good blug post on rim and disk brakes

[Will]

Might be nice to push back to GP and encourage more of these posts.

[Mark Reimer]

This anti-disc, pro rim-brake argument feels like flogging a dead horse. I've ridden more than enough disc brake bikes to know the appeal and see/feel firsthand how they surpass rim brakes in so many ways. I'm in no way anti-rim brake, in fact I'm usually the odd-man out on rides as the only rim-brake guy, still race canti-brake CX bikes, etc etc etc. 

Just because rim brakes technically have more mechanical advantage, by way of being further from the hub, doesn't mean anything positive or negative on its own. Just because disc rotors are close to the hub and require more stopping force and frame construction considerations also doesn't mean anything positive or negative on it's own. So disc brakes frames need stouter construction and re-enforcement....and? I find it particularly amusing coming from Rivendell, who's frames are not exactly known for being built to be light. Yes, discs put large forces on a frame, but who cares? That can be mitigated by design. The fact is, while rim brakes work quite well in most regular circumstances (dry, warm) discs have better and stronger stopping power in lousy conditions than rim brakes will have. 

I remember coming down Rainier on my Atlantis while it was drizzling, loaded with front panniers and saddle bags. Normally I can lift my rear wheel off the ground with the Paul touring canti's, bike unloaded. I was coming down at about 60km/h, not a crazy speed on a bike by any means, and it took me probably 100 meters to come to a stop. I was shocked, and getting ready to jump off my bike into the ditch as I realized I would be sailing through the intersection at the bottom of the hill. Wet rims = compromised braking. Wet rotors = basically no difference. 

In winter, when I bring my bike outside into sub-zero temperatures, the warm rims melt the snow as I ride. After applying the brakes, that melted water is spread nice and evenly across the brake track, which freezes shortly after. Many times I've had ZERO braking ability within two blocks of leaving because of this issue. Discs don't run through the snow and are way less susceptible to this problem.

So basically, rim brakes work wonderfully, in some/most circumstances (If I lived in Texas I'd probably never need discs). But disc brakes work just as well in those circumstances, and better in the areas rim brakes fall short, though require some frame construction considerations to be safe. I think most people would agree with that. 

So, I fail to understand why any bike manufacturer would refuse to consider building a bike with discs. If the drawback of discs are hubs popping out of forks (lawyer lips, front-facing drop outs, and through axles solved this already), and frame stress (build the frame accordingly, like pretty much most frame builders out there are doing now), that seems like a pretty paltry price to pay compared to the stated drawbacks of rim brakes: possibly popping tubes and crashing form overheated rims (I know a guy who had this happen on FLAT ground in Texas heat!), or having little to no braking from wet/frozen surfaces, or compromised brakes as a result of bent rims.... seems like an easy call? Disc = your frame needs heavy re-enforcement. Rim = it almost always works, but when it doesn't you're in for a RUDE surprise. Kinda reminds me of the argument Riv uses against Carbon frames - they usually work, but when they fail, they fail catastrophically.... 

One of the things i love about the Rivendell brand is championing bicycle design that just works, stuff that makes sense and is no-nonsense. To me, that is exactly what disc brakes are. I think that is why this debate irks me (can you tell LOL), because I agree with pretty much all Grant/Rivendell's opinions except this one. I love my Atlantis, most of the time have no complaints about it's braking abilities, love the look of canti's more than any other braking system, and will continue to have rim brake bikes in the future I'm sure. But man... A disc option of this bike? Or a disc Hunq? I'd be over the moon for that. 

[Kieran J]

Great post, I always enjoy Grant's writings.

Physics aside, I don't completely buy his staunch position on disks. I would certainly consider disks on future bikes (a serious dirt bike, my next winter slushmobile). I imagine disk brakes (or some of them at least) are adequately user-serviceable once you learn how.

That said, I do feel like dual pivot/canti brakes have always done the job well in most cases and I know how to adjust them them they need it. I won't be turning my back on them anytime soon.

KJ

[Stephen Kemp]

I am a satisfied rim braker. I've never seriously considered riding discs but I can see the attraction in avoiding compromised braking in the wet and annoying mud on rim grinding noises when off road.

One big factor that Grant has missed is the wear effect of rim brakes. Sooner or later the rim will need replacing. That means a wheel rebuild which may well lead to getting a new hub at the same time. That's a whole new wheel just because your brakes are worn - quite a waste if you have decent, handbuilt wheels that otherwise would have lasted a long time. On a disc system, you just replace the disc.

The related thing is that wear on the rim is hard to detect. You either play it safe or you take it to the limit - which you only reach when your rim is so compromised it blows. Discs are far more transparent. As Mark says above, on this basis Grant's preference for rim brakes goes against the usual argument for steel over carbon.

On the issue of servicing, I've never worked on disc brakes but surely if you avoid hydraulics and stick with cable operated then servicing/repair is easy.

[Mark Reimer]

Servicing discs could not be easier. Hydraulic's are a bit more finicky, but they're no more difficult to dial in than my Paul canti's are. Changing the pads takes 60 seconds. Actually the more I think about it, the more I think discs are much easier to setup and service than rim brakes. You just have to do it once to catch on. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/lJn4CJ1Y9zU/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Patrick Moore]

I read Grant's post yesterday and thought it pretty moderate. He defends rim brakes, and explains the disadvantages of disk brakes, but he nowhere says that rim brakes are always better or that disk brakes are never useful.

As far as Grant's assertions go, I agree with him -- most riders, for most riding, don't need disk brakes, which add unnecessary complication. Perhaps he could have spelled out in more detail some of the benefits of disks, but again, his point seems very clearly to be to defend rim brakes -- and he does so well.

Me, I much prefer disk brakes on dirt, because (1) I can use wide rims that are very light because they have no braking track (the 30 mm wide Velocity Blunt SS's are claimed to be the weight of Open Pros -- 430 grams), and (2) I can buy expensive rims without worrying about wearing them out in a few years.

One defect of disks that Grant didn't mention is the finickiness, at least for Avid BB7s with linear pull road levers, of getting the pads close enough for firm braking while avoiding rub from the inevitable planear irregularity in the disks. It can be done, and I've done it, but it is finicky. And at least my BB7s squeak when dusty.

In fact, I plan to replace the mtb BB7s and linear drop bar levers with the (I hear much improved) road version of the BB7, with old-school Dura Ace levers.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews.

By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.

Other professional writing services.

http://www.resumespecialties.com/

www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/

Patrick Moore

Alburquerque, Nouvelle Mexique,  Vereinigte Staaten

****************************************************************************************

The point which is the pivot of the norm is the motionless center of a circumference on the contours of which all conditions, distinctions, and individualities revolve. Chuang Tzu

Stat crux dum volvitur orbis. (The cross stands motionless while the world revolves.) Carthusian motto

It is we who change; He remains the same. Eckhart

Kinei hos eromenon. (It moves [all things] as the beloved.) Aristotle

[Patrick Moore]

"Couldn't be easier" is, in my experience over 4 bikes with various cable disk systems, not quite accurate. It's certainly not rocket science, and once you find the right method it is straightforward, but it took me a long while to find that method.

Sidepulls are easiest. V brakes, at least decent ones, are easy to setup, as are, slightly less so, wide profile cantis. Low profile cantis are a pain in the ass, IME. Centerpulls are much like wide profile cantis. Gauging all this from my own experience

BB7s are about as easy as brakes requiring cable yokes, IME, and easier than low profiles, at least with drop bar levers.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Garth]

    Mechanics aside ..... disc brakes are just plain aesthetically unappealing :)   I can't use any brake lever I want to either, and you have to dish the front wheel.... stupid stuff like this ... goes on and on.    On this I'm happily a  s n o b !

  I wouldn't expect Riv to add disc brakes any more than I'd expect low trail frames. I don't expect Ferrari to make station wagons either ;) 

There's plenty of willing bike manufactures out there for the i-this/that/andtheother crowd who has to have the latest thing.  As for wet braking performance and wear, they could also just make better rims.  Hark ! ... there's a novel idea, improve upon what you're already offering. 
 
   What's the big push for discs anyways ?  Follow the money ... always follow the money .

[Mark Reimer]

I suppose ease of brake setup will vary from person to person. I find setting up canti's a pain in the butt mostly because of the pad angle business. Finding the right toe-in for strong braking, no squealing or shuddering, is a bit of a dark magic for me. I usually do the old 'business card between the pad and rim' trick, which works most of the time, but is clumsy and awkward.

Regardless though, ease of setup should be a minor consideration when choosing the style of brake to run IMO. I'm happy to deal with some irritating setup now and then if it means my braking will be reliable, powerful, smooth, etc. Afterall, how often do you need to adjust your brakes anyway? I say that as a prairie-living cyclist with no hills, so my brakes may go much longer between adjustment than others...

[Mark Reimer]

The big push for discs is because they work better, period. Some people are happy to have brakes that work 'well enough'. Like I said before, if I always rode in fair weather, I too wouldn't care about having discs. But if you ride in snow, rain, wet mud, swampy terrain, etc, it becomes very obvious, very quickly, how rim brakes fall short.

