smashndash

I can’t tell if you believe these things or if you’re pointing out the excuses people make to defend the things they believe in.

The performance difference between rim and disc brakes is disc’s ability to cut through water and stop in the wet. The “power” and “modulation” are better with hydraulic rim brakes. Most people haven’t even tried compressionless cable housing with their rim brakes. Hydraulic rim brakes are incredibly rare, but there have been a few and those are supposedly better than disc brakes. You could argue that disc brakes have an advantage because the pads sit closer to the rotor, but that causes a lot of rubbing issues. If rubbing were acceptable, you could do the same with rim brakes. Rim brake pads also compress a bit more but you can remedy that by using thinner or harder pads if it really bothers you.

I personally think that the main reason disc brakes came in was because carbon rim brake clinchers were really tough to get right, especially in the rain and long descents. That and maybe wider tires became fashionable and nobody wants 90s era V brakes on their road bike. More cynically, perhaps, bike manufacturers ran out of supposed “innovation” to push on us.

I truly sympathize with the co-op mechanic above. It must be tough, especially with so many people believing that disc brakes are the second coming. I know that, for most people, hydro discs are pain-free, but it also seems that there’s greater scope for things to go wrong. At the very least, it seems harder to get them “perfect”. On a group ride last week, two people had new Specialized disc brake bikes and both were rubbing HARD on steep kickers. Both of my friends on my team who upgraded to road disc last season rub on hill sprints. I’m not even OK with my bike making vague clicking sounds. If that happened to my bike (I sprint up hills frequently), I would demand a refund or warranty.