Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => Freewheeling => Topic started by: mzjo on 27 March, 2018, 09:49:05 pm
-
Watching the Tour of Catalonia 6th stage today there were two riders up the road of which one, Schachmann of the Quickstep, was riding a disc-braked S-Works. Looking down the bunch I couldn't see any other discs, even among the other Quickstep riders. I have not followed the UCI's position on discs in the pro pelotons. What is the current position? How does a pro team manage to service discs and calipers in the same race?
Mods, if you feel this should be in the racing thread please move it - I am assuming it is of more general interest.
-
Disc brakes are allowed in pro road racing from the year. Also at all levels in U.K.
And it will create headaches for service course, esp if riders from the same team choose different braking systems, and god knows what neutral service is going to do. But that’s not the UCI’s or British Cycling’s problem.
-
The situation is, I believe, that teams can use disc brakes on a trial basis.
Last season saw quite a lot of use. This year, even in races like Strade Bianca and wet Belgian races they have been rare.
The best explanation of this I have seen is that last year the sponsoring manufacturers put pressure on teams to be seen with discs. Now that the disc has been established on “ sportive” and “ gravel” bikes the manufacturers have eased off.
You are right, discs make wheel changes much, much longer. That’s a key reason why teams don’t use them.
Strangely ( in my view) British Cycling jumped the UCI gun and have allowed discs in domestic racing - apparently to ease the way for sportive riders who want to try racing!
-
Mods, if you feel this should be in the racing thread please move it - I am assuming it is of more general interest.
I think you mean the "Wiggo is a big fat cheat" forum! that's pretty much all they want to talk about.
has Wiggo (or Sky) cheated by using the wrong sort of discs?!?
-
Thanks for those explanations. In my mind I was still at the stage where the experiment had been stopped by the UCI. I did wonder if what I saw was a break being allowed to help the sponsors (with little hope that it would go to the line - but then for various reasons I couldn't watch right to the finish). It is not the first time I think I have seen discs in a pro race this year but it is the first time the camera has panned the whole bike to give a good close-up view. Spotting them in the middle of the bunch ios a bit more difficult because the cameras tend to concentrate on the riders not the hubs.
This made me think a bit of Phil Anderson showing off his Kirk magnesium bike on the Paris stage of a TdF (1988 or 89, I think, before I moved to France). The pros have to help the sponsors from time to time, that's why they're pros!
-
Mods, if you feel this should be in the racing thread please move it - I am assuming it is of more general interest.
I think you mean the "Wiggo is a big fat cheat" forum! that's pretty much all they want to talk about.
has Wiggo (or Sky) cheated by using the wrong sort of discs?!?
I cannot claim total innocence in this matter :-[ :-[
-
How does a pro team manage to service discs and calipers in the same race?
So far, I have not seen a team attempt to change a wheel on a disc-braked bicycle in a race. They have simply changed the whole bicycle in every instance I’ve seen.
It’s a pity that all sorts of expensive, pointless things have been allowed into racing: disc wheels (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.bicycles/LvEjlX2tJoM/sy155W3UFJwJ), radios, electric shifting (https://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=120802&p=1218624#p1218624), and now disc brakes. None of them have added anything to the racing and have often detracted from it while increasing costs for everyone. Of course it is all justified by saying that manufacturers need to showcase innovation they can sell to the public. I’m insensitive to that argument because I don’t care about the size and profitability of the bicycle industry. There would be other sponsors if bicycle manufacturers weren’t there, and that arrangement with fewer vested interests would be better for the sport. The big bicycle manufacturers have become too influential in road racing.
-
Mods, if you feel this should be in the racing thread please move it - I am assuming it is of more general interest.
I think you mean the "Wiggo is a big fat cheat" forum! that's pretty much all they want to talk about.
has Wiggo (or Sky) cheated by using the wrong sort of discs?!?
Well he did cut someone's head with one* so I'd say yes.
*Allegedly, or I may have just made it up I'm not sure ;D
-
Also at all levels in U.K.
Does anyone know about overseas? The FFCT/ASO had issues when they were last introduced I know, (e.g. being disallowed in the Etape etc)
-
Mods, if you feel this should be in the racing thread please move it - I am assuming it is of more general interest.
I think you mean the "Wiggo is a big fat cheat" forum! that's pretty much all they want to talk about.
has Wiggo (or Sky) cheated by using the wrong sort of discs?!?
Well he did cut someone's head with one* so I'd say yes.
*Allegedly, or I may have just made it up I'm not sure ;D
I hope Sky have detailed records of what discs they've used, on what day, where, and whose heads they've cut. We demand full transparency!!! Anything less is pretty much a clear admission of guilt. >:(
-
Mattc: don’t get them started in this thread too!
-
Mattc: don’t get them started in this thread too!
Sorry. I've clearly let it get to me :facepalm:
-
How does a pro team manage to service discs and calipers in the same race?
So far, I have not seen a team attempt to change a wheel on a disc-braked bicycle in a race. They have simply changed the whole bicycle in every instance I’ve seen.
[luddite rant]
Yawn. If you don't want to go faster on a bike, go get a pair of trainers and start running.
-
How does a pro team manage to service discs and calipers in the same race?
So far, I have not seen a team attempt to change a wheel on a disc-braked bicycle in a race. They have simply changed the whole bicycle in every instance I’ve seen.
[luddite rant]
Yawn. If you don't want to go faster on a bike, go get a pair of trainers and start running.
got a motor yet Karla?
-
How does a pro team manage to service discs and calipers in the same race?
So far, I have not seen a team attempt to change a wheel on a disc-braked bicycle in a race. They have simply changed the whole bicycle in every instance I’ve seen.