I agree re: aesthetics. Canti's and centre-pulls look SO good to me. And CX racing bikes with wide-hanging canti's...so euro-pro! 

--

[Steve Palincsar]

On 05/13/2016 12:26 PM, Mark Reimer wrote:
> I suppose ease of brake setup will vary from person to person. I find
> setting up canti's a pain in the butt mostly because of the pad angle
> business. Finding the right toe-in for strong braking, no squealing or
> shuddering, is a bit of a dark magic for me. I usually do the old
> 'business card between the pad and rim' trick, which works most of the
> time, but is clumsy and awkward.
>
> Regardless though, ease of setup should be a minor consideration when
> choosing the style of brake to run IMO. I'm happy to deal with some
> irritating setup now and then if it means my braking will be reliable,
> powerful, smooth, etc. Afterall, how often do you need to adjust your
> brakes anyway? I say that as a prairie-living cyclist with no hills,
> so my brakes may go much longer between adjustment than others...

In which case, rim wear is hardly going to be an issue for you,
obviating one of the claimed advantages of discs. I live in the
Piedmont, and the one rim I managed to wear out due to braking, it took
me 25 years to do so.

Apropos of "ease of setup," I've seen some disc brake setups that were
maddening to ride next to on account of constant squeal, even when the
brakes weren't being applied -- and when they were, the resulting squeal
was about as piercing and penetrating as an icepick to the ear canal.
And the claimed ease of braking -- I've ridden one disc brake equipped
bike (an electric) for maybe a quarter mile. I found the brakes as
grabby and binary ON-OFF as V brakes, and about as unpleasant to use.

And then by all means, let's talk about the "Whirling Ginsu Knives of
Destruction," and the affect on the supposed Inevitability of Disc
Brakes of recent UCI changes terminating the experiment and banning disc
brakes from road racing.

I think the claim of "beating a dead horse" is greatly overblown.

[Patrick Moore]

I think I recently posted a link to the remarks of an ex pro who slammed the marketing and said that the peloton is really no better off with them.

Having ridden cable disks on road many a mile, as well as all the kinds of rim brakes, I can say confidently that, in my own experience, they don't add any benefit in dry conditions -- and I've ridden in the wet enough to know that, at least I, prefer the disadvantages of rim brakes in occasional wet ("occasional" -- if I rode pavement regularly in the rain, I'd want disk or drum or coaster) than the complication, weight, and fork-altering qualities of disks. Again, these are my opinions, but it takes only a single negative instance to refute a universal affirmation.

The best performing brakes I've ever, ever used were IRD wide profiles with salmon pads set up with Tektro drop levers by Rivendell -- more power, more modulation, and best feel of any other. (The worst: a. Mafac cantis, with salmons, both the regular and longer armed tandem version, pulled seriatim by Mafac levers and then by Shimano aero levers: nothing I or one shop could do would make those things work well. Even worse: original issue Road BB7s, even with 180 mm front disk, but these have been greatly improved, I hear.)

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Mark Reimer]

Rim wear is an issue actually. I have worn out rims in under 5 years easily. Remember the wet, muddy, swampy riding conditions I mentioned? And add racing CX with sand to the equation? You don't need hills to wear out rims. 

In my personal experience, persistent brake squeal is not restricted to disc brakes. Just look at the number of people who can't get rid of squeal on their centre pull brakes. Even the new Compass centre-pulls seem to be prone to that issue. Watch one CX race and listen to the symphony of rim brake squeal at the first corner. More often than not, it's user setup error, or possibly poor pad material. 

I've also had disc setups that were madding to ride due to squeal, just horrible. I was doing a winter ultra a few years back where my rear rotor squealed the ENTIRE 12 hours. Nobody wanted to ride near me.  In the end, my pads hadn't been burned in properly, as per the instructions supplied by Shimano. New pads, proper setup, zero squeal. 

My point is, pretty much any brake style can run poorly when not setup properly, and pretty much all brakes can be made to run silent when properly set. Just because someone you knew had brakes that wouldn't stop squealing doesn't mean the whole platform is flawed. The same goes for forming an opinion of discs based on one ride. I've ridden canti, v-brake and side pulls that braked horribly. Same with discs. It wasn't the brakes that sucked, it was the setup.

[Patrick Moore]

Score: 

Rim brakes: 1

Disk brakes: 1

Patrick "likem both" Moore, who was just telling someone he really wants a bike with drum brakes too, in ABQ, NM.

[Mark Reimer]

I want to be clear that I DON'T think everyone needs or should ride discs. I'm simply saying that in certain circumstances they work better than rim brakes, and as a result have a valuable place in cycling. What works for you may not work for others, that kinda thing. I love rim brakes. I also love disc brakes. 

What irks me is that Grant seems to write discs off entirely, suggesting rim brakes are adequate enough for all circumstances. Maybe they're adequate for his riding, or for most Rivendell riders' riding, I can't really say. Perhaps he will elaborate more. But if that was the case, then fine! Just say that the kind of riding Rivendell customers tend to do doesn't warrant pursuing the advantages/disadvantages disc brakes provide. 

All the other traditional approaches Riv takes I can agree with: 1" steer tube and quill stems - is there a significant benefit to tapered head tubes and threadless? Not really... 

Press fit BB over threaded square taper? Not really... 

Carbon fibre? Certainly not... 

But braking? Who doesn't want brakes that work well in all circumstances, rather than just in most.

--

[Philip Kim]

I tend to agree Mark. Although I don't know a lot of people who ride in such conditions as you do. Paul touring cantis have been usually great, even in the rain. But with a good load on the bike, in the rain going downhill, rim brakes I can it  quickly getting dicey. One of the many reasons I decided to put myself on the NFE list.

I think generally-speaking, bike manufacturers seem to slap disc brakes on everything to market it more versatile, but can't bother to add proper rack brazeons. And a lot of mid-level completes don't have quality disc brakes, and wheels are not true.

[drew]

im no scientist, and ive never used disc brakes, but the argument that the stopping force near the hub is too extreme doesnt really work in my head, as long as modulation is in play. i would understand it, if he is talking about locking up the wheel on a regular basis, but assuming that's not the case and you are just trying to slow down normally, is there any real risk to the frame?

anyway, i like rim brakes. i like the way they look. i know how to put them together and take them apart. ill probably never need or want a disc brake bike.  i don't ride in the rain or mud very much here in CA, but when i do, stopping can get scary. i can see someone wanting a better option for that type of riding...which isnt really fringe riding for a lot of the world. 

[Scott Henry]

Brakes are important.   Whatever type you have on your bike, make sure they work well.    Pick the type that will work for you and the riding that you do.  

For me, my next frame will be a disc road.

Grant is an excellent writer who designs very pretty bicycles.    He writes wonderfully and can extol the virtues of whatever products that his site is offering.  
It's called sales and marketing.  

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 1:02 PM, drew <drewbe...@gmail.com> wrote:

im no scientist, and ive never used disc brakes, but the argument that the stopping force near the hub is too extreme doesnt really work in my head, as long as modulation is in play. i would understand it, if he is talking about locking up the wheel on a regular basis, but assuming that's not the case and you are just trying to slow down normally, is there any real risk to the frame?

anyway, i like rim brakes. i like the way they look. i know how to put them together and take them apart. ill probably never need or want a disc brake bike.  i don't ride in the rain or mud very much here in CA, but when i do, stopping can get scary. i can see someone wanting a better option for that type of riding...which isnt really fringe riding for a lot of the world. 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

[Patrick Moore]

I think Grant was referring to the danger of this force bending a fork that is not sufficiently stout - ie, designed for disk braking, and, second, the danger of this force pushing the axle out of the dropouts. I've heard that drum brakes too can crumple an insufficiently stout fork, and seen photos of fork legs so crumpled.

[Sky Coulter]

Mark, 

You make a good case for the virtues of disc brakes, just as Grant did for rim brakes.  I've found both points of view and arguments/examples illuminating.  I think this kind of cordial disagreement represents the best of online discussion -- it offers up more information for those of us who silently spectate without becoming hostile or unreasonable.  It's exactly what I like about this forum.

Thanks,

Sky in New West

[John Phillips]

It almost sounds to me like Grant is arguing with himself inside his own noggin over adding disc brakes to his line up. Or was this started by customers? 

As I was reading, I thought to myself, "Ok, my Hunqapillar is a touring bike rated to carrying a load up to 360lbs, we (Riv & I) live in the East bay hills & near the Sierras, Grant advocates fenders for riding in all weather, so...why not build a touring bike with disc brakes?"

Are customers or would-be customers pestering Grant over his choice of brakes?

John (Happy w/ my Cant's) Phillips

[Peter White]

I bent the left blade of a Reynolds 531 fork on my touring bike around 1980 or so using a Phil Wood disc brake. Fork blades for disc brakes must be a lot stiffer than they need to be for rim brakes.

