Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - braking power for your big bad selves

I have always had a problem on road bikes with over heating my brakes on long descents. This happens on single pivot or dual pivot brakes. Never had an issue on mountain bikes with v brakes or disc brakes. Although I do have a half moon scar on my left calf from a hot rotor. As I lose weight I am having this problem less and less (obviously). For a while I had to stop half way down a climb I frequently do. I no longer have to do that, but I came down a real steep grade today and lost braking power for a little while. Part of the problem was I used to be so heavy I would gain momentum quickly. Also, the weight made my handling at speed uncomfortable. I once hit 50 + mph at 300 pounds (very scary and sketchy). I am now sitting at 280 and it is starting to feel more natural again. So, it might be a combination of physics and confidence!

A road bike with disc brakes would be ideal. But then I think I may not even need that as I drop more pounds.

Anyone else have issues with this?

Even at 260 it never bothered me to hit 50 mph.
I did not like seeing 56mph on the speedometer, though. That was what I considered "scary fast."

Now at 225, I still routinely hit 47 - 48mph on my morning downhill.

I suppose if you're doing a lot of really long descending, you could consider a drag brake like tandems use.

While descending, I'll sit up (wide chest) to catch some wind to keep from going too fast. But 40-45, not big deal. Feels like 20 when you get used to it. On long desents (GMR) I rarely brake. I might feather the rear before going into a tight switchback but that's about it.

I use Ultegra brake shoes. I don't care for the cartridge types. Had them but removed them. The brake shoes have worked well and lasted for me.

While descending, I'll sit up (wide chest) to catch some wind to keep from going too fast. But 40-45, not big deal. Feels like 20 when you get used to it. On long desents (GMR) I rarely brake. I might feather the rear before going into a tight switchback but that's about it.

I use Ultegra brake shoes. I don't care for the cartridge types. Had them but removed them. The brake shoes have worked well and lasted for me.

Hmmm.. That's a good reference point since we both know it. How fast you get going down GMR?

2 upgrades you can make is too use softer pads, like Matthauser or Kool Stop Salmon pads.. These will give you a little more grab.. You may have to replace them every year but they are worth it..

http://store.yokozunausa.com/brakeinserts.html
http://www.velo-orange.com/yoscmabrpa.html

The better upgrade would be looking at more powerful double pivot / leaf spring designed brakes like the Mavic brakes, super powerful without having to go into the zero gravity brakes which are $300-500..

I have 2 pairs of these brakes and they are stronger than the Dura Ace or Campy Record brakes I have on my other bikes...

http://www.excelsports.com/new.asp?page=8&description=Brake+Calipers&vendorCode=MAVIC&major=1&minor=7

http://www.roadbikereview.com/cat/brakes/brake-calipers/mavic-inc/PRD_28360_2480crx.aspx

If you don't use the brakes you don't have to worry about them overheating! ;);) On a descent like GMR I'm still on the gas all the way down. :) I have no problem with speed but it is very important that you ride within your comfort level. Those Mavic Brakes that Socalrider mentioned are great. Another option is to (Mr Beanz close your eyes!) get some Mavic Open Pro Cermac wheels built up. The ceramic rims do not translate the break heat through to the tires. They do wear out pads faster but they work great in the dry and they have superior braking in the rain.

I think it may just be me getting used to descending again.

But I swear I almost enjoy going up more than down.

OK Homey, that maybe one good point about the ceramic OP's. I'll give ya that one!:thumb:

On GMR, I get about 25-30 in the turns. 42 on the longest straightaway, which is about 4 miles up from the bottom gate. But I don't push on the way down, so that's a tuck.:D

OK Homey, that maybe one good point about the ceramic OP's. I'll give ya that one!:thumb:

Woo Hoo It's the small things in life that make it worth living! :lol:

bigtempo, getting used to going faster may or may not help your descending. It is a skill you can get better at. It is important that you not push it past your comfort zone. That is a recipe for some nasty roadrash. Whether or not you ever get comfortable going 60+mph I'll guarantee that it won't happen if your aren't confident that you can stop your bike or if in the back of your mind you are worrying about overheating a tire and blowing it off the rim at 60mph. Get that straightened out before you start letting it go. :)

Woo Hoo It's the small things in life that make it worth living! :lol:

bigtempo, getting used to going faster may or may not help your descending. It is a skill you can get better at. It is important that you not push it past your comfort zone. That is a recipe for some nasty roadrash. Whether or not you ever get comfortable going 60+mph I'll guarantee that it won't happen if your aren't confident that you can stop your bike or if in the back of your mind you are worrying about overheating a tire and blowing it off the rim at 60mph. Get that straightened out before you start letting it go. :)

Yeah, I am no stranger to it. It has just been a long time. I have hit the high 40s off road in the past, now that is sketchy. I have wrecked both on and off road when I was younger at speed. I was just never this heavy, so it feels funny this time around.