It’s a pity that all sorts of expensive, pointless things have been allowed into racing: disc wheels (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.bicycles/LvEjlX2tJoM/sy155W3UFJwJ), radios, electric shifting (https://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=120802&p=1218624#p1218624), and now disc brakes. None of them have added anything to the racing and have often detracted from it while increasing costs for everyone.
Oh, I absolutely agree. They should be riding on fixed gear. Steel frames only.
People who do super long-distance racing (RAAM, TransAM and suchlike) think highly of electronic shifting.
-
How does a pro team manage to service discs and calipers in the same race?
So far, I have not seen a team attempt to change a wheel on a disc-braked bicycle in a race. They have simply changed the whole bicycle in every instance I’ve seen.
[luddite rant]
Yawn. If you don't want to go faster on a bike, go get a pair of trainers and start running.
For rider to rider pro racing, it doesn't matter anyway. If one rider has a bit of kit that gives them an advantage then everyone else should be using it if it's going to be allowed; result is no advantage.
For amateurs, I suppose having faster bikes would make a difference for people doing TT personal bests, but not in a race against other riders.
-
Karla and mrcharly-YHT: you can do better than that low form of wit.
Hubner: but disc brakes give a disadvantage, not an advantage, as Lennard Zinn describes here (http://www.velonews.com/2018/03/bikes-and-tech/technical-faq/technical-faq-converting-campy-rims-vs-discs_461264) (scroll down to “Rim brakes vs. disc brakes”).
Granted, the difference is negligible, so the best man wins anyway (unless he gets a puncture; see below). Marginal gains or marginal losses conferred by technology are less important than Trek and Specialized wish we believed.
The question remains how to change a disc-brake wheel quickly or service a mixed fleet in a race. There’s presently no satisfactory answer, but the pressure to get this technology on television is strong enough that it gets raced anyway.
-
How does a pro team manage to service discs and calipers in the same race?
So far, I have not seen a team attempt to change a wheel on a disc-braked bicycle in a race. They have simply changed the whole bicycle in every instance I’ve seen.
[luddite rant]
Yawn. If you don't want to go faster on a bike, go get a pair of trainers and start running.
got a motor yet Karla?
Yes, but it got nicked.
-
global cycling industry is too small and poor to hire highly skilled engineers and product designers, hence many new products are released as beta versions to be tested and adopted/rejected by consumers. some products catch on and evolve, others stay as they are or disappear. without innovation (flawed as it is) the industry would not survive.
-
but disc brakes give a disadvantage, not an advantage, as Lennard Zinn describes here (scroll down to “Rim brakes vs. disc brakes”).
My point was really about riders in a race should have bikes of the same performance. Either everyone has disc brakes, disc wheels etc or no one has them.
-
Mods, if you feel this should be in the racing thread please move it - I am assuming it is of more general interest.
I think you mean the "Wiggo is a big fat cheat" forum! that's pretty much all they want to talk about.
has Wiggo (or Sky) cheated by using the wrong sort of discs?!?
He certainly wasn’t fat when he was (allegedly) cheating, any more Han Froome is fat;)
I’ll get me coat
-
but disc brakes give a disadvantage, not an advantage, as Lennard Zinn describes here (scroll down to “Rim brakes vs. disc brakes”).
My point was really about riders in a race should have bikes of the same performance. Either everyone has disc brakes, disc wheels etc or no one has them.
What, like exactly the same? Like in strict one-design dinghy racing? Because even there, people find advantages. Usually it makes racing more expensive and exclusive, not less, because it means it's the competitors with lots of time and money who can work out which subtle advancements are actually useful, and who can buy a new set of sails every season. I remember Chris Boardman saying the same when the UCI introduced restrictions on something or other: that BC had the resources to fund the fine measurement labs that could differentiate what gave them a performance advantage, while everyone else was reduced to guesswork.
Face it, cycling is a sport that is fundamentally about using technology to enhance man's capabilities. If you don't like that, it isn't the sport for you.
-
Face it, cycling is a sport that is fundamentally about using technology to enhance man's capabilities.
Just as long as they don't use too much technology...
-
If you don't have to pay for your own rims, you have a team of mechanics tuning brakes and replacing cable inners and outers, and you are racing on closed roads with no surprises then I'm not really sure what the advantage is of disc brakes in racing (other than for manufacturers)
I can see the advantage of electronic shifting in racing, but that is because I've been using it extensively for 2 years.
Let's not bring Wiggins and Sky's lying and cheating into this thread. Samuel and Matt have already been ripped a new one on that thread. They need time for it to heal.
-
global cycling industry is too small and poor to hire highly skilled engineers and product designers, hence many new products are released as beta versions to be tested and adopted/rejected by consumers....
I really don’t think that applies to Shimano, with 12,000 plus employees and a turnover of $2.5 billion in 2013.
-
but disc brakes give a disadvantage, not an advantage, as Lennard Zinn describes here (scroll down to “Rim brakes vs. disc brakes”).
My point was really about riders in a race should have bikes of the same performance. Either everyone has disc brakes, disc wheels etc or no one has them.
What, like exactly the same? Like in strict one-design dinghy racing? Because even there, people find advantages. Usually it makes racing more expensive and exclusive, not less, because it means it's the competitors with lots of time and money who can work out which subtle advancements are actually useful, and who can buy a new set of sails every season. I remember Chris Boardman saying the same when the UCI introduced restrictions on something or other: that BC had the resources to fund the fine measurement labs that could differentiate what gave them a performance advantage, while everyone else was reduced to guesswork.
