can grip the bar much looser over rough terrain which leads to a lot less overall fatigue and abuse on your body. 

3. Reliability/consistency of all weather braking. Discs obviously win here. If I lived in SoCal, I wouldn't even consider running discs for cross. I live in Oregon, so discs, while by no means necessary on any cross course, do make somewhat more sense. The wetter the course the bigger the benefit. In theory, many people claim that the tire contact patch for cross is too small to warrant the use of discs. I haven't found this to be true. Sure, discs can easiliy skid the rear tire (I can skid the rear with cantis just as easiliy when it's dry), but I've rarely locked up the front tire with discs. Never in the dry, and very seldom in the slop (very easy to modulate with 1 finger). A 140 mm rotor in back would be plenty. Like cantis, setup matters a lot when it comes to modulation with discs, (at least with the adjustability of the BB7s).

4. Ease of Wheel changes - I've seen this one argued both ways. For me, I can do wheel changes much quicker with a disc wheel than with cantis. Even more so with rims of varying width. When racing with discs, I ran 2 identical hubsets, so I could swap wheels with no adjustment whatsoever.

5. Rim Wear vs pad life- Yep, if you ride in the wet/grit a lot, you are going to wear out rims. Just a fact of life. Not as much of an issue if you have race only rims, but in really extreme conditions, you can damage a rim in short order. I've got a set of race only wheels that I built up part way into last cross season that are already have pretty severely worn brake tracks. A couple more really bad races this year and they'll be shot. Not a deal killer for me, but yes it does merit some consideration. Generally, pad life for me has been much better with discs, and braking performance doesn't degrade as much with disc pads vs canti.

6. Mud Clearance. I give the nod here to to discs in most conditions. The only conditions where I don't favor discs in mud is when there is a considerable amount of sand thrown in. Sand can eat disc pads pretty quickly. It eats canti pads and rims pretty quickly too though. On the flip side, my race last Saturday was in as extreme mud/slop as any cross race I've done. Long grass mixed in with ever thickening mud. I had so much mud/grass clogged into my cantis as the fork and at the rear stays that the wheels wouldn't turn and I'd come to a stop. That is one extreme end of the conditions where I definitely would have preferred discs with much less hardware at the fork and stays to clog up and catch mud/grass. If I had my disc bike in the pits, I'd have been on that sucker after the first lap and would have stayed on it.

7. Weight.- This is the obvious achilles heal of discs. You can argue it all you want, but currently disc setups are not near as light as canti's. Heavier hubs, more robust (heavier) frame/fork, rotors, higher spoke count and heavier spokes and nipples. I run my disc wheels 32 hole 3x with DT comp spokes with brass nipples, vs using DT revos on my canti wheels with alu nipples front and non-drive rear. The durability of these wheelsets have been very comparable (same rims, very different spokes/nipples). You COULD save some rim weight by eliminating the brake track. So far, that is a moot point until somebody comes our with an ultralight disc only carbon tubular rim. I don't expect that anytime soon, nor could I afford it if it was available. 

Now, how much does weight really matter for cross? I would argue that it matters more than for any other cycling discipline save an uphill TT. Reason being, that you have to carry your bike. I don't notice the extra weight of the discs at all when on the bike.

Ask me whether or not I notice the extra weight of discs on the last lap of an A/elite cross race, when I've been in the in the pain cave for 65 minutes, and I've got to lug my disc equipped cross bike over a six pack of barriers on lap 12 of the race. Forget it, for that reason alone, I'm not running discs on my race bike anymore. 

On the whole, while the UCI disc ban didn't affect 99% of racers, the misunderstanding of the rule, and the common consumer's infatuation with what the Pros are running did have an impact on disc availability/development for cross. I'm looking forward to see what new cross specific discs come out in the next few years, and if the weight penalty comes down, then maybe I'd go back to discs on my race bike, but I don't see the weight penalty being eliminated ($ for $ compared to cantis) anytime soon if ever. 

And I don't expect I'll be without a canti equipped race bike anytime soon. 

That's my experience......worth what you paid for it.


----------



## Kram (Jan 28, 2004)

Finally, a rational, methodical, seemingly unbiased comment. Thanks.


----------



## Britishbane (Mar 4, 2009)

TWD said:


> I hesitate to even post in this thread (same tired old disc debate), but I'll offer my experiences take it or leave it, as I've raced and trained a lot on cross bikes both with canti's and discs.
> 
> Background Disclosure to put my experience in context:
> 
> ...



Awesome explanation. Discussion over. I don't get the debate...its pretty obvious what the pros and cons are of each braking system.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Thanks for the review!


