Commuting - DISadvantages of disc brakes?

From another thread, to avoid hi-jacking:


disc brakes not only work better, they're more consistent, don't over heat, are better in the rain, are way way cleaner, don't wear away your rim, last longer, aren't affected by debris on the road that can get lodged in your regular pads, and allow you to put reflective tape along the whole sidewall of your wheels for that cool effect.

If you can afford it and don't mind the extra few ounces, get them.

That's a strong argument for disc brakes. Is there an argument against them?

Weight and expense.

Not as easy to repair, meaning not as many parts available. Also, if you have a roof rack tray for a non-disc bike, you'll need to replace that tray with one that will accept a disc brake bike.

Those things said, I'm thinking of getting a disc bike for commuting as I live in Portland and it rains 8-9months out of the year here.

I love 'em, but one other potential downside is noise. The pads can occassionally rub against the rotor. I noticed when walking my son to school this morning if I tilted my bike to the right, no sound. To the left, the ringing noise from pad on rotor.

I've never used them. I passed on them when I ordered a spare wheelset for my MTB due to cost and weight. My understanding is that the mechanical disc brakes don't have much modulation. The hydraulic ones are supposed to work better, but they come with the potential leak issue.

I think if I were buying a new MTB, I would probably get them. I would not on a road bike.

Kool Stop Salmons haven't failed me, even in the PNW rain and constant moisture. Even when I build up a new bike, I'm sticking with canti's instead of discs.

Come ride with me on my off road commute in the winter. You'll wish you had them. I wouldn't go back, and yes, I can adjust canti's, V's etc. just fine.

And I'm in the PNW, too.

I hear disc brakes make you stop shorter. Coworker w/ discs has done MAJOR faceplant twice now going over the bars during 'panic stop'.

User problem.

Heavy, ugly, expensive thief magnets that are completely pointless for most of us. I'm convinced that 90% of people buy/want disc brakes because they suck hard at setting up and adjusting V or caliper brakes.

Is that enough? Let me know if you need more.

The biggest problem I see with them, other than cost and weight, is adding fenders and racks can be difficult. Trek/Lemond made it easier by placing the caliper inside the chainstay/seatstay junction, rather that outside, but you still have the issue up front. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it helps if you are a little creative.

Kool Stop Salmons haven't failed me, even in the PNW rain and constant moisture. Even when I build up a new bike, I'm sticking with canti's instead of discs.

I have disc brakes and am quite fond of them. For a heavier rider who rides in the rain and mud and snow and ectoplasmic semen of mother nature they come in pretty handy. I don't mind the weight and uglyness factor of them because... well... because I weigh alot and I don't think their ugliness distracts from the fact that there is a fat man on the bicycle they are attached to. :) Having said that, my current project bike is not going to have disc brakes, I'm sure the canti brakes will work just fine with the right pads.
Oh, and as for modulation and faceplants: they have excellant modulation, better than the rim brakes I have ridden in the past, and I have never been able to endo on this bike, maybe it's my weight, but I can't get the back wheel off the gra\ound unless I am leaning so far forward my package is resting on the handlebar.

I hear disc brakes make you stop shorter. Coworker w/ discs has done MAJOR faceplant twice now going over the bars during 'panic stop'.

The arguments have been made in other threads. I've run Kool Stop Salmons and in the rain and disc brakes just work much better. Does it matter most of the time? No. But for unexpected decelerations in the rain there is no "waiting" for your rims to dry off. The modulation of my disc brakes is fine.

I'll give you that I sucked hard at setting up my ancient cantis. Discs are much easier to maintain.

While disc brakes are the most "modern" brakes they are not 'new' at all.
What they are is a re-invention of the rim brakes to seperate you from a
few more bucks. Yep, that right "rim" brakes are , in effect, "disk" brakes
because they use the rim in place of a disc to stop the bike.

When you consider the level of mechanical complexity that "disc" brakes
add to a bike , to me, they are just gee whiz without adding any real $$
value to the bike. To me all they add is cost & weight.

Rim brakes work & work very well 99.999% of the time while being
very user friendly. There is no real advantage to "disc" brakes on a
bicycle at all.

