It’s official, the bike industry has lost its way.

[cgolvin]

Originally Posted by Burnette

You're standing there with an egg shaped blob in your head

Maybe the egg shaped blobs in our heads account for the wildly varying opinions and intermittent rants on the forum. (Yes, I realize it was a typo.)

[Aaron O]

This isn't really worth a personal insult fest gents.

[johnniecakes]

Here is my take on this and most things discussed here. Ride what ever you like. Me, I am a rim brake guy with 23 or 25 wide tires. But if you ride something else that's OK with me. Your choices about bikes will not rock my world.

[dancinkozmo]

Didn't think your bike was complicated enough? soon you can get a 13 speed system with 3 chains, 4 sprockets/cogs, and 2 cassettes. All in a large housing that significantly limits suspension design, shock, and water bottle placement. Everyone wins!

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/shiman...nsmission.html

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by Clancy

I did not present my point correctly. It’s not about discs vs rim brakes!

I recently attended a training seminar put on by the local Cannondale rep. He was introducing the “ all new” 2020 Bad Habit full suspension MTB. In describing the “all new” part the rep said that Cannondale’s engineers discovered that as the bike sizes changed that the action of the suspension changed unless the positioning of the suspension mounts were also changed. In other words, the suspension pivots/angles/actions were engineered around a specific size bike. But as the frame changed dimensions, unless the pivot points and angles also changed, the action of the suspension would be different then designed.

I was dumbfounded! In 2019, with all the available engineering technology available to a large company like Cannondale they just now figured out that as a frame changes dimensions, unless the suspension points also change relative to the frame, the action of the suspension is not consistent throughout all sizes. This seems to me to be engineering 101.

My point with the (to me) absurdity of disc brakes and thur axles on basic hybrid bikes is where the bike industry is putting their R&D dollars. It’s similar to the rabbit hole manufacturers went down when touting “women specific geometry “ only to quietly drop all such a few years later after realizing it was all based on outdated and limited data.

There is no question that hydraulic brakes perform better. There is also no question that rim brakes perform absolutely fine for most riders.

This is not about disc brakes vs rim brakes. It’s about manufacturers designing and producing bicycles that are appropriate in terms of price and functionality for the targeted buyers.

Hydraulic disc brakes on a bike with a Shimano Tourney rear derailleur? That’s putting manufacturing dollars to the best use? That really has the end user’s best interests in mind?

My point is that some (large and influential) bike companies are pushing debatable and questionable technology over sound engineering principals. I was using those two bikes as examples of what I see as hype over functionality.

I’ll bet Hambini would agree

[shinomaster]

Originally Posted by Clancy

I saw a 2020 Cannondale Quick today, a typical flat bar, upright, hybrid bike. Price tag of $1,000. It had flat mount hydraulic disc brakes and a front thur axle.

I saw a 2020 Electra Townie today, a typical ballon tire beach cruiser. It had hydraulic disc brakes. (With a Shimano Tourney derailleur)

I am struggling to find the right words to express the absurdity. No argument that hydraulic disc brakes offer better performance but these are two bike models that absolutely do not need discs and will only complicate the maintenance for the end user not to mention the added costs to the bike, added maintenance costs and although minimal, impact on the environment. To what end?

The engineering and development costs surely could have been put to better use by the companies involved.

I just don’t get it.

Most commuters have cantilever brakes which suck. If you lived in Seattle or Portland and had to ride down really steep hills in the rain, and you were a novice cyclist, you might want discs so you don't get killed.

[Burnette]

While people get twisted over disc brakes they fail to see the whole picture of what's happening around them.

Cycling is changing from the tour racer wannabes of old and is becoming more urban and varied, folding, electric assisted, commuting, gravel... and I think it's great. If you don't like disc then you're in for a world of silly irritation as cycling continues to evolve away from old norms.

I think that's great. The want of conformity to your tastes in others was always weird. And intolerant elitism never was good for the cycling community and it was a deterrent for those looking to join.

