Advantage of Disc Brakes?
#2
Really Old Senior Member
Yes and no. Depends on your riding style, terrain etc....
Personally, I don't like the "vulnerability" of the rotor when little brats jamb their bike against yours in bike racks etc.
Personally, I don't like the "vulnerability" of the rotor when little brats jamb their bike against yours in bike racks etc.
#3
Jet Jockey
Mine outperform rim brakes in wet/slick conditions. So if you do a lot of riding in those conditions, then they are the right tool for you.
Rim brakes are equal on dry roads. Rim brakes work in slick conditions, but you just have to be more careful.
Rim brakes are equal on dry roads. Rim brakes work in slick conditions, but you just have to be more careful.
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Reykjavík
Posts: 194
Bikes: Trek Crossrip 2 2017, Cube Cruve Pro 2015 and Berlín Dutch Bike 3 speed 2014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Disc brake works a lot better in the wet/muddy condition than traditional rim brakes and have consistent braking.
I love hydraulic disc brakes as they automatically adjust the pads as they wear down.
I love hydraulic disc brakes as they automatically adjust the pads as they wear down.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 4,454
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
10 Posts
My opinion is consistent with what others have said, but I'll try to add some explanation (and a couple more points).
1) The talk of disc brakes being obviously stronger in good weather is largely marketing hype. As others in this thread have noted, discs aren't "better at being brakes" in dry weather. The increased clamping force of discs are canceled out by the much smaller disc diameter compared to a rim.
2) Disc brakes are generally better in wet/mud for two reasons: (a) the disc is further from the ground, and doesn't get wet or muddy just based on what the bike wheel is rolling through (b) wet rims need a revolution under the brake pads to scrape the water off for better friction between rim and pad. Disc brakes have higher clamping force, which squeezes the water out from between pad and braking surface almost instantly.
Other relative upsides of disc brakes:
3) you can easily swap between different wheel sizes on the same frame
4) no need to replace the rim once the braking surface is worn down. this matters more for commuting bikes (where braking is more frequent and rims will thus wear down more quickly)
5) easier to use with fatter tires and/or fenders, where longer arms of normal sidepull brakes will mean more flexing and less braking force (this advantage disappears when comparing disc brakes with centerpull rim brakes)
Other relative upsides of rim brakes:
6) less finnicky adjustment when changing wheels, because tolerances are larger
7) a flexible fork (which gives a smoother ride) can be used, whereas disc brakes require a stiffer fork.
8) pads are less likely to "fade" from overheating on long descents, because large rim (esp aluminum) acts as a better heat sink than small steel disc
9) less aerodynamic drag in crosswinds
10) brake pads last a lot longer. numerous reports of disc brake pads wearing down quickly.
All this means that disc brakes are obviously better for off-road usage.
For road riding, things are much less clear. Disc brakes are more likely worth it if you live in rainy conditions, where you'll get better power and won't need to replace your rims when the braking surface wears out.
Jan Heine of Bicycle Quarterly (who rides fatter-tire road bikes in all-weather conditions, with centerpull rim brakes on some bikes and discs on others) recently wrote a general overview of disc brake pros and cons
1) The talk of disc brakes being obviously stronger in good weather is largely marketing hype. As others in this thread have noted, discs aren't "better at being brakes" in dry weather. The increased clamping force of discs are canceled out by the much smaller disc diameter compared to a rim.
2) Disc brakes are generally better in wet/mud for two reasons: (a) the disc is further from the ground, and doesn't get wet or muddy just based on what the bike wheel is rolling through (b) wet rims need a revolution under the brake pads to scrape the water off for better friction between rim and pad. Disc brakes have higher clamping force, which squeezes the water out from between pad and braking surface almost instantly.
Other relative upsides of disc brakes:
3) you can easily swap between different wheel sizes on the same frame
4) no need to replace the rim once the braking surface is worn down. this matters more for commuting bikes (where braking is more frequent and rims will thus wear down more quickly)
5) easier to use with fatter tires and/or fenders, where longer arms of normal sidepull brakes will mean more flexing and less braking force (this advantage disappears when comparing disc brakes with centerpull rim brakes)
Other relative upsides of rim brakes:
6) less finnicky adjustment when changing wheels, because tolerances are larger
7) a flexible fork (which gives a smoother ride) can be used, whereas disc brakes require a stiffer fork.