Disc brakes are heavier and a bit more fuss but perform better and more reliably than Canti's do. My Paul canti's with fresh Kool Stop pads and properly dialed in can just match my el cheapo discs in a poor state of repair. In the muck there is no comparison in my experience.

none really

http://www.bikeforums.net/search.php?searchid=2874627

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a326/markhr/cx%20bike/backend.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a326/markhr/cx%20bike/fronthub.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a326/markhr/cx%20bike/stoponadime.jpg

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a326/markhr/cx%20bike/stoponadimefree.jpg

How about in snow/slush/freezing rain? I gotta believe discs would be better there. I haven't had much trouble braking in the rain with rim brakes but I'm thinking about discs for the winter.
Also I ride over gravel roads, and I get a lot of grit embedded in my brake pads; the rim brakes are really wearing through the rims, especially on my front wheel. I should maybe switch before I have to build a new wheel.

They are almost a requisite part of a trike. I have mechanical disc brakes, and modulation is pretty good IMO. No worse than rim brakes. And it's true, they are better in the rain, stay clean, and have fantastic braking power.

DISadvantages of Disc Brakes?

There are quite a few, depending on what you plan to do with the bike:

– Less choice of racks and potential conflicts with panniers. Rack selection is improving and should be less of a problem in a few years.

– Disc brakes and an appropriate disc-compatible frame are heavier then their canti equivalent. Not a real problem for touring.

– Parts harder to find, whereas there are some brake pads – not the best ones, mind you – in almost all towns and cities. However, except on a multi-year tour, it's rare that a tourer replaces pads on the road without any serious advance notice.

– The fork needs to be beefier. Which then means a less springy fork, so bumps feel harder.

– Less gracious look. But that's me.

Heavy, ugly, expensive thief magnets that are completely pointless for most of us. I'm convinced that 90% of people buy/want disc brakes because they suck hard at setting up and adjusting V or caliper brakes.

Is that enough? Let me know if you need more.

Ugly is a practical reason?? :p

Another advantage is that I can swap out wheels w/o readjusting the brakes. I can have 4 sets of wheels, one with skinny's, one with wider tires, one with knobbies, one with studded tires, and use them all on the same bike.

So far.. the counter points are:

Racks need adjusting before mounting.
Can't find parts readily in some backwards bombed out country on your 40000 mile tour.
Too cheap to buy it.
Too weak to ride with a few extra ounces.
Too dumb to adjust it.
Ass too soft to take the bumps.
Too inexperienced to use it properly.

Wow that's frightening the type of people who dislike disc brakes... except the guy on the 40000 mile tour, he's cool I guess. :p

I hear disc brakes make you stop shorter. Coworker w/ discs has done MAJOR faceplant twice now going over the bars during 'panic stop'.

In my experience, my discs have a lot of power but it comes on linearly, I can predict when and where it'll be so I actually have less experiences with lock up.

I've sworn that I'll never buy another bike without discs. Certainly for riding in traffic I consider them mandatory.

Some real-world disadvantages:
Harder to get a rack and pannier to fit -- but still doable, I've got two bikes set up that way.

Spoke repair is harder if you break a left-side spoke. You have to take the disc off, whereas on a non-disc bike you can sometimes do that repair with the wheel on the bike. One of my bikes has straight-pull spokes and does not have this disadvantage.

Not an inherent disadvantage, but a flaw of the Avid mechanicals my bikes have: The rear brake is the same as the front brake, with a different mounting bracket. The return spring on the rear needs to be stronger to compensate for the longer cable on the rear and the attendant friction. The rear has a tendency to stick when applied. Not really a problem for me as I haven't used the rear brake in years.

Sure, weight and cost are issues, but with any bike part you can buy things that cost less and don't work so well.

I hear disc brakes make you stop shorter. Coworker w/ discs has done MAJOR faceplant twice now going over the bars during 'panic stop'.

Before I had discs I went over the bars twice, haven't done it since I got discs.

Any brake should have enough power to lift the rear wheel. If it didn't I would consider it defective. What makes powerful brakes is modulation -- the ability to apply braking right up to the point where the rear wheel lifts, and then back off. This is where discs really shine, the modulation is terrific -- and it stays good, even as the brake pads wear.

A well-adjusted rim brake, on a perfectly true wheel, can also have good modulation. The problem, particularly for commuters, is that it is very easy for a rim brake to go out of adjustment, or for a wheel to go slightly out of true. When I had rim brakes I found that I just didn't adjust them as often as I needed to, and I often was riding with sub-standard brakes.

I'm considering putting a disc on the front and leave the v-brake on the rear of my commute bike. I hate the noise my rim brakes create when I don't keep the rims clean. I had them adjusted perfectly...no noise and stopped great. That lasted for about a week. Now the squeel again.