By the way, I then fitted the disc brake to my Raleigh Pro track bike and it worked just dandily for quite a few years.

Peter White

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Peter White

[dougP]

And the wheel goes around & around

Doug p

[Mark Reimer]

Sky - thanks, that was my hope. Lively debate is good. I don't care at all if no one decides to try disc brakes as a result of this thread. But I do hope readers will have a better understanding of when and where discs are an advantage. 

I've never had a problem braking in the mountains on my side-pull rim brake road bike. Even in the rain. If you read what all the road pros are saying now - none of them want stronger brakes, they want better tire traction! Nobody seems to want discs in the peloton other than the bike manufacturers. Even guys like ryder hesjedal, who comes from the world of mountain biking and disc brakes, doesn't want them anywhere near him. All this is to indicate that there is a time and place for one style over the other.

Rivendell/Grant often talk about how there is a lot of overlap designed into their bikes - you can take an Atlantis on a cross country paved tour, but can also throw some fat knobbies on and go ride trails. I love riding mine on mountain bike trails!  Next to how beautiful it looks, versatility is one of my favourite things about my Atlantis. 

The braking issue is where that versatility kinda falls apart for me. I'm sure rim brakes work superbly in Walnut Creek, but there are Rivendell owners riding all over the world. Someone earlier said that a lot of people aren't riding their bikes in the conditions I am. I wonder... I suspect that Rivendell riders who live in warm, dry, sunny conditions year round might be the minority. Anyone in the pacific northwest, Canada, New England, anywhere it snows or rains a lot, will face the same rim-brake challenges I outlined. 

Rivendell definitely does not owe it to anyone to make a bike that has disc brakes. If Grant doesn't want to, that's just fine. They make bikes that are very well suited to where they're from, and work for the rest of us most of the time too. But with a brand known for designing bikes that 'just work', I find it odd that Grant is so adamantly against a brake technology that does just that in a broader range of conditions. 

Anyway, I think my point is made and then some. I'll keep riding my Atlantis more and more. But based on my experience riding in Washington and Oregon last year, I have decided to leave it at home this summer when I ride the divide trail, in favour of a bike with discs and even fatter tires. 

Enjoy the ride :)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/lJn4CJ1Y9zU/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

[Philip Kim]

Maybe Grant is frustrated with the lack of questioning and reflection when it comes to the type of brakes needed for riding. You can't just slap disc tabs on Riv bikes and call it a day, you have to design a bike entirely around discs, new drop outs for curved fork blades, thicker fork blades, reinforcement at the stays, etc. He already doesn't like lawyer tabs.

I think Grant designs what type of bike he wants first and designing around that. I remember about him refusing to put canti posts for awhile on AHH because the seatstays he chose were not designed to withhold the brake forces of cantis. 

Of course this is all speculation, but Grant does advocate for accessibility of riding and getting more people to ride bikes - not just bike enthusiasts. And he may view rim brakes capable for a vast majority of riding a vast majority of people do, but the disc brake enthusiasts along with bike industry marketing are luring people/customers to think disc brakes are a necessity.

I've read a few comments on some websites/forums like: "beautiful, but wish it were disc brake...", which may seem dismissive or not showing acknowledgment that Grant designed the bike for a specific purpose. I bet he probably gets a number of people call or walk in who are looking into biking more "seriously" and are looking for disc brake bikes as a pre-requisite.

This is all speculation because I am not Grant, nor do i reside in his mind. But trying to picture what it would be like to own a business selling great bikes and advocating more people on bikes, only to be dismissed over disc brakes. Even Rivendell's "stout" frames are pretty lively over something like a Surley Straggler.

[Bill Lindsay]

I disagree that Grant's BLUG post is against disc brakes at all, much less adamantly against them.  My summary of Grant's BLUG post is:

- Rim brakes are adequate for most applications, and get a bad rap from the majority of the bicycle world in 2016

- Disc brakes are better, but most riding applications don't require them

- Rim brakes have three things wrong with them, and we're stuck with them

- Disc brakes have two things wrong with them, but both of those problems have been solved

- The bike of the future won't be mechanically understood by riders as well as the bikes of the past were, and that's kind of a bummer

Note that the forthcoming Rivendell tandem will have at least one disc brake. 

Bill Lindsay

El Cerrito, CA

[Daniel D.]

I like your summary better than I like grant's post :p

[Mark in Beacon]

Of course to some extent Grant's writing is designed to help his business. But I would not really categorize a 1,000-word essay about rim vs disc on his Blug as sales and marketing.

For me, there were two key points in his post. First, he writes about the changes necessary in the frame when spec'ing disc brakes:

Disc brakes in action also focus stress onto seat stays and fork blades, which can then buckle. Frame manufacturers address this with more mass, which brings up kind of a namby-pamby philosophical question: Which is better— a mechanical system that localizes stress on a small area, then bullies it into submission with bulk and beef, or one that minimizes stress and spreads it out?

While the question might appear at first to be weak or pointless, if you follow the logic you can end up in a potentially disturbing place. Here is where you start down the road of added complexity, and need to ask what does the ledger read after all is said and done.

One of the reasons I love bicycles so much is because of the simple elegance inherent in a machine that interfaces so well with the human body. This aesthetics/function balance is the reason several posters mention the beauty of wide profile cantis on euro CX bicycles. When you subsequently take one element (brake calipers) and redesign it, only to find that you must now rethink the major element (frame/fork), you begin to upset that balance and corrupt that simplicity. As Petersen then writes:

Ultimately, you can expect the bicycle of the immediate future to become more of a high tech black box, with cables being replaced by hydraulics, and the visible levers and pulleys and other simple machines that combine into bicycle magic being hidden or replaced by electronics. The bicycle of the future will, absolutely, be shrouded in mystery and sold on reputation and faith, like a Samsung flat-screen TV.

My view is that the world's economies will be pretty much wrecked before this Samsung-ization of bicycles can be completed, though certainly the process is under way. Despite my pessimism in the realm of global economics, I am interested in this line of thought, and the next post in my ongoing Clementine review is about this larger philosophical issue; specifically, the bicycle as the epitome of what Ivan Illich called tools for conviviality. The bicycle will always be a more convivial tool than a car or a bomb, but within the category there are also levels of conviviality. My take is that the rim/disc debate is a bulwark in the continued erosion of the bicycle's core conviviality. Which as I said I hope to at least partially explain in the next installment of My Clementine.

P.S.: I consider my Clementine to be more than just another very pretty bicycle designed by an excellent writer. Way more. And it doesn't even have lugs!

[Mike in WA]

Mark, I fully agree with your points on the benefits of disc brakes and also that not all riding conditions are as idealized for rim braking as Northern CA. I switched to a Jones because I found Jeff's goals in building a bike more appealing to me than Grant's goals, and I feel the Jones Plus is a prime example of a bike that has disc brakes because they make sense for the application and discs make everything easier, in my experience. I have Avid BB7's and a complete set with Levers from Germany cost about $100 and they've never had any issue. Adjustment is super simple, just have to adjust the calipers with a torque wrench as the pads wear and there's hardly ever a need to mess with them. I DO NOT miss having to buy a new $100 rim every few years as sidewalls wear down either. The pads last about a year and take less than a minute to change. 

 Overall I have found discs to be much easier to use and adjust in practice than v-brakes ever were. The Jones Truss fork design makes for a fork that can well withstand high braking forces and is also low-trail because of the large rake on the fork. This sold me on the bike because it showed that frame design for disc bikes could be elegant too. I also have zero brake judder which was always a problem on my V-braked Sam. 

[Mark in Beacon]

I am puzzled as to how you concluded Grant thinks disc brakes are "better." That is a vague term in the best of scenarios; given the various points and counterpoints brought up in the post, it seems more your preconceived conclusion than Petersen's opinion in the piece. "Disc brakes are fine, but if the bike could speak for itself, it might request a rim brake" Is about as close to any definitive statement on one vs. the other as he is willing to give here. In any case, I think your summary misses the forest for the trees.

I also don't think he views the fact that wheels can get wobbly and that can rub against a rim brake as something inherently "wrong" with the design of the rim brake itself. You could just as easily lay that on the wheel. It's just a fact that wheels can go out of true and rub on brake pads. You can use it as a warning to take a look at your wheel tension. He merely offers this and the fact that heat might pop a tube or wet and muck can affect braking as potential advantages to discs, not as things "wrong" with rim brakes. (BTW, I live in a hilly area, never heard of or saw a tube pop from overheated rim. But our hills are not as long as the ones out West.) Just as frames had to be beefed up for discs, you could potentially design a tube that can withstand the temps, or a wheel that does not go out of true. But since these are not really problems per se so much as things that sometimes (rarely in the case of popped tubes) happen. Just as if you accidentally get grease or lube spray on your discs.

[Bill Lindsay]

I'm puzzled that you are puzzled, Mark in Beacon.  

