Good piece Matt, I like the playful, excited tone, but you do push a couple arguments about disc adoption rather hard. At the £/$500 price point discs save money to manufacturers who build 000s of bikes a year - there's no cabling to be done - hydraulic cables come as a system, already attached to both lever and caliper so the factory worker can attach them in a minute, front and rear. V-brakes require cabling, cutting, set up, pad adjustment, crimping etc. There's no tuning to be done with hydraulics. Same with wheels: trueness tolerances don't have to be as precise with disc brakes, no one notices a rim rubbing against the pad. A lot of riders might be better off with v-brakes but they aspire to discs so that works as well.

My beef is with these £/$500 silly boxes we'll need under our stems. That it total throw away stop-gap compromise. Imagine trying to see one of those silly boxes in 3-4 years time? Exactly. LIke selling those silly cell phone radiations shield :-) Seriously, the brake manufactuerers can only sit and wait till Shimano and SRAM arrive with their first hydraulic road level, then flood gates will open, until then, I'm not interested in a $500 300 gram box.

It's odd when so-called 'editors’ don't know the difference between "you're" and "your" (the last sentence of the first paragraph reads as, "So if you are intended goal is...")

Dealing with deteriorating braking ability through an hour-long race is part of what makes cyclo-cross a distinct challenge from mountain biking.

Perhaps Mr. Pacocha was too busy salivating at the prospect of the ad-revenue, and all the nice, new, shiny bits of kit he'll be sent to review, should disc brakes take over the cyclo-cross and road bike markets, to proof-read his own article.

@ ubercurmudgeon

You need to get out more !

sadly this seems like another marketing/industry ploy to solve a problem that doesnt exist...oh and ive had a cross bike with discs for several years (redline cross bike w bb7). simply not necessary or that useful. too much power for such low grip levels found with cross tyres, even with a 140/160mm set up and ended up going back to a standard cross kinesis with avid ultimates, much better for actual cross use.

feels like another attempt from certain quarters to change things that dont need changing, anyone remember rockshox ruby's????

it's discs on road bikes I'm more interested in.

For those of us riding in muddy CX races, the main benefit is less about late braking and more about not having to stop every lap to pull handfuls of grass and mud out of caliper brakes. Longevity of rims is also a great bonus.

I find my BB7 mechanical discs powerful enough, although I might be tempted by a hydraulic system in a few years when the price is right.

There are lots of keen amateurs that want to see discs on road/cyclocross bikes. I'll take discs over cantilevers any day...

For the serious cross racer, with spare bikes and somebody in the pit there is little advantage. In muddy conditions, tyre grip is the limiting factor. This means that your not going to see a world cup or superprestige winner using discs any time soon.

When/if shimano or sram develop controls with hydraulic brake levers, this might change (agree with previous comments regarding the absurdity of a $500 hydraulic conversion system). For the average occasional cross rider/commuter, BB7 discs are great and with more disc compatible frames/forks being released all the time the future looks good for cyclo cross disc brakes.

Let's face it, the majority of us are not pro's so we can negate the weight penalty by having a big pooh before a race.

The froggleggs on my bike are meant to be awesome! I have to get the bike shop to set them up, they squeal, judder and wobble my eyeballs out under heavy braking. I wish I could fit discs!

It's a no-brainer!

No need.

1. a real mudbath is very rare - maybe once a season

2. You don't need anymore braking power

But then they will eventually takeover as us cyclists love our gadgets and hi tech progress whether its needed or not!

Its interesting that some feel this is marketing/ change for the sake. Discs work better, as for frog's legs they barely count as a brake! If you feel you cannot use the disc brake power/modulation the fault is more likley with the tyre. Remember the shift in tyre design when mountain bikes went to disc - arrow tread designs faded as they could not deliver the grip/friction performance needed to take advantage of the disc. How many motocross tyres have an arrow type tread? If you can brake later with control you can use more speed - you are faster. Discs will also mean the removal of the brake surface at the outer most of the wheel meaning lower rotational mass, most likley even with the steel rota - let alone a lightweight ceramic impregnated alloy fancy type with ti bolts... less rotational mass means quicker acceleration/deceleration at the corners where it counts - zero heat at the rim may even help stop tub's rolling?