----------



## 196nautique (Sep 23, 2005)

Been pretty happy racing on my disc brake La Cruz this season. Been in a couple of muddy races where it was nice to have confidence that the brakes would stop me when I needed them. The bike is steel and weighs 22 lbs. I place in the middle of the Cat 3s and am having fun. Might be faster or place better if I was on a lighter, stiffer aluminum or carbon bike, but I really like having no brake chatter or stopping/ slowing issues. I am using the wheels off of my 29er, DT 240 hubs and Stan's Arch rims, tubeless with Michelin Muds, and really like this setup. If there is a carbon frame, disc bike with 135mm spacing available next season, I will be looking hard at it.

Also, when the racing season is over, the bike will get a mountain cassette and rear der., and become a fire road machine.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

TWD, good contribution. 

In your trade study, disk won a lot of the topics, but a system mass was heavily ‘weighted’ and cantis won overall. Would you ever consider modifying your bike to compensate for disks? Flat bar, 1x9, ect? Heavy stuff like drop bars and STI shifters are weighting down cross bikes with no debate to my knowledge.


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

you can get uncarbon rimbrakeless tubular rims from these guys.

410 grams much cheaper and more durable than carbon.

http://www.geax.com//accessories/?cat=8&prod=72

about 100 bucks a rim. lace them up to a I9 hub or something cheaper if cost is an option and youd have a 1500-1600 grams in the wheels.

the real fun will be when zipp gets in on the action though.


----------



## TWD (Feb 9, 2004)

Killroy said:


> TWD, good contribution.
> 
> In your trade study, disk won a lot of the topics, but a system mass was heavily ‘weighted’ and cantis won overall. Would you ever consider modifying your bike to compensate for disks? Flat bar, 1x9, ect? Heavy stuff like drop bars and STI shifters are weighting down cross bikes with no debate to my knowledge.


You are correct, in a lot of cases, I see very little drawback to discs for cross, but as I noted for me, the weight issues is the killer. 

I have not considered going to flat bar on a cross bike from a weight perspective, and honestly couldn't tell you off hand how much you could save weight wise by making that switch. I doubt it's enough to offset the weight of discs, but haven't done the math.

I'd have to say that I prefer drop bars for cross for a number of reasons, but that is another thread altogether.


----------



## Miles E (Jul 31, 2003)

cx_fan said:


> As for rotor thickness, if you have your avid BB7's adjusted to the "race wheels" or primary wheels and you change wheels, you will have to rotate either the inside or outside knob to accommodate for that change, again depending on how used the rotors are.


Have you even used discs? The rotors do not wear like rims do. Also, they have these things called "rotor spacers" so you can set all your wheelsets to have the disc in the exact same inboard/outboard position.

I can understand people being content with cantis, but why the irrational fears about discs?


----------



## MichaelB (Feb 28, 2010)

TWD said:


> You are correct, in a lot of cases, I see very little drawback to discs for cross, but as I noted for me, the weight issues is the killer.
> 
> .


So since "weight" seems to be the killer, what is the REAL weight difference (compare apples with apples please)

TDW's writeup was pretty good and sensible - thanks


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

TWD said:


> I have not considered going to flat bar on a cross bike from a weight perspective, and honestly couldn't tell you off hand how much you could save weight wise by making that switch. I doubt it's enough to offset the weight of discs, but haven't done the math.


I haven't done the math either, but grip shifters, carbon flatbars and hydro discs are pretty darn light. I'm sure someone will post some numbers though


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

MichaelB said:


> So since "weight" seems to be the killer, what is the REAL weight difference (compare apples with apples please)


Such a tough question to answer. The real answer is that both CAN be built to minimum weight allowances if racing in a class that weighs bikes. I personally lust for a true CX flatbar set-up. I never ride the drops in a race EXCEPT for the finish. I can sprint just as well with a flat bar. Opinions obviously vary.


----------



## perttime (Jun 27, 2005)

TWD said:


> 2. Modulation: Properly set up canti's get the nod over discs here. I'm running Pauls NeoRetro/Touring cantis w/Kool stop salmons and Avid BB7 discs.


In my very limited experience with MTB brakes, hydraulic discs have better modulation than mechanical ones. Also, with the hydraulics I have used, lever movement is very short: you just increase pressure without much movement, so the braking finger does not have to get into awkward angles.

I am pretty sure hydraulic disc brakes for drop bars are coming soon.

(just my 2c. don't feel the need to convince anyone one way or another)


----------



## TWD (Feb 9, 2004)

MichaelB said:


> So since "weight" seems to be the killer, what is the REAL weight difference (compare apples with apples please)
> 
> TDW's writeup was pretty good and sensible - thanks


I don't remember the exact number, and I'm too lazy to go back and calculate it, but it was over 2 lbs. 

