Manufacturers return to rim brakes

I love the old style steel forks with a curve in them, modern straight forks just look wrong. It was always interesting to see that different builders used different types of bend, I have steel forks that start to gradually bend right near the crown and others that are straight for over half their lenght and then bend much more sharply to give the same trail, there is remarkably little difference in road feel from them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPLNR_0x-L8&t=2s

marmotte27 wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPLNR_0x-L8&t=2s

the vertical movement of the chrome hoop us less that it's diameter so although there is impressive horizontal movement it is not doing as much as the tyres to smooth out the ride.

As I said above wide tyres plus fork smooth it even more.

Up and down flexing of the fork is called a suspension fork! Just ask the off road guys riding mtb's.

You know what would be exelent? Cushioned brakes so you don't feel if you are using the brakes or not😂🤣
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Just kidding

marmotte27 wrote:

Yes of course. Slim steel forks absorb a lot of road irregularities.

Yeah it's marvellous how smooth a ride a curved steel fork gives, even with a 23mm tyre - admittedly, on a wide rim.

I've often wondered whether the very stiff forks now required for disk brakes have led to a new search for comfort through ever wider tyres.

There's a good discussion of that in the context of touring bikes on the Thorn cycles 'Touring Bible' (pdf).

"There's a good discussion of that in the context of touring bikes on the Thorn cycles 'Touring Bible (link is external)' (pdf)."

Looks very interesting, will give this a thorough read when I'll have the time.The wide tire research stared before disc brakes really became a thing on road bikes.

I'm more from a french randonneur bike background. Where the front loading geometry, amongst other great advantages, makes the fork bends even longer and thus even more comfortable.

Gravel/All-roadl bikes miss out on many advantages of this older type of bike.

The knowledge on the Thorn site about real life usage of the Rohloff was enlightening. Lot of advice and a great community thing going on. 

I have read a bit more on the site, lots of stuff I agree with.
One thing I find myself disagreeing with is his take on drop bars. He seems mostly dead set against them, I've had them on my randonneur bike (which I use for loaded touring also) for a decade now and I wouldn't want anything else...

In the winter time is when I used my disk brakes bike more. Much better stopping with disks in the snow and wet then rim brakes. I rather be able to stop then complain about noisy brakes

Yes that's fair. Personally I have no issues stopping in wet/icy/snowy conditions on my rim brakes with Swissstop BXP pads, which is why I get so fixated on the unpleasant noise from disc brakes, there's no worthwhile trade-off!

If your brakes are noisy all the time they either have not been bedded in properly or set up properly. Neither are the systems fault.

No, I can confidently say the setup and bedding in are meticulous, I've followed all the tricks and tips and manufacturers advice and frankly spent an unhealthy amount of time on both aspects despite neither being particularly difficult.

Go watch professional road or CX races in the wet (CX in particular). Squealing ahoy! If the professional mechanics can't get it right then frankly that's a failure of the design, not the user.

Have you tried sanding the pads and/or rotors? I was at my wits' end (not a very long journey) recently with a squealing rear brake until a couple of minutes' work with some fine grit sandpaper on both pads and rotors cleared it up immediately.

Yes, sanding pads (less so rotors) takes them back to their 'un-bedded' state, and I seem to recall they are quieter until they get bedded in again, at the expense of power.

I guess you could try sanding them with a rougher grit sandpaper such that they take longer to smooth out, but that means you would remain underpowered for longer. Could you then increase rotor size to compensate? Hmm...

I think this is why sintered pads are reputed to be quieter in the wet, they are more porous so perhaps rougher. My experience was that they were equally noisy though.

Maybe in 5 years time when I'm tempted to try discs again I'll get some Hope RX4s with sintered pads on 180mm discs, it will look like my MTB! 😂

IanEdward wrote:

Yes, sanding pads (less so rotors) takes them back to their 'un-bedded' state, and I seem to recall they are quieter until they get bedded in again, at the expense of power.

I experienced exactly the opposite, an increase in power, because the sanding removes the glaze that both impairs braking power and causes squealing.

huntswheelers wrote:

A ride mate of mine says "when the UCI loosen the weight limit of World Tour frames, Teams will dump disc brakes straight away"...... from the tools side of things.... Disc brakes keep the till ringing more than rim brakes....and I recently upgraded a Bespoke Omega Ti bike which had the original wheels and group, 21 years on....he kept the faith but moved up to Potenza and Shamal wheels...the original Mavic's were past it but after 21 years he got his money's worth

Is there a reason that the UCI would want to reduce the weight limit? Surely that would just make frames more prone to breaking and prompt a tech race to make ever lighter frames. To my mind, they should keep a relatively high weight limit so that there's more choice of bike components and rely on the riders for the racing aspect.

I'd guess it depends on how you look after them.  My hybrid is eleven or twelve years old and I'm on about my third set of rims.

But I don't look after it (I do scrape off the worst of the mud - I'm not a monster!)

When I did bike repairs, it was scary how many bikes came in with destroyed rims. The ones where you have to check the website to see what marker the manufacturer users and you discover it is a solid black groove that is nowhere to be seen but the crater either side was a clue that you didn't need to know. Fewer customers knew that rims were wearing parts than those that knew about chains being wearing parts, and that was about 10%!

You can destroy a rim with a few rides over winter, the ones where you use a pair of brake blocks in a week because it is wet and the roads are gritted. It also massively depends on terrain. Group riding can be a pain for brake wear too, whereas riding by yourself you will tend to be a bit more in control of your speed.

It's basic physics, braking is friction, and although you can avoid premature wear with extra care, if you are using brake pads, you are using rim. If your rims are lasting you aren't braking. I never worked out the ratio of pad and rim, but I reckoned a pair of wheels were good for about 2 seasons in the conditions I rode in, which is about 10000 miles, allowing for rotating between summer best and then using part worn for winter. On my Defy, I am on one rotor replaced in 20,000 miles.

Hear!  I'm not high-mileage and I do go as far as wiping down the rims after a ride (and the occasional burst of cleaning) but daily use in winter will chew through front wheels - even more "robust" ones.  Mind I do mostly brake on the front unless icy / very greasy - I'm not a balanced braker...

I ate through a set of Mavic crossmax rims in about 4 months of my filthy winter commute. Got them cheap before the bike boom, specifically to keep some meat on my last set of xc717s. Several sets of cantilever KOOL stop salmons.

I used to be lucky to get much more than a year out of a set of rims - commuting 200km a week through the winter in London does that.

jaymack wrote:

I may have buckled the odd rim but I've never worn one out.

Really?

jaymack wrote:

My cantilever brakes

Ah, so that's why.

jaymack wrote:

stop on the proverbial six pence and I've been using the same pair of mavic open pro rims for nearly eleven years. I've ridden my brother's disc equipped road bike which is great but far more complicated. If it ain't broke there's no need to replace it

Exactly what is the diameter of a proverbial sixpence, is it something like the diameter of the moon's orbit?