pablosnazzy

seriously bicycle industry, what are you thinking?

looks like many bicycles now come with 180mm rotors on the rear wheel. i just got my rocky mountain slayer (have to build it up, my rear wheel didn't fit so i had to order a new rear wheel, when it comes i will build it up and post pics) and it came with a 180mm rotor. the bike is a 16.5 inch bike (i'm a little guy). what person would ride a 16.5 inch bike and need a 180mm brake rotor on the back?


why? it's ludicrous and makes no sense to me. I can understand a 180 rotor on the front and rear brake for a heavy guy going really really fast downhill, but to just put them on the rear of whatever bike sells to whoever?

i would say 99% of riders just don't need that much stopping power on their rear wheel. it's almost too much.

why is this happening? what is the reason? are people asking for it or is the bike industry saying this is how it will be?

just because you can, doesn't always mean you should.

never

A bigger rotor means you're more badass.

pablosnazzy

it would take way more than that. i'm so far from badass, the light from badass would take years to reach me.

Burton

On the other hand thats a fairly serious machine and some people might actually want larger disks for better cooling, not brute stopping power. You're still the guy in charge of how hard you squeeze.

Personally I'd prefer a 203 up front but I think thats the next model up.

samburger

I'd say the manufacturer is just trying to provide equal components regardless of the frame size. I'd be pretty pissed if I found out someone else got 20mm larger brakes on their bike just because the frame is 2" bigger. Not that I'd ever need 180's, but it still wouldn't seem fair unless I got a price cut.