I want to run panniers and a rack, and dont want to deal with the rack if I have to fix a rear flat. Plus the rtear brakes don't do a whole lot anyway.

The thing that puts me off discs is that looking at them, I think they must make repairing a puncture much more time consuming. Is this true ?

Ugly is a practical reason?? :p
A DISadvantage is all the OP asked about. Ugly is enough to be a dealbreaker 4 me.

The thing that puts me off discs is that looking at them, I think they must make repairing a puncture much more time consuming. Is this true ?

No, you dont have to do anything.

I run an Avid BBDB (probably a relic by todays standards) but adjustment is super simple and super fine.

They stop on a sixpence(and my commuting weight is around 280-90), they last longer than rim brakes and they dont get crap stuck in the pads that score your handbuilt rear wheel :mad:

As for adjusting, when the brake isnt stopping so great, one turn on each caliper screw and you are back to uber performance.

If my frame would take a rear I wouldnt hesitate for a second.

The originals on my bike from new were Grimmica (sp) what a pile of junk. After reading up on the review sites I got the Avid's. 10/10! They are absolutely superb!

I Posted this in the Touring Forum about two weeks ago...

"I had canti's on one tour,V-brakes on another and disc on a third...the V's stopped better than the caniti's,but the disc (for me) is the way to go. No problems if you bend a wheel or break a spoke,better modulation,MUCH better stopping power when loaded."

DISadvantages of disc brakes? NONE!!

After using them for commuting on a road bike for two years; the only disadvantage I can think of is that currently you still have a limited number of forks and road frames that come with disc brake tabs. It makes your selection harder but I think that is slowly changing especially with cross bike frames.

Some people have questioned the safety of disc brakes.

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/disk_and_quick_release/

I'm not bothering with retrofitting my existing bikes with discs right now. When I buy a new high-end mountain bike, it will be a different story altogether.

One bike I have will take a lot of retrofitting to get disc brakes on there properly, almost to the point where I might as well save that cash for a new bike. I may have to replace the fork, definitely the front hub and rebuild the wheel, and the back wheel will need an adapter for the frame and perhaps a hub/wheel rebuild as well to get discs operable.

The other bike I bought last month which is my commute bike, I'm not bothering with discs no matter how easy it would be to retrofit, mainly because discs are a thief magnet.

I think with almost any decent bike brakes you can go over the handlebars easily. I was about 14 and riding a mates new mountain bike, which was the first bike I ever road with cantilever brakes. I put the brakes on and went over the handlebars.

The thing that puts me off discs is that looking at them, I think they must make repairing a puncture much more time consuming. Is this true ?
Not really.
When you take the wheel out just undo the axle quick release and drop out the wheel, no brake release necessary.
When you reinsert the wheel take a little care to line up the rotor with the caliper as you insert the wheel. There should be no other adjustment necessary.
I think they would be a nice addition to a commuter, an excellent idea for an off-road bike but overkill for a road bike. As has been mentioned disc brakes are heavier and require a heavier frame, and they are more expensive. For commuting they do make fitting a rack and fenders more difficult but by no means impossible. For this expense you get better braking that is less effected by weather and grime, longer lasting brake pads and no wear on your rims. If you live in SoCal or AZ don't bother, if you live in the NW seriously consider.
For me cheapness won out over the disc brakes. My summers don't have alot of rain to ride through and my winters mean lots of road salt which eats components. A disc brake frame and brake is too expensive for me to expose to Cleveland winters and is not needed for the summers. But my off-road bike does have disc brakes and I wouldn't have it any other way.
Craig

I think discs major disadvantage is on low-end discs. Low end (x-mart type) disc brakes can suck, be hard to adjust etc. I don't know that that's really an argument against them though because the same quality v-brake/canti/calipers also suck.

The only reason I don't have disc brakes is expense. I already have cantis/v-brakes. If I want to upgrade to discs I need a new fork, new brakes, new wheel (at least hub) etc. I don't even have tabs on the frame so I can't upgrade the rear. canti's and v-brakes work fine. I'm not saying they are as good as discs, but they work fine so I can't see spending the $$$.


none really
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a326/markhr/cx%20bike/backend.jpg


Um...I don't see any powercranks on that bike!

My bike came with discs and other than weight, there really is no DIS-advantage to disc brakes.

