Why have disc brakes become so popular?

[horizon]

It took many decades to engineer forks that were nice and compliant whilst also being strong enough, and arguably we are blithely throwing that all away just to have brakes that offer some marginal advantage for a tiny fraction of the time, and hoping that fat tyres will paper over the cracks.

I am concious throughout this discussion of my favourite bike, my Dawes Sardar, having disc brake-ready forks and stays. I've never fitted them so in effect have the worst of both worlds. In a way, the Sardar should be prime disc territory (I wonder now why Dawes didn't just fit them): load lugging, wide tyres, muddy conditions, all purpose bike. Of course I haven't got a clue as to how the ride is affected - all I know is that it's stable, smooth and comfy. So maybe in the future I'll fit a front BB7. In the meantime, I'm sticking with rim brakes on all my other bikes.

[gnvqsos]

If you cannot stop using a conventional caliper set-up ypu need to sharpen your anticipation,the sole exception being loaded when a cantilever is very adequate.Disc brakes are a gimmick-rather like the nbew shapes of mountain-bikes.

[Debs]

The problem with getting people with discs in a group to stay at the back, is getting them to actually do so. In my experience they will try to get to the front ( particularly on descents ) because they can brake better, right? That’s what causes the issues.

What this evidently proves is that in practise bicycle disc brakes are far superior and totally outperform rim brakes, and that 21st century disc bikes stop much quicker, better, easier, safer, than old fashioned rim brakes from the days of yesteryore

[LollyKat]

I don't think anyone has mentioned comfort - Brucey, maybe? IME disc brakes need a beefier fork which for a given tyre gives a harsher ride. Personally I'd like a cable disc on the rear and a caliper/cantilever/v-brake on the the front, thus getting the best of both worlds / hedging my bets / saving my rear rim.

One very significant advantage of disc brakes is that fat tyres can be mounted, assuming the frame is designed to provide the necessary gaps....

Fat tyres, especially the efficiently-rolling modern variety, add a huge amount of comfort and may actually be faster of themselve...

I should have made it clear that I don't have and don't want a fat bike - apart from anything else I'd find it too awkward to carry up and down stairs. Instead I'm thinking of something light and nippy for commuting and light touring, with 28-32mm tyres. Winter commuting in the wet west of Scotland is hard on rear rims so a disc brake would be better here. OTOH our shocking road surfaces become more tolerable with a compliant fork.

[reohn2]

If you cannot stop using a conventional caliper set-up ypu need to sharpen your anticipation,the sole exception being loaded when a cantilever is very adequate.Disc brakes are a gimmick-rather like the nbew shapes of mountain-bikes.

And I ask,yet again ,how much experience do you have of disc brakes?

[reohn2]

I should have made it clear that I don't have and don't want a fat bike - apart from anything else I'd find it too awkward to carry up and down stairs. Instead I'm thinking of something light and nippy for commuting and light touring, with 28-32mm tyres. Winter commuting in the wet west of Scotland is hard on rear rims so a disc brake would be better here. OTOH our shocking road surfaces become more tolerable with a compliant fork.

Fatter tyres doesn't have mean a "Fatbike" but Cugel's meaning is discs allow more clearance than caliper brakes allowing 32mm> tyres to be used,which if a bigger supple high quality tyre such as Vittoria Voyager Hypers are fitted comfort will increase and road buzz eliminated,making for a more comfortable more stable bike with better brakes in adverse conditions.Rim wear is no longer a problem and the bike stays much cleaner in such conditions too as an added bonus

[The utility cyclist]