My disc setup:

-Avid BB7 w/160mm rotors
-King Disc hubs laced 32x3cross with DT competition spokes and brass nipples. 
-Fork Winwood Dualist (carbon steerer) ~640 gm 

Canti Setup; 
-Paul Neo Retro Front, Touring Canit rear
-Velocity road hubs laced 32x3cross with DT Revolution spokes w/Alu nipples front and non-drive rear, DT comps and brass nipples on rear - drive side.
-Fork - Origin8 (carbon steerer) ~450 gm

Same spoke count, lacing pattern and rims for each both setups.

So, comparing apples to apples: 

-Brakes. I think the brakes alone account for at least a pound difference (caliper, pads, adapter, hardware, rotor, bolts etc..) In fairness, the BB7 is about the heaviest disc caliper on the market. There is a fair bit of room for improvement in that regard. My Paul's canti's are a tad more expendive MSRP (I paid a fraction of that used), but there are plenty of cheap light cantis out there.

- Hubs - my King disc hubs cost nearly 4 times as much as the Velocity hubs. No comparison in quality, but the Velocity hubs are 150gm lighter for the set. In my searches, it seems like cheap, light, quality disc hubs are harder to come by than road hubs. I wouldn't call the Velocity hubs as quality, but that is another matter.

-Wheels - I build all of my own wheels, and typically build 32 hole 3 cross for most. For durability, I won't use anything but 3x lacing on disc wheels, nor will I use anything lighter than a DT competition spokes, and brass nipples all around for discs. 

On rim brake wheels, I wouldn't hesitate to drop the spoke count down on the front wheel to 28, or even 24 for cross. Could also go with radial lacing up front, but that saves very little weight over a 3x pattern I won't likely go below 32x3cross on the rear wheel for durability on a cross setup. Lighter spokes generally cost more money, but in the grand total this isn't a huge cost unless you are using CX-rays or Aerolites.

Frame - I didn't include any difference in frame weight for a disc tab and more robust tubing. No real way to calculate that unless you've got a near identical frame with disc tabs and one without.

-Fork - I think the canti fork was about 50 cheaper, and nearly 200 gm lighter.

On the whole, apples to apples to me means comparable quality, price, and durability. My setups have been pretty comparable in terms of durability, but the hub choices skew the quality and price aspects. 

A more fair comparison would be comparing a set of DT240 road hubs to a set of their mountain hubs. Would equalize the cost and quality a bit. Or you could compare ultegra hubs to XT hubs (very heavy if I recall). 

At any rate, if you compare dollor for dollar, discs come out a significant amount heavier. You can argue that you can build a disc bike down to the UCI limit, and I'm sure we'll see that done on some pro's bikes in the future (did I see a disc equipped carbon Stevens somewhere?), but until that technology trickles down to the common racer at a reasonable pricepoint, then it's irrelevant for many of us. 

Put another way, yes you COULD build a light disc cross setup, but for those of us without the disposable income to drop that kind of money on a bike that is going to get severely abused, it would take a lot of $$$ to make up the weight difference. 

In my case, I know I couldn't afford to buy 2lbs worth of lighter components to maike up for the discs without seriously sacrificing durability, breaking the bank, draining my kids college funds and causing a divorce.


----------



## FTM (Feb 4, 2005)

I am assuming that this thread, and discussion, were started in large part because of the recent UCI rule change regarding disc brakes. If so, until the UCI decides to allow flat bars in cyclocross, maybe we leave them out of the weight saving discussion.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

88 rex said:


> I haven't done the math either, but grip shifters, carbon flatbars and hydro discs are pretty darn light. I'm sure someone will post some numbers though


I'll do the math for the canti drop bar to hydro disk flat bar:

I used Motobecane’s top of the line ($1999, its all relative) Fantom Cross Team Ti for the baseline:
- Avid Shorty 4 Cantis, 314g
- Utegra Shiter/Lever, 447g
- Cable & Housing, 40g (estimate)
- American Classic non-disk 105/205 hubs, 310g (Surrogate)
- Ritchey BioMax Pro Bar, 240g
- Tektro RL570 Cross Top Levers, 95g
- Front Brake Cable Housing Stop, 10g (estimate)
- Canti Brake Posts, 20g (estimate)

+ Avid Elixer CR hydro Disk Brakes, 790g (Includes levers, housing, rotors, calipers, and adaptors and hardware)
+ Grip Shift, 195g
+ American Classic Disk 130/225 hubs, 355g (Surrogate)
+ Ritchey SuperLogic Carbon Flat Bar, 112g (If too much $, go alloy for 130g)
*
Total 
-24 g (weight savings)*

The Fantom Cross Team Ti comes disk ready, so it already has disk hubs, but in order to account for the non-disk to disk hub switch, I used American Classic hubs as a surrogate. The result is that we find out that Ultegra Shifter/levers are heavy, drop bars are heavy, and the Cross Top levers are a redundant part. I did not account for spokes. If we went to Formula R1 Disk brakes ($), we would save another 192 g. Go 1X9 and save another ~300 g.