8) pads are less likely to "fade" from overheating on long descents, because large rim (esp aluminum) acts as a better heat sink than small steel disc
9) less aerodynamic drag in crosswinds
10) brake pads last a lot longer. numerous reports of disc brake pads wearing down quickly.
All this means that disc brakes are obviously better for off-road usage.
For road riding, things are much less clear. Disc brakes are more likely worth it if you live in rainy conditions, where you'll get better power and won't need to replace your rims when the braking surface wears out.
Jan Heine of Bicycle Quarterly (who rides fatter-tire road bikes in all-weather conditions, with centerpull rim brakes on some bikes and discs on others) recently wrote a general overview of disc brake pros and cons
Last edited by TallRider; 02-11-17 at 04:42 PM.
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Edmonton Canada
Posts: 317
Bikes: Too many to list here
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
My very first disk brake equipped bike is my daily commuter. It took a bit to get used to them. I was squeezing to hard when coming to a stop and I had a few minor crashes. I am much better now. I really like them for commuting as I am always stopping and going. As other forum members have mentioned, disk brakes are not effected by rain. I can't imagine my commuter not having disk brakes any more. They have made my commute much safer.
#8
FLIR Kitten to 0.05C
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,331
Bikes: Roadie: Seven Axiom Race Ti w/Chorus 11s. CX/Adventure: Carver Gravel Grinder w/ Di2
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2349 Post(s)
Liked 406 Times
in
254 Posts
My opinion is consistent with what others have said, but I'll try to add some explanation (and a couple more points).
1) The talk of disc brakes being obviously stronger in good weather is largely marketing hype. As others in this thread have noted, discs aren't "better at being brakes" in dry weather. The increased clamping force of discs are canceled out by the much smaller disc diameter compared to a rim.
2) Disc brakes are generally better in wet/mud for two reasons: (a) the disc is further from the ground, and doesn't get wet or muddy just based on what the bike wheel is rolling through (b) wet rims need a revolution under the brake pads to scrape the water off for better friction between rim and pad. Disc brakes have higher clamping force, which squeezes the water out from between pad and braking surface almost instantly.
Other relative upsides of disc brakes:
3) you can easily swap between different wheel sizes on the same frame
4) no need to replace the rim once the braking surface is worn down. this matters more for commuting bikes (where braking is more frequent and rims will thus wear down more quickly)
5) easier to use with fatter tires and/or fenders, where longer arms of normal sidepull brakes will mean more flexing and less braking force (this advantage disappears when comparing disc brakes with centerpull rim brakes)
Other relative upsides of rim brakes:
6) less finnicky adjustment when changing wheels, because tolerances are larger
7) a flexible fork (which gives a smoother ride) can be used, whereas disc brakes require a stiffer fork.
8) pads are less likely to "fade" from overheating on long descents, because large rim (esp aluminum) acts as a better heat sink than small steel disc
All this means that disc brakes are obviously better for off-road usage.
For road riding, things are much less clear.
1) The talk of disc brakes being obviously stronger in good weather is largely marketing hype. As others in this thread have noted, discs aren't "better at being brakes" in dry weather. The increased clamping force of discs are canceled out by the much smaller disc diameter compared to a rim.
2) Disc brakes are generally better in wet/mud for two reasons: (a) the disc is further from the ground, and doesn't get wet or muddy just based on what the bike wheel is rolling through (b) wet rims need a revolution under the brake pads to scrape the water off for better friction between rim and pad. Disc brakes have higher clamping force, which squeezes the water out from between pad and braking surface almost instantly.
Other relative upsides of disc brakes:
3) you can easily swap between different wheel sizes on the same frame
4) no need to replace the rim once the braking surface is worn down. this matters more for commuting bikes (where braking is more frequent and rims will thus wear down more quickly)
5) easier to use with fatter tires and/or fenders, where longer arms of normal sidepull brakes will mean more flexing and less braking force (this advantage disappears when comparing disc brakes with centerpull rim brakes)
Other relative upsides of rim brakes:
6) less finnicky adjustment when changing wheels, because tolerances are larger
7) a flexible fork (which gives a smoother ride) can be used, whereas disc brakes require a stiffer fork.
8) pads are less likely to "fade" from overheating on long descents, because large rim (esp aluminum) acts as a better heat sink than small steel disc
All this means that disc brakes are obviously better for off-road usage.