The only reason why one cannot have wider tyres on some rim braked bikes is due solely down to reluctance of manufacturers to subtly change the design
My own rim braked bike that I use for winter/heavy duty/audax/touring/utility takes a 55mm wide tyre without mudguards and about 45mm with, thats a 2007/8 bike, it's better than many modrrn 'gravel' disc braked bikes.
That said the vast majority of riders a 32mm wide tyre is the maximum you will ever need or want even loaded. With c.130kg on board I've never found 32mm tyres to be inadequate, in fact i'd rather have a 28mm front with 32mm rear, this is the current srtup on my daily.
Of course if you want wider that's fine but the numbers are few and far between as a %. It is a fact though that if you restrict the offerings in terms of tyres and wheel rims and indeed hubs, put no development into a system and then market the heck out of something with loads of development you'll of course get a swing. Of course some will say the new stuff is better, percieved or otherwise, many won't admit their new thing is worse/no better but just like 559/571 rims and frames that accepted such when mqnufacturers make stuff obsolete you're virtually forced to change. There was nothi g wrong with those wheel sizes for touring/gravel/utility type bikes but nope manufacturers had to go back to yet an even older obsolete size and market it as the next greatest thing but only if you buy a new frame.
Similar is now happening with 700C tyres that aren't tubeless, 135mm non disc hubs of a decent quality has reduced massively, no development in dual pivot/U brakes to accept wider tyres, modern/CF rim braked framesets are not designed for wider tyres despite it being possible because manufacturers want to sell you a disc frameset/bike to accept that wider tyre. Basically it's the tail wagging the dog and more costly all round which is what it boils down to ... money, getting punters to spend more. I don't object to spending a wad of cash, I objrct to being effectively forced to change because manufacturers restrict/stop development on the existing systens, more so when tgere was nothing inadequate with that system and a bit of development would make wanting the latest simoly not attractive or less appealing than it is.

[mattsccm]

Not sure about your dog comparison. The industry is the dog surely? As in everything in life we buy what's provided not what we want. Sure a few of us like to think that we are "above" marketing and are happy with what we perceive as superior. We all have our little preferences. I for one fail to see why we need to have phones that we can carry about with us. Stuff talking instantly, wait until you get home.
I think that many of us here, me included , forget or are blinded by our own impressions. For example, most new riders won't be able to tell the difference between a supple old 531 fork and a more rigid disc braked one.( Indeed a carbon fork tends to negate any stiffness anyway. Mine most certainly offers a nicer ride that my 531 forks. ) Most don't care anyway.
Many people won't worry if a component doesn't last a decade. The bike will be long gone by then just like our telly, car, fridge and the rest of modern life. And the majority of consumers either don't care a damn or actually want disposable things. To some extent I do. I get bored way before quality kit wears out. Hydraulic discs are the easy things to maintain. You bung pads in occasionally. If anything else goes wrong you bin them. Same as your telly or trainers.

As usual this thread has wandered off into personal experiences which, as in every case, emphasis the negatives as those people who have a grievance are usually louder. To balance that I would use as an example my own experience with disc brakes. My MTB has Avid Juicy brakes. Known far and wide as being ineffective, a pain to work on and fragile. Maybe so but mine are now 12 years old, have had a lot of abuse and never a service and are still fine. But as in all comparisons, those who are happy don't open their mouths.

Finally might I assume two things please? Firstly that those who condemn any product have had extensive use of it in all situations as theoretical condemnation has no value and secondly have never adopted any modernisation in technology. To condemn something but to use a more modern version of something else is plain daft surely.
Finally maybe we should stop assuming that every cyclist wants to save the world, by reducing carbon, road deaths and obesity. Most people don't give a damn.

[gnvqsos]

"


Well as I can see they are an expensive gimmick,I have eschewed them for a conventional alternaive,which is both economical and effective.I do not need to drink urine or eat faeces to qualify any opinion I form about their epicuyrean qualities.It is clear you have been sediced sucked in,ripped off and now have to prosletyse to alleviate your sense of disappointment.

[gregoryoftours]

I am concious throughout this discussion of my favourite bike, my Dawes Sardar, having disc brake-ready forks and stays. I've never fitted them so in effect have the worst of both worlds. In a way, the Sardar should be prime disc territory (I wonder now why Dawes didn't just fit them): load lugging, wide tyres, muddy conditions, all purpose bike. Of course I haven't got a clue as to how the ride is affected - all I know is that it's stable, smooth and comfy. So maybe in the future I'll fit a front BB7. In the meantime, I'm sticking with rim brakes on all my other bikes.

I bought a used Sardar frame and fork recently, and it has really good points and really weird ones too, it's a real mish mash! Both Canti and disc mounts, great! The fork disc mount on mine is quite wonky so I think I'll have to use an Avid cable caliper with the cup and dome washers to get past that. 26" wheels on a touring frame, fantastic! Should make for a great all terrain tourer. But 1" threadless steerer, wha? Especially seeing as the model it replaced had 1 1/8" steerer. the fork is really narrow, barely taking a 1.75" tyre. It makes me wonder if they put it together out of loads of odd bits they want shot of! Good to hear it rides nice though.

