#16
|
|||
|
|||
Mainstreaming the disc brake
Quote:
I agree for a new bike to consider discs. Room for bigger tires plus better for braking on carbon wheels vs pads. I have had disc brakes on my MTBs for past several years and older canti brake parts are getting hard to find at the lbs. However I just bought a new Ultegra Groupo with rim brakes since that's what I run on all my road bikes and the rims are interchangeable, etc. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Last edited by Volksbike; 08-19-2018 at 07:34 AM. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
dddd-"The industry players work in secret to build their better mouse traps, but are willing to collude in order to assure that standards exist for interchangeability between brands, and also license their patented technology to one another...
Not really..MTB/road disc brakes wee parts, BBs, chainrings, shifter/der compatibility...maybe cables and chains but dern little else. Ever see a shimano threadless headset? Or maybe a non shimano octalink BB?
__________________
Chisholm's Custom Wheels Qui Si Parla Campagnolo |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Bingo
Quote:
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
LOL at the conspiracy theories about disc brakes being forced on us. They worked great on mountain bikes and then started filtering over to CX bikes. After people noticed that they were a better option than cantilevers, people started looking at incorporating them on road bikes. It seems like a natural progression to me, similar to any other technological evolution.
Also we consumers asked for this stuff and bike companies were more than happy to oblige. Their business models rely on selling more and more bikes each year and responding to, and more importantly, anticipating consumer demand so selling race bikes with disc brakes seems to make a lot of sense. Anyway, I am about to put an order on one of those gloss oil chameleon framesets to build up with Dura Ace. That thing is hot. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
29" came first because it was better. 27.5" was a way to get all the "26 for life" people to actually try a bigger wheel (and because mfgrs were having trouble packaging 29" wheels, long-travel suspension, wide tires, and short chainstays - all generally solved by 1x drivetrains and boost spacing). It's really only used on enduro and DH bikes (and many of those are 29" now). |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Better, more consistent braking, more tire clearance, and a CX bike that can be a crit bike in a pinch (and an aero road bike that can race moderate gravel). Versatility FTW. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Jack of all trades, master of none.
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Well, I won a crit on the CX bike last week.
On the other hand, the industry could continue selling us a different bike for road, gravel, adventure, light trail riding, winter cycling, commuting, etc, and you all could complain about that industry conspiracy instead... ETA: if you care more about "collecting" bikes than using them, or have the disposable income to have a different rig for every possible drop-bar riding situation you could possibly encounter (and the desire to maintain such a quiver), then I get the skepticism. Otherwise, this is great for a lot of people. In my masters' crit today, a former (1990s) domestic road pro nipped me at the line for the win, on a Raleigh CX bike with aero wheels and disc brakes. A current national-level CX and MTB pro won the P/1/2 on a Kona CX bike with aero wheels and discs. Yes, it's the engine (and skills) that count - but people are using these more versatile bikes in cool ways, and aren't being held back by doing so. Last edited by tommyrod74; 08-19-2018 at 06:19 PM. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
I feel like at the state of current tech - alloy wheels and metal frames - for road bikes disc just incur too much trade offs, weight and costs. For allroads and gravel, the trade offs make sense
For carbon frames and wheels they make sense Last edited by tylercheung; 08-19-2018 at 04:58 PM. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Disc brakes are the lowest common denominator
Yes, bike manufacturers want consumers to buy disc brake bikes. Not for the conspiracy-minded "they want to force discs down everyone's throat" reasons (or not exactly, anyway), but for the simple reason that it would reduce their costs, and therefore increase their profits.
Disc brakes are basically the lowest common denominator, in the sense that it is coming to the point where more people will refuse to buy a bike because it has rim brakes, than will refuse to buy a bike because it has disc brakes (there is also a group of people who are ambivalent about the brake type, as long as the bike does what they want). It costs the bike companies (and retailers) money to design, produce, and stock bikes in both rim and disc brake models. Therefore, it makes business sense to only make the version that will sell the most. The marginal cost of also making rim brake models available may not be low enough for the number of extra bikes they might sell. The long and short of it is this: If 8 out of 10 people that came into the bike shop walked out with a disc brake bike, the bike manufacturers will not make rim brake bikes for those 9th and 10th people who want a rim brake bike. But they still want to sell a bike to those people, so yes, the bike companies want to get people to buy a disc brake bikes. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Exactly
Quote:
And of course bike companies want you to buy what the majority of consumers are also buying. But that's not to say rim brake wants won't be met, they just won't on some models/brands. Aluminum survives, rim brakes will too. Because they both work. Now, how much demand there will be and how many models will retain them is an open and ongoing question. For me the Allez Sprint Disc frame is intriguing, it's $1,500 and the cool colored Sagan edition is $1,750. These will go on sale at some point and if they dropped down far enough IMO they would make a killer crit project that would look awesome too. |
|
|