Agree on rear brake but will keep mine when my ss/fg is built.

I do use my rear brake, but barely. On occasion I have had the need to brake mid-turn and using the front brakes hard on a suspended bike would upset the bike waaay too much. Using hand brakes and being good at it should be a requirement for anyone riding streets, particularly commuting. Most of your braking is in the front tire and the weight bias moves forward always, most obviously under hard/emergency braking. As on motorcycles, I won't ride with anyone who only uses the rear brake. Too dangerous! for themselves and those around them. It may be scary to learn to brake hard and maintain control but it is literally a life-saving skill.

As the great, late Sheldon Brown said, you really only need the front brake - the rear brake is there as a backup, in case of a front brake failure. If you haven't read his braking and steering article, do it now.

So, when you brake in traffic, only one of your hands will be busy squeezing the front brake lever, while the other will maintain a firm grip on the handlebars. Your hand that is busy braking still contributes to steering, as does your ass and the rest of your body.

When riding a coaster brake bike with a front brake (and I wouldn't want to ride any bike without a front brake) I feel that I maintain more control braking with my hand than I do by backpedaling. Why? Because when braking with your feet by backpedaling, you lose the ability to instantly apply a driving force to the rear wheel, which is very useful to maintain better control of the bike.

You can try this on any bike...

1. Apply the rear brake while backpedaling, and bring the bike down to the slowest speed you can without tipping over.
2. Apply the front brake while applying a small forward driving force to the pedals (and thus the rear wheel), and bring the bike down to the slowest speed you can without tipping over

Which of these do you think leaves you in greater control of the bike?

Also, try controlling the bike with a single hand on the handlebars. You can still perform just about any maneuver safely with a single hand. Then, use the other hand to lightly grab the handlebar with say, two fingers. Control increases quite a bit, again, enough to handle nearly any situation.

Still, I think one of the reasons why you should never try to apply both hand-operated brakes at once it that you should always have at least one hand firmly gripping the handlebars.

I can understand the modulation part, but you can't exceed 100% traction on the tyre no matter what your brake is, otherwise you'll skid on the tyre.

Is this more like releasing slightly when turning? or you mean you can feel the tyre traction better while braking and turning at the same time?

I don't MTB myself, so I just want to know what you mean by this.

I myself prefer a freewheel bike with no brakes at all. All brakes do is add weight and complexity to the bike. And as if that isn't bad enough, even if used properly they actually slow you down. Who wants that? You always have to pedal harder just to get back to the speed you were going.
Bikes without brakes also look a great deal cleaner -- more sleek -- more aerodynamic.
All in all, brakes are a bad idea, even when done "right."

Eh? Am I getting drowsy? Did I read that correctly? Hills? Traffic? Stray children? Any of this ringing a bell?

Not only do you not need to grip the 'bars to steer, you also don't need all four fingers to pull a brake lever.

Fairly bizarre discussion.

Two brakes for redundancy and greater heat absorption capacity. Might not seem important, but brakes do fail and pad do overheat or overheat rims on long mountain descents.

Certainly one needs a front brake in traffic. Full stops aren't unusual at all, and only a front brake gives that potential. I can't imagine the readers here have any trouble controlling the transmission, direction, and braking all at once. It isn't like playing a pipe organ or flying an F-16 at low altitude. Just a bicycle.

Coaster brakes suck.

You might have your irony sensor calibrated too high.

To the OP - if you think brakes are dangerous, that suggests you don't know how to use them. If the appropriate thing to do is NOT to brake, then you simply don't brake. Not having the option would be significantly, more dangerous.

Ted shread, lol

It's been giving me trouble lately; I'll have that checked out ASAP ;)

cccorlew was being facetious but in 'The Wonderful Ride' by George Loher, he poo-poos brakes as being unnecessary. His tale is about riding across the country in 1895 on a safety cycle. All he did was jam his foot in the fork to slow down:eek::eek::eek::eek:

Disc brakes have a longer range of force appliable before the braking action causes maximum tire traction to be achieved. Basically, the "lock" point on a disc brake is harder to achieve even on high braking forces as compared to a rim brake. Also there's the "ABS" affect. But, we digress.