I used the term 'better' to mean 'more powerful, but overkill for most situations', which is what I think Grant said and what he meant.  I'm sorry if that was not clear.  I used the phrase "three things wrong with rim brakes" to mean exactly what you said "three things potentially superior about disc brakes".  We agree, so don't be puzzled.  I agree with you that those three aspects of superiority of disc brakes rarely come up as actual problems with rim brakes, which is why ten of my eleven bikes have rim brakes.  I agree with Grant that rim brakes are completely adequate for most applications, and I agree with you that rim brakes are a part of the bicycle's core conviviality.  

[Mark in Beacon]

Well then Bill, let's just agree to agree! Quite convivial.

[Kurt Manley]

Just ride.....then.... just brake

[ascpgh]

You mean "stop it", right?

Andy Cheatham

Pittsburgh, PA

[Benz, Sunnyvale, CA]

On Friday, May 13, 2016 at 9:30:44 AM UTC-7, Mark Reimer wrote:

The big push for discs is because they work better, period. Some people are happy to have brakes that work 'well enough'. Like I said before, if I always rode in fair weather, I too wouldn't care about having discs. But if you ride in snow, rain, wet mud, swampy terrain, etc, it becomes very obvious, very quickly, how rim brakes fall short.

I disagree that the big push for discs is because they work better. Discs are being pushed simply because manufacturers need something new and different to sell in this stagnate market. You, I and most people on this Google group aren't the majority of the customers for the bicycle industry. Make no mistake – we are the tiny minority of cycling nuts (I wear that badge with pride). The majority of cycling industry customers aren't pushing their bicycles to the limit. In fact, I suspect the majority of cycling industry customers won't be riding in the rain, and they won't be touring with stuffed panniers. They are the fair weather cyclists whose bikes probably won't even need a brake pad change while in their possession.

These customers buy stuff because it's novel and cool, but not necessarily because it works better. A lot of them probably buy by bullet points – Disc brakes? Check. Minimum dual 5" suspension? Check. 27.5" wheels? Check. Wheels that can save 5 seconds off a 40-km time trial? Check. Now, there's nothing wrong with that, but let's not fool ourselves by claiming that disc brakes are pushed because they work better. Indeed, manufacturers won't be bothered with disc brakes, if the target market only consists of people who can functionally benefit from them. And yes, I'm an all-weather commuter (albeit in Northern CA) who has two disc-equipped bikes, so I'm demonstrably not anti-disc.

[Benz, Sunnyvale, CA]

It's straightforward physics. When the lever arm is shorter, more force is needed for the same torque (stopping force). Thus, more force is being applied by the disc brake and countered by the fork blade for the same deceleration, compared to a rim brake setup.

Let's do some estimating for a front setup: "Big" discs have about a 10 cm radius, while rim brake tracks are about 30 cm from the hub. So the fork blade will experience 3 times the force of what the fork crown experiences, given the same deceleration of the bike. That means one will likely have to make the fork blade stronger for disc use (unless one already overbuilt the fork to start with).

[Eric Daume]

Have you ridden with discs? Because they do work better. Period. Not even in terms of absolute power, but the modulation of hydraulic discs is a wonderful feeling.

[Chris in Redding, Ca.]

Eric,

That just is not true. I would be happy to engage, but I think it would shorten the conversation, for all, if you agree to at least that bit.

Regards,

Chris

redding, Ca.

[Benz, Sunnyvale, CA]

Eric, I did mention in my post that I own two disc brake-equipped bikes – one rather fanciful full hydraulic and one plain-jane mechanical. So yes, I have used disc brakes. Both disc brake setups perform fine, but the point is I seldom wish I have disc brakes when riding my rim brake bikes, with the main exception being rainy days when the scratching sound of contaminated pads-on-rims really irritates me. For me, discs don't really offer better modulation than my rim brakes (that I've spent effort setting up to my liking).

On Saturday, May 14, 2016 at 5:20:54 PM UTC-7, Eric Daume wrote:

[Garth]

Benz has got it ...... always follow the money trial . Hey, people that know a whole lot more about the investment world than I or anyone here does know the money trail does not lie. They know the product is but a means to the end, profit, or else they would not waste a moment on it. So the merits of the product are quite secondary or even irrelavant , so all this arguing over it is futile as as long as thè product is profitable it is going to be sold,.

Who has has noticed, the only purpose of a debate is the debate itself, there are no winners or losers. Debates never end as the subject just shifts to another one. Well, they end when you catch on that is ....... and you laugh wih Eternity the Eternal laughter of Joy .

[Belopsky]

Probably saying what has already been said:

Disc brakes are superior for stopping power, mucky conditions, I much prefer them.

Cantis are annoying as hell to set up. 

Discs take barely any time. The hydros are annoying only if you need to change the length of the housing.

[Mark in Beacon]

"Money trail" and "investment world" sure make this sound big-time--conspiratorial, even! But then again, all bicycles and bicycle parts cost money. It's not quite as simple as, "Hey, let's come up with something completely different so we can make more money." The way our economy is set up, combined with the enormous inputs of energy, basically requires us to make more and more stuff to sell and buy. Everything is continually expected to rise, and as long as there is 1. the flow of cheap to produce energy, 2. a debt load that is in proportion to what can reasonably be expected to be produced and earned in the future, and 3. a working force that can afford the products being churned out, everything is hunky dory. Which basically describes the 1950s and 60s in the U.S. Unfortunately for us, none of these conditions applies any longer. (The price of oil may be cheap right now, but not the price to retrieve it from the earth, which is what matters. The price is low because the workers are being squeezed, which sends the economy down, and the need for oil drops, etc. Until one day, the "recovery" part of the cycle just doesn't happen.)

Again, the interesting angle to me in Grant's piece is not this brake is better than that brake, but the increasing complexity of bicycles, and the issue of diminishing marginal returns. Which is also related to energy inputs. The more energy a society has at its disposal, the more complex it will become. You can go from there to Tainter's The Collapse of Complex Societies. In other words, disc brakes = Apocalypse. Please brake responsibly.

[Will]

+1. So glad to read this post.

It's all true.  We need our economies to expand more quickly than the population to raise living standards. That's not happening. There are more people than jobs the planet can support.

Funny this comes up in a rim vs. disk brake thread.

[Rich Lesnik]

I've so far hesitated joining this thread. First, let me be perfectly clear: I speak only for myself. Nothing I say should be construed as representing "Rivendell Policy" or "Rivendell Opinion". I prefer rim brakes 99 to 1 over "disc" brakes. I put "disc" in quotation marks because, of course, rim brakes are disc brakes, with a much larger radius. And that makes all the difference. A front disc-brake wheel is heavily dished (uneven spoke tension, left to right). The proximity of the braking surface to the hub increases the stress on the pulling spokes, relieving the "pushing" spokes -- the flex on the looser-side spokes can work-harden the bend in the spoke elbow at the hub, and it will eventually break. Same thing with the rear wheel (only here the lower-tension spokes are on the non-drive, left side). These spokes are already prone to breaking over the long haul, as they flex more, and will work-harden more quickly. This increased stress would still be problemmatic on a non-dished disc-brake front wheel, as well, because of the increased stress all around, at the hub. Admittedly, replacing a broken spoke is easier, and less costly, than replacing a worn rim. Nonetheless, a dished front wheel presents additional problems -- as the primary braking instrument, the front wheel, when unevenly tensioned (side to side), can, under severe stopping conditions, become unstable, provoke an accident, or even "figure-8". Not good.

Additionally, disc brakes present a safety hazard to other riders. That spinning, thin disc can easily become a buzz saw when presented with a fallen rider's limb. Hence the ban on disc brakes by the UCI. This should be an alarm bell, at least.

Full disclosure: I use a disc brake as a "drag brake" on my tandem, so far with no problems. That's why is "99 to 1" as opposed to 100 to zero!

[Matt B.]

Rich built a set of wheels (rim brake) used once on a fully loaded on/off-road tour across northern Ontario, northern USA, and British Columbia-- the bike probably about 75lbs though never actually weighed-- but in any case it was heavy--  anyway this was on chipped-up backroads, through woods, across fallow fields with petrified furrows the wrong way, got bucked out of the saddle a few times, crashed and bent fork north of Lake Superior, did a leg in the Rockies from Yellowstone to Jasper AB (braking was fine, cantilevers), and wheels were still true after ~6000 miles, no broken spokes.  They were 36h rear and 32h front fwiw, tires 700x40 iirc.

[ascpgh]

That path of deception by function got us to the cartridge bottom bracket and cartridge bearing headsets ("OEM factories and LBSs don't prep frames for headsets and BBs"). "Oh, these work so much better than the old ones" when pointing this out was easier than addressing the complex issue of standardized bicycle mechanic certification, repair shop functions and the number of "warranty" replacement parts being subsidized due to incomplete preparation, installation and adjustment at factories and shops all over.