Just wanted to see what everyone else's experience is.

I will be getting a new bike in the early spring. Thinking of maybe going disc ala Redline Conquest Classic or Salsa La Cruz.

You sound like an experienced rider but just incase. You mention loss of brake power. Only time that has happened to me was when the calipers weren't centered or when the rim was out of true.

You sound like an experienced rider but just incase. You mention loss of brake power. Only time that has happened to me was when the calipers weren't centered or when the rim was out of true.

Good point. My rear wheel is fine, was just rebuilt recently, but I have not truly checked in a while, just by looking down during a ride. I will check things out tomorrow.

my guess is going from really high weight (300) to average weight will exponentially improve braking, for two reasons. After just going from 260 to 230 I have way more control over not just my brakes but my own mass. I can kind of fart around skidding and stuff on my fiancé's MTB with discs now but I couldn't just a couple of months ago.

So weight lose puts less stress on your brakes but also can stop your body from slinging around and creates a more stable center of gravity. I did something the other day that was exactly how I flipped my bike the first week I had it but this time it just skidded to a stop.

Every time you slow down or brake you don't have to use both front and rear. You can alternate from feathering the front and then feather the rear. By doing this you give each one an opportunity to cool. If you just squeeze them both down and hold it they are doing a constant duty cycle and they will get hot on a long descent.

Every time you slow down or brake you don't have to use both front and rear. You can alternate from feathering the front and then feather the rear. By doing this you give each one an opportunity to cool. If you just squeeze them both down and hold it they are doing a constant duty cycle and they will get hot on a long descent.

I'd serioulsy advise against this!:eek:....Makes sense and would work on short hills and the flats but really, in these situations, you wouldn't be so concerned about a heat induced flat or braking trouble.

The OP is talking about long mtn descents so I'mthinkin gthis includes windy twisty switchbacks. WHICH often include small patches of sand and/or rocks. I'd NEVER hit my front brakes only in these conditions. Not even a feather of the front without the rear. One small mistake and it's "lights out"! If one accidentally apllies too much pressure at the wrong time, the front wheel is coming out from under you.

If you hit the front brakes in a switchback, you lose handling and steering. That aint good!

Actually getting into the habit of hitting the front brakes without the rear is not a habit you want. It's setting oneself up for a big mistake. Even on the flats. I've seen guys flip at stops or slowing when hitting a patch of sand or dirt on the trail.:eek:

I can't control everybody's brake habits, but I certainly wouldn't consider this practice or habit!:(

Might work for others, but that's my two cent!:p

Buy a cyclocross bike. The handling will be less twitchy, you'll get cantis or discs, the frame will be tougher, and most importantly of all you can run wider tyres with a bigger contact patch and therefore more effective braking.

Buy a cyclocross bike. The handling will be less twitchy, you'll get cantis or discs, the frame will be tougher, and most importantly of all you can run wider tyres with a bigger contact patch and therefore more effective braking.


Yeah, I had been bent on getting a classic racer, but I am now leaning more towards a cross. It's between Redline Conquest Classic, Surly Cross Check and Salsa La Cruz.

I think the best/funniest name in bike is Chili con Crosso

Every time you slow down or brake you don't have to use both front and rear. You can alternate from feathering the front and then feather the rear. By doing this you give each one an opportunity to cool. If you just squeeze them both down and hold it they are doing a constant duty cycle and they will get hot on a long descent.
I'd serioulsy advise against this!:eek:....Makes sense and would work on short hills and the flats but really, in these situations, you wouldn't be so concerned about a heat induced flat or braking trouble.

The OP is talking about long mtn descents so I'mthinkin gthis includes windy twisty switchbacks. WHICH often include small patches of sand and/or rocks. I'd NEVER hit my front brakes only in these conditions. Not even a feather of the front without the rear. One small mistake and it's "lights out"! If one accidentally apllies too much pressure at the wrong time, the front wheel is coming out from under you.

