Braking

[Velo]

That's harsh - his page has a long list of situations when it's a good idea not to just use the front brake.

Yes. Agree. But not harsh. He puts that section as an add-on.

But if he'd said at the beginning of the article that using both brakes was normal and advisable in just about every situation in just about every road surface, especially at speed, I'd have been happy.

I would also have been happy had he said that in theory, in a perfect world on a perfect surface with perfect brakes, all you need is a front one!

I can't and won't argue with science. The front brake only situation is right. But only in theory. The Perfect World only exists in theory.

Sheldon Brown understood the difference between "cycling theory" and the "real word cycling" and it is patronising to suggest otherwise.

It is a great shame that he is no longer with us.

[Mick F]

I agree it's a shame. He is a very sad loss to all of us.

I feel guilty about challenging his word, and if things had been different, I'd have emailed him for a chat!

It's obvious he was all too human, aren't we all?, and maybe I'm wrong.

I still believe in what I say, and to be honest, I'm only complaining about semantics.

It's not what he says (he's right, I've already said that) it's the way he's couched it. Saying that all you really need is a front brake. And ADDING there are times when the rear is needed. The way he puts it, it's as if the other times are unusual.

I maintain that the "other times" are usual, and the perfect black and white world is not.

As Pigman says:
......but I'm sure that if front brake only was the way to go, the pro teams that have budgets running into millions would have done this. If the rear brake was there as a back-up only, it would make sense to have the two calipers, one in front of and one behind the fork crown and hence have front braking only along with a secondary back-up caliper.

Please, someone carry out your own experiment, and see.
Find out how YOU can stop in the shortest distance, and by what method/s.

[axel_knutt]

Sheldon Brown is right, but ONLY when the front brake is powerful enough to lift the rear wheel. Otherwise Mick F is right, both brakes MUST stop you quicker.

[Auchmill]

One point not remarked upon is straight line vs non- straight line braking. Riding my mtb recently on a dirt track I braked over enthusiastically with the front brake on a bend and hit the deck. Combination braking would have seen me round safely. When we get abs then maybe that would make a difference.

[PW]

And front brake only is fine in a straight line.... We all know we're not supposed to brake in a corner but it happens, in less than emergency stop conditions that rear brake definitely affects handling for the better.
PS I've had a soft spot for Sheldon for a long time and I'm very sorry he's gone - but I reserve the right to disagree.

[Auchmill]

.... We all know we're not supposed to brake in a corner

Now why didn't I remember that as the great oak loomed large!!

[professorlandslide]

I've had his discussion quite a lot on other forums, especially american ones where you DO NOT QUESTION mr Brown (RIP)...

It's a load of rubbish. Sorry, but it is. If you go over the bars you're pulling too hard. Its probably fine if you're a lifelong roadie on 20mm wide tyres at 300PSI that will explode/wear out if they skid a bit. But for anything else, forget it. BOTH brakes, BOTH modulated. The rear creates drag and spreads the braking force along the frame rather than having it all go through the headset. Plus, its possible to control a front wheel skid if you're braking at the rear as well.

As far as skidding the rear, its useful as a commuting trick for getting round tight bends like those in underpasses (and makes a great SQEE! noise which alerts peds on the cycle path). I'm also a fan of fishtailing the back a bit when braking in traffic, it gets the driver coming up behind you's attention quite effectively....

Not that i'd recommend single braking in any way. There are two brakes on a bike for a reason...

[PW]

Hooray I've got an ally!

[Mick F]

Hang on a sec .....
Wasn't it my thread?

I'm glad people are debating this. I think SB had loads of experience in straight smooth roads in the US, not bendy wet and rough roads in UK?

[DaveP]

Hmmm.
I read the article some weeks ago. I thought there were some good points for me to think about, but I also started to feel that I might have a different riding style to The Man - I reckon I'm probably slower and less confident, and thats just for starters!
I cant help feeling that all this attention on limiting cases could be misplaced. You can have a bike, in good order, with the best bike brakes and tyres in the world, and everything depends on the friction at two very small contact patches with the road. That road surface is completely beyond your control, and can change from day to day, depending on the weather and on what has been deposited on it by other users. Thats why my preference has always been to use both brakes together, just to reduce the chance of one tyre breaking loose.
I wont deny that the front brake can do just about everything you need - most of the time - but if you ride that way, I reckon you're riding closer to the edge than you need.
I do find the back brake quite useful for gentle, preplanned speed adjustments, and I find myself using it almost as a drag brake on long descents.

[coyoteboy]

I think its fairly obvious that one brake is enough to stop a bike, assuming the world is perfect. Since it's not perfect I think its fairly obvious that two are needed to obtain best braking due to problems with traction.

[Auchmill]

Link from another thread - I hope this guy aint about to use his front brake in anger like wot I did.

[coyoteboy]

Or him...

[thirdcrank]

He's saying - "It's a fortnight since I reported this and they still haven't filled it in."

[Mick F]

That's coz he doesn't pay any Road Tax !!!