Disc brakes don't obligate wheels to be round, true or dished properly, the braking surface is nearly inert and hard to screw up. The frame fixtures for calipers remove most adjustments (hard to screw up so much as to be a liability). Troubling to hear local riders talk about how often they use up pads. Many riders are carrying a set on long trail rides if they expect mud. That defines both their ability to discern pad wear, potential disc damage and trailside ability to drop in some new ones.

I spent my licensed youth buying, fixing, driving and laddering up old cars that were interesting. Not cars resistant to the abuses of mass market consumers' use. I loved that they did more with less, had simplicity on their side and performed under my foot and hand as long as I used my discrimination and didn't over do it.

I really enjoyed working my way up to my first "store bought" vehicle and found that the new cars became soulless in their correction of things I didn't find to be faults, but consumers buying cars as appliances did. Bicycles follow this course in a slower manner. A Porsche 911 Turbo 4S can go 200 MPH, 0-60 in 2.5 seconds and corner at 1.09 g, but you can't get a manual transmission or have any fun using it in real world where I live.

I ensure I am supplied with bikes that are fun to my uses, big parts makers and bike companies aside. They'll get it occasionally, like with bigger tires, but I don't wait for them and their component makers to show me that path.  

Andy Cheatham

Pittsburgh

[Garth]

    The day of the "generic bike" is fast coming indeed !  Like how so many cars and SUV's all tend to look alike these days within their certain "category" . I honestly cannot tell what's what other than the name plate. 

 I'm a little "slow" when it comes to "new" bike technologies , and joyfully so.  I still run 6-7 speed freewheels for the simple reason, hark .... it works and I don't need more cogs ! Cant-I-leave-her brakes ..... hark .... it works and look ma, I can stop my bike too !   I remember a rare meet around here with a roadie about my 1999 Franklin frame and freewheel setup, he spoke it as being somehow "old" ! Ahahahaha , really ? I had not really noticed as I was after all , riding it. Doh !  Age of anything present is irrelevant to me. Notice how they are so many "old" mtb's and road bikes being bought and sold these days.  They all will need parts indefinitely and there will be parts for them.  Disc brakes are here to stay but this does not relegate any other type of brake at all, there is plenty of room for all of it.  

 I'm sure Andy has been to Kraynicks bike shop in Pittsburgh a whole lot more than I have, it's a treasure trove of new "old" stuff. Love that place !  It's not only great for parts but also the self service shop in the rear of the store.

[Patrick Moore]

This is an interesting subject. As technologies get more and more refined, they inevitably lose more and more distinction -- by the necessity of the case; there is only 1 best way to do things. But this also makes technology less interesting.

Perhaps it's just age and repeated disappointment (that's only half serious, fellas) but I find much modern technology excruciatingly boring precisely because of its perfection; one facet of this perfection is its tolerance of user error or, at least, crudity.

Computers are a good example. I have 2: a scavenged 2009 13" Macbook, and a new-to-me 13" 2014 MacBook Pro. The 2014 is wonderful to use; the 2009 is slow and -- trackpad -- clunky: irritating. But I have absolutely no interest in either except as a middle term to produce YYY results from XXX inputs. Be seamless, or get tossed -- what happens in between is of no practical interest.

Cars: I've rented 2015 and 2016 fleet cars for drives to CO: 2015 Impala, 2016 Chrysler 300. Big 4 cyl -- 2.4 or 2.5 l -- with 6 or 8/9 speed automatics and induction systems and valves and cams that produce close to 200 hp from this displacement. My personal 2006 PT Cruiser has a 2.4 that makes a torquey 140 with 4 speeds. 

Amazing the difference in 9-10 years: cruise at 90, average 31 mpg; climb Raton Pass at 80 (5-6000 rpm in 3d-4th).

But all of them are effing boring: do you job and shut up, basically. I should think that that the current Mustang, 300 bhp for the base engine, would be even more boring -- why think when all you have to do is push the right pedal a bit more?

OTOH, my 1984 Passat Wagon, 88 hp, manual 5 speed was interesting to drive. It took advance planning to maintain revs, - this could be interesting at 85 on I 40 in rolling terrain with lanes cluttered with semis and Winnebagos; and it cornered very well, too -- all this involves user input. Even more fun was the 29 hp also 1984 Citroen Acadiane: 4 speeds, 4th over drive, 4" wide tires: planning and concentration required -- every drive became a game. Even the 1990 Plymouth Voyager -- torquey 140 hp Mitsubishi 6, 3 speeds -- required enough input to make it mildly interesting, at least as far as cornering went -- it was basically a covered pickup with all rear seats and cladding and carpeting and spare tire removed. 

Technology always seems to involve a moving choice point between user skill and effort, and ease of results. At a certain point -- stone axes to cut down a 2 foot thick tree -- an improvement adds to the enjoyment of skill; good tools make your agency more precise and interesting. After a certain later point, you gain efficiency but lose interest. I used to like sectioning 18'24" logs with an axe, for recreation. I would use a chainsaw to fill a woodshed, but I daresay I'd find the process less interesting. Using a mechanical log splitter?

[Mark in Beacon]

"Refined," with it's implication of removing elements, is probably the wrong word here. Modern technology tends to add complexity. I have used the example of a car's rear view mirror, but the entire vehicle is basically a computer black box on wheels, and even the technicians operating the diagnostic computers have a hard time figuring out how to turn off various warning lights. I recommend carrying a roll of black electrical tape in the glove box. And as Patrick notes, it does get pretty boring driving these hermetically sealed, climate controlled, voice activated, video equipped oversized wonder wheels. Which explains why the advertisements get more outrageous every model year.

On the other hand, I don't have a notion of what he means by the terms "best" or "perfection" in this context. But at some point, the tools we create--whether it be something to drive nails or our transportation or medical systems--are developed to the point where, for the energy put in, they deliver what we need as individuals or a society in a way that satisfies us and also, critically, does not start to make excessive demands--on natural resources, our time, the social fabric (Industrial production has the neat trick of claiming to be the king of "efficiency" mainly because it has offloaded all these consequences--externalities.) This is not a set, definitive point in most cases, and needs to be agreed upon by the members of the society or civilization. Which we obviously really suck at doing--in part because our economic system demands that we don't put any kind of governor on making stuff, and in part because we seem to be programmed/have been programmed (genetics/marketing) for acquiring stuff, whether we need it or not. Which is why you can find 37 different kinds of caulk at Home Depot. And which is why I like giving my business to Rivendell Bicycle Works, because they do battle against some of this onslaught of "technological progress."

On Sunday, May 15, 2016 at 4:57:56 PM UTC-4, Patrick Moore wrote:
As technologies get more and more refined, they inevitably lose more and more distinction -- by the necessity of the case; there is only 1 best way to do things.

I find much modern technology excruciatingly boring precisely because of its perfection; one facet of this perfection is its tolerance of user error or, at least, crudity.

 

[ascpgh]

My main consumable's source. 

Jerry's been a friend since I moved to the city: https://goo.gl/photos/pFgnczoVJEDF84Ti7 I ride by the shop twice a day on my commute. 

Andy Cheatham

Pittsburgh

[Mark in Beacon]

Oops. I meant side view mirror, but whatever. It's the myth of progress, that humans as a species are somehow destined to go from wooden sticks to the constellations. Which means the fate of humanity is resting on Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk...yikes. Interesting how our rational, scientific civilization is "destined" to do this or that. "They" will come up with something, something to get us out of the jam the last thing "they" came up with got us into. It sure sounds as hokus pokus as any creed-based system. Meanwhile, I will carry on astride my Clementine, everything just fine. It's (almost) summertime and the livin' is easy!

[Scott McLain]

I really appreciate Grant sharing his thoughts on various subjects.

To me, suggesting that Riv should put disc brakes on a bike is very similar to asking them to add a suspension fork to a Hunq.

Riv bikes strike me as more of an atisan created bicycle that has been refined through many years of trial and error.  As opposed to design through computer aided engineering techniques.  I very seriously doubt that Grant has engaged an engineer to do a finite element analysis model for one of his bikes.

If you want a steel bike with disc brakes there are plenty of them available.  If you want a lugged steel frame with canti's and a quill stem, there are very few options.

It is not a question of one right answer, but more about do what you like.  I like canti's and side pull's.  

Two things I don't like about discs:  I end up hauling a lot of bikes around and frequently taking off front wheels.  I think it is much easier to take off a front wheel on a QR canti bike than a disc thru axle and I have to pry the pads apart if I bump the brake lever while the wheel is out.  And it is going to get harder to find nice wheels for rim brakes in the future because the rim manufacturers as discs become more prevalent.

Best,

Scott

[RJM]

Rim brakes are fine for road biking and fine for a touring bike where speeds aren't getting too fast. I can see the allure to disc brake equipped touring bikes though since the weight is higher and the possibility of over cooking a rim on a mountain descent is real.

However....