If you hit the front brakes in a switchback, you lose handling and steering. That aint good!

Actually getting into the habit of hitting the front brakes without the rear is not a habit you want. It's setting oneself up for a big mistake. Even on the flats. I've seen guys flip at stops or slowing when hitting a patch of sand or dirt on the trail.:eek:


Wrong. You don't know how to brake and are passing on dangerous mis-information. Go to the MTB or cyclocross forums, where people have to know how to brake or get injured, and ask for advice. Or search old threads. Or read

www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html)

(And notice that St Sheldon not only gives own opinion but quotes the legendary engineer and cycle tech guru Jobst Brandt.)

What your "analysis" doesn't take into account is that during braking grip at the front increases and grip at the rear decreases. During hard braking the front will have several times more grip than the rear wheel - so if you brake both wheels evenly hard then the rear wheel will go into a skid long before the front.

It's true that you should be cautious about braking in turns - because turning and braking both use up grip - but the same logic still applies. The best tactic is to brake using the front brake BEFORE a turn - which can be done very quickly, because of the superior grip.



I can't control everybody's brake habits, but I certainly wouldn't consider this practice or habit!:(

Might work for others, but that's my two cent!:pThis really isn't a matter of opinion - it's simple physics and correct braking technique is well understood by competent off roaders, crit racers, etc. You're simply wrong and the other guy is right. For effective braking, use the front brake.

my guess is going from really high weight (300) to average weight will exponentially improve braking, for two reasons. After just going from 260 to 230 I have way more control over not just my brakes but my own mass. I can kind of fart around skidding and stuff on my fiancé's MTB with discs now but I couldn't just a couple of months ago.

So weight lose puts less stress on your brakes but also can stop your body from slinging around and creates a more stable center of gravity. I did something the other day that was exactly how I flipped my bike the first week I had it but this time it just skidded to a stop.

The explanation for this maybe that you are now more able to hold your body weight back from going forwards than previously - it's the body going forwards, for example, that causes braking endos.

Yeah, I had been bent on getting a classic racer, but I am now leaning more towards a cross. It's between Redline Conquest Classic, Surly Cross Check and Salsa La Cruz.

I think the best/funniest name in bike is Chili con Crosso

I'm sure that any of those would be excellent buys. Don't be afraid to have the chain ring or cassettes tweaked for extra hill climbing power - most crossers are configured for fit light riders who run up steeper hills carrying their bikes. And swap the tyres for 35mm ish road tyres - unless you are planning on riding offroad, in which case get dual purpose tyres like Schalbe Extremes.

I do know how to brake and I do know how to take the corners. I do 90 percent of my braking right before going into a corner. Most of my braking power comes from the front. I hardly ever brake while in the turn. I also rarely pump the brakes. I alternate between leaning with the outside foot down and bearing weight on it or I will just keep both pedals level and scoot my butt back behind the seat some.

I do not have any braking issues on my mtb. Also, my road bike, while old, is a very solid and capable of descending. It is Bridgestone and responds well and has very comfortable geometry. It has that on rails feel. I would be a great cross type bike, but it has caliper brakes. My gearing is 50x34 - 12-28, pretty much all the gears I need.

yeah i've been braking different since i read that Brown article. eye opening.

I do know how to brake and I do know how to take the corners. I do 90 percent of my braking right before going into a corner. Most of my braking power comes from the front. I hardly ever brake while in the turn. I also rarely pump the brakes. I alternate between leaning with the outside foot down and bearing weight on it or I will just keep both pedals level and scoot my butt back behind the seat some.

I do not have any braking issues on my mtb. Also, my road bike, while old, is a very solid and capable of descending. It is Bridgestone and responds well and has very comfortable geometry. It has that on rails feel. I would be a great cross type bike, but it has caliper brakes. My gearing is 50x34 - 12-28, pretty much all the gears I need.

Then you need more grip: if you don't have enough of it your brakes will grab the side of the rims, heating up, but the wheels won't exert enough frictional force on the road. Try the widest best gripping tyres you can fit on the bike, combined with good pads - probably Kool Stops. Or get that crosser. A good tyre maker like Schwalbe or Conti will have grip ratings for their tyres on their website.

