Do i need disc brakes?
10-14-13, 07:34 PM
#26
Senior Member
10-14-13, 08:09 PM
#27
Senior Member
Not really. The 5-bolt pattern and 110mm BCD mean that you're unlikely to find a small chainring with few than the current 34 teeth.
Your best bet might be to find a 10-speed rear derailleur that will allow a cassette with a 34- or 36-tooth cog. IMHO, that's still not low enough if you're planning to tour with camping gear and plan to tackle hilly routes. If you're fit and you can travel light or pick relatively flat routes, it might be enough.
Your best bet might be to find a 10-speed rear derailleur that will allow a cassette with a 34- or 36-tooth cog. IMHO, that's still not low enough if you're planning to tour with camping gear and plan to tackle hilly routes. If you're fit and you can travel light or pick relatively flat routes, it might be enough.
10-14-13, 10:06 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
Not sure what happened to my post, or was it in the other thread? I have two forks, same manufacturer, one touring, one touring/cross with both mounts. The Disc fork is 9 ounces heavier. BB7 calipers are real heavy, plus you need a rotor, and you need a special wheel the spoke rigging angles of which are generally worse, or the rear hub is oddball and heavier.
One thing that might be nicer about a disc would be if the load didn't interfere with it. I normally find some point on tour when the load is in the way of my brake cables, not a big deal, but one more thing about touring bikes that is a bit of a kludge.
One thing that might be nicer about a disc would be if the load didn't interfere with it. I normally find some point on tour when the load is in the way of my brake cables, not a big deal, but one more thing about touring bikes that is a bit of a kludge.
10-14-13, 11:02 PM
#29
Crawler
It's good to know your real world is based on promotional material published on a website.
After these recall notices on the Pugsley forks, one wonder if Surly has in fact got the specs right on its other disc forks:
https://surlybikes.com/surlyforkrecall
It would seem that any fork with tapered blades and significant rake seems to be asking for trouble if it has disc brakes mounted to it. The issue really comes down to having a fork that is over-engineered for the additional forces that are applied on the blades that are quite capable of deforming to upset the handling as well as run the risk of breaking.
Have a look at cyclocross bike forks, and you won't see many, if any, with tapered and raked forks. There's a reason for that.
Frankly, now knowing the issues a little more intimately, I wouldn't touch the Straggler fork, and would settle only for a straight-blade unicrown fork with the resultant weight penalty... but not from Surly based on their failure to get it right with the Pugsley forks.
I also understand now the UCI's reluctance to permit disc brakes in road competition until the safety factor has been fully addressed.
Anyway, it seems the OP's eyes have been lured by a cyclocross bike.
The biggest issuse for him now should be fit and how the bike feels when he rides it, along with the gearing. But I suspect they are down the list compared with the lust for disc brakes, carbon fibre, and eyelets.
After these recall notices on the Pugsley forks, one wonder if Surly has in fact got the specs right on its other disc forks:
https://surlybikes.com/surlyforkrecall
It would seem that any fork with tapered blades and significant rake seems to be asking for trouble if it has disc brakes mounted to it. The issue really comes down to having a fork that is over-engineered for the additional forces that are applied on the blades that are quite capable of deforming to upset the handling as well as run the risk of breaking.
Have a look at cyclocross bike forks, and you won't see many, if any, with tapered and raked forks. There's a reason for that.
Frankly, now knowing the issues a little more intimately, I wouldn't touch the Straggler fork, and would settle only for a straight-blade unicrown fork with the resultant weight penalty... but not from Surly based on their failure to get it right with the Pugsley forks.
I also understand now the UCI's reluctance to permit disc brakes in road competition until the safety factor has been fully addressed.
Anyway, it seems the OP's eyes have been lured by a cyclocross bike.
The biggest issuse for him now should be fit and how the bike feels when he rides it, along with the gearing. But I suspect they are down the list compared with the lust for disc brakes, carbon fibre, and eyelets.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rydabent
Bicycle Mechanics
187
11-01-12 02:10 PM