As for the comment that discs will save manufacturers money? how? the brake may come to us assembled- even the manufacturer perhaps but someone has to put it together at some piont. time labour. and with modern interanal routings this would have to be done at manufacture anyhow - more time,labour etc - Few manufacturers actually set-up their cycles merely assemble pre-set parts on to the chassis, thats why a proffesional cycle shop has to PDI your cycle for you, to make these adjustments

People fear change but its change that brings performance - perhaps next season those doubters should go back to toeclips? for i'm sure there was a similar revolution??

Honest question.

Why hydraulics are needed instead of wired? I understand that hydraulics have a lot more power than wired but, is it needed in cross?

Hi all,

The CX disc argument is not about power - never has been, at least from the people who are actually behind the idea. As always, ultimate braking power will always be limited by tire traction.

The main advantage of discs is how controllable the power is up to that point and in this case, also their more consistent performance in muddy conditions.

Generally speaking, mechanical disc brakes work alright but hydraulics definitely provide more consistent operation and if designed properly, they're also quite a bit lighter. For 'cross, it also means one fewer thing to service as the system is fully sealed.

@angryasian

Thanks

Well, I guess disc brakes would be valuable to those who can go fast enough in cross but for the majority of us, we ain't going fast enough and could just drag our feet to slow down. But even the fast guys are girls are not screaming down a long decent like they would in a mountain bike race so mechanical disc brakes should do the job. We'll see who wins: marketing or function. I'm betting on marketing.

As someone who runs disks on my commuter bike as well as MTB, what's good about them even on skinny tres is they behave the same in the wet as the dry: no lag. your rims last a long time, and even when bashed don't matter. You may need a new rotor if someone crashes into that, but you can try hammering it flat first.

Disadvantages

-every disk pad type is different

-some -and I am thinking of avid- aren't bolted in and can fall out. It is not fun to have your rear brake pads fall out on a night-time DH descent.

-hydraulics add new problems. You have to load the bikes in cars differently to avoid accidentally squeezing the brakes when the wheels are out. You can't store the bike upside down or on its side for any length of time. And every couple of years you need to play with the fluids.

That's why I'm going to switch to BB7 cabled on the commuter; stick to hydraulics on the MTB. The commuter currently only has a disk on the front, as that is where you get the most benefit braking-wise. CX bikes may want to do the same thing: canti on the back, cabled disk on the front.

I don't see the point of disc brakes for cyclocross. But that's because I don't see the point of cyclocross :-). I've got discs on my mtb and if I could have gotten then on my road bike I would not have doubted. Rim brakes are sort of adequate in dry weather, but in the rain they simply suck.

i can see the benefits of disc brakes on all bikes. i can also see that the parabox and the hope version could be around some time if the big companies cant find a cheap way of putting the hydraulic system in the sti, although shimano probably have a fully working hydro di2 system ready for launch. wouldn't surprise me if sram have as well. it would surprise me if campagnolo had one.

I can’t really get my head around why anyone would want to add complexity for the sake of feel, cost at the expense of serviceability and weight for weights sake.

I’m reminded of electronic shifting; it’s just the over-complication of a beautiful and simple machine.

Sometimes, one should not do things; even though one can.

I dunno if I fancy seeing disc brakes on road bikes in the near future,.....3/4 cat racing is dangerous enough with inexperienced riders at the moment let alone them having powerful brakes at their disposal,it would be carnage with all that panic braking lol.