For road riding, things are much less clear.
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 4,454
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
10 Posts
I don't think there's technically anything keeping thru-axles from being used with rim brakes. My sense is that they developed in part because of the asymmetrical forces on frame/fork that come with disc brakes. but as mostly a roadie, I'm not an expert on this one.
My very first disk brake equipped bike is my daily commuter. It took a bit to get used to them. I was squeezing to hard when coming to a stop and I had a few minor crashes. I am much better now. I really like them for commuting as I am always stopping and going. As other forum members have mentioned, disk brakes are not effected by rain. I can't imagine my commuter not having disk brakes any more. They have made my commute much safer.
Last edited by TallRider; 02-11-17 at 04:48 PM.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Indiana
Posts: 151
Bikes: Trek 4.0 Domane
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Down side for me has been ....wheels. Getting disc brake wheels with thru axle is nothing. Then look at 36 spoke wheels,disc brake and thru axle the numbers narrow down quickly.
However as a Clyde I do like my disc.
However as a Clyde I do like my disc.
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,688
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked 295 Times
in
222 Posts
The advantage you can get from thru-axles is that they tie the left and right side of the fork/frame together more rigidly, which makes the frame/fork overall stiffer.
A thru-axle wheel may well be stronger, but not b/c its a thru-axle.
#13
Occam's Rotor
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 7,248
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 2,331 Times
in
1,164 Posts
I find even under dry conditions that my hydraulic disc brakes are a major improvement over rim brakes, probably because I do a lot of riding in very steep hills and off-road, and I make very heavy use of the brakes. Being sub-clinically paranoid after a significant injury probably doesn't help either, but I find they have given me a lot more confidence.
Having said that, I recently put new rims and Campy rim brakes on a different road bike, and I would say they are at least 80% as effective. My hands do hurt more, however, when I use conventional brakes for long descents.
For me, the main irritations are finicky adjustment and frequent replacement of pads as well as rotors. The other thing is I highly recommend thru-axle, especially in the front, if you get disc brakes. I don't have it, but I wish I did. Because of the way the front brake caliper mounts on most forks, the force vector points down, which tends to push the wheel out of the fork dropouts. (My Enve 1st gen cyclocross fork has forward-pointing dropouts, which is a bit better, but they obviously decided thru-axle was an improvement, because the next gen of cyclocross fork is thru-axle.)
I also recommend Shimano (vs. SRAM) as mineral oil is a lot more pleasant to work with than DOT brake fluid, when it comes time to bleed your brakes (another delight).
Having said that, I recently put new rims and Campy rim brakes on a different road bike, and I would say they are at least 80% as effective. My hands do hurt more, however, when I use conventional brakes for long descents.
For me, the main irritations are finicky adjustment and frequent replacement of pads as well as rotors. The other thing is I highly recommend thru-axle, especially in the front, if you get disc brakes. I don't have it, but I wish I did. Because of the way the front brake caliper mounts on most forks, the force vector points down, which tends to push the wheel out of the fork dropouts. (My Enve 1st gen cyclocross fork has forward-pointing dropouts, which is a bit better, but they obviously decided thru-axle was an improvement, because the next gen of cyclocross fork is thru-axle.)
I also recommend Shimano (vs. SRAM) as mineral oil is a lot more pleasant to work with than DOT brake fluid, when it comes time to bleed your brakes (another delight).
Last edited by Cyclist0108; 02-12-17 at 01:44 AM.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,688
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked 295 Times
in
222 Posts
I think a lot of the "stronger" commentary comes from disc brakes generally providing more braking for a given amount of hand effort compared to rim brakes.
Getting full braking on my road bike - with old, single-pivot Saccon rim brakes - takes literally a white-knuckle effort.
On my nice MTB, I can get all the braking I'd ever want from a moderate, 2-finger effort.
I'd say that calling disc brakes stronger - for the amount of hand effort that feels comfortable and natural to apply - is a quite fitting description for many bikes.
Getting full braking on my road bike - with old, single-pivot Saccon rim brakes - takes literally a white-knuckle effort.
On my nice MTB, I can get all the braking I'd ever want from a moderate, 2-finger effort.
I'd say that calling disc brakes stronger - for the amount of hand effort that feels comfortable and natural to apply - is a quite fitting description for many bikes.