Face it, cycling is a sport that is fundamentally about using technology to enhance man's capabilities. If you don't like that, it isn't the sport for you.
Boardman would say that, wouldn't he? Because he used a bike that gave him an advantage to win an Olympic title. One might say he "cheated", same goes for LeMond in the 89 Tour.
By same bike, I mean something like bikes from the 70s, all had steel frames of the same basic design with same diameter tubing, Campagnolo Super/Nuovo Record parts, alloy sprint rims etc. They weren't exactly the same but had the same performance. I don't mean current riders should be using 70s bikes, they should be riding current bikes, they don't have to be same but the same performance, no rider should have an advantage because of their equipment.
-
Basically, manufacturers want pros to use disc brakes to sell disc brakes to the public, obviously.
It's not just the brakes, people have to buy new bikes/frames, so there's a lot of money involved.
-
But, for many many riders, it is progress.
-
but disc brakes give a disadvantage, not an advantage, as Lennard Zinn describes here (scroll down to “Rim brakes vs. disc brakes”).
My point was really about riders in a race should have bikes of the same performance. Either everyone has disc brakes, disc wheels etc or no one has them.
What, like exactly the same? Like in strict one-design dinghy racing? Because even there, people find advantages. Usually it makes racing more expensive and exclusive, not less, because it means it's the competitors with lots of time and money who can work out which subtle advancements are actually useful, and who can buy a new set of sails every season. I remember Chris Boardman saying the same when the UCI introduced restrictions on something or other: that BC had the resources to fund the fine measurement labs that could differentiate what gave them a performance advantage, while everyone else was reduced to guesswork.
Face it, cycling is a sport that is fundamentally about using technology to enhance man's capabilities. If you don't like that, it isn't the sport for you.
Boardman would say that, wouldn't he? Because he used a bike that gave him an advantage to win an Olympic title. One might say he "cheated", same goes for LeMond in the 89 Tour.
By same bike, I mean something like bikes from the 70s, all had steel frames of the same basic design with same diameter tubing, Campagnolo Super/Nuovo Record parts, alloy sprint rims etc. They weren't exactly the same but had the same performance. I don't mean current riders should be using 70s bikes, they should be riding current bikes, they don't have to be same but the same performance, no rider should have an advantage because of their equipment.
One might say that, in the same way that one could say "The illuminati rule the world" or "Mr Blobby was the most talented musician the world has ever seen". There's no law of physics stopping one saying any of those things. Just as in both those cases though, one would be wrong.
Sports are artificial constructs, confined by their rules and their governing bodies. If they weren't artificial, they'd be total war. There's no natural reason why football teams should have eleven players, cricket bats should be 108mm wide or basketball players shouldn't be split into leagues based on height - it's all completely arbitrary, curated by those in power to make the games how they want them. The rules aren't natural or intrinsic, so neither is cheating: the only way to cheat is to step outside of the rules, and if you stay within them, you haven't cheated - period. Boardman's and Lemond's bikes were both within the rules, and were passed by the commissaries, so they didn't cheat. If you think they did? Well your opinion is at odds with the sport of cycling, and is of no consequence whatsoever. Enjoy fulminating in your shed about how everything was better in the 1970s :demon:
-
Face it, cycling is a sport that is fundamentally about using technology to enhance man's capabilities. If you don't like that, it isn't the sport for you.
My dear chap, that is nonsense. Track cycling is almost always the most exciting branch of the sport, and they use considerably less tech than Froome et al.
(Amateur elite track bikes are far more affordable than road racing bikes, let alone competitive TT bikes.)
If you watch footage of races from the black-and-white era and wonder how much more exciting they'd be with integrated shifters etc, then I don't think it is the sport for you.
-
I'd suggest you ask a track rider how much his double discs cost ...
... except you won't keep up with him as you've just got rid of your bike, because it's technology innit. Oops.
-
I'd suggest you ask a track rider how much his double discs cost ...
... except you won't keep up with him as you've just got rid of your bike, because it's technology innit. Oops.
No silly - I could just buy a motorbike. Much faster for less money.
But we're drifting away; explain to me why these "double discs", or e-shifting have made the racing more exciting.
Here's a visual prop for you to work from:
(http://cdn.media.cyclingnews.com/2018/03/02/2/gettyimages_926413470_670.jpg)
(It's the 2018 womens Omnium)
-
global cycling industry is too small and poor to hire highly skilled engineers and product designers, hence many new products are released as beta versions to be tested and adopted/rejected by consumers....
I really don’t think that applies to Shimano, with 12,000 plus employees and a turnover of $2.5 billion in 2013.
well, shimano are the largest in cycling, but $2.5bn for a global market leader is still a tiny amount (and a big chunk of that revenue is their fishing reels etc.), but i agree that they are the ones that can afford innovation and therefore design products that work quite well.
-
I'd suggest you ask a track rider how much his double discs cost ...
... except you won't keep up with him as you've just got rid of your bike, because it's technology innit. Oops.
No silly - I could just buy a motorbike. Much faster for less money.
But we're drifting away; explain to me why these "double discs", or e-shifting have made the racing more exciting.
Here's a visual prop for you to work from:
(http://cdn.media.cyclingnews.com/2018/03/02/2/gettyimages_926413470_670.jpg)
(It's the 2018 womens Omnium)
You were saying how track bikes were so cheap. Tracks are also indoors, which allows you to run double discs, which allow you to go faster but at a tremendous cost. The bikes in the photo you posted are worth several grand each - and even some of the helmets are worth £300. Once you've removed all the cheap and obvious ways of getting faster such as adding extra gears, the subtler ways that are still employed, such as a disc wheels front and back or extra tunnel tweaking, tend to be hideously expensive. Your regulatory attempt backfires.