Then you need more grip: if you don't have enough of it your brakes will grab the side of the rims, heating up, but the wheels won't exert enough frictional force on the road. Try the widest best gripping tyres you can fit on the bike, combined with good pads - probably Kool Stops. Or get that crosser. A good tyre maker like Schwalbe or Conti will have grip ratings for their tyres on their website.

I have Panaracer Pasela 28. I will look at other tires and the kool stop pads. Thanks.

Wrong. You don't know how to brake and are passing on dangerous mis-information. Go to the MTB or cyclocross forums, where people have to know how to brake or get injured, and ask for advice. Or search old threads.

Yes. By all means go ask mountain bike riders or cyclocross riders how to brake. Every one of them...every single one...would laugh their heads off if you told them to brake with only the front brake. We all know that front brake only usage is the quickest way to get introduced to the ground...Teeth, Ground. Ground, Teeth.

The advice that they would give you is that when the rear wheel slides, you release pressure on the front brake, not the rear, and push back on the saddle to move your center of gravity towards the back and down. This maneuver increases the rear brakes effectiveness. The higher the angle of descent, the more exaggerated the movement towards the rear wheel should be.


Or read

www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html)

(And notice that St Sheldon not only gives own opinion but quotes the legendary engineer and cycle tech guru Jobst Brandt.)

Sheldon Brown's article is a misinterpretation of the physics of braking. While it is true that reducing the contribution of the rear wheel's braking power to zero will give you the maximum possible deceleration that a bicycle can experience, this should not be interpreted to mean that the only way to get to maximum deceleration out of a bicycle is by doing a nose wheelie every time you use the front brake...any mountain bike rider can tell you what would happen on a regular basis:rolleyes:

In fact, the only way to reach maximum braking power if you are relying only on the front brake for deceleration is to do a nose wheelie. As long as the rear wheel is in contact with the ground...even marginally...you have not reached maximum deceleration of the bike. With both wheels in contact, the rear wheel is contributing some deceleration and thus the rear brake should be used.

This quote...


...it takes twice as long to stop with the rear brake alone as with the front brake alone, so reliance on the rear brake is unsafe for cyclists who ever go fast. It is important to use your arms to brace yourself securely during hard braking, to prevent this. Indeed, good technique involves moving back on your saddle as far as you can comfortably go, to keep the center of gravity as far back as possible. This applies whether you are using the front, rear or both brakes. Using both brakes together can cause "fishtailing." If the rear wheel skids while braking force is also being applied to the front, the rear of the bike will tend to swing past the front, since the front is applying a greater decelerating force than the rear. Once the rear tire starts to skid, it can move sideways as easily as forward.

...illustrates where he goes wrong in his thinking. Just because it takes twice as long to stop with the rear brake alone, does not mean that you shouldn't use the rear brake. It only means that you shouldn't rely on only the rear brake. Further 'fishtailing' results when the rear wheel is sliding and not rotating. To avoid sideways sliding, release pressure on the front brake, move your body back and down and increase the force on the rear wheel. Don't increase lever pressure on the brakes but increase the force on the contact patch.


What your "analysis" doesn't take into account is that during braking grip at the front increases and grip at the rear decreases. During hard braking the front will have several times more grip than the rear wheel - so if you brake both wheels evenly hard then the rear wheel will go into a skid long before the front.

Certainly, the weight on the front increases. The transfer of weight from the rear of any vehicle to the front is a well known phenomenon. But, by changing the center of gravity by moving back and down on the bike, the weight transfer is mitigated somewhat. You should brake with both wheels but you should modulate the pressure on the calipers as necessary to keep the rear wheel from sliding. In other words, release pressure on the front brake as the rear starts to slide and move your center of gravity back and down to put more force on the rear tire contact patch.


It's true that you should be cautious about braking in turns - because turning and braking both use up grip - but the same logic still applies. The best tactic is to brake using the front brake BEFORE a turn - which can be done very quickly, because of the superior grip.

Yes, you should be cautious about braking in turns. In turns the forces involved become more complicated. You have the normal force of deceleration on the wheels as you would in a straight line, however there is also a sideways thrust from the bike's momentum. And, because the wheel is angled to the road surface, i.e. banked, the contact patch is smaller. A smaller contact patch means that it's easier to convert it from a rolling contact to a sliding contact, i.e. skid it.

