View Single Post
Old 11-22-16 | 11:20 PM
  #127  
rhm's Avatar
rhm
multimodal commuter
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,810
Likes: 597
From: NJ, NYC, LI

Bikes: 1940s Fothergill, 1959 Allegro Special, 1963? Claud Butler Olympic Sprint, Lambert 'Clubman', 1974 Fuji "the Ace", 1976 Holdsworth 650b conversion rando bike, 1983 Trek 720 tourer, 1984 Counterpoint Opus II, 1993 Basso Gap, 2010 Downtube 8h, and...

Originally Posted by Darth Lefty
I think the easy way to do a 650b-with-42's conversion on a MTB would be to start out with a disk-brake 26er cross country frame, and forget about rim brakes. I have in a few places before spelled out my idea of a convertible disk brake bike, I do think it would work.
Well yes, as you say, that's the easy way. And (before I start my obligatory scoffing) I admit, there's a lot to be said for taking the easy way out (otherwise there wouldn't be a song about it).
And obviously there's something wonderfully elegant about a disk brake system where you can substitute any wheel set with approximately the same overall diameter.
Indeed, if the fatness of the tires is the only variable that has any effect on ride quality, you'll be in luck, because that'll be the only variable you'll experience.
So, as I say, this approach has a lot to recommend it.

On the other hand, disk brakes require heavy and more or less inflexible fork blades that (some experts argue) have a detrimental effect on ride quality. Now if you spend your whole ride worrying about whether your brakes are up to the task of stopping you, then the awesomeness of disk brakes is worth any cost.
I, however, am one of those guys who spends a lot of time pedaling and very little time braking, and it seems to me my brakes don't have to be awesome. They only have to be good enough. And rim brakes are good enough for me. They allow a lighter frame and more resiliant fork blades... And that seems more important to me than braking awesomeness.
At least in theory.
rhm is offline  
Reply