Even if we could successfully ban everything that you and Samuel don't like, would that make the racing more exciting? No - for the same reason as why if you took the F1 drivers and put them in VW Beetles, F1 would lose stature and fans: a lot of them watch to see people going higher faster stronger, doing the absolute best that the human race can do, and if you put too many obstacles in their way, the whole thing loses credibility.
-
You bring up Formula One. That sport is a farce lurching from one financial crisis to the next precisely because it allows too much freedom to buy success. Special effort or talent – whether creativity of concept, natural driving talent, persistence, or other admirable sporting merit – isn’t enough there. You need to blow £20 million on engine-development drudge-work or you’ll be an also-ran. Consequently most of the drivers are chosen because they’re rich or famous rather than good at their nominal job.
There aren’t many sports looking at Formula One and thinking they’d like a bit of that. It’s no longer a sport in the traditional sense. To the limited extent that driving can still be considered a sport, it’s undermined by the fact that the cars are more significant to the outcome than the drivers. If it’s a sport at all it’s a game of business acumen: how can you hoodwink the rule-makers, scare up another £10 million in funding from your parent group, manage an agile organisation, write the smartest contracts, optimise your marketing spend, etc. Who cares? Fewer and fewer people, judging by its decades-long decline.
I understand technology and admire it more than most people. However, cycling is firstly an athletic endeavour, and road racing should pit men and women against each other in a competition of strength and wit. Otherwise it betrays its past and becomes another beautiful thing spoiled by American-style consumerism.
Since technology in cycling or any sport will always be limited by the rules, the line in the sand will always be somewhat arbitrary. I’m arguing for a line that reduces costs and therefore barriers to participation and helps develop cycling as a force for good in the world.
On the latter point, it’s depressing how many problems these fragile bicycles have today. Dropping out of a race because your Di2 derailleur glitches out has become downright common.
And disc brakes are even weirder because they positively harm performance even when they work correctly. It’s purely technology push with no benefit for anyone except the bike-manufacturing sponsors, which is why I’d like to see them replaced with supermarkets and sanitary-fittings specialists. At the moment the tail is wagging the dog (http://www.velonews.com/2018/03/news/trek-segafredo-plans-to-put-all-its-roubaix-riders-on-discs_461383) and the sport is too broke and incompetently run to protest.
-
Karka,
I really cannot know why you watch bike racing, and I cannot be sure (any more than you can) of why "a lot of fans" watch;
but I know that I am
more impressed by Hoy's thighs than what material his cranks are made out of;
more impressed by Tour riders chucking themselves down a mountain, than what shifters they're using;
more entertained by jens Voigt finishing a stage on a "kids bike" than by reading about the latest team Pinarello.
-
And disc brakes are even weirder because they positively harm performance even when they work correctly. It’s purely technology push with no benefit for anyone except the bike-manufacturing sponsors, which is why I’d like to see them replaced with supermarkets and sanitary-fittings specialists. At the moment the tail is wagging the dog (http://www.velonews.com/2018/03/news/trek-segafredo-plans-to-put-all-its-roubaix-riders-on-discs_461383) and the sport is too broke and incompetently run to protest.
I am somewhat perplexed by the first two sentences, they appear to be nonsense. Ultimately, I think you're right about the tail wagging the dog though. The commuter and real world bike rider has tried disc brakes and likes them. For once, the everyday bike rider's interests are lining up alongside the manufacturers, and racers interests are being ignored. Just this once I am amused to watch the tail wagging the dog.
-
Karka,
I really cannot know why you watch bike racing, and I cannot be sure (any more than you can) of why "a lot of fans" watch;
but I know that I am
more impressed by Hoy's thighs than what material his cranks are made out of;
more impressed by Tour riders chucking themselves down a mountain, than what shifters they're using;
more entertained by jens Voigt finishing a stage on a "kids bike" than by reading about the latest team Pinarello.
And quite frankly, if it's technology you're interested in, HPV racing is where it's at.
-
Matt, let's go back to where you started this.
Face it, cycling is a sport that is fundamentally about using technology to enhance man's capabilities. If you don't like that, it isn't the sport for you.
My dear chap, that is nonsense. Track cycling is almost always the most exciting branch of the sport, and they use considerably less tech than Froome et al.
This is wrong. It is an incorrect statement. If you think it's correct, you need to read up more. Your idea of corinthian low-tech track cycling is a delusion. Any conclusions you draw based on this misguided ide are themselves wrong. Got it yet?
-
Sticking with the track, there's a team at Bristol University sponsored by British Cycling and Renold Chain to research transmission efficiencies. I know someone who works in the team (or did until the end of the year, he's know at Bath Uni in a team looking at motor vehicle transmissions) and he's said that something as simple as a change in lubrication regime can make the difference between gold and zero at world level. The differences are tiny. Track racing at the top level definitely is about the bike at least as much as it's about the rider.
-
But that's perhaps the opposite case of disc brakes. You can buy the chain as used by BC track team – competition rules mean it has to be made commercially available – but Renold aren't marketing it, or any cycling products, to you. Their main business is roller chain for industrial and engineering equipment (they made the chains which operate the Thames Barrier, for instance).
-
Zinn says that discs have a weight penalty and an aero penalty. However:
* many pro bikes are brought up to the UCI limit by the mechanics adding weight (which I think explains why so many of them ride the "aero road" rather than the super lightweight bikes from the relevant manufacturer).
* both Specialized and Giant claim that their latest aero disc bike is as aero as the non disc version.