However, braking before the turn should be done with both brakes before the turn. Ease up on both brakes as you enter the turn and increase the force on the contact patch by pushing down on the outer pedal. If you do have to brake in a turn...it happens...try to decrease the lean angle while braking and be prepared to countersteer into the turn if the rear wheel starts to slide. Just because the rear wheel slides doesn't mean that you are going to crash


This really isn't a matter of opinion - it's simple physics and correct braking technique is well understood by competent off roaders, crit racers, etc. You're simply wrong and the other guy is right. For effective braking, use the front brake.

It certainly is physics. It is by no means simple. Competent off roaders, cyclocrossers and even crit riders will tell you that for effective braking, use both brakes...just do so wisely.

I do know how to brake and I do know how to take the corners. I do 90 percent of my braking right before going into a corner. Most of my braking power comes from the front. I hardly ever brake while in the turn. I also rarely pump the brakes. I alternate between leaning with the outside foot down and bearing weight on it or I will just keep both pedals level and scoot my butt back behind the seat some.

I do not have any braking issues on my mtb. Also, my road bike, while old, is a very solid and capable of descending. It is Bridgestone and responds well and has very comfortable geometry. It has that on rails feel. I would be a great cross type bike, but it has caliper brakes. My gearing is 50x34 - 12-28, pretty much all the gears I need.

It sounds like your technique is good, although overheating brakes speaks to dragging them too much. But I think your problem may be more related to equipment. Not knowing what Bridgestone you have, I'd suspect that you have old single pivot road calipers. Not a horrible brake but not anything fancy either.

I'd suggest you look into upgrading your single pivot calipers to a dual pivot caliper. The braking power of the dual pivots is much greater. Additionally if you have old style cable-over-the-handlebar nonaero levers, you'll see some improvement in replacing them with modern aero style levers.

I don't know that I would suggest a cyclocross bike as a more stable alternative to a road bike. I have one and, while it is fun to ride, I wouldn't consider it to be more stable than a regular road bike. The higher bottom bracket makes it slightly less stable during cornering. Perhaps a better bike to look at for stability would be a touring bike...longer, lower and built for stability as well as comfort. A Cannondale T2 is a very good bike for the money. And it's built to handle any kind of load a touring cyclists can throw at it.

It sounds like your technique is good, although overheating brakes speaks to dragging them too much. But I think your problem may be more related to equipment. Not knowing what Bridgestone you have, I'd suspect that you have old single pivot road calipers. Not a horrible brake but not anything fancy either.

I'd suggest you look into upgrading your single pivot calipers to a dual pivot caliper. The braking power of the dual pivots is much greater.


No, it's not. The mechanical advantage is higher, that's all. Which means that, with the same levers, you have to press less hard to get the same degree of braking force. This has nothing to do with the maximum amount of braking you can exert unless you have very weak hands. The issue here is heat, not lack of hand strength. There is nothing intrinsic to the design of dual pivots that makes them less prone to overheating.



Additionally if you have old style cable-over-the-handlebar nonaero levers, you'll see some improvement in replacing them with modern aero style levers.


I doubt it. Except as a side effect of putting fresh cables on, which may reduce hand strength requirements but won't help with overheating.



I don't know that I would suggest a cyclocross bike as a more stable alternative to a road bike. I have one and, while it is fun to ride, I wouldn't consider it to be more stable than a regular road bike. The higher bottom bracket makes it slightly less stable during cornering.


Wrong.

Firstly, cornering stability is a matter of grip - which really means tyre width. The key factor for stability when, say, hitting a pot hole is the steering set up of the bike - ie the amount of trail and frame angles. Road racers are optimized for squirrelly handling for cutting through packs; crossers for staying upright on rough surfaces. Crossers are more stable, at the cost of not responding quite as fast to steering input. This is why crossers are often used as Roubaix bikes by pros - when the road gets rough they're less prone to crashing. See eg http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=591270. If your logic was correct, then this would be an idiotic thing to do - the racers would be much better off sticking with their regular bikes.

Secondly, although bottom bracket height will have a minor effect (minor because it varies so slightly), it is a LONG time since it could be assumed that crosser will have a higher BB than a road racer!

Indeed if your logic was correct than MTBs would be less stable than either racing bikes or crossers - which, again, would be idiotic.