[gregoryoftours]

"


Well as I can see they are an expensive gimmick,I have eschewed them for a conventional alternaive,which is both economical and effective.I do not need to drink urine or eat faeces to qualify any opinion I form about their epicuyrean qualities.It is clear you have been sediced sucked in,ripped off and now have to prosletyse to alleviate your sense of disappointment.

They are being sold hard in a lot of cases where rim or other types of brake might be better suited, but in themselves they are not a gimmick in any sense of the word.

[LollyKat]

Fatter tyres doesn't have mean a "Fatbike" but Cugel's meaning is discs allow more clearance than caliper brakes allowing 32mm> tyres to be used,which if a bigger supple high quality tyre such as Vittoria Voyager Hypers are fitted comfort will increase and road buzz eliminated,making for a more comfortable more stable bike with better brakes in adverse conditions.Rim wear is no longer a problem and the bike stays much cleaner in such conditions too as an added bonus

Fair enough - but my V-brake will also allow a bigger supple high quality tyre, etc, with even greater comfort from the compliant fork. The front rim wears much more slowly than the rear and a good mudflap keeps off most of the crud.

[reohn2]

"


Well as I can see they are an expensive gimmick,I have eschewed them for a conventional alternaive,which is both economical and effective.I do not need to drink urine or eat faeces to qualify any opinion I form about their epicuyrean qualities.It is clear you have been sediced sucked in,ripped off and now have to prosletyse to alleviate your sense of disappointment.

So,as you have no experience of disc brakes you have not the slightest inkling of their worth.
In short,your opinion is invalid and you have no idea what you're talking about,much as I thought.
Thank you for your useless and worthless input,much like your pointless opinion of pedelecs and disability scooters

[reohn2]

Fatter tyres doesn't have mean a "Fatbike" but Cugel's meaning is discs allow more clearance than caliper brakes allowing 32mm> tyres to be used,which if a bigger supple high quality tyre such as Vittoria Voyager Hypers are fitted comfort will increase and road buzz eliminated,making for a more comfortable more stable bike with better brakes in adverse conditions.Rim wear is no longer a problem and the bike stays much cleaner in such conditions too as an added bonus

Fair enough - but my V-brake will also allow a bigger supple high quality tyre, etc, with even greater comfort from the compliant fork. The front rim wears much more slowly than the rear and a good mudflap keeps off most of the crud.

I did mention up thread that V brakes were the only other brake offering the same clearances.
If you're happy with your V's who am I to argue?
BTW,what fork do you have fitted?

[Cugel]

I don't think anyone has mentioned comfort - Brucey, maybe? IME disc brakes need a beefier fork which for a given tyre gives a harsher ride. Personally I'd like a cable disc on the rear and a caliper/cantilever/v-brake on the the front, thus getting the best of both worlds / hedging my bets / saving my rear rim.

One very significant advantage of disc brakes is that fat tyres can be mounted, assuming the frame is designed to provide the necessary gaps. Rim brakes themselves tend to be the limiting factor to the width of tyre that can be fitted to a rim brake frame.

Fat tyres, especially the efficiently-rolling modern variety, add a huge amount of comfort and may actually be faster of themselves, as well as keeping you more inclined to pedal hard because you're not fatigued by the punishment that hard narrow tyres can impart over the miles.

Cugel

I'd agree with that generally,though V brakes overcome such a problem.
Some years ago after getting big rubber dialled in and sorted,I also found I could descend far faster.On a particular twisty bumpy descent I ride often àlmost 10mph faster, due to the lower TP's and complience of the bigger tyre which are more secure and planted,only my lack of courage stops me from pushing the envelope further.

This is my experience also - my descents became faster and more certain when the fat&softer tyres were acquired, then when a very compliant(Trek Domane) frame was acquired and then when hydro discs were added. In fact, the bike sticks so well to the road (including the bumpy scabby road) and brakes so well that I must be wary of that syndrome so common with these new technologies: don't take far more risk than the improved safety features (road grip and brake modulation, in this case) actually justify.

And one must always remember that tractors love to lurch out of hidden gates in the hedgerow, especially the tractors draped in sharp gubbins. I feel that some are deliberately awaiting sight of a fat-tired, disc-braked cyclist enjoying their new-found speedy-descending opportunities!

Cugel