So the disadvantages that Zinn points out don't apply to the pro peleton (they might apply to mere mortals who buy their bikes).
The other disadvantage that has been suggested is the difficulty with fast wheel changes, and I believe that's why the pro peleton aren't riding them yet. (On the other hand, we may see then when there's a lot of descending because rim brakes with carbon wheels are not as good as discs.)
Outside the pro peleton, it seems that discs are where it's at - I personally wouldn't buy a road bike with rim brakes again (unless it's something retro). They just work better (esp in the wet).
-
In reality the point of the kit is marketing. The mamil warriors and wannabes will be dropping another £5k to £10k on this years bike with this years kit rather than just getting out there and enjoying riding their bicycles.
Each to his own.
-
Regarding wheel changes in the peloton, neutral service has always had to make assumptions and/or compromises on rim width and sprockets. Introducing disc brakes just adds another factor to assume and compromise, it's not the origin of the issue.
-
Regarding wheel changes in the peloton, neutral service has always had to make assumptions and/or compromises on rim width and sprockets. Introducing disc brakes just adds another factor to assume and compromise, it's not the origin of the issue.
Surely all the neutral service has to do is carry wheels with discs and brake-compatible rims?
-
Replace a rim with one just 1 or 2mm wider or narrower and you often have to adjust the brakes. I presume there are similar issues with different diameter rotors. Easy enough to do at the roadside but not good when every second counts.
-
HOLD ON, HOLD ON, HOLD ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only asked a simple question; I didn't mean to start an intertribal war!!
FWIW I got to see this stage again this evening, right up to the thrilling finish in which the two man breakaway held off the bunch right up to the end (in part due to a complete disorganisation of the sprinters' teams). The winner was the man with the discs!! but I cannot say that they really played any vital part in his victory which was due to a superior finishing skill. They obviously didn't disadvantage him either. There would appear to still be a real place for skill and tactics (and a bit of luck) in pro road racing.
So will the Luddites go into the room on the left to smash up carbon frames and spinning jennies with sledge hammers, the modernists go into the room on the right to hunt for the latest marginal gains (and undoubtedly scratch theircricket balls with sandpaper if that takes their fancy) and the lovers of tradition take their Draisiens down to the local cinder track (avoiding the horsemuck in the streets on the way).
Like it or not cycle racing is and always has been a mechanical sport; my personal take is that in trying to align with the IOC and make out that racing is purely about athleticism and not mechanics the UCI is making a big mistake - but I could be wrong since that appears to be where the money and political clout is.
End of Rant :)
-
Also at all levels in U.K.
Does anyone know about overseas? The FFCT/ASO had issues when they were last introduced I know, (e.g. being disallowed in the Etape etc)
Cr***p The FFCT is nothing to do with cycle sport and certainly not L'Etape or ASO. As far as I know the FFCT has no policy on bikes other than lights, bells and reflectors - it even allows e-bikes in randonnées. It also loves vtts so has a high opinion on discs (and encourages vtts in road as well as off-road use as far as I can understand from local instructors - you can use a vtt for the road part of the Initiateur qualification - but not a road bike off-road!)
-
In reality the point of the kit is marketing. The mamil warriors and wannabes will be dropping another £5k to £10k on this years bike with this years kit rather than just getting out there and enjoying riding their bicycles.
Each to his own.
There's nothing stopping a mamil warrior dropping £5k on this years bike AND getting out there and enjoying riding their bikes. It's not a binary thing.
-
And disc brakes are even weirder because they positively harm performance even when they work correctly. It’s purely technology push with no benefit for anyone except the bike-manufacturing sponsors, which is why I’d like to see them replaced with supermarkets and sanitary-fittings specialists. At the moment the tail is wagging the dog (http://www.velonews.com/2018/03/news/trek-segafredo-plans-to-put-all-its-roubaix-riders-on-discs_461383) and the sport is too broke and incompetently run to protest.
I am somewhat perplexed by the first two sentences, they appear to be nonsense.
Why do they appear that way to you? I hope it’s obvious I’m talking about disc brakes in pro racing, the subject of the thread. The tenuous braking advantage they have is outweighed by drag, weight, and wheel-swap penalties.
Zinn says that discs have a weight penalty and an aero penalty. However:
* many pro bikes are brought up to the UCI limit by the mechanics adding weight (which I think explains why so many of them ride the "aero road" rather than the super lightweight bikes from the relevant manufacturer).
Every time someone weighs the bikes, they find this not to be true. Some of them are around 8 kg and even the climber’s machines are rarely at the legal limit. They ride aero bikes because they’re marginally faster and the sponsors want them to, and because weight doesn’t make much difference even at this level of competition.
* both Specialized and Giant claim that their latest aero disc bike is as aero as the non disc version.
So who should we believe: a technophile with no visible vested interest whose job it is to be expert in these matters or a company whose success depends on the public perception that disc brakes belong everywhere?
Don’t get me wrong: I don’t think the tiny burden in weight and drag of disc brakes makes a button of difference in 99 out of a 100 races. The marginal-gains palaver has got people thinking these things matter a great deal more than they do.
But disc brakes are being pushed despite fractionally harming racing performance. This situation is novel, because previous new tech in the avalanche of change over the last two decades has infinitesimally improved performance (while it’s worked, at least), allowing us to suspend disbelief about why it was introduced. No longer!
[Disc brakes] obviously didn't disadvantage him either.
You cannot see their weight and drag on television. Nor can you assess puncture risk with a sample size of one.
-
Zinn says that discs have a weight penalty and an aero penalty. However:
* many pro bikes are brought up to the UCI limit by the mechanics adding weight (which I think explains why so many of them ride the "aero road" rather than the super lightweight bikes from the relevant manufacturer).