..touring bike


Manufacturers have been known to sell the same frame with a double ring as a crosser and with a triple as a tourer... Tourer geometry varies. Some of them do ride on the slow and boring side - short top tubes, longer wheel bases, and really BBs will do that. If the OP is looking for a bike as much like a racer as possible but with better braking and stability - which he is - then a crosser will generally be a better bet.

Wrong. You don't know how to brake and are passing on dangerous mis-information. Go to the MTB or cyclocross forums, where people have to know how to brake or get injured, and ask for advice. Or search old threads. Or read

www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html)

(And notice that St Sheldon not only gives own opinion but quotes the legendary engineer and cycle tech guru Jobst Brandt.)

What your "analysis" doesn't take into account is that during braking grip at the front increases and grip at the rear decreases. During hard braking the front will have several times more grip than the rear wheel - so if you brake both wheels evenly hard then the rear wheel will go into a skid long before the front.

It's true that you should be cautious about braking in turns - because turning and braking both use up grip - but the same logic still applies. The best tactic is to brake using the front brake BEFORE a turn - which can be done very quickly, because of the superior grip.

This really isn't a matter of opinion - it's simple physics and correct braking technique is well understood by competent off roaders, crit racers, etc. You're simply wrong and the other guy is right. For effective braking, use the front brake.

Actually no, I'm not wrong. I was commenting on the other guy's advice as I wouldn't front brake only with Mtn road switchbacks. Read my post #3. I said I may feather the rear break before a switchback, other than that, I don't brake. If I do, it's both evenly on straights. Never in a switchback, especially the front. I'd be picking gravel out of my teeth if I had any left.;)

This was my main concern about not using the front brake only! This is what I wrote although very sheotty typing as always!:p




The OP is talking about long mtn descents so I'mthinkin gthis includes windy twisty switchbacks. WHICH often include small patches of sand and/or rocks. I'd NEVER hit my front brakes only in these conditions.



Taken form Sheldon's link you posted.......I'm pretty sure if you read what I wrote, it says "I dont use the front brake only as there is often sand and rocks in the tight swithcbacks while descending mtn roads"(roadie not MTB).

Bold section ssuggest what I say is correct.;)

The rear brake is O.K. for situations where traction is poor, or for when your front tire blows, but for stopping on dry pavement, the front brake all by itself provides the maximum stopping power, both in theory and in practice.

No, it's not. The mechanical advantage is higher, that's all. Which means that, with the same levers, you have to press less hard to get the same degree of braking force. This has nothing to do with the maximum amount of braking you can exert unless you have very weak hands. The issue here is heat, not lack of hand strength. There is nothing intrinsic to the design of dual pivots that makes them less prone to overheating.

While you technically correct, most people would say that less lever force needed to obtain the same result, i.e. more mechanical advantage, would equate with more braking force. Being able to apply the maximum force with as little effort as possible is the main aim of most all braking system advances.
You'll find most everyone uses the term 'stronger brakes' when what they really mean is brakes with more mechanical advantage. I doubt that by being a bit incorrect in my explanation bigtempo or anyone else, for that matter, would not get my meaning.

As for heat, application of a higher mechanical advantage brake that seems to be stronger would lead to more confidence in downhill runs, less usage of the brake and less overheating of the brake in the end. I did, afterall, point out that overheating of rims seems to suggest that he is dragging them too much.


I doubt it. Except as a side effect of putting fresh cables on, which may reduce hand strength requirements but won't help with overheating.

Again, higher mechanical advantage. Less cable means less force lost to cable stretch and housing compression. More mechanical advantage would result in a brake that seems stronger, inspiring more confidence, etc. In other words, rim overheating is always a function of the amount of time the brake pads are applied to the rims.



Firstly, cornering stability is a matter of grip - which really means tyre width. The key factor for stability when, say, hitting a pot hole is the steering set up of the bike - ie the amount of trail and frame angles. Road racers are optimized for squirrelly handling for cutting through packs; crossers for staying upright on rough surfaces.

Cornering stability is a matter of more than just grip. Grip is important but rider input and ability are also important. Center of gravity of the frame is important. Trail is important. Even tire compound is important. You can't distill a dynamic situation like cornering down to one factor and say all the rest don't matter.