There is absolutely no way I'm going back to rim brakes on mountain bikes though....and hydraulics are so much better than cable in that arena. Here is the thing, hydraulic disc brakes are super simple to work on and aren't a black box, no more so than cable actuated brakes. The feel of disc brakes when ripping down a trail is loads better than rim brakes, and that includes v-brakes which are strong, powerful brakes. The ease at which I can scrub speed on my Trek Fuel which uses Shimano XT hydraulic disc is so awesome and needed, because I really don't think I could be riding the way I do down the trail with a rim brake.

Two problems exist with rim braking on a mountain bike, IMHO...mud and grime getting all over the brake track which seems to happen on every ride, and the lever feel stays the same with disc, which doesn't with rim braking. I'm not describing that correctly though; what I mean is that rim braking doesn't seem consistent in the muddy world of mountain biking, compared to hydraulic disc.

I took my very nice 1996 26" wheeled specialized stumpjumper with canti's out on the trail not too long ago just to see how it rode and play around. The one thing I took from that ride is that rim brakes on mountain bikes suck compared to a disc brake setup. No contest.

Setting up and servicing hydraulic disc brakes like Shimano's XTs is an easier process than setting up canti brakes, especially premier brakes like Pauls, which I find are a pain in the butt to work on. Seriously, they aren't difficult at all.

On Friday, May 13, 2016 at 9:19:47 AM UTC-5, Will wrote:

[RJM]

I should add that my other mountain bike is a fully rigid single speed Niner Sir9, which is a steel 29'er with a carbon fork (yeah, yeah, I know.) The bike is fun, but utilizes disc brakes. I do wish riv would produce a steel frame bike with disk like the Bombadil disc model, because I would be all over it. Rigid fork mountain bikes  are a blast.

[RJM]

I will also add and repeat that I don't really see much advantage to disc brakes on road bikes, especially ones using aluminum rims.

[Patrick Moore]

I think a disc equipped Hunq or Atlantis would be wonderful. 

Can't you find bolt-on brackets for rear disk calipers? If so, wouldn't the easy way to do this be to offer a choice of rim brake or disk brake forks?

Why does everyone spell it "disc" instead of "disk"?

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews.

By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.

Other professional writing services.

http://www.resumespecialties.com/

www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/

Patrick Moore

Alburquerque, Nouvelle Mexique,  Vereinigte Staaten

****************************************************************************************

The point which is the pivot of the norm is the motionless center of a circumference on the contours of which all conditions, distinctions, and individualities revolve. Chuang Tzu

Stat crux dum volvitur orbis. (The cross stands motionless while the world revolves.) Carthusian motto

It is we who change; He remains the same. Eckhart

Kinei hos eromenon. (It moves [all things] as the beloved.) Aristotle

[Bill Lindsay]

Patrick Moore asked:

"Why does everyone spell it "disc" instead of "disk"?"

They spell it that way because that's the way it is spelled.  Generally if you choose to spell it 'disk', everyone will know what you are talking about.  Only the uptight jerks will correct you, or claim that they don't know what you are talking about.  Kind of like derailer and derailleur.  

[reynoldslugs]

Well, this has been enlightening. 

It was a pretty good blug post.  I like the non-technical part: "This is just a BLUG, not a stone tablet."

Many of these posts have been pretty thoughtful, and I enjoyed the discussion.  Of my 30-odd bikes, none are disk-, I mean disc-braked. So, I think I'll have one built and see if i like it.

on that note, I'm going for a ride.

Max in Sunny Sonoma County

[Philip Kim]

i hadn't even thought about that! A disc Hunq would definitely be awesome. Especially since the Clem / Appaloosa are slowly overlapping into Hunq territory...

[RJM]

I've had disc brakes on 4 bikes now, two cable actuated and two hydraulic. Honestly, I think hydros are so much better and not that much more difficult to setup compared to cable pull. I'd honestly rather use hydros because they are easier to pull (1 finger braking), more powerful, and have consistent feel and I felt that the cable actuated brakes lacked that performance. TRP does have a brake that has all the hydros in the caliper, but I've never used them. Bleeding brakes isn't difficult at all, but I may be approaching this from a different place because in a past life I was an automotive mechanic where bleeding brakes is normal. I don't find it weird or difficult at all to setup a hydraulic braking system on a bike.

I find cantis to be a regular pain in the butt to setup and adjust, and was always a little befuddled why people liked them over V-brakes, which I find much easier to set and forget.

On Friday, May 13, 2016 at 11:19:47 AM UTC-5, Patrick Moore wrote:

"Couldn't be easier" is, in my experience over 4 bikes with various cable disk systems, not quite accurate. It's certainly not rocket science, and once you find the right method it is straightforward, but it took me a long while to find that method.

Sidepulls are easiest. V brakes, at least decent ones, are easy to setup, as are, slightly less so, wide profile cantis. Low profile cantis are a pain in the ass, IME. Centerpulls are much like wide profile cantis. Gauging all this from my own experience

BB7s are about as easy as brakes requiring cable yokes, IME, and easier than low profiles, at least with drop bar levers.

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Mark Reimer <markn...@gmail.com> wrote:

Servicing discs could not be easier. Hydraulic's are a bit more finicky, but they're no more difficult to dial in than my Paul canti's are. Changing the pads takes 60 seconds. Actually the more I think about it, the more I think discs are much easier to setup and service than rim brakes. You just have to do it once to catch on. 

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:56 AM, 'Stephen Kemp' via RBW Owners Bunch <rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

I am a satisfied rim braker. I've never seriously considered riding discs but I can see the attraction in avoiding compromised braking in the wet and annoying mud on rim grinding noises when off road.

One big factor that Grant has missed is the wear effect of rim brakes. Sooner or later the rim will need replacing. That means a wheel rebuild which may well lead to getting a new hub at the same time. That's a whole new wheel just because your brakes are worn - quite a waste if you have decent, handbuilt wheels that otherwise would have lasted a long time. On a disc system, you just replace the disc.

The related thing is that wear on the rim is hard to detect. You either play it safe or you take it to the limit - which you only reach when your rim is so compromised it blows. Discs are far more transparent. As Mark says above, on this basis Grant's preference for rim brakes goes against the usual argument for steel over carbon.

On the issue of servicing, I've never worked on disc brakes but surely if you avoid hydraulics and stick with cable operated then servicing/repair is easy.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/lJn4CJ1Y9zU/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Mark in Beacon]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelling_of_disc

[Philip Kim]

i recently saw norvidian modded with discs. I wonder if that is safe and if someone really wanted discs could do that to an atlantis or a hunq safely. just hypotheticals here

[Mark Reimer]

Speaking as someone who loves disc brakes and really wants a disc Riv, I wouldn't modify an existing Riv to take disc brakes. They were never designed for them. 

What I would love to see is a Riv model that is LIKE a Hunq or Atlantis, but designed from the ground up for discs. Not just disc tabs slapped on and braced up the wazoo where required. There's been much talk in this thread already about the special frame bracing required to handle the stress of discs. That's not inherently a problem, but does need to be designed into the frame. 

Given the stoutness of the frames, you probably COULD do this to the frame, but I'd have serious doubts about the fork. If memory serves me correctly, most disc conversions I've seen have a new fork, with a rear disc tab/brace added to the frame. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/lJn4CJ1Y9zU/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

[Patrick Moore]

This is too enigmatic for me.

Patrick "I thought it might be a US/UK difference" Moore

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[George Schick]

RJM - I have a similar background with auto mechanics as you and I agree with your assessment of hydros - to a certain extent. For one thing, it depends on the manufacturer.  Hayes brakes have been a PITA to install and bleed compared with some others.  Secondly, my experience with the reliability and ease of adjustment of discs in general all depends on how well they are anchored to the fork or rear stays.  I have a Surly 1x1 with an Avid BB7 mounted on the front with which I had a devil of a time keeping the disc centered between the pads for the longest time UNTIL I ditched the QR and changed the front axle to a bolt-on that I could torque down nice and tight.  Since then they've been rub free, squeak free, and uneven braking free.  I recall reading somewhere, though the source escapes me, that if everything were ideally designed from scratch, the disc and caliper would be on the right side of the fork, which would act against working a QR mounted hub loose from its fork ends.  

[Mark in Beacon]

I guess you did not click on the link I posted above. There is a US/UK component to it.

[George Schick]

Mark - sorry, some of us yanks are slow to catch on; others are just slow period; then there are those of us who are simply old and slow.  I try to remember in the future.

[Mark in Beacon]

Hi George. I wasn't chastising anyone for their spelling, (and you spelled it correctly) just pointing out to Patrick that the wiki thing I posted explained the two spellings, and part of the difference was the US/UK thing he mentioned--though it is not a clear cut case of US/UK such as gray/grey or color/colour. For those that care about such things (that would include me) disc is currently the correct spelling when referring to brakes, whether English brakes or American brakes.

[Bill Lindsay]

The fun thing I picked up from Mark's Wiki link is that in computer media, a DISK is magnetic media, while a DISC is optical media.  Floppy disks, diskettes, and hard disks are magnetic media.  Compact discs, laser discs, and Digital Video Discs are optical media.  