#15
Newbie
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 53
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
6 Posts
I think a lot of the "stronger" commentary comes from disc brakes generally providing more braking for a given amount of hand effort compared to rim brakes.
Getting full braking on my road bike - with old, single-pivot Saccon rim brakes - takes literally a white-knuckle effort.
On my nice MTB, I can get all the braking I'd ever want from a moderate, 2-finger effort.
I'd say that calling disc brakes stronger - for the amount of hand effort that feels comfortable and natural to apply - is a quite fitting description for many bikes.
Getting full braking on my road bike - with old, single-pivot Saccon rim brakes - takes literally a white-knuckle effort.
On my nice MTB, I can get all the braking I'd ever want from a moderate, 2-finger effort.
I'd say that calling disc brakes stronger - for the amount of hand effort that feels comfortable and natural to apply - is a quite fitting description for many bikes.
#16
Senior Member
09box, The greatest virtue is that disc brakes work better in wet conditions.
Braking power is limited by traction and a set of linear pull cantilever brakes or dual pivot caliper brakes modulate braking power well, while still capable of delivering enough power to endo the bike and rider.
Disc brakes wouldn't be a deciding factor for me WRT a new bike purchase.
Brad
Braking power is limited by traction and a set of linear pull cantilever brakes or dual pivot caliper brakes modulate braking power well, while still capable of delivering enough power to endo the bike and rider.
Disc brakes wouldn't be a deciding factor for me WRT a new bike purchase.
Brad
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Somewhere in TX
Posts: 2,266
Bikes: BH, Cervelo, Cube, Canyon
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 212 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
6 Posts
If you live in a dry climate all you're doing is adding a pound to your bike and restricting your wheel options.
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 643 Times
in
364 Posts
There's no direct link between wheel strength and thru-axles. Wheel strength comes from things like flange diameter/ spacing, spoke count/diameter etc
The advantage you can get from thru-axles is that they tie the left and right side of the fork/frame together more rigidly, which makes the frame/fork overall stiffer.
A thru-axle wheel may well be stronger, but not b/c its a thru-axle.
The advantage you can get from thru-axles is that they tie the left and right side of the fork/frame together more rigidly, which makes the frame/fork overall stiffer.
A thru-axle wheel may well be stronger, but not b/c its a thru-axle.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,688
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked 295 Times
in
222 Posts
No, you should put that on the list of poor engineering decisions that the bike industry has accepted as standard.
It is not an unavoidable feature of disc brakes as such.
Putting the caliper on the front of the fork leg would have been a far better solution, not only to avoid wheel ejection but also for thru-axles.
As it is, you still have ride forces pushing the axle up, and brake forces pushing the axle down.
And as thru-axles aren't press-fit, the design still allows the axle to shift around and become self-loosening if the lever is ever not sufficiently tightened.
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 643 Times
in
364 Posts
Oh man! Now I have to check to see how the front wheels of my Catrike are held on.
I can tell you from personal experience that the front wheel disc brakes have PLENTY of stopping power to lift the rear wheel off the ground. It won't endo, though, because the sprocket bash guard hits the ground to stop it. Might it eject a front wheel? I honestly don't know. I've never needed to take one of the front wheels off. If I have a puncture, I just roll the trike up on it's side.
I can tell you from personal experience that the front wheel disc brakes have PLENTY of stopping power to lift the rear wheel off the ground. It won't endo, though, because the sprocket bash guard hits the ground to stop it. Might it eject a front wheel? I honestly don't know. I've never needed to take one of the front wheels off. If I have a puncture, I just roll the trike up on it's side.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 33,656
Bikes: '96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '20 Surly Midnight Special, All are 3x10. It is hilly around here!
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2026 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,096 Times
in
742 Posts
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 643 Times
in
364 Posts
I worked on a full suspension mountain bike from a major manufacturer that kept ejecting it's front wheel. The best solution I could come up with was to replace the QR lever with a genuine Shimano (enclosed mechanism) lever. It wasn't my bike and the owner never brought it back so I don't know if that was an adequate solution.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
#25
The Infractionator
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 2,201
Bikes: Classic road bikes: 1986 Cannondale, 1978 Trek
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 875 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
I can see where disc brakes could be an advantage; in wet conditions, and for severe downhill speed limiting (either on long mountain descents, or on heavily loaded touring/tandem bikes). Other than that, I can't see where the extra weight, cost, and complexity would be worth it.