To all of you battering the poor OP, do y'all realize how hard it is to brake while holding a coffee cup in one hand and lighting a cigarette with the other? The whole brake-lever-things just get in the way. For that matter, even having to stop at all is a hassle.:p

I mountain bike, and I can tell you having control of the bike, i.e. good grip, and being able to have max brake control nothing matches a good down hill run. I would never ever consider anything other than hand breaks. Coaster breaks would be a serious danger, they do not offer as much control, require a change in peddling direction which in different locations on the stroke are difficult, and they do not offer a font and rear wheel control

As opposed to what? A coaster brake? Just try coming to a quick stop with a coaster brake from 20mph. See how long of a skidmark you leave while your friend with the handbrakes stops in half the distance since he can utilize his front tire for braking.

On the other hand, I suppose one could rig some sort of bizarre device to a saddle with cables to allow for braking with ones bottom but I think that is really the only other alternative and I think hands would still be much easier.

Of course, now that I think of it, with enough marketing and hype, and underestimated weight values, a bottom brake might be a successful business venture. Anyone want to lend me the capital?

There seem to be six or seven basic posts in this thread and the rest are parrots, so I've grouped the parrots together and answered them point by point:

Considering the fact that I didn't mention any experience, I'm quite surprised at how many folks find that their experience differs. What exactly is your experience different from?



I have to say I'm a bit puzzled with all these responses essentially saying "I manage to do it without too much difficultly, therefore it must be safe". Driving a car while drunk isn't that difficult to do either, but that doesn't mean it's safe.

Difficultly has absolutely nothing to do with it. The point is not whether or not one can manage to simultaneously operate brake levers and steer. The point is that when your reflex and coordination abilities are pushed to the limit by an emergency situation it's best to have all essential operations as easy as possible. Not, easy enough under most circumstances, but as easy as possible. Not sober enough to manage driving with practice, but eliminating all potential difficulties by being as sober as possible.

Depending on skills that must be learned with practice in emergency situations is a recipe for disaster. When the adrenaline starts pumping, learned practiced skills go out the window and basic instincts take over. For example, when most people get angry they start talking in their native accents. Practice can not help and, therefore, all essential functions necessary to survive emergency situations should be as easy and instinctual as possible, which means that you shouldn't need to use your hands to do multiple jobs.

Of course you don't need to grip the bars to steer. You can steer with your elbows while holding a pizza, but that doesn't make it the safest way to ride.

A good grip is not necessarily a tight grip. A good grip is an unobstructed grip that allows you to apply the right amount of force for the situation. Putting brake levers between your hands and the handlebars hinders that. It might even force you to use too tight a grip (for example, lightening your grip might prevent you from squeezing the levers with enough force to skillfully engage the brake).

Which is exactly why it's a bad idea to either commit your hands to braking by putting them over the brake levers or commit them to steering by putting them under the brake levers. Using different extremities for braking and steering allows you to switch between the two more quickly, but if you are stuck being committed to one and can't switch fast enough then you might be tempted to do both simultaneously because you can't do either one with the necessary precision.

Steering your bike with your body's balance is steering with your hands. Your body weight rests on your butt, your feet, and your hands. So to change your body's balance you need to use your butt your feet and your hands. Now, since your butt isn't very maneuverable and your feet are resting on cranks which are unstable due to freewheeling, your hands are your best option....unless of course they're too preoccupied with the brake levers.

And having a foot brake would improve your ability to do so by eliminating the possibility of braking and accelerating at the same time. Obviously no one would brake and accelerate at the same time with a handbrake, but the fact that the possibility needs to be avoided slows your reflexes by just that many more milliseconds. Just like operating both the gas and the brake on a a car with one foot instead of two allows for better coordination so does using forward pedaling for acceleration and rearward pedaling for deceleration on a bicycle.

I agree. I'm not saying there's anything dangerous about just having brake levers on the handlebars. What's dangerous is giving braking priority over steering by putting those levers between your hands and the bars.