[Joe Bernard]

I have no engineering objection to discs, I'm just glad Grant is reluctant to mess with them. A Rivendell with disc brakes would be too weird for my brain to absorb.

[RJM]

I agree with you Marc, I wouldn't want to modify a Riv to accept a disc brake and don't really see a huge point to it. I'm sure there are ways to do it since we are talking about steel bikes, but at some point you just really need to be looking at a different manufacturer/type of bike. There are a lot of nice bikes out there that are made with discs already, so no reason to hack up a nice Riv.

Although, as I said before, a disc braked Rivendell Bombadil that can fit modern 27.5 or even 27.5+ tires would be the absolute bomb.  

[Brewster Fong]

Agree! I'm considering having a cross bike built and will probably go with Paul mini-moto v-brakes. I was talking to one of my friends and he said I'm building a "period piece!" Good Luck! 

[Patrick Moore]

No, I saw that; I was responding to Bill.

[Rod Holland]

Fear...

[Rod Holland]

Specifically, the thought of a Nordavinden retrofitted with disc brakes scares me. There are disc-native Rawlands that have a loyal following, though, with more rumored to be on the way.

rod

[masmojo]

I am a diehard canti. guy, but I do have a few bikes with mechanical disk brakes. While Grants observations are correct, there are trade offs; I have recently been looking at going tubeless on a build and I've noticed some things, first most tubeless/ disk specific wheels rarely have more than 32 spoke & many have 28! It stands to reason that while a disk brake may require a stouter frame, a rim brake is going to ideally need a stouter wheel.
Now simple engineering dictates that less rolling weight is preferable to sprung weight, so theoretically, moving the strength/additional weight to the frame should result in faster, better accerating, lively handling bike!
Now are the differences noticeable by the average rider?? That remains to be seen
Initially, I avoided disk brakes, because I perceived them as being overly complicated & expensive, but they are actually pretty simple and costs have plummeted over the last few years to the point that the cost difference is negligible.
I still prefer Cantis., but I don't really mind disks now.
My major beef with disks is that if you lean the bike against something or the bike falls over it can get warped or bent and once it is, it seems to stay that way. At least if your wheel is out of true, you can easily fix it.

[Steve Palincsar]

On 05/20/2016 03:00 PM, masmojo wrote:

I am a diehard canti. guy, but I do have a few bikes with mechanical disk brakes.  While Grants observations are correct, there are trade offs; I have recently been looking at going tubeless on a build and I've noticed some things, first most tubeless/ disk specific wheels rarely have more than 32 spoke &  many have 28! It stands to reason that while a disk brake may require a stouter frame,  a rim brake is going to ideally need a stouter wheel. 

How do you figure that?   As Rich Lesnik said here the other day,

"A front disc-brake wheel is heavily dished (uneven spoke tension, left to right). The proximity of the braking surface to the hub increases the stress on the pulling spokes, relieving the "pushing" spokes -- the flex on the looser-side spokes can work-harden the bend in the spoke elbow at the hub, and it will eventually break. Same thing with the rear wheel (only here the lower-tension spokes are on the non-drive, left side). These spokes are already prone to breaking over the long haul, as they flex more, and will work-harden more quickly. This increased stress would still be problematic on a non-dished disc-brake front wheel, as well, because of the increased stress all around, at the hub. Admittedly, replacing a broken spoke is easier, and less costly, than replacing a worn rim. Nonetheless, a dished front wheel presents additional problems -- as the primary braking instrument, the front wheel, when unevenly tensioned (side to side), can, under severe stopping conditions, become unstable, provoke an accident, or even "figure-8". Not good."

And Rich is a very highly respected wheel builder, the very top of the heap in Rivendell-world.  And I can add some anecdotal evidence to this: a guy in our bike club bought a disc-equipped Trek kinda-sorta-touring-bike last year, the one made for those proprietary "dry bags" that mount on a proprietary rack on the front fork.  Since he's had the bike, he's broken spokes in both the front and rear wheels.   Other than this, I'm not sure I can recall a single front wheel I've ever seen that's broken spokes.

Now simple engineering dictates that less rolling weight is preferable to sprung weight, so theoretically,  moving the strength/additional weight to the frame should result in faster, better accerating,  lively handling bike!

Unless you're talking about a suspension bike, there is no "sprung weight," is there?   And in the suspension world, it's between sprung weight and unsprung weight, with the former being greatly preferred.

Now are the differences noticeable by the average rider?? That remains to be seen

The average rider will most certainly notice broken spokes.

[Tim Gavin]

Regarding truing a disc rotor, it can be frustrating to get "just right", but it's a simple task with an adjustable wrench or a specific tool (like the Park DT-2).  

Truing a rotor is similar to truing a wheel, with the following differences;
* the brake pads become the truing indicators, and they're a lot harder to see clearly than the feelers on a truing stand.  I pivot the bike on its repair stand until the rotor and caliper are easy to see, and I can see a lighted surface between the pads and rotor.

* you use brute force to bend the rotor back into alignment (instead of mechanical force from adjusting spoke tension), and it can be pretty fussy to get the rotor straight again.

It does seem unfortunately easy to bend a rotor.

Regarding disc vs. rim brakes:  I like both, and have bikes with both.  However, for muddy/wet/filthy riding, I greatly prefer disc brakes.  For road/gravel/dry riding, rim brakes work fine for me.  

That said, I've tuned my rim brakes as well as the internet, this forum, and the head mechanic at my shop have instructed me, and they still don't have the stopping power of even my mediocre (for discs) BB7R calipers, let alone the incredibly powerful (and easily-modulated) hydraulic BR-M780 calipers.  

My Riv Road, with Paul Racer calipers (with KS pads), requires me to think ahead before braking, because it won't stop on a dime like my disc brake-equipped bikes will.  Stoppies aren't a worry.

My '99 Schwinn KOM (with BR-M730 cantis and U-brakes) is actually a better stopper, and my Roadeo (with Tektro R539 calipers) is pretty decent.

Cheers,

Tim

[masmojo]

Well, I've personally built several disk wheels & a couple of those were fronts and will be building 2 or 3 more shortly. (On top of that I have probably built a couple dozen non disk wheels) No disrespect to Rich but the front disk hubs I have used required no dish at all! Typically, (from what little I've seen) the manufacturers relocate the non braking side flange further inboard so that no dishing of the wheel is needed and while I prefer not having any dish in the wheel I am not sure whether I wouldn't prefer it to the loss of triangulation that results from moving the flanges in to compensate for the disk.
I used the term sprung weight mearly as a counterpoint to the rolling weight and because a better term did not come to mind. It was not the significant point of the topic anywayz. The main point that you obviously missed was that less rotating mass is preferable to less weight in the frame. AND not to be argumentative or go into too much pointless explanation, but a bicycle frame on spoked wheels would be considered sprung weight!
Your friends Trek probably just got a bum wheel, my XO-1s front wheel broke several spokes when I first got it, tore it down rebuilt it, no further problems.
The average rider probably doesn't break too many spokes regardless of configuration, which was part of the point of what I was making. If you break a lot of spokes you need a new wheel builder.

My experience with trying to straighten pieces of metal like brake rotors is that typically you do more harm then good. The tolerances on disks are so small that a wobble of less then a millimeter effects whether it will rub or not and by extension how good it will work. I have seen people "shrink" metal, using a torch/heat, but again I might cause more harm then good.

[Daniel D.]

Yet the bumble bee still flies...

[ascpgh]

When I look at a disk equipped wheel and I am less distressed by asymmetry of dish and am more concerned about the builder's resolution of which are inbound versus outbound spokes now that the hub is stopping the wheel under braking intend of the rim. The dearth of asymmetrically drilled rims seems to support that. I give more gravity in Rich's comments to his concerns for inbound/outbound assignment.

Despite the increasing use of the low spoke count wheels, used on OEM bikes, I still see the spoked wheel as a dynamic rather than static engineering structure. It is a construction of parts that by selection (of material, design and gauge) distribute stresses of rider input (braking, pedaling and steering) and surface input. Not too dissimilar from all the city bridges around here...and I will tell you that they do move under load. More easily sensed from a bike. 

Steve's observation of a rider in his group breaking a spoke on one of those wheels, a Trek 720 disk by his description, parallels my experience. A fellow rider popped a spoke on low count, girder-like rim proprietary wheel,  and no one (LBS mech, bike company, component mfgr.) could give him a spoke, source, tool for the nipple or specification of tension, only an address for warranty service. OEM, but unsatisfactory. 

I want my bike wheels to share those forces and not imply more of the structure to a single one (or type, like spokes). The net result is a wheel that has response to those surges of input rather than direct transmission of them to you via the frame. I can't speak for Rich, but his concern for assembling the spokes of a disk hub so as to account for the dynamic operating stresses and response. Common rim-braked wheels have the same dynamic considerations. Spokes pulling under the implied rotating force exerted by rim braking caused distortion of overall structure, deflecting the rim, resulting in this brake wear pattern in the anodization:

Jobst Brandt's excellent diagrammatic of the same:

Bottom line is that I haven't seen or heard this amount of insight and attention to detail being discussed regarding disk brake wheel spoking patterns or discussions about contrasting views or designs supporting the alternate views. My quiet inspections of rear disk wheels in shops hasn't indicated a consensus either (PJW built my SON28 centerlock front hub and Synergy 36° rim with 14g pulling spokes inbound, symmetric).