There may be issues people have with disc nrakes, some real and some perceived, but there is no disadvantage to disc brakes as per the question by the OP.

Changing tires is easier with discs as they don't need to be released. In fact, you can spin the tire before you close the QR and confirm it is seated properly.

They are also extremelt adjustable with no tools required (mechanical brakes, I have no experience with hydraulic brakes).



Would I put discs on a new road bike? No. Do I see any reason to take them off my current bike, absolutely not.

I think discs major disadvantage is on low-end discs. Low end (x-mart type) disc brakes can suck, be hard to adjust etc. - agreed but we're noot generally talking about $50 wallymart bikes are we?

I don't know that that's really an argument against them though because the same quality v-brake/canti/calipers also suck. - +1

The only reason I don't have disc brakes is expense. - so when/if you get a new bike you can do something about it then

I already have cantis/v-brakes. If I want to upgrade to discs I need a new fork, new brakes, new wheel (at least hub) etc.

I don't even have tabs on the frame so I can't upgrade the rear. - WRONG - there are a LOT of alternatives out there to adapting bikes with either cantilever studs or straight seat stays to DB use- here's a random example from the back pages of BIKE magazine - www.therapycomponents.com (they use a disc brake equipped trek madone as an example) - there are many other companies out there with similar products

http://bikemag.com/features/gear/therapy350pull.jpg

canti's and v-brakes work fine. I'm not saying they are as good as discs, but they work fine so I can't see spending the $$$. - canti's work but you still have to put up with wearing out rims, out of true wheels, inconsistent braking, wet weather/mud/dirt all changing braking, grabby brakes, not being able to just drop out wheels to change tyres/tubes, the FRIK-about factor when setting them up, calf tattoo/hole amongst a few other things

Um...I don't see any powercranks on that bike! - check my sig :D

1...2...character reply

I'm considering putting a disc on the front and leave the v-brake on the rear of my commute bike. I hate the noise my rim brakes create when I don't keep the rims clean. I had them adjusted perfectly...no noise and stopped great. That lasted for about a week. Now the squeel again.

I want to run panniers and a rack, and dont want to deal with the rack if I have to fix a rear flat. Plus the rtear brakes don't do a whole lot anyway.

I think you will be very happy with this setup. Your right that rear brakes don't do a lot.

I found that a week was about the adjustment interval needed for v-brakes. Disc brakes require much less frequent adjustment, and adjustment is much simpler.

WRONG - there are a LOT of alternatives out there to adapting bikes with either cantilever studs or straight seat stays to DB use- here's a random example from the back pages of BIKE magazine - www.therapycomponents.com (they use a disc brake equipped trek madone as an example) - there are many other companies out there with similar products


I didn't realize there were other options. I stand corrected. Even so I think the front conversion is more important, and that would still be $$$. I guess my point is that I agree that Discs are great solutions, and for most utility/commuting folks they would be a better choice than rim brakes, but they are not enough better that I am willing to shell out more for them.

It rarely rains here. No need for them on my roadie which is what I commute on. I carry a shirt, underwear, socks, cell phone and wallet in a backpack so there is very little extra weight on my bike when I'm commuting.

I didn't realize there were other options. I stand corrected. Even so I think the front conversion is more important, and that would still be $$$. I guess my point is that I agree that Discs are great solutions, and for most utility/commuting folks they would be a better choice than rim brakes, but they are not enough better that I am willing to shell out more for them.

cool - now I just need someone to knock me off my hobby horse :P

I still love disc brakes, but there are some disadvantages:

1. have to remove disc's if break a rear spoke on the wrong side
2. most road bikes don't have a strong enough fork to handle the extra forces generated by a fast stop
3. few CF bikes have strong enough forks
4. many race wheelsets are CF and are not strong enough to handle the faster stopping of disc brakes, i.e. Zipp and HED

[5. claimed problem raised on tri forum: not as aero as rim brakes. But I'm not convinced, looks like about the same frontal surface area to me. ]

6. roadies think they are uncool and riders with them are probably lame

Only other negatives are perception negatives and not real negatives:
a. weight - it's not a speed issue but a safety issue, especially for commuters
b. cost - it's not a toy, but rather a transportation vehicle. Cheapest forms of transportation are
1-- walking
2-- running
3-- using a manual 2 wheeled scooter or skateboard
4-- biking
5-- motor scooter
6-- motorcycle
7-- economy car
8-- car
9-- small truck/suv
10-- suv
11-- large truck
12-- dump truck
13-- semi
14-- tank

As far as I'm concerned the only real downside to discs is having to MacGuyver fenders on(and I fault the fender companies for this). Discs blow rim brakes out of the water. Longer pad life,less adjusting,cleaner wheels,plus the obvious advantages in bad weather. When I decided to sell off a couple bikes(finally ran out of room:o ) the rim brake ones were the first to go.