----------



## roseyscot (Jan 30, 2005)

btw, the specialized engineer designing those disc equipped CRUX is supposedly the former owner of October Bicycles. he's been out east racing a red version of the same thing the last few weeks. he said the fork is indeed a ritchey mtb for meant for 26 inch wheels since there are no high quality alternatives with a reasonably close axle to crown right now. i do not think he is the one in the pictures though.


----------



## Saddle Up (Oct 25, 2009)

MichaelB said:


> So since "weight" seems to be the killer, what is the REAL weight difference (compare apples with apples please)
> 
> TDW's writeup was pretty good and sensible - thanks


 I weighed a Rocky Mountain Solo CX (canti brakes, Avid Shorty 4's) against a Solo CXD (disc brake version,Avid BB7), the CXD weighed 1.6 lbs more.


----------



## Dynastar (Jun 8, 2007)

This debate is a well and good. My feeling is run whatever you want, but in 5-8 years unless it is a custom build, the only bike you will be able to buy will be disc.

Now that the UCI restrictions are lifted, a lot more $ will go into disc R&D and weights will come down pretty quickly.

The "I already have 3 wheel sets and will have to buy more " excuse is a pretty piss poor one. I know very few people in cycling who object to buying more cycling stuff. I am surprised the people who threw this out could even say it with a straight face. HELLO, you have THREE wheelsets - 'nuff said.


----------



## steve_e_f (Sep 8, 2003)

I'm fine with discs, but I can't afford a new frame AND a/b wheels so its a non-starter


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/pro-bike-tim-johnsons-cannondale-cyclocrossworld-superx

an american pro on record saying he is looking forward to disc brakes.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

Saddle Up said:


> I weighed a Rocky Mountain Solo CX (canti brakes, Avid Shorty 4's) against a Solo CXD (disc brake version,Avid BB7), the CXD weighed 1.6 lbs more.



I smell apples AND oranges. 0.9 lb maybe, but not 1.6 lb.


----------



## PT (Mar 8, 2002)

Dynastar said:


> I know very few people in cycling who object to buying more cycling stuff. I am surprised the people who threw this out could even say it with a straight face. HELLO, you have THREE wheelsets - 'nuff said.


I encourage everyone to go disc, mostly to enhance my choice of cheap rim brake cross wheels at the 2011 VeloSwap...


----------



## Henri65 (Nov 24, 2008)

Bushwacka said:


> http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/pro-bike-tim-johnsons-cannondale-cyclocrossworld-superx
> 
> an american pro on record saying he is looking forward to disc brakes.


His team mate Powers says similar here, Cannondale must have something coming.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Henri65 said:


> His team mate Powers says similar here, Cannondale must have something coming.


http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/disc-brakes-and-cross-bikes-coming-soon-to-a-store-near-you

As well as Specialized and Stevens..........AND interest from Euro riders.:thumbsup: 

I would LOVE to see a C-dale Super X disc.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*I'm still running*



cx_fan said:


> Nicely put...it is all about advertising to those companies.
> 
> Me, I will probably be the 21st century "old school" guy running canti's while everyone else is on discs just like the 20th centruy "old school" guy was running 7/8 speed while everyone else is running 9/10 speed stuff.


8 speed

I have no issues with discs but won't be using any soon


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

88 rex said:


> http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/disc-brakes-and-cross-bikes-coming-soon-to-a-store-near-you
> 
> As well as Specialized and Stevens..........AND interest from Euro riders.:thumbsup:
> 
> I would LOVE to see a C-dale Super X disc.


 But would you drop $$$ SIX GRAND PLUS to buy one?
C-dale would LOVE to see that!


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

atpjunkie said:


> 8 speed
> 
> I have no issues with discs but won't be using any soon


I have a newish 8 speed XT 12-32 that I cant seem to sell to anyone. Maybe you, $10.


----------



## ZoomBoy (Jan 28, 2004)

Dynastar said:


> The "I already have 3 wheel sets and will have to buy more " excuse is a pretty piss poor one. I know very few people in cycling who object to buying more cycling stuff. I am surprised the people who threw this out could even say it with a straight face. HELLO, you have THREE wheelsets - 'nuff said.


I have no problem buying it's the paying for it part that gets me!


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

the mayor said:


> But would you drop $$$ SIX GRAND PLUS to buy one?
> C-dale would LOVE to see that!



The SuperX Rival doesn't cost $6k, and I don't pay MSRP. And in 2 years, when I expect things to REALLY be in production, Yes, I will most likely pay for one.


----------



## Jim311 (Sep 18, 2009)

The BB7s are heavier than hell. There will be a much lighter hydro alternative out, it's only a matter of time.


----------



## PaleAleYum (Jan 12, 2006)

*Unicorns*



the mayor said:


> When is some one going to mention Unicorns?
> This thread has already gotten boring with out them.




This thread is using up all the good ammo before the traditional Christmas post.