Every time someone weighs the bikes, they find this not to be true. Some of them are around 8 kg and even the climber’s machines are rarely at the legal limit. They ride aero bikes because they’re marginally faster and the sponsors want them to, and because weight doesn’t make much difference even at this level of competition.
* both Specialized and Giant claim that their latest aero disc bike is as aero as the non disc version.
So who should we believe: a technophile with no visible vested interest whose job it is to be expert in these matters or a company whose success depends on the public perception that disc brakes belong everywhere?
Don’t get me wrong: I don’t think the tiny burden in weight and drag of disc brakes makes a button of difference in 99 out of a 100 races. The marginal-gains palaver has got people thinking these things matter a great deal more than they do.
But disc brakes are being pushed despite fractionally harming racing performance. This situation is novel, because previous new tech in the avalanche of change over the last two decades has infinitesimally improved performance (while it’s worked, at least), allowing us to suspend disbelief about why it was introduced. No longer!
On weight, it's not hard to build a bike under the UCI limit if money isn't an issue. I understand they run alloy bars and other stuff to provide resilience over lightness, but if they are 8kg, it just shows how much they care about bike weight.
When it comes to aero, I believe the people with wind tunnels. ;) If you can point me at experiments on the latest Propel disc or Venge Vias disc, I'd love to read them. As you said, aero trumps weight, and if these bikes are as aero, then the only downside is the wheel change situation.
-
the speed of wheel changing will be a non issue as the tubeless tyre technology matures (it's getting there) and pro peloton adopts it.
-
With disc brakes, it’s still non-trivial to hit 6.8 kg in a fully kitted-out racing bicycle. You need to make some tough choices to get there.
Thankfully we’ve moved away from the weight obsession anyway, such that even pros care less about this than they used to. The new obsession is drag reduction, something that is complex enough that almost any claim can be supported by cherry-picking the evidence (modelling assumptions, wind-tunnel set-up, yaw angle, time versus speed versus power versus drag force saved over different distances, times, etc., etc. You can’t even get experts to agree on these things and yet Specialized – to pick the worst offender – is happy to boil down everything to a single figure of merit that fits in a clickbait title).
This new environment is a marketing windfall, and the American companies that excel at this haven’t been shy to hit us with unlikely claims. (http://blog.wahoofitness.com/geeks-guide-new-elemnt-bolt-bike-computer/)
I can’t point you to drag tests beyond the advertisements for the Propel Disc or Venge ViAS Disc. But from what I’ve read from reputable or knowledgeable sources – excluding the manufacturers’ propaganda – disc brakes have slightly more drag.
Kittel’s Venge ViAS Disc from last year weighed 7.95 kg. (https://youtu.be/8pzM2GkSo9I?t=169)
-
Matt, let's go back to where you started this.
Face it, cycling is a sport that is fundamentally about using technology to enhance man's capabilities. If you don't like that, it isn't the sport for you.
My dear chap, that is nonsense.
Ok, let us go back to the start:
This is the crux of it - lots of us don't watch (or "do") cycle sport for the technology. It is still the sport for us. I don't know why you presume to tell us what we think.
(That doesnt mean a complete lack of interest in the tech - it's just not why we watch.)
-
You bring up Formula One. That sport is a farce lurching from one financial crisis to the next precisely because it allows too much freedom to buy success. Special effort or talent – whether creativity of concept, natural driving talent, persistence, or other admirable sporting merit – isn’t enough there. You need to blow £20 million on engine-development drudge-work or you’ll be an also-ran. Consequently most of the drivers are chosen because they’re rich or famous rather than good at their nominal job.
There aren’t many sports looking at Formula One and thinking they’d like a bit of that. It’s no longer a sport in the traditional sense. To the limited extent that driving can still be considered a sport, it’s undermined by the fact that the cars are more significant to the outcome than the drivers. If it’s a sport at all it’s a game of business acumen: how can you hoodwink the rule-makers, scare up another £10 million in funding from your parent group, manage an agile organisation, write the smartest contracts, optimise your marketing spend, etc. Who cares? Fewer and fewer people, judging by its decades-long decline.
I understand technology and admire it more than most people. However, cycling is firstly an athletic endeavour, and road racing should pit men and women against each other in a competition of strength and wit. Otherwise it betrays its past and becomes another beautiful thing spoiled by American-style consumerism.
Since technology in cycling or any sport will always be limited by the rules, the line in the sand will always be somewhat arbitrary. I’m arguing for a line that reduces costs and therefore barriers to participation and helps develop cycling as a force for good in the world.
On the latter point, it’s depressing how many problems these fragile bicycles have today. Dropping out of a race because your Di2 derailleur glitches out has become downright common.
And disc brakes are even weirder because they positively harm performance even when they work correctly. It’s purely technology push with no benefit for anyone except the bike-manufacturing sponsors, which is why I’d like to see them replaced with supermarkets and sanitary-fittings specialists. At the moment the tail is wagging the dog (http://www.velonews.com/2018/03/news/trek-segafredo-plans-to-put-all-its-roubaix-riders-on-discs_461383) and the sport is too broke and incompetently run to protest.
Eloquent and informed. Thank you.
-
Regarding wheel changes in the peloton, neutral service has always had to make assumptions and/or compromises on rim width and sprockets. Introducing disc brakes just adds another factor to assume and compromise, it's not the origin of the issue.
If there is ANY chance of neutral service not having the right spare for you, then you've just doubled that chance by adding this extra factor.
