New Mavic Open Pro

[The utility cyclist]

Using a rear brake as " the main brake I use for speed retardation in 85% of my riding" tells me something no so "balanced"

If I can brake enough using the rear brake only on a ceramic rim and still be in control and yet have the front if I require more braking how is that a problem, how is that in any way related to balance issues?
I don't go through front rims on my daily/workhorse bike simply because I can use the back brake on the long lasting ceramic rim effectively in both wet and dry, it not only teaches you to think more about your braking/riding/environment but the off-shoot is that it's cost effective too.

just because you/others don't do it doesn't mean it can't/doesn't work and isn't safe.

[The utility cyclist]

That's a very balanced dissertation Mr Utility Cyclist. Speaking for myself, I'd have tried the new Open Pros, if they'll do a 36 hole version, but information is that they won't - so I won't either.

I've regularly run the rear 32 spoke OP (on Ultegra 6500 hub, front MA2 36 spoke) with about 130kg on board including rider, max weight was fully loaded with a passenger for a few miles about twice every 10 days (long story don't ask), all told 180-190kg. That was 3 years ago and the wheel is still going, it was already second hand when I accquired it some 7-8 years ago.
I rode my 24/20 carbon tubs at 107kg, people stress too much about spoke count IMHO

[fastpedaller]

That's a very balanced dissertation Mr Utility Cyclist. Speaking for myself, I'd have tried the new Open Pros, if they'll do a 36 hole version, but information is that they won't - so I won't either.

I've regularly run the rear 32 spoke OP (on Ultegra 6500 hub, front MA2 36 spoke) with about 130kg on board including rider, max weight was fully loaded with a passenger for a few miles about twice every 10 days (long story don't ask), all told 180-190kg. That was 3 years ago and the wheel is still going, it was already second hand when I accquired it some 7-8 years ago.
I rode my 24/20 carbon tubs at 107kg, people stress too much about spoke count IMHO

But with all other factors being equal, a (well built) few extra spokes is stronger!

[JohnW]

That's a very balanced dissertation Mr Utility Cyclist. Speaking for myself, I'd have tried the new Open Pros, if they'll do a 36 hole version, but information is that they won't - so I won't either.

I've regularly run the rear 32 spoke OP ..............I rode my 24/20 carbon tubs at 107kg, people stress too much about spoke count IMHO

But with all other factors being equal, a (well built) few extra spokes is stronger!

Oh, I absolutely agree with that fastpedaller - and especially when one is re-using 36-hole hubs time and again.............which I do.

[Keezx]

just because you/others don't do it doesn't mean it can't/doesn't work and isn't safe.

Under circumstances it can be safe , but by giving away 70% of the potential stopping power you're just asking for trouble.

[The utility cyclist]

just because you/others don't do it doesn't mean it can't/doesn't work and isn't safe.

Under circumstances it can be safe , but by giving away 70% of the potential stopping power you're just asking for trouble.

Read again exactly what i said, i'm giving nothing away in the slightest and certainly am not asking for trouble, I have all the braking to hand that I need as and when i need it. How you fathom I'm given away 70% i've no idea, did you randomly pluck that out of the air, do you know how effective my back brake is, do you know my weight distribution, do you know how much braking I need for any given situation?
I just elect to use the rear only to retard speed because that's all I need for 85% of my daily braking.

With all due respect you sound like you can't evaluate how much braking you need for any given circumstance and just like to slam on both brakes all the time. if that's how you ride you leave no margin, reading your environ better and knowing how much braking is required ahead better will leave you plenty in hand.
I've never not being able to brake enough that was physically possible within the grip of my tyres, (I've never skidded out or ran on/run into something because of lack of braking ever) those that understand braking and their environment know exactly how much braking they need at any given time, just because you seemingly need every last drop of braking power to keep you on the straight and narrow and think covering a brake lever is 'giving away' 70% of your braking isn't really my problem but you're trying to transpose your inability onto me and state i'm the one asking for trouble, oh please!

[Keezx]

Still doesn't make much sense to me , but if it satisfies you, so be it.

[Brucey]

70% is being generous; it might be more than that which is lost if you elect to use the rear brake only.

With a typical weight distribution, the retardation that produces a rear wheel lockup (rear brake only) is about 1/3 of what is possible using the front brake only.

cheers

[JohnW]

70% is being generous; it might be more than that which is lost if you elect to use the rear brake only.

With a typical weight distribution, the retardation that produces a rear wheel lockup (rear brake only) is about 1/3 of what is possible using the front brake only.

cheers

I think we're digressing a bit - possibly a subject for a separate thread, but..................:

Going back to school days, when cycling was changing from 'playing out' to riding out to meet and visit friends and the occasional ride to visit relatives, the talk among my peer-group was that we only used the front brake in an emergency, because rumour had it that the front wheel would lock-up, the bike would stop but we wouldn't and we'd be face first onto the road. Under those circumstances, the slowing-down process was fraught with dangers - especially with the rod-brakes with which I started.

