Howdy all. Just found the forum. Managed to misspell the title of the thread.

I'm in the market for a bike for a short commute, and general city riding. I'm in Columbus, OH, and plan on riding as close to year round as possible. Which means rain and snow and slush, etc. I'm planning on keeping it for a while, kitting it out with a rack or two, maybe some upgrades, etc.

My question is this: given my all-weather goals, are disc brakes a serious advantage? I like the Trek Valencia, but if the disc breaks aren't worth the $110, I'll get the 7.3 FX.
Compare Linky
If you've got any similar suggestions I'd love to hear them. I'd like to stick to around $750.

Thanks!

I have drum/roller brakes, not disc brakes (but similar). I've found them invaluable on rainy days b/c I know the brakes will work just the same as they do when it's dry outside. Definitely worth $100 in my opinion.

You may hear criticisms that they are heavy & hard to maintain. I've only put 700 miles on my Trek Soho, but the brakes have required zero maintenance in that time.

Since you're shopping Trek, if you can find a 2009 Trek Soho you might be able to get it for around $850-900 (MSRP jumped $200 this year, inexplicably). The Soho looks similar to the valencia but has two other maintenance-reducing, weather-embracing features: internal gears and a belt drive.

good luck with your search!

In pleasant/dry conditions: No.

In total crap: Yes.

I have a disc brake cx bike and a rim brake cx bike.

Oh...provided you get good discs, like Avid BB7. Crappy discs are just extra weight to not equal the performance of a quality rim brake.

And it's "brake"...not "break".

Thanks. I had looked at the Soho, but at $1050 I'm not sure if I can spring for the extra price.

I haven't been able to find bikes from any other manufacturers with disc brakes for this price point. Any suggestions anyone? This is a pretty bike-friendly place, so I could even do a custom build I suppose.

Yes, thank you. I noticed this and am rather embarrassed about it. Double checked my spelling and then reassured myself that I had it right. So much for that!
I've heard about upgrading to Avids. I could do that eventually if the stock Shimanos disappoint.

another one to look for is the Giant TranSend EX. it has been discontinued, but a local Giant dealer may still be able to order one.

An LBS had one for less than $700 and it is a fantastic bike with internal gears, disc brakes, ergon grips, the whole package. In fact, it looks like they still have it - maybe they would ship it to you? https://farinas.com/product/09-giant-...ex-48785-1.htm

(I didn't buy it because I wanted to try a Trek, and because I got my '09 Soho for $720. But it is a steal for the money. )

Again, if you have any flexibility on price an '09 Soho might be findable for $850-900. I think the Soho is overpriced at $1050.

That about says it.

All it took for me was one winter before I swore off rim brakes. Now I commute year 'round on a Trek Portland.

Maintenance is dead-simple, and the bike stays clean from that fine-powdered brake pad dust. I sure love my disk brakes, and these are the fairly low-end mechanical Hayes MX-2 that used to be an option on the 7.3 FX.

I love my hydraulic discs. They're only really needed in bad weather, but I really like the sense of control they give even in good weather.

I commute year round in a northern climate and have never had a problem with regular old rim brakes. Recently purchased an 08 Soho with discs and they aren't one of the more impressive parts of the bike. So for me, I wouldn't buy a bike based on what brakes it had.

I have Shimano cable disc brakes, I think they are borderline crappy grade but they work well all winter. I can ride through water and slush without having to feather the water off the rim.

Be aware that the std rear disc brake position doesn't work well with racks. Some narrow profile brakes can get away with normal racks, otherwise you need a rack with 1" of standoff. That means an extra 1" of wind resistance and 1" less of gap-going-forability.
Chainstay mounted disc-brakes are the ones to get. Scott do this on their hybrids.

Hey Sam,

Another Columbusite here. My vote goes for the disc brakes. I got a CX bike with discs about a year and a half ago and it is my go-to bike in rain and snow. They make a huge difference in wet weather, and in snowy or icy weather they are verging on an absolute must.

The first time my discs got a real good test, the bike was sitting outside of my workplace for 8 hours in constant freezing rain. I had to knock a layer of ice off my handlebars and saddle before heading home. But sure enough, the brakes worked just fine. I was sold.