(This does happen - first google hit was a "ride-along" article where rider on 10-speed had to make do with an 11sp until a team bike was available. In the event of a crash the chances go up enormously.)
-
as to the drag of bike frames, there can be significant differences and as long as the tests are done in a controlled environment (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWDmbKzf3ig) by a third party i see no reason not to believe the results. manufacturers, as we all know, will spin the test results their way, so they are not the source of information to be assumed as true/real.
-
Don’t get me wrong: I don’t think the tiny burden in weight and drag of disc brakes makes a button of difference in 99 out of a 100 races. The marginal-gains palaver has got people thinking these things matter a great deal more than they do.
But disc brakes are being pushed despite fractionally harming racing performance. This situation is novel, because previous new tech in the avalanche of change over the last two decades has infinitesimally improved performance (while it’s worked, at least), allowing us to suspend disbelief about why it was introduced. No longer!
[Disc brakes] obviously didn't disadvantage him either.
You cannot see their weight and drag on television. Nor can you assess puncture risk with a sample size of one.
He made his choice and he won; no disadvantage proved. If he had come second or if he had blown up and been caught by the bunch (as should have happened and was predicted to happen by people more knowledgeable than me or, I would guess, you) then there might have been a case. If he had punctured and taken 15 minutes to get going again, ditto. It didn't happen, he won with a very clever bit of sprinting.
It was a wet day and he was away with Rubio from the start. He is known as not a good descender so it was no surprise to see Rubio pull out 50-100m on the descents. Did the discs help him stay in contact? There again case not really proven, one way or the other. Too soon to draw conclusions.
If you want to know about racing with a real disadvantage from your contracted machine, read Dr. Ruffier's acounts of his racing days under contract to ride the Alcathène (1890's IIRC, I will go and hunt out my copy to check over the w-e). It's from his 50 Years of Cycletouring articles; you're in Paris, you should be able to track it down. It's also in the french of a 19th century doctor so anglophiles may find it a bit hard going.
Edit I think that should be Alcatène; alkathene is plastic pipe!
-
Matt, let's go back to where you started this.
Face it, cycling is a sport that is fundamentally about using technology to enhance man's capabilities. If you don't like that, it isn't the sport for you.
My dear chap, that is nonsense.
Ok, let us go back to the start:
This is the crux of it - lots of us don't watch (or "do") cycle sport for the technology. It is still the sport for us. I don't know why you presume to tell us what we think.
Matt, stop being idiotic. Cycling is a sport that is fundamentally about using technology to enhance man's capabilities. The bicycle is a piece of technology that is used to allow you to go further and faster than you could do otherwise. Stop rubbing your face in the egg, stop casting around straw men and just accept this simple fact.
-
It's about who can ride a bike the fastest.
Your description isn't completely at odds with that, but it puts a very different emphasis on certain elements.
I would say that most televised cycle sport is more about the riders than the tech - whereas HPV racing is pretty much the opposite. Each has its followers (for good reasons), but I think it's pretty clear which is more popular, and which will continue to be the more popular for as long you live.
Now, get back to the timetrialling forum and your discussions of overshoe drag :-*
-
A pro cyclists view on disc brakes -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jfso8wP83bU
-
It's about who can ride a bike the fastest.
Your description isn't completely at odds with that, but it puts a very different emphasis on certain elements.
I would say that most televised cycle sport is more about the riders than the tech - whereas HPV racing is pretty much the opposite. Each has its followers (for good reasons), but I think it's pretty clear which is more popular, and which will continue to be the more popular for as long you live.
Now, get back to the timetrialling forum and your discussions of overshoe drag :-*
Nice climbdown there.
-
It's about who can ride a bike the fastest.
Your description isn't completely at odds with that, but it puts a very different emphasis on certain elements.
I would say that most televised cycle sport is more about the riders than the tech - whereas HPV racing is pretty much the opposite. Each has its followers (for good reasons), but I think it's pretty clear which is more popular, and which will continue to be the more popular for as long you live.
Now, get back to the timetrialling forum and your discussions of overshoe drag :-*
Nice climbdown there.
The continental idea of cycle racing has always been to concentrate on the personalities and the human story rather than the technical side. The anglo-saxon view has usually concentrated on the technical side. The reasons for this are probably in the popular following of cycle-racing by sedentary or non-cyclists, either watching the tele with a few beers sunday afternoon or by reading in the papers on the continent (and the role of the Tour caravan, which has little to do with the bike and a lot with the personalities). In my young day (even up to 25 years ago) there wasn't much popular following of cycle-racing in UK by non-cyclists and in the absence of the personalities, the technical side was more interesting for practising cyclists. The whole difference was better explained by JB Wadley in The Guiness Guide to Bicycling published in the 1977 (which was an english translation of a french book).
-
It's about who can ride a bike the fastest.
Your description isn't completely at odds with that, but it puts a very different emphasis on certain elements.
I would say that most televised cycle sport is more about the riders than the tech - whereas HPV racing is pretty much the opposite. Each has its followers (for good reasons), but I think it's pretty clear which is more popular, and which will continue to be the more popular for as long you live.
Now, get back to the timetrialling forum and your discussions of overshoe drag :-*
Nice climbdown there.
Er .... thanks. I think.
-
Regarding wheel changes in the peloton, neutral service has always had to make assumptions and/or compromises on rim width and sprockets. Introducing disc brakes just adds another factor to assume and compromise, it's not the origin of the issue.
Surely all the neutral service has to do is carry wheels with discs and brake-compatible rims?
We're into standards and permutations again, QR or 12 mm or 15 mm or 20mm thru axle. As others have said it's nowt new, witness Froome on the neutral service bike with cleats and pedals that didn't match.