Best part of the picture sequence is that my pickup and the Lobster circus tent is prominently featured in the background!


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

PaleAleYum said:


> This thread is using up all the good ammo before the traditional Christmas post.
> 
> Best part of the picture sequence is that my pickup and the Lobster circus tent is prominently featured in the background!


Awesome! Here in New England....parking and tents are huge! Several promoters are going to get rid of all the stupid bikes ( whether they have discs or not) to make more room for parking and tents!


----------



## m_s (Nov 20, 2007)

I don't even know why you would need a light hydro setup, initially. There's really no reason BB7s have to be as heavy as they are? I'm sure if avid put out a BB7 ultimate for 150 a caliper or whatever people would buy it. 

I have no other input.


----------



## Magdaddy (Feb 23, 2007)

m_s said:


> I don't even know why you would need a light hydro setup, initially. There's really no reason BB7s have to be as heavy as they are? I'm sure if avid put out a BB7 ultimate for 150 a caliper or whatever people would buy it.
> 
> I have no other input.



spot on assessment really.
I bet Avid can turn around a light weight version in practically no time. In fact, I would be surprised if they didn't have one on the shelf awaiting the market.

I built up a disc Salsa Las Cruces last season, Rival build, Speed Dream wheels with Hugi 240 hubs/Velocity rims, and BB7's. The bike came in at a little over 20 lbs. I'm currently running 700x 38's on it, and simple and cheap Salsa components-seat tube, stem, bar.

I could probably get a pound off of it by swapping out the tires and tha other above mentioned bits. However, the bike rides extremely well-everywhere. It see's all kinds of different uses..and quite a bit of semi aggressive singletrack.

I welcome with open arms, the thought of being able to buy a full tilt carbon disc cross bike. C'Dale, Stevens, etc...sub 16 lbs with disc's for $6K, as long as I can get a Sram build kit with it...show me where to sign!


----------



## MichaelB (Feb 28, 2010)

Cheers for all the replies guys re the weight.

I agree that it won't be long before lighter/better componenst are on the scene if not already developed pending the push by Shimano to get them legalised.

It will be interesting to see what Shimano come up with /// :thumbsup:


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Cross specific development will likely be very slow. There are very few products in the CX market that are CX specific (cantis, tires). Relative to road and mtb, cross is a tiny market. Companies like shimano, avid, hayes don't develop parts unless there is a guarantee of OEM volume and bike companies probably don't make enough CX bikes to get there. If Shimano or one of the others are believers in disc road setups then that's a different story.


----------



## jroden (Jun 15, 2004)

davidka said:


> Cross specific development will likely be very slow. There are very few products in the CX market that are CX specific (cantis, tires). Relative to road and mtb, cross is a tiny market. Companies like shimano, avid, hayes don't develop parts unless there is a guarantee of OEM volume and bike companies probably don't make enough CX bikes to get there. If Shimano or one of the others are believers in disc road setups then that's a different story.


I'd be more than happy to run disc brakes on the road also, especially if there is a hydro option with integrated shifting


----------



## MichaelB (Feb 28, 2010)

davidka said:


> Cross specific development will likely be very slow. There are very few products in the CX market that are CX specific (cantis, tires). Relative to road and mtb, cross is a tiny market. Companies like shimano, avid, hayes don't develop parts unless there is a guarantee of OEM volume and bike companies probably don't make enough CX bikes to get there. If Shimano or one of the others are believers in disc road setups then that's a different story.



I wouldn't bet on it ...

Anyway, my interest is more from a road perspective (added a disc to my road bike primarily for wet weather riding) but had to use a Cross/MTB fork, as there are no OTS road forks available (Kona wouldn't reply to the request to get a Kona Honky Inc fork  ).

Main difference is axle to crown height. Wound can match this dimension, but it's to exxy at the moment.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

davidka said:


> Cross specific development will likely be very slow. There are very few products in the CX market that are CX specific (cantis, tires). Relative to road and mtb, cross is a tiny market. Companies like shimano, avid, hayes don't develop parts unless there is a guarantee of OEM volume and bike companies probably don't make enough CX bikes to get there. If Shimano or one of the others are believers in disc road setups then that's a different story.



It would be CX/Road worthy, AND think of all those hybrids/touring bikes. I would have to think Shimano has something up their sleeve since they made the push. Avid/SRAM can maybe (finally) produce a mythical Avid BB9?:thumbsup:


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

FYI, these are 325g lighter then Avid BB7 apples to apples. They work better too. More coin, obviously.


----------



## Saddle Up (Oct 25, 2009)

davidka said:


> Cross specific development will likely be very slow. There are very few products in the CX market that are CX specific (cantis, tires). Relative to road and mtb, cross is a tiny market. Companies like shimano, avid, hayes don't develop parts unless there is a guarantee of OEM volume and bike companies probably don't make enough CX bikes to get there. If Shimano or one of the others are believers in disc road setups then that's a different story.


