And the manufactures of disc brakes are licking their chops at the thought of replacing discs and pads and hydraulic reservoirs and cylinders and plungers and lines and seals and fluids.

When indexed shifting first came out, it was to improve shifting at the highest levels of racing with positive indexing of the shift lever to avoid missed shifts, and the trickle down effect was that any Sunday rider could shift like a pro.

Disc brakes are not "top-down" technology for road bikes, but adapted to road bikes from mud slingers, courtesy of a dollar hungry industry, looking for more complicated systems to rake in the dough.

Rim brakes are as elegant as they are effective on road bikes. I see no need for disc brakes. "Progress", for the sake of progress itself, is simply marketing: create a demand.

You have a point. It could all be about the UCI and acceptance of disks in racing. Still sanctioned UCI CYCLO-Cross and UCI MTBs can use disks. So safety doesn't seem to be the real issue. Tradition might be some of it and manufacturing pressure might be some of it but the UCI is having to rethink several of their decissions. Like the weight limits for a racing bike itself.

UCI ready to change the 6.8 kg weight limit? | CyclingTips

It reminds me of my old sailing days. PHRF fights hammer and tongs to keep as much tradition in sail boar racing as they can. Technology creeps in but if it does a boat can be kicked into a different class. Full battens work for the non racer and make shaping a sail easier and the sails can last longer. but that is off topic.

UCI is falling into a trap of getting between the teams, riders and manufacturers and simply making excuses rather than decisions. IMHO

I think the comparisons to other UCI disciplines are not really relevant. Road cycling is unique and it should have unique considerations when compared to CX and MTB.

Maybe, but the considerations should be clearly stated. Is it safety or tradition, or competitiveness or what? And all road cycling in not alike are they, TT, Crits, Road racing? It is getting overly complicated anyway. Was someone injured by a disk or not? If they let the teams try them and they don't work that would be the end of it. If they cause teams to lose big rices that would be the end of it. The manufacturers don't need the UCI to make them they can just offer them and see what the public wants. I remember when the UCI banned race radios and now for the 2016 season they will allow them.

To be real I don't know that disks will work better in a racing application than rim brakes but they should make wheels last longer. Not that a pro racing team will care but for the smaller teams it could be a consideration.

Safety is the issue pro riders and UCI is concerned with in road races. Road speeds and the large pelethon fields allow for massive pileups and riders being run over. CX and mtn bikes don't have those kind of crashes. Often crashes often involve a single or just a few steps relatively slow speeds.

How about TT bikes? But if you say it is a safety issue I will have to take your word for it. They said they were trying them for safety reasons before. I wonder if a disk is more dangerous then a 53 tooth chainring?

Chainrings being necessary but unsafe doesn't quite justify other things being maybe unsafe, probably useless anyway for race purposes, and likely trending for non-sporting-related reasons. Probably those should be separated issues though. Maybe many pros don't want to feel like sellouts for being coerced by sponsors into advertising expensive utility kit on their race bikes? Maybe UCI is sympathetic but isn't comfortable legislating things on those grounds? Maybe safety is a good excuse?

You know weekend rider with the most expensive race bike in town will have to get disc brakes once all the pros have them, otherwise instead of the excuse of leaving off the dork disc, he'll just have a less expensive bike than his neighbor.

If we discuss the safety of disc brakes I think this is an interesting little video about the matter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YJeKb_hzAE

Well, chainrings aren't necessary, they're just what's commonly in use. "Safety" is an often-used and nebulous term that tends to be used whenever someone wants to ban something. In this case, a lot of road racers don't want disc brakes, and "safety" is a keyword they know works, regardless of whether or not they're really unsafe.

I wonder if aero spokes are necessary? Seems to me they would be a lot more dangerous than a brake disc since you can be injured from either side of the bicycle, plus there are a lot more of them per bicycle. I mean good ole round spokes work just fine and not as likely to cut/ slice you. Don't here the racers complaining about them, wonder why?
Oh and by the way, if they "the racers" were really concerned about safety they could demand belt drive and internal gear hubs and get rid of the dangerous cassette and chin ring.

Why not just ban cycling altogether because it's unnecessarily dangerous? Who needs it anyway, now that we got Uber and indoor trainers?

Primary reason I cannot wait to get a disc brake bike. Plus, I think it looks great. Let the pro's ride with their rim brakes whilst the world changes to disc.

It's amazing how much cyclists have in common with the Amish.

More than likely it is always a small fraction of any group that are like the Amish or the Shakers. But many people don't like change and tend to be more vocal about the changes they don't see a need for.

The debate is almost always the same. You should hear the comments at the bike shops over the 1x11 crit bikes. So it is more than disks brakes that are evolving it is also the bikes themselves.

I am more concerned about the move towards more gears in the back than disks. If they decided to add another gear of two in the back to try and get rid of a ring in the front they might have to make the rear drop outs wider and CF is pretty hard to make wider if you are considering trying a 1x12. The frames will change and it will be like when they went from 126 to 130.

