The back brake can never provide the stopping power of a front brake. When a brake is applied weight is thrown forward (even with just applying the back brake) and friction between the rear wheel and the road surface decreases. If the rear brake is applied harder the rear wheel will start to skid, with further loss of braking performance. Even if it is not obviously skidding there will be a certain amount of sliding and additional tyre wear. In certain conditions you need to be cautious about using the front brake, but otherwise the front is by far the most effective brake. See https://www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html. Additionally front tyre wear from braking is minimal compared with that of the rear tyre. In fact I'm not sure why disc brakes are needed at all on the rear - at least for braking purposes.The utility cyclist wrote:MikeF wrote:+1 My Tektro hoods I find very comfortable. Shimano could take lessons. Mini V on the front canti on the rear. Rear brake provides little stopping power on roads and "trails", so it doesn't need to be as effective as the front.tooley92 wrote:
How little? Less so if you put an inferior brake system on and/or pay it no mind.
Sorry but as someone that uses their back brake first to retard speed I don't agree with your summation. Why have two different braking types in any case, it makes no logical sense at all
You need two independent brakes for safety reasons. Completely "logical".