Disc brakes just make more sense for commuters. All weather,longer lasting,less maintenance.

I'm considering putting a disc on the front and leave the v-brake on the rear of my commute bike. I hate the noise my rim brakes create when I don't keep the rims clean. I had them adjusted perfectly...no noise and stopped great. That lasted for about a week. Now the squeel again.

I want to run panniers and a rack, and dont want to deal with the rack if I have to fix a rear flat. Plus the rtear brakes don't do a whole lot anyway.
I find i use my rear discs a lot more than the front vees.

Less noise, better contol of speed/braking. I can haul it down pretty quick with just the rears.

Although fronts are a better position to handle braking force, don't dismiss rear discs outright - they are a major improvement in braking over rear vees. Before the rears seemed like nothing, but now i have BRAKES.

I have disc brake on rear only mostly because i didn't want to shell out for a new fork for this bike, plus i figure rear discs compromise the rear wheel strength little to none, while putting discs on front would clearly reduce front wheel strength due to the dish required to accomodate them. This is probably a moot point since front wheels have excess strength anyway, and have to handle only ~1/3 of the total load.

Also, I'm building another bike from a non-disc frame - and it's getting the front disc brakeset...

Before the rears seemed like nothing, but now i have BRAKES.

Having had crap or moronically adjusted V-brakes doesn't justify buying discs.
Any halfway decent V-brake (properly adjusted) has enough braking power for any and all situations (possible exceptions: in a tropical downpour, alpine descent at 100+km/h, 220+pound rider). Grab a handful of my front V, and I absolutely guarantee that you fly over the bars like a cannonball. Same with the rear. If you grab it full force, it skids regardless of conditions. And mine are not remarkably good brakes at all, just average.

Having had crap or moronically adjusted V-brakes doesn't justify buying discs.
Any halfway decent V-brake (properly adjusted) has enough braking power for any and all situations (possible exceptions: in a tropical downpour, alpine descent at 100+km/h, 220+pound rider). Grab a handful of my front V, and I absolutely guarantee that you fly over the bars like a cannonball. Same with the rear. If you grab it full force, it skids regardless of conditions. And mine are not remarkably good brakes at all, just average.

Thanks for that clever, useful reply. I'm going out to the garage now to start rebuilding my bikes so i can have 1993-technology brakes. I'll be sure to call you before I buy any parts, or actually install or adjust them myself, since I apparently lack the intelligence to perform these acts.

Actually, I have the disc on the rear so i can a) stop in pouring rain and b) stop in a controlled (skid-free) fashion and NOT fly over the bars of my bike like a cannonball (i have the impression that this has happened to you one too many times).

All I see so far is why V brakes are not worse than discs.

There is no questions discs stop better, the OP question was are there any disadvantages to discs and based on the replies in here, I'd have to say NO.

I think the mechanical drag inherent in a disc system is the biggest disadvantage for disc brakes. It's my biggest gripe I have about my bike.

Thanks for that clever, useful reply. I'm going out to the garage now to start rebuilding my bikes so i can have 1993-technology brakes. I'll be sure to call you before I buy any parts, or actually install or adjust them myself, since I apparently lack the intelligence to perform these acts.

Actually, I have the disc on the rear so i can a) stop in pouring rain and b) stop in a controlled (skid-free) fashion and NOT fly over the bars of my bike like a cannonball (i have the impression that this has happened to you one too many times).
1 I never flew over my bars
2 you were the one who wrote that a V didn't provide enough stopping power. I told you it can, for any rider and situation.
3 we all know that grabbing a handful is not the proper way for a panic stop. But it illustrates whether a brake has sufficient stopping power.

Discussion over.

Edit: why do I even answer someone who has a disc on the rear only? Mysteries of the universe...

I think the mechanical drag inherent in a disc system is the biggest disadvantage for disc brakes. It's my biggest gripe I have about my bike.

Good systems don't drag. I can set up my Avid BB's and Shimanos for zero drag. My Hayes MX-2's will because you can only adjust the inner pad.