Disc brakes do indeed have a bright future. For many they already have a very bright present. Why degrade your wheel with rim brakes every time you want to slow down or stop? Given the cost of the wheels in the first place, why "pay" to degrade your wheel with rim brakes every time you want to slow down or stop. All three of my mountain bikes have hydraulic disc brakes, one of which is fitted with a rack and 1.5 inch semi slicks for the road. This road going Trek 6500 is used for commuting, touring and general road use. Two broken spokes whilst touring in the Picos de Europa, Spain caused no ill effects as regards braking, another advantage in addition to those regarding power and modulation. At the moment I'm seeking to replace my Giant SCR 1 used for Sportives and longer distances. I'm looking for a fast hybrid with......hydraulic disc brakes. The weedy rim brakes on the SCR 1 scare the **** out of me. Oh and as rgards any weight penalty? As "Mr Have a Go Average", not always in an all out rush, do you really think I'm going to notice?!

I think disc brakes will have a bigger benefit on dry grippy courses where you will be able to brake later and more predictably in corners. I can see myself passing a bunch of people on turns as well as transitions from steep/fast downhills. The ability to brake later, harder and more consistently is a big advantage in other types of racing...

How many times do you feather your canti's for longer than needed given the crappy modulation. In the wet, a lot of times you're just squeezing the levers hoping that the pads eventually bite. Really takes away from your ability to ride aggressively up to the limits of your tires traction.

I don't ride cross, but have been riding road for years and recently upgraded my old mtb to a lovely new 29er with, you guessed it, new fangled disc brakes. They are so goddamn good that every time I get on my road bike (with ultegra rim brakes) I think how excellent it would be to have discs on the road bike... There's absolutely no justification for rim brakes apart from weight... And for those arguments about 'complexity'... I take it that you're running a derailleur on you're bike, right?

I take the same fast corner on my mtb as on my roadie in order to start riding and it's now terrifying on my roadie as I have become used to control and power... And in the wet... Don't get me started. Rim brakes are primitive. You can argue that they're not broken and don't need fixing, so I take it that these folk are still running a commodore 64 computer use toe clips and still object to that weighty, complex device bolted to the derailleur hanger...

.an addit: I just looked back at last year's cycling world review of cyclocross bikes... Every one of them had an issue with brake judder and squeal from the canti's... Every one.... This whole argument reminds me of the campy arguments in the 90's (when their stuff was seriously outplayed by Shimano)

Why are people so concerned with braking in cross? The speeds are not that high, there isn't much descending, and you dismount while still moving. You can tell I'm not too bullish about disc brakes. The author seems to trivialize the weight penalty- if you're carrying your bike, you definitely want it lighter. One important advantage I see is that discs would help preserve carbon rims, but it's ironic that the weight of the disc brakes would negate some of the weight advantage of carbon wheels.

Yes, perhaps the technology will leave me behind (figuratively, not literally I hope), but as long as my cantilevers are legal I can still race, and I don't think I'll be at as much of a disadvantage as the author says, except for my legs feeling like lead as I try to get over the barriers.

I can see the advantages of disc brakes on cross bikes, but until I can get a Ridley with alloy tubular wheels with discs I'll stick with my X-Fire...

cross races are not won by braking - they are won by pedalling...

Disc brakes on a road or cross bike? That's like having ABS on a family car, what advantage would it be.......

I have used every braking system on a bike and nothing comes close to hydraulic disc brakes, it like ABS compared with drum brakes on cars.

People go on about a well set up cantilever etc. so what, a badly set up disc will still outperform it. It's not about the stopping power, it's about the feel and control. Hydraulic brakes will not leave you with forearm pump so bad that you can't hold a pen.

Some things are good ideas and others are just sales hype, hydraulic disc brakes work full stop.

Choccy...

Skid Patch you're exactly right in what you're saying.

If you were racing and worrying about your brakes not performing to their best ability then surely you would change them. If it were you tyres you would.

People bang on about racing being about going fast and not about stopping, well that's rubbish because if you can't brake late then you have to slow down earlier. Racers who take on discs early will see great benefits in races I think.

Choccy...