Andy Cheatham

Pittsburgh

[dstein]

Man, can we just go back to talking about something less controversial like the pros and cons of helmets, or politics?

I'm a big fan of disc brakes. But only for that 2% of riding I do in wet weather. Going on long, steep downhills in the rain with rim brakes is enough to make me not ever want to ride my brakes in the rain (on hilly rides). I accept that Rivendell will never have a non-tandem with discs (which I always attributed to a mix of of design aesthetics and lack of combatibility with any of their other frames or brake lever offerings), but its good to have one disc brake bike in your stable. I would love to see a future Hunq with disc brakes though and would consider selling up to get it.

[masmojo]

I personally feel like a disk brake is not a never do item for Grant, but it would be a tough call for him I am sure. He has those things that he clings to, but he has come around to other concepts over the years. Things have to make sense to him, he's obviously been weighing the pros and cons. But, what is the tipping point? And is there an overriding negative to it that trumps the other positive aspects. Personally, I feel that the esthetics of a disk brake don't really mesh well with Rivendells current design language, on the other hand a Roscoe Bubbe type bike might be the perfect test mule for a disk concept test. Of course that would not be able to use an existing fork, so maybe he'd hafta call it something else!?

[Brewster Fong]

I think Rich may be on to something. But is this really a problem or is it theoretical?  There are probably 100s of thousands, if not million of bikes out there with disc brakes!  Yes, it's new for road bikes, but there have been disc brake mtbs and cross bikes for at least what 5, if not 10 years.  But a broken spoke is fairly minor and usually can be easily fixed at most LBSs.  Further, a broken spoke could be from something else or it may be from this poor dish, but everyone thinks its from something else.

So, it doesn't seem like that big a problem. Maybe a survey of shops is needed to see how many disc-brake equipped bikes come in with broken spokes that require only a few dollars and minutes to fix.

So far, my two or three friends with disc brakes love it and haven't broken any spokes yet!

Good Luck!

[rob markwardt]

Rim brakes are better because discs are getting popular.

Friction is better because indexing is everywhere.

Steel is best because it's outdated!

Yes, I wear a wind up watch.

Rob "elevate from the norm" Markwardt

Seattle, WA

[Peter White]

Replacing a warped disc is a lot cheaper than rebuilding a wheel. A customer brought in his tandem wheel a few weeks ago. It had a slightly dented rim. If the tandem had rim brakes he would have needed the rim replaced. But since it is disc, all it needed was a bit of truing. The dent isn't bad enough to affect the ride or the seating of the tire.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Peter White

[Brewster Fong]

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:27:38 PM UTC-7, Peter White wrote:

Replacing a warped disc is a lot cheaper than rebuilding a wheel. A customer brought in his tandem wheel a few weeks ago. It had a slightly dented rim. If the tandem had rim brakes he would have needed the rim replaced. But since it is disc, all it needed was a bit of truing. The dent isn't bad enough to affect the ride or the seating of the tire.

Agree. The flip side is disc brakes can be difficult to maintenance, especially if it has hydraulic disc brakes. One of my friends with a C'dale cross had a really hard time bleeding his brakes. He brought in a mobile mechanic who couldn't do it. But, the mechanic was able to contact the mfr and they found a problem with the caliper, which was replaced under warranty! So far, so good!

 With rim brakes, changing pads is a piece of cake and he would have never had any problems. Of course, YMMV!  Good Luck!

[Mike in WA]

The only maintenance I've had to do on Avid BB7's in a year of running them is adjusting the calipers every so often with then turn of a screw and changing the pads. I do not miss having to try to conjure devil magic (or relying on LBS) to adjust V-brakes to reduce squealing or (worse) cantis to work properly at all. 

[Brewster Fong]

On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 1:15:21 PM UTC-7, Mike in WA wrote:

The only maintenance I've had to do on Avid BB7's in a year of running them is adjusting the calipers every so often with then turn of a screw and changing the pads. I do not miss having to try to conjure devil magic (or relying on LBS) to adjust V-brakes to reduce squealing or (worse) cantis to work properly at all. 

That's good to know. But Avid BB7s are mechanical brakes, not hydraulic. I believe my friend had Shimano hydraulic on his bike. I will agree that trying to reduce squealing and chattering on cantis is crazy. I hate cantis! However, I had no problems getting Tektro mini v-brakes to work properly!  I bought the cheapie Tektro 926al to replace my crappy Suntour xc pro canti brake and it was like night and day. No more adjustments, squealing or shuddering!  For $20 or less if you buy on line, it is a real bargain!

Good Luck!

[Matt B.]

For the life of me I can't understand the bad rap cantilever brakes get in these discussions.  I've had them on most of my bikes, from old mafac or dia compe style to newer shimano style, and have never had a difficult time adjusting them or maintaining them, or using them in the rain, or snowy weather (provided you know what to expect from them, you can account for it in your riding). I ride daily year round and am sticking with cantilevers, but have also used and would be fine with old weinmann centerpulls, sidepulls, or u-brakes. 

The horrible reputation cantilevers (and now all rim brakes in some cases) have, when these kinds of 'this or that' argument come up, tends to make me mistrust similar sentiments about other technology with which I don't have any experience. I get the feeling issues just get blown way the hell out of proportion.

[Steve Palincsar]

From what I see on the forums, it's the cyclocross bikes that seem to
have the worst time with brake shudder. The "impossible to adjust" is,
in my opinion, down to incompetent mechanics. Hard, sure; impossible,
nonsense.

[masmojo]

If people aren't "handy", it really does not matter what type of brake it is! They all have their quirks. Caliper brakes used to drive me batty until I worked in a bike shop & learned some of the tricks for adjusting them.

[Scott Henry]

I'd go hands down every time for hydraulic discs over cable.   Not sure why they get a bad rep, I find them so much easier to bleed and set up than the cables.   

I have been running hydraulics since my old Magura hydro rim brakes back in the 1990's though.   BTW - they are still in use on my tandem.

Whatever you end up using, Disc/Canti/V or hydro/cable, learn how they work and how to work on them...

Scott

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 8:04 AM, masmojo <mas...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

If people aren't "handy", it really does not matter what type of brake it is! They all have their quirks. Caliper brakes used to drive me batty until I worked in a bike shop & learned some of the tricks for adjusting them.

[Brewster Fong]

On Tuesday, May 24, 2016 at 3:53:00 AM UTC-7, Steve Palincsar wrote:

From what I see on the forums, it's the cyclocross bikes that seem to
have the worst time with brake shudder.  The "impossible to adjust" is,
in my opinion, down to incompetent mechanics.  Hard, sure; impossible,
nonsense.

Agree, on my bike I was using a Campy ergo lever with a crappy front suntour xc pro canti brake, and kool stop salmon pads, I would get it working nicely for a couple of rides, then it would revert back to the shuddering and chattering that I hated when braking! Then I put on a cheapie tektro 926al front mini-v  and lo and behold, no more chattering/shuddering/squealing!  It just worked!  I'll admit to being a crappy mechanic and believe that the suntour is either a terrible front brake or a very difficult one to adjust. Interestingly, I had the suntour on the rear and had zero problems with it. So, I left it on. But, mini-v brakes are my choice for a front brake. Of course, you excellent mechanics can make anything work, so YMMV!  Good Luck!

[Garth]

     Definitely not the XC pro brakes Brewster.  I find them very easy to setup and adjust, and the for the bikes I have owned or used the best performing brake. As with everything bike, one person's bliss is another's hell and no one can explain it so don't bother ;)  No biggie. I have found some bikes just don't go well with certain brakes, and there is always another brake to try. Glad you found something that worked for you !  And this is the essence of this entire subject, there's many brakes(and whatever) to choose from, none of them in themselves superior or inferior to the other, just another kind of brake.

   One thing that may have helped you Brewster is to use a fork crown mounted Tektro cable stop, so your cable and housing go directly to it instead of the one long from the headset. The cable drop then is very short and I noticed a difference right away in using it.

[Brewster Fong]

Thanks. I learned about the fork mount cable stop after I picked up the mini-v brake. I think that would have made a difference. Unfortunately, I no longer have that bike, so I'll never know if it would have made a difference.

However, I am in the market for a cross bike, unless I break down and buy the latest Trek carbon with etap....I've borrowed a friend's Black Mtn Cycles (BMC) cross bike and it is a very nice bike so far. It has Paul mini-vs and so far, very nice.  Not a big fan of tig-welded frames, so I may considering a Della Santa as he's builds a nice bike at a very reasonable price.

Good Luck!