Yes, a serious advantage for rainy, snowy city riding... I'm not going back to rim brakes, while they work OK, the discs are predictable(consistent stopping) and easier to maintain since they tend to get less filthy. You'll never have to replace a rim due to road grit chewing it away and if your wheel is out of round(pothole/curb) you can still ride around without the brakes going wonky. The bicycle you picked has a chainstay mounted caliper which is best for racks/fenders though i haven't used shimano's mechanical brake.

People who have disc brakes seem to really like them. I've only test-ridden disc brake bikes, so I'm not able to directly compare, but I do feel that the disadvantages of rim brakes are vastly overstated. Most rim brakes come with mediocre pads, but after a $15 pad replacement will brake just fine in all conditions. It remains the road-tire traction that restricts my braking ability, not the brake. I ride winter and summer - v-brakes on the winter bike, cantis on the summer bike - and have had no problems, through adjusting to eliminate squeal is kind of a PITA.

I rode home with a spoke ripped out of my rim and therefore a wheel completely out of true - didn't even notice as my disk brakes worked as usual. I don't mind rim brakes on my road bike, but disk brakes sure are good. I put them on my all year round bikes.

Check out what Kona has to offer:

-Dew Plus (less expensive than the 7.3FX) with mechanincal discs.
-Dew Deluxe (less expensive than the Valencia) with hydraulic's

And according to the Kona website, here are the dealers in your town.

My 2cents: Worth it, sure. Necessary, no.

I had Shimano hydraulics on my commuter, in a previous life. I take the downhills a little slower in the rain/snow, now that I'm back to canti's, but this hasn't created any major problems in my life. Even when I had discs, I used my junker on snow days, which had V-brakes, because I didn't want to expose the nicer bike to the extra salty roads. Learning how to keep rim brakes properly adjusted and maintained took me awhile, but it makes a huge difference. Also learned not to buy the cheapest pads available - which goes for discs or rim.

A good set of V-brakes is more than adequate.
If you ride through rain and mud. Then yes, disc brakes have an advantage. Actually I don't even know you need rear disc for a commuter. The front brakes handles most of the stopping. With a commuter that has rear discs, the rear rack choices are reduced significantly. Not to mention added weight.

There are zero rear-rack issues with chain-stay mounted disc calipers. The reason to run a disc on the back is the pile up of silt and such on the v-brake area, not to mention the rear-wheel is always the one with the braking surface wearing out first. That happens specifically because dirt piles up more readily on the rear v-brakes

The added weight is nothing, unless one is considering a pro-level race bike in comparison.

I think they're worth it if you ride in bad conditions. I've had almost no brakes a few times while riding in freezing rain - the kind of stuff where I get to work, stand up straight and 1/4 inch of ice cracks off the rain jacket and clatters to the pavement.

If you ride in stuff like that, or even any icy weather or lots of rain, it's worth it.

Also, I ride on gravel roads, and in the rain, the sand gets up on the rims and every time I use the brakes it grinds on the rims.

I put a disc on the front, because I had the mounts for it. None on the back. So on the front I put on a $6 set of pads once a year and I'm good. On the back, a $3 set of pads, but every 2 years or so I need a new rim.

Thanks for all the replies, everyone. I think I'd rather stick to mechanical disk brakes, for simplicity of maintenance and possible replacement. Trek's PDX is a lower-quality option, and I wonder how the Kona stacks up to the PDX, given the lower price.

Time to buy a bike!

I may be mistaken here, but the Alpha White (PDX) is of a lesser quality frame material than the Alpha Black (Valencia). You might look at the Hybrid forum here

Good call, thanks.

Disc brakes rock. I took a Traffic 101 course offered by the LAB, when we did emergency stopping drills I stopped quicker than everyone else. I was the only one in the class with disc brakes. I like them much more than rim brakes.

Well, it's not just the climate, it's what your municipality does about that climate. Here, they just throw stupid quantities of salt, sand, gravel on the roads, it turns into something which seems designed to screw up your rims. I got seriously annoyed with the number of times I had to pull my V-brakes apart and refurbish. Like, more than once a week in the bad times.