Actually the sales of cyclocross bikes is where we are seeing real growth at a retail level. Racing is where R & D always takes place, then the technology trickles down to what you find on the street. In this current bike boom we are finding riders coming from other forms of riding and discovering how practical many cyclocross bikes are.

The OEM volume is on the horizon, Shimano, Avid, Hayes etc are looking ahead. Consumers want disc brake equipped bikes, they are asking for them on the show room floor, racers will supply the R&D.


----------



## FTM (Feb 4, 2005)

Killroy said:


> FYI, these are 325g lighter than Avid BB7. They work better too. More coin, obviously.


All true




Killroy said:


> apples to apples


not if you want to use drop bars and have brake hoods like the vast majority of cross bikes.


----------



## m_s (Nov 20, 2007)

Saddle Up said:


> Actually the sales of cyclocross bikes is where we are seeing real growth at a retail level. Racing is where R & D always takes place, then the technology trickles down to what you find on the street. In this current bike boom we are finding riders coming from other forms of riding and discovering how practical many cyclocross bikes are.
> 
> The OEM volume is on the horizon, Shimano, Avid, Hayes etc are looking ahead. Consumers want disc brake equipped bikes, they are asking for them on the show room floor, racers will supply the R&D.


This is probably true.

OK, I have a little more to say.

I think discs are inevitable, maybe even for road bikes eventually. The amount people spend on cross and other cycling disciplines makes the "I'll never get discs because I have so much money in my wheels" argument ring hollow. The people spending a ton of money on cycling are generally the ones who replace most of their gear every few years anyways.

BUT I will be one of the people sticking with used stuff and cantis for a while I think, since I don't have the coin to replace my stuff all the time. That said, I'm not a roadie and a lightweight tubeless wheelset I can use on raceday for my 29er and also for more general use on my cross bike is pretty appealing, so maybe I'll make the move sooner rather than later. Any new, expensive wheelset I buy will be disc and rim compatible, though, and hopefully re-spaceable between 130mm and 135. I think Kings are, but they're $$$.


----------



## perttime (Jun 27, 2005)

FTM said:


> not if you want to use drop bars and have brake hoods like the vast majority of cross bikes.


Hydro levers (with hoods) for drop bars are probably just around the corner.


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

perttime said:


> Hydro levers (with hoods) for drop bars are probably just around the corner.


And they are going to be massive. 

Imagine trying to fit this under your palm.


----------



## perttime (Jun 27, 2005)

OnTheRivet said:


> And they are going to be massive.
> 
> Imagine trying to fit this under your palm.


Are you trying to be funny  or really belive that engineers are dumb?


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

FTM said:


> All true
> 
> 
> not if you want to use drop bars and have brake hoods like the vast majority of cross bikes.


"'What chu talking about..."

he he


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

perttime said:


> Are you trying to be funny  or really belive that engineers are dumb?


I am an engineer. Can't fit 10 pounds of **** into a 5 pound bag. They can't have the area under the hood any bigger so the master cylinder and shifting mechanism will probably protrude forward resulting in a very large shifter body. Oh and a lot of people (not me) hated Shimano shifter cables coming out of the body so they ran them under the bar tape, prepare for hydraulic lines exiting the shifter like old styles Shimano shift cables, no way they'll conform to the curves of a drop bar unless they run pre-bent hard lines.


----------



## perttime (Jun 27, 2005)

Here's some sketches for drop bar hydraulics, using existing brake components. Without shifters, though. I am pretty sure big names like Shimano and SRAM can spare some resources to design parts that fit better.

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=628818&highlight=drop


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

OnTheRivet said:


> I am an engineer.


And a longtime cynic and just all around hater of the whole idea. Of course you don't see how it could work. I'm sure Shimano and SRAM will have no problem engineering something, or even dusting off some hardware that's been shelved for a while. It's not really all that complicated.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

OnTheRivet said:


> I am an engineer. Can't fit 10 pounds of **** into a 5 pound bag.


Oh yeah...well if you're so wicked smaht ( Yes, I'm from Boston)...explain the phenom known as politicians...or some of the posters on here????:aureola:


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

perttime said:


> Here's some sketches for drop bar hydraulics, using existing brake components. Without shifters, though. I am pretty sure big names like Shimano and SRAM can spare some resources to design parts that fit better.
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=628818&highlight=drop


 Is this what you use when you drop the pick up line:" Hey baby, want to come up to my apartment to see my etchings?"?


----------



## perttime (Jun 27, 2005)

the mayor said:


> Is this what you use when you drop the pick up line:" Hey baby, want to come up to my apartment to see my etchings?"?