Here's what Retrogrouch had to say about the issue in a 2004 post


The contact patch is pretty much determined by air pressure and how much you weigh. Your tires are nice and round until you get onto your bike - not much contact area. Now say that you have your rear tire inflated to 60psi and the load on that tire is 120 pounds. That tire is going to squish against the ground until it has a contact patch area of exactly 2 square inches. It doesn't matter how wide the tire is, the contact patch area will be the same because that's what is necessary to hold up the weight.

Now here's the interesting part. A wider tire is going to have a short wide contact patch. A narrow tire is going to have a long, skinny contact patch so it's going to have to deform more from it's natural round shape.

Cross bikes, like mountain bikes, have higher bottom brackets for more clearance. This raises the center of gravity of the bike and makes them slightly less stable in corners. I'm not talking about straight line riding here but handling corners.



Manufacturers have been known to sell the same frame with a double ring as a crosser and with a triple as a tourer... Tourer geometry varies. Some of them do ride on the slow and boring side - short top tubes, longer wheel bases, and really BBs will do that. If the OP is looking for a bike as much like a racer as possible but with better braking and stability - which he is - then a crosser will generally be a better bet.

Name one company that sells a touring bike...not a cross bike or a "touring bike" but an honest to pete loaded touring bike with a long wheel base and outfitted for touring...as a cross bike. Lots of companies sell cross bikes and some people suggest that you can use them for touring. I have both and the difference is night and day. A cross bike makes for a very poor touring bike. A touring bike makes for a very nice, if somewhat heavier, road bike.

Weird tone in this thread...

Here's the thing, I descend 1500 feet in 3 miles, pretty fast and pretty technical. I know the route well. Just a matter of getting used to it again I guess.

Weird tone in this thread...

Here's the thing, I descend 1500 feet in 3 miles, pretty fast and pretty technical. I know the route well. Just a matter of getting used to it again I guess.

You just need a drogue 'chute, that's all.

Weird tone in this thread...

Here's the thing, I descend 1500 feet in 3 miles, pretty fast and pretty technical. I know the route well. Just a matter of getting used to it again I guess.


You're on the right track. You don't need a new bike. If you are worried about your stopping power, just try the suggested brakes/pads combos and/or the ceramic wheels. You should be fine...

http://golfsales2010.com/wrong.jpg

I have always had a problem on road bikes with over heating my brakes on long descents. This happens on single pivot or dual pivot brakes. Never had an issue on mountain bikes with v brakes or disc brakes. Although I do have a half moon scar on my left calf from a hot rotor. As I lose weight I am having this problem less and less (obviously). For a while I had to stop half way down a climb I frequently do. I no longer have to do that, but I came down a real steep grade today and lost braking power for a little while. Part of the problem was I used to be so heavy I would gain momentum quickly. Also, the weight made my handling at speed uncomfortable. I once hit 50 + mph at 300 pounds (very scary and sketchy). I am now sitting at 280 and it is starting to feel more natural again. So, it might be a combination of physics and confidence!

A road bike with disc brakes would be ideal. But then I think I may not even need that as I drop more pounds.

Anyone else have issues with this?

I'm about a hundred pounds heavier than you. There are technical mountain descents in Colorado that I have NEVER made it down without blowing out a tire because the rim became so hot due to braking. Considering I would lose my life going over a cliff if my front tire blew out on a corner, I heavily favor the rear brake in the corners, almost always causing the tube to blow out.

Once on our tandem, while pulling our baby carrier, the tandem was out of control on the Iowa County human society ride in Dodgeville, WI (think Dairyland Dare or Horrible Hilly Hundred). We were going over 55mph with the drag brake maxed out and both front and rear brakes fully on. I kid you not. I've never been on a steeper descent. It may have only been four or five hundred foot hills but they added up to 10,000 ft of climbing over the 100 mile route.

That was as scary ride. Our rear wheel, that had just been hand built by Yellow Jersey the week before, collapsed on us. Even though we are nearly 600lbs on the bike Muzi thought it would be 'best' to use 14/16g spokes. The wheel collapsed on an uphill. If it had happened on the descent we'd be dead. Andrew offered to rebuild the wheel using a different rim (it was a 48h Velocity Dyad, a bombproof rim) but wasn't willing to go to 14g straight spokes or even the 13/14g we probably need.

Moral lesson, if the custom wheel you are having built is being made by a shop that mostly deals with a hundred and fifty pound hipsters on fixies you might want to wait to get a Peter White wheel instead.