I find it extremely "interesting" when people invoke the S word. If safety is the issue the UCI or race officials (and here's where my ignorance comes in) or whoever is in charge of racer/rider safety, they should start by not allowing THESE F@&KING IDIOTS from running right up to and coming dangerously close to the competitors dressed like fools and hollering within in arms reach of the riders faces.

I am all for cheering on your favorite riders but @ one point watching the Tour of Cali this evening I witnessed a fan actually PUSH this 19 yr old rider while he was making his ascent. Being that I don't watch a lot of races I don't know if that's normal. Just a thought

It still remains, with the UCI, suddenly it is 1900!!!!

You seem to have completely missed my point, and most of the post after seem to have missed the whole conversation. I'm not saying anyone is concerned about safety. Quite the opposite. I'm saying (just a theory) maybe they are concerned about pressure from the industry to advertise goods that aren't related to race function in any way. To all who like to yell about amish, the point here isn't are disk brakes good... the point is should it become the norm, and ultimately mandatory by standard, for making race bikes more expensive? Disc brakes on your winter snow and sludge bike seems to make some sense by all accounts. What does that have to do with pro racing? Yes, the UCI could mandate against aero spokes and could require baskets and tassles and races would be fine, but instead they allow equipment to compete too. That's fine, but I don't blame them for finding excuses to block it when it's only about selling equipment AS IF it's race equipment and not about selling equipment that has competitive advantage in a race. I doubt the racers are enthusiastic about being pushers, doesn't seem like, but of course if it's not blocked they will fall in line and follow the money and in the end it's no sweat of their backs. Maybe I'm underestimating the racing advantage of disc brakes?

Wait why would you need to make YOUR bike into 13 speed? Are you just worried about lack of good 11 speed replacement equipment when your derailleur is old?

My thoughts exactly!

Big difference.

Not many people get hurt by fans like that. I (and many posters, i'd wager, and many racers, I know, because many have said so or swung at fans) want fans to not be idiots, particularly when riders are killing themselves trying to climb steep hills to win races. But ... how many get hurt? I have seen a few instances where a fan clipped a rider but usually not in those situations because the riders aren't going very fast. A few times where fans leaned over barriers and dumped riders, but not many.

On the other hand, there are almost guaranteed to be several major pileups during any Grand Tours, and probably a couple even in a week-long race, and a couple in a monument. If (and it is unproven) discs can drastically increase the risk of laceration but do not offer any significant increase in performance, then discs would be an unacceptable safety risk.

The fact that there are already a lot of bike parts which can cut a rider is not relevant; it is an increased risk with no commensurate increase in benefit which makes the risk/reward equation tilt to wards rim brakes (if discs are proven to increase lacerations in pileups.)

With screaming crowd pushing past the barricades particularly on hillclimbs, the risk is proven to be slight but the reward is the fanaticism of the fans ... they make for a great TV spectacle and show that cycling is exciting, which helps gt more people involved as fans. There is a reason why football teams ask the crowds to get loud----even an excellent football game would seem a little lame if everyone sat there silently, with maybe the occasional golf clap.

I believe that cycling is amazing and captivating on its own merits. When I watched the last 6 km of the 2nd stage of the Tour of Cali the other day I was so locked in until the finish I didn't even want to leave for a potty break :). The only other sport that has that effect on me is hockey (2nd fastest team sport in the world) Its ridiculous to me that a sport has to be made a "spectacle" to be exciting but that is clearly the current culture we live in.

It is difficult for me to equate a tour fan MAKING CONTACT with or even getting close enough to touch a professional in competition with any other professional athlete. I have seen it before plenty and I still think it is an unnecessary risk to the competitor. That being said I do not want this to get off topic regarding equipment safety. Apologies to the OP

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=522465

it looks like a dog muzzle

I don't at the moment "need" to convert to a 12 or 14 speed. But when I had my old 7400 series Dura Ace on my Klein I didn't think I would ever "need" 10 speeds rather than 8. But when they came out with the big 11x32-34-36 cassettes with the mid cage sooner or later the temptation was just too great, and the legs weren't as strong, and I got a new drive train. So right now I might not need a 1x12 or 14 but if they ever become the norm and I wanted to take advantage of that system it wouldn't be possible if the rear spacing was spread to 135 because of a wider cassette. So it is only looking at the future that makes me concerned.

I guess I could get a frame and build it up if that day ever came but I had a taste of it when my Lapierre Xlite 300 cracked at the set stay. It was made of scandium and one of the best climbing bikes I ever owned. When the company replace the frame they no longer made it in scandium and I was sent the next level up CF frame as a replacement. It was a great CF bike and way more comfortable for century rides but never quite as good climbing, not as stiff I think. I ended up replacing it with a Tarmac because it was closer to the characteristics of the old Lapierre.

So you're concerned that bikes might evolve to more speeds, because then yours won't be able to have more speeds? And if they don't evolve to more speeds that helps you how? Never mind, it's pretty far off topic, it confuses me slightly but it's ok.

Is there a need for more powerful braking or better modulation in a TT? A big chainring is harmless when the chain is on it.

I don't think a team would want to have to deal with having rim brakes on road bikes, and and disc brakes on TT bikes.