No :blush2: 

The successful one seems to be: "Hey, I live out at the edge of town. Can I sleep on your sofa" :thumbsup:


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

these are hot 
















I would like to see post-mounts and adapters go away. 








Todd Well's rig


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

88 rex said:


> It's not really all that complicated.


Which is why there are so many hydraulic braked road shifters on the market?


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

perttime said:


> Here's some sketches for drop bar hydraulics, using existing brake components. Without shifters, though. I am pretty sure big names like Shimano and SRAM can spare some resources to design parts that fit better.
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=628818&highlight=drop


Gotta love this quote from the guy who did those models. 

"Ideally, it would be nice to make a replacement body for the business end of an STI unit to attach to, retaining gears, but gaining hydraulics, *but there physically isn't enough space by my reckoning, unless everything was to be incredibly tiny to the point that I doubt it would work very well*."


----------



## OnTheRivet (Sep 3, 2004)

Killroy said:


> these are hot


Both those bikes use the Ritchey MTB fork which has a 48mm offset, not great for typical cross geometry.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

OnTheRivet said:


> Both those bikes use the Ritchey MTB fork which has a 48mm offset, not great for typical cross geometry.


But it makes you wonder....do the Pros who ride them notice? And do they care?
Going to be a mudder at the 1st World Cup tomorrow.....who will ride disc' and mtb forks???


----------



## CycloCross (Feb 26, 2004)

you guys are totally missing the idea of the disc brake, how are they going to fit the brake and shifting components? Well, shimano is already ahead of the game with DI2 if you think its gonna be mechanical shifting and hydraulic brakes you are wrong. The DI2 has no internals to work around.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

CycloCross said:


> you guys are totally missing the idea of the disc brake, how are they going to fit the brake and shifting components? Well, shimano is already ahead of the game with DI2 if you think its gonna be mechanical shifting and hydraulic brakes you are wrong. The DI2 has no internals to work around.


I agree!
And I can't wait till I can drop $1000 x2 for a couple of sets of Di3 Hydro shifters for my 2 new bikes.
And of course...the $900 electro derailuers to go with them.
And a bunch of new wheels
My kids already know that I ride their inheritance.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

OnTheRivet said:


> Which is why there are so many hydraulic braked road shifters on the market?



Was there a need until very very recently?


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

88 rex said:


> Was there a need until very very recently?


Well...disc brakes have always been legal for people that actually buy bikes...so, in theory, yes.
The no disc rule only effected a couple hundred riders, male and female, world wide( most of whom get free bikes and parts).
But the real questions is: is there really a need now?
And who will be able to afford and/or buy them?
I wish we could all talk about unicorns.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

the mayor said:


> But the real questions is: is there really a need now?
> And who will be able to afford them?


We could play that game with SO many things.


Is there a NEED for deep carbon tubulars? Who will afford them?

Do racers NEED custom builds? Who will afford them?

The answer to both.......apparently quite a few judging by the bikes floating around Granogue today. I'm pretty sure folks have some money sitting around to spend on this fun hobby. 

FWIW, I enjoy looking at the custom steel rigs with deep carbon tubulars. Something pretty cool about them.:thumbsup:

I do think if a hydro "brifter" is in the price range of Di2 then it won't go anywhere. I will stick with BB7's, or take a dremmel to a BB7 just to see what kind of fat I can trim off.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

Killroy said:


> Racing exist to advertize and sell bikes.


Racing exists because two or more riders want to see who's fastest. Racing exists because of racers.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

88 rex said:


> I do think if a hydro "brifter" is in the price range of Di2 then it won't go anywhere. I will stick with BB7's, or take a dremmel to a BB7 just to see what kind of fat I can trim off.


So the BB7 brakes have been around for ever.
And there are/were plenty of disc ready frames to use ( I had a pair of disc C-dales back in 01).
But very few used them.
All of a sudden....they 're going to be HUGE because now a guy from Belgie who's name everyone mispronounces can use discs?
Well...if high end stuff comes out before I die.....I'll buy it


----------



## perttime (Jun 27, 2005)

the mayor said:


> Well...if high end stuff comes out before I die.....I'll buy it


I will try to remind you some time next year.


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

the mayor said:


> Well...disc brakes have always been legal for people that actually buy bikes...so, in theory, yes.
> The no disc rule only effected a couple hundred riders, male and female, world wide( most of whom get free bikes and parts).
> But the real questions is: is there really a need now?
> And who will be able to afford and/or buy them?
> I wish we could all talk about unicorns.


the .01 percent of people that the rule change affect is responsible for 99 percent of the innovation being done.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

OnTheRivet said:


> Gotta love this quote from the guy who did those models.
> 
> "Ideally, it would be nice to make a replacement body for the business end of an STI unit to attach to, retaining gears, but gaining hydraulics, *but there physically isn't enough space by my reckoning, unless everything was to be incredibly tiny to the point that I doubt it would work very well*."