Perhaps you have abnormally long fingers because I certainly can't put the palm side of my knuckles on the bars to grab the bars with some fingers while simultaneously putting other fingers over the levers. It's either palms on the bars and fingers on the levers or fingers under the levers. My fingers aren't long enough to do both.

I suppose you also drive your car with just your pinky finger on the steering wheel. Newsflash: despite the fact that you don't need two hands to turn the wheel, it's still safer to drive with two hands then just your pinky finger.

Stopping distances on a bike are too long for most emergency situations anyway and if you need to lift a pedal to prevent it from striking the ground then your bottom bracket is too low and you need to get a new bike.

The fact that braking distances aren't negligible is exactly the point. They are too long to be an effective course of action in most situations. Swerving is more important and more effective. And why wouldn't there be a good swerve option? You don't need a 10-12 foot window to swerve into like a car and you don't need as wide of a turning radius. When isn't there a 3-4 foot window to swerve into?

And I'm going to guess that you make a habit out of ignorant guessing.

You can try this on any bike...

1. Apply the rear brake while backpedaling, and bring the bike down to the slowest speed you can without tipping over.
2. Apply the front brake while applying a small forward driving force to the pedals (and thus the rear wheel), and bring the bike down to the slowest speed you can without tipping over

Which of these do you think leaves you in greater control of the bike?

Also, try controlling the bike with a single hand on the handlebars. You can still perform just about any maneuver safely with a single hand. Then, use the other hand to lightly grab the handlebar with say, two fingers. Control increases quite a bit, again, enough to handle nearly any situation.[/quote]

Still, I think one of the reasons why you should never try to apply both hand-operated brakes at once it that you should always have at least one hand firmly gripping the handlebars.[/QUOTE]
This has nothing to do with front versus rear brakes. Not all bikes are rear wheel drive.

If hand brakes are dangerous and depending on rear brakes are dangerous then it wouldn't mean that hand brakes are no longer dangerous. It would mean that rear wheel drive bikes are dangerous.

And watch how you can make that skid mark in figure eights due to the fact that you can concentrate your hands on controlling the bike instead of braking.

Or how about a coaster brake in the rear the simultaneously triggers a front hub brake?

I'm just asking the question of whether or not handbrakes are dangerous. The lack of safe alternatives is another discussion.

I think you need to change those reading glasses.

I'd respond but do not have the time to read that post.

Take lever and pull. Your bike stops. It is literally second nature to anyone who rides a bike. No thinking required. At most you shift your weight backwards to keep the bike stable. I still don't get it.

I personally would take effective stopping over swerving any day but that is just me. Swerving is important, but it comes second to stopping for me. Incidentally one can swerve just fine if they don't grab the brakes. I think an emergency swerve with controlled braking would be difficult even with a foot brake as your leg would be flexing and your balance would be changing. Plus with a pedal brake you would still have the delay of switching from forward motion to engaging the brake wherease my hands are always on the handbrakes and can engage them instantly. Fingers are a lot lighter and faster to engage things as well, legs are heavy and take more oomph to overcome inertia.

Sounds like a lot of bull-pucky to me. If the brakes are set up and adjusted properly there should be no reason why they can't be fully actuated with the first two fingers of either hand, leaving the other two fingers to grip the 'bar well enough for any maneuver a commuter is likely to face.

what he said

I don't see how this would be possible excepting the use of: a magical fairy repealing the laws of inertia, Hallucinagenic drugs, or a large something to push you around in a figure eight while you skidded.

I don't know how many skids you have been in but steering goes out the window when the tires start skidding my friend. Any control you may have is mostly directed into staying upright and not avoiding obstacles.

Congrats to you on one of the more amusing posts in awhile though. I don't suppose we could make our butt brake so that it engaged when you tensed up? That way you would hardly even have to think about braking and could concentrate on how much control you had of the handlebars. I think we would definitely have to overcome some comfort issues with that design though......

Use road bike handlebars and brakes, works very well.

Indeed.