To fashion an argument that your purchase is devoid of hype and is "the right way" and that another person’s choice is uneducated and based fabricated marketing is just so wrong and hypocritical.

This and other cycling forums are full of passionate threads about clothing and components that are regurgitated company hype.

A bicycle is a simple device and the argument of "need" is funny, because if we're honest I would wager we all have way more than we need. I would add that some of us paid way more for it than we could have, we believed in the brand, in their ad copy and their product works well for us. So we buy and like it.

It's just where you turn around and throw a stone at another for their choices it all goes wrong.

If someone went to a shop and bought a Townie bike with all the doo dads they wanted on it, I hardly think we're the bunch to cry foul. I've read enough build threads to know we do pretty much the same. Didn't need to spend three grand on a bicycle, but did, then can't understand why someone else got exactly what they wanted? OK.

[colker]

Originally Posted by Burnette

While people get twisted over disc brakes they fail to see the whole picture of what's happening around them.

Cycling is changing from the tour racer wannabes of old and is becoming more urban and varied, folding, electric assisted, commuting, gravel... and I think it's great. If you don't like disc then you're in for a world of silly irritation as cycling continues to evolve away from old norms.

I think that's great. The want of conformity to your tastes in others was always weird. And intolerant elitism never was good for the cycling community and it was a deterrent for those looking to join.

To fashion an argument that your purchase is devoid of hype and is "the right way" and that another person’s choice is uneducated and based fabricated marketing is just so wrong and hypocritical.

This and other cycling forums are full of passionate threads about clothing and components that are regurgitated company hype.

A bicycle is a simple device and the argument of "need" is funny, because if we're honest I would wager we all have way more than we need. I would add that some of us paid way more for it than we could have, we believed in the brand, in their ad copy and their product works well for us. So we buy and like it.

It's just where you turn around and throw a stone at another for their choices it all goes wrong.

If someone went to a shop and bought a Townie bike with all the doo dads they wanted on it, I hardly think we're the bunch to cry foul. I've read enough build threads to know we do pretty much the same. Didn't need to spend three grand on a bicycle, but did, then can't understand why someone else got exactly what they wanted? OK.

It´s common knowledge that discs require stouter forks and frames. You are sacrificing frame/fork supplenness when opting for discs. Not if you ride on fat tires or susp forks but skinny wheels under a road frame? If that´s progress so be it. If you look in horror at 700x25 tires because your frameset is too stiff to absorb shock... ok. Just don´t tell me discs are "better". It may be the future, it may be better on a commuter... but not on the kind of riding a lot of us do.

[fa63]

Originally Posted by colker

It´s common knowledge that discs require stouter forks and frames. You are sacrificing frame/fork supplenness when opting for discs. Not if you ride on fat tires or susp forks but skinny wheels under a road frame? If that´s progress so be it. If you look in horror at 700x25 tires because your frameset is too stiff to absorb shock... ok. Just don´t tell me discs are "better". It may be the future, it may be better on a commuter... but not on the kind of riding a lot of us do.

My Felt FR Disc rides as good if not better than the Quiring XCR it replaced. And I am riding 25c tires on the Felt, and was riding 28c on the Quiring.

[colker]

Originally Posted by fa63

My Felt FR Disc rides as good if not better than the Quiring XCR it replaced. And I am riding 25c tires on the Felt, and was riding 28c on the Quiring.

Fact is discs require stiffer fork legs. Stiffer is harsher.
You may love a harsher fork or frame. Some of us don´t.
You may not feel the difference. Some do.

That´s all.

[joosttx]

Originally Posted by colker

Fact is discs require stiffer fork legs. Stiffer is harsher.
You may love a harsher fork or frame. Some of us don´t.
You may not feel the difference. Some do.

That´s all.

My festka is the stiffest bike I own (but I would not call it harsh or stiff) It is also the only bike I own with rim brakes. I think argument works on paper but it reality it doesn’t matter.

[Jaybee]

Originally Posted by Burnette

While people get twisted over disc brakes they fail to see the whole picture of what's happening around them.