From the same guy later on:


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

OnTheRivet said:


> Both those bikes use the Ritchey MTB fork which has a 48mm offset, not great for typical cross geometry.


Neither my latest posts of Disk Cross bikes look like they have the Ritchey WCS Carbon MTB fork. Yet, if they did, the frame builders can adjust the head angle for correct handling. The rolling radius of a mountain bike tire and a cross tire are similar. Right?


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

perttime said:


> I will try to remind you some time next year.


I await your love letters.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

Bushwacka said:


> the .01 percent of people that the rule change affect is responsible for 99 percent of the innovation being done.


Really?
What planet are you from?


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

the mayor said:


> Really?
> What planet are you from?


at what point does a tubular make sense for anything but a race bike?


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Bushwacka said:


> at what point does a tubular make sense for anything but a race bike?



Doesn't make sense for any amatuer racing. But I'm still in the process of building a road set for everyday training and racing.


----------



## Henri65 (Nov 24, 2008)

Bushwacka said:


> at what point does a tubular make sense for anything but a race bike?


I used to commute on tubulars.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*I haven't found out*



Bushwacka said:


> at what point does a tubular make sense for anything but a race bike?


because I ride tubs everyday on my crossers

cheap set of beater/training tubs = better than the best clincher by a country mile


----------



## Bushwacka (Oct 6, 2010)

Henri65 said:


> I used to commute on tubulars.


so what happened when you got a flat? 

I actually ride my bike on long gravel rides where tubeless makes more sense, although it hasnt flatted on me.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

the mayor said:


> I agree!
> And I can't wait till I can drop $1000 x2 for a couple of sets of Di3 Hydro shifters for my 2 new bikes.
> And of course...the $900 electro derailuers to go with them.
> And a bunch of new wheels
> My kids already know that I ride their inheritance.


I'm pretty sure this was tongue in cheek but the Di2 setup is about the only way there is any hope of having the shifters and hydraulic master cylinder under a brake hood that you'd want to ride. There is no way a usable mechanical shifter and hydraulic setup can fit, just can't happen. 

If it is ever to happen then it will likely have to be a refinement of the outboard m/c setup that was shown at eurobike.

I still don't see it happening anytime soon unless the aftermarket setup is acutally successful. CX bike sales are growing but it's up 50% from nearly nothing. Still tiny compared to road and mtb. The shining light is that CX racers (in the US anyway) show a willingness to spend money on gear that is only rivaled by the tri crowd.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*and I'm sure that di3*



the mayor said:


> I agree!
> And I can't wait till I can drop $1000 x2 for a couple of sets of Di3 Hydro shifters for my 2 new bikes.
> And of course...the $900 electro derailuers to go with them.
> And a bunch of new wheels
> My kids already know that I ride their inheritance.


is gonna be so awesome after crashing it mud/water/sand......


----------



## myette10 (Jul 20, 2003)

*space*

there's lots of unused space in the cavity of the handlebars. sram and shimano could design bars with a recessed area that would create the necessary space for all that shifty and braky tech.


----------



## Killroy (Feb 9, 2006)

I'm sure that space can be found for shifting and braking.


----------



## FTM (Feb 4, 2005)

Bushwacka said:


> so what happened when you got a flat?


change the tire with the spare you have under your saddle, takes about the same amount of time as changing a tube, often less.


----------



## deuxdiesel (May 16, 2007)

Single speed, mechanical discs. Problem solved right now! I agree that to have a brake and shifter set up under the hoods will be difficult, but Shimano has some pretty deep pockets. The cable actuated remote hydro reservoir that was posted seems like a pretty elegant short term solution.


----------



## Henri65 (Nov 24, 2008)

Bushwacka said:


> so what happened when you got a flat?
> 
> I actually ride my bike on long gravel rides where tubeless makes more sense, although it hasnt flatted on me.



I had sealant in them, and carried a spare. Only once did the sealant not take care of a puncture and I had to put on the spare, but for the most part, more reliable than the clinchers I had been using.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

Bushwacka said:


> at what point does a tubular make sense for anything but a race bike?


I don't know what your point is...but you got this backasswards, Dingus.
Tubulars were around before clinchers.
Clinchers were developed for 99.9 % of riders...the one who buy products
And cross bikes are race bikes....so....


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

davidka said:


> I still don't see it happening anytime soon unless the aftermarket setup is acutally successful. CX bike sales are growing but it's up 50% from nearly nothing. Still tiny compared to road and mtb. The shining light is that CX racers (in the US anyway) show a willingness to spend money on gear that is only rivaled by the tri crowd.


Davidka is the voice of reason.
Well said!


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*I might bite*



Killroy said:


> I have a newish 8 speed XT 12-32 that I cant seem to sell to anyone. Maybe you, $10.


wouldn't use for cx but for stock on my mtb

send me a pm


----------