Later, having started riding with the club and other adult relatives, by whom the bike was inspected, I found that the front brake stopped me dead because, being little used, the blocks were new and the brake was better adjusted. I got advice and guidance from the 'older guys' for looking after my brakes properly, and checking them regularly. Generally the advice was to use both brakes together. So I learned to maintain and adjust my brakes very regularly.

One sophisticated wise-man among my seniors showed me that he adjusted his brakes and cables so that, if he applied the brakes at the same time, the rear actually came on momentarily before the front and he believed that was proof against the front wheel locking up. It probably makes sense in theory but I dunno in fact. Having tried that, it did seem to work for me - but did it really make any difference? - I don't know.

However, one thing I have learned from experience is to do what the 'old guys' told me way back in the fifties, and use both brakes. From all those years back, I remember how impressed I was with the difference when I first started to use both together. On very few occasions, and for one reason or another, I have applied rear brake only and find that the rear wheel very easily locks up and can skid all over the place, depending upon the road surface....................and can even wear a flat on the tyre.

How much braking does one loose when applying rear only? - depends upon the circumstances, but I would guess that up to 70% isn't wildly over the top especially on long descents where brake-fade becomes a factor.................you find that up in the Dales when you've just ridden the pass between one Dale and the next.

Do you know the Yorkshire Dales Keezx?..................don't go at weekends nowadays, because it's fraught with motorists, but on a traffic-free day it's heavenly.

[Keezx]

Well I live in flat Holland, but i'm also often to find in the hills and mountains of Belgium and Germany and i'm glad I don't have to rely on my rear brake only...

[meic]

and i'm glad I don't have to rely on my rear brake only...

Which shows that you are just not reading what has been written.
The back brake is being used predominantly, it is not being solely relied upon.
The front brake is there to be used too if needed but generally it isnt needed as much, so isnt used as much.
If it was needed then it would be used.

[Keezx]

When I brake , I do nothing intentional, just braking with both brakes as hard as needed.
What's the difference.....

[pwa]

When I brake , I do nothing intentional, just braking with both brakes as hard as needed.
What's the difference.....

Some people use their rear brake more than their front brake for gentle speed reduction, resorting to the front brake only when the need to slow down or stop cannot be met by the rear brake alone. Such people see more wear on the rear rim.

Paul Hewitt once told me that he used a ceramic rim on his front wheel only, since he did most of his braking with the front brake and didn't see a need to splash out on two very expensive rims. That was a long time ago and he may no longer think that a great idea if he experienced the poor wet weather braking that some report.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Nothing to do with the OP's post.

I remember using my front brake mostly when I was younger over 40 years ago, because the rear cable was seizing due to lack of use
This all changed over night when I grabbed the front brake and due to lack of maintenance at the time (as I used to leave bike outside and didn't add lube till something squeaked ) the front nipple dropped out of the lever On the bonnet and walking home

As most of my riding is down lanes - off road - moorland track etc, the back brake comes on first but is then joined by the front brake and I pull back with somewhat equal pull.
The result is that if its slippy then the back starts to slip and you can still control the steering, bear in mind that most of my riding is with a loaded bike of about 50 Ibs, and at times I will be just locking the rear and applying a small amount to the front to get max braking with no loss of control.
Motorcycles have whopping twin disc and a some what mediocre rear drum, and cars where like this for years, disc up front and drum at rear.
Riding on slippery surface with all two wheeled vehicles means you use the front as little as possible, your odds of reacting to a front wheel slide on corners is not good, rear on the other hand is relatively easy to master.

In the dry on a road bike you can afford to use the front quite hard as grip is not a problem with the weight moving to the front as you de-accelerate, the rear will lock easily because as with cars some 70% of braking is via the front.
Today I would probably never just apply one brake unless I was scooting then it would be the rear, applying the front scooting full weight on one side of bike won't fell good and easy off as it affects steering.

Riding motorcycles in all weathers you learn how to feather brakes especially with ice snow etc, probably easier on a motorcycle than a bicycle as the engine is a very controllable drag brake, acting on the rear.
Consequently my rear rim is always the first to suffer brake wear, I think this is where discs come into there own as loaded off road riding is chronic on rim brakes, fair weather road bikes can keep rim brakes.
P.S. Open Pro rims, never seen one and am still using early eighties rims / touring types, they seem to have equal likes and dislikes from the posts so I am not probably missing much, Argents have nearly two mm's of wall.

[Gattonero]

IME (10 years worth of using ceramic rims) i've found that the braking in the wet is plenty fine even with my 100kg plus loads on board....

First person I hear being happy about, and with such weight! Like me, 75kg cyclist with less than 10kg load, other fellow cyclists with Open Pro Ceramic simply would not stop in wet, barely slowing down the bike but not stopping it, no matter how hard would squeeze the levers