Cycling is changing from the tour racer wannabes of old and is becoming more urban and varied, folding, electric assisted, commuting, gravel... and I think it's great. If you don't like disc then you're in for a world of silly irritation as cycling continues to evolve away from old norms.

I think that's great. The want of conformity to your tastes in others was always weird. And intolerant elitism never was good for the cycling community and it was a deterrent for those looking to join.

To fashion an argument that your purchase is devoid of hype and is "the right way" and that another person’s choice is uneducated and based fabricated marketing is just so wrong and hypocritical.

This and other cycling forums are full of passionate threads about clothing and components that are regurgitated company hype.

A bicycle is a simple device and the argument of "need" is funny, because if we're honest I would wager we all have way more than we need. I would add that some of us paid way more for it than we could have, we believed in the brand, in their ad copy and their product works well for us. So we buy and like it.

It's just where you turn around and throw a stone at another for their choices it all goes wrong.

If someone went to a shop and bought a Townie bike with all the doo dads they wanted on it, I hardly think we're the bunch to cry foul. I've read enough build threads to know we do pretty much the same. Didn't need to spend three grand on a bicycle, but did, then can't understand why someone else got exactly what they wanted? OK.

There is so much specialized knowledge on this forum (which is one of the things that make it so great), but I think that a lot of us (self included, just ask my wife)tend to project our fairly niche and elitist preferences onto people who just want a bike to ride around the lake path on the weekends. There are a ton of those people, and the big bike companies are pretty good at selling bikes to them. They don’t care that Fausto Coppi didn’t need discs going down the Gavia in 1964 or whatever. A good bike to them is one that needs near zero maintenance and is comfortable and stable at 15mph.

[yinzerniner]

Originally Posted by colker

Fact is discs require stiffer fork legs. Stiffer is harsher.
You may love a harsher fork or frame. Some of us don´t.
You may not feel the difference. Some do.

That´s all.

You "FACT" is 100% non factual. Stiffness and harshness have nothing to do with strength, especially the strength needed for disc brakes.

Disc forks need to be designed so that the added stresses and forces of the caliper stopping the rotor don't affect the safe use of said fork. Some poorly designed disc forks might not be able to compensate for that without resorting to layups which produce such harshness, but well designed ones will perform and feel the exact same as a rim brake fork. I've yet to hear anyone say the Ritchey WCS disc fork performs any differently than the WCS rim fork even though they have the same straight steerer, and likewise with other aftermarket models from Enve, Whisky, Columbus, etc. which might have small differences which are most likely more due to the oversized steerer shapes.

As disc bike technology advances we're starting to see more asymmetric forks where the caliper leg is designed specifically for dealing with the added forces while the non-caliper leg is designed differently. It's taken some time but now that they have the ingredients they've started to perfect the alchemy.

In the last five years or so the biggest technological advancement in carbon has been the fine tuning of layup. Granted, a lot of the properties that are gained through layup precision were already found in existing materials and technologies but the industry and consumers still put some priority in weight, in which carbon cannot be beat.

[colker]

Originally Posted by yinzerniner

You "FACT" is 100% non factual.


As disc bike technology advances we're starting to see more asymmetric forks where the caliper leg is designed specifically for dealing with the added forces while the non-caliper leg is designed differently. It's taken some time but now that they have the ingredients they've started to perfect the alchemy.

HOw does a fork leg is designed to deal w/ added forces without being stiffer? How does a stiffer fork is more supple than a softer fork? Answer lies in the world of marketing.

EDIT: i don´t need stronger braking nor i want to give up on the ride of my steel frame and fork.

[colker]

Originally Posted by joosttx

My festka is the stiffest bike I own (but I would not call it harsh or stiff) It is also the only bike I own with rim brakes. I think argument works on paper but it reality it doesn’t matter.

You can build a stiff fork which uses rim brakes.

You cannot build a mellow supple steel fork using disc brakes. At least a lot of builders won´t.. Braking forces pivoting on the fork crown x pivoting on lower leg. Mechanically thinking it is obvious