-
Also at all levels in U.K.
Does anyone know about overseas? The FFCT/ASO had issues when they were last introduced I know, (e.g. being disallowed in the Etape etc)
Cr***p The FFCT is nothing to do with cycle sport and certainly not L'Etape or ASO. As far as I know the FFCT has no policy on bikes other than lights, bells and reflectors - it even allows e-bikes in randonnées. It also loves vtts so has a high opinion on discs (and encourages vtts in road as well as off-road use as far as I can understand from local instructors - you can use a vtt for the road part of the Initiateur qualification - but not a road bike off-road!)
OK FFC. My mistake.
http://www.sportive.com/cycling/522490/ffc-ban-casts-doubt-over-use-of-disc-brakes-in-la-marmotte-and-letape-du-tour
Is this still the case or have changed their minds?
-
Also at all levels in U.K.
Does anyone know about overseas? The FFCT/ASO had issues when they were last introduced I know, (e.g. being disallowed in the Etape etc)
Cr***p The FFCT is nothing to do with cycle sport and certainly not L'Etape or ASO. As far as I know the FFCT has no policy on bikes other than lights, bells and reflectors - it even allows e-bikes in randonnées. It also loves vtts so has a high opinion on discs (and encourages vtts in road as well as off-road use as far as I can understand from local instructors - you can use a vtt for the road part of the Initiateur qualification - but not a road bike off-road!)
OK FFC. My mistake.
http://www.sportive.com/cycling/522490/ffc-ban-casts-doubt-over-use-of-disc-brakes-in-la-marmotte-and-letape-du-tour
Is this still the case or have changed their minds?
https://www.ffc.fr/actualite/federation-francaise-de-cyclisme-prend-acte-de-position-de-luci-lutilisation-freins-a-disques-epreuves-de-masse-rappelle-interdiction-competitions/ is what Google has shown on the subject and this is copyright 2018. So it would appear that even though the UCI authorises discs except in national and international races the FFC take note but still ban them in all competition on french soil. Remains to be seen if sportives are considered races or manifestations de masse (in UFOLEP terms they count as cycletouring!). I would like to see something definitive with a 2018 date, rather than decisions from 2016. Anyone got anything better?
Edit: found this as well
http://www.granfondoguide.com/Contents/Index/1448/the-uci-gives-the-go-ahead-for-disc-brakes-to-be-used-in-mass-cycling-events
It seems that the FFC are being typically french - we're banning it but you can still do it, only don't tell us!
Edit 2. This also http://www.sportive.com/cycling/533935/letape-marmotte-flanders-are-disc-brakes-allowed-on-sportives-now
It looks like you have to check with the various organisers! The article is from last year.
-
The UCI have said that national federations can choose whether to allow disc brakes or not so expect some
confusion for a while yet.
-
HOLD ON, HOLD ON, HOLD ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I only asked a simple question; I didn't mean to start an intertribal war!!
FWIW I got to see this stage again this evening, right up to the thrilling finish in which the two man breakaway held off the bunch right up to the end (in part due to a complete disorganisation of the sprinters' teams). The winner was the man with the discs!! but I cannot say that they really played any vital part in his victory which was due to a superior finishing skill. They obviously didn't disadvantage him either. There would appear to still be a real place for skill and tactics (and a bit of luck) in pro road racing.
So will the Luddites go into the room on the left to smash up carbon frames and spinning jennies with sledge hammers, the modernists go into the room on the right to hunt for the latest marginal gains (and undoubtedly scratch theircricket balls with sandpaper if that takes their fancy) and the lovers of tradition take their Draisiens down to the local cinder track (avoiding the horsemuck in the streets on the way).
Like it or not cycle racing is and always has been a mechanical sport; my personal take is that in trying to align with the IOC and make out that racing is purely about athleticism and not mechanics the UCI is making a big mistake - but I could be wrong since that appears to be where the money and political clout is.
End of Rant :)
POTD
-
Regarding wheel changes in the peloton, neutral service has always had to make assumptions and/or compromises on rim width and sprockets. Introducing disc brakes just adds another factor to assume and compromise, it's not the origin of the issue.
Surely all the neutral service has to do is carry wheels with discs and brake-compatible rims?
We're into standards and permutations again, QR or 12 mm or 15 mm or 20mm thru axle. As others have said it's nowt new, witness Froome on the neutral service bike with cleats and pedals that didn't match.
Is there a standard rotor size yet?
My big problem with discs is the lack of travel on the brake pads which means brake rubbing. With a caliper brake, i could just twist the caliper to line it all up again, not so with discs!
-
My big problem with discs is the lack of travel on the brake pads which means brake rubbing. With a caliper brake, i could just twist the caliper to line it all up again, not so with discs!
On my mechanical (cable) BB7s that's an issue but not on my full hydraulics.
-
It's really easy. Loosen the caliper bolts. Apply brakes. Tighten bolts.
The only issue I've had is with cheapest cable disc brakes where I had to shim them to get them centred.
-
I've heard of problems with nervous novices grabbing brakes in the peloton. I seem to recall that Campag designed brakes for road-racing specifically not to grab too hard.
-
Yes, the Delta. Didn't realise it was designed to be shit.
I thought it was just..err ...shit.
-
Yes, the Delta. Didn't realise it was designed to be shit.
I thought it was just..err ...shit.
No, their normal single pivot design.
Did you ever use a set of properly set up Deltas? With a couple of washers to get the linkages in the right position with narrow rims, they worked nicely. Those who ran them with the linkages protruding at rest and tried to wear their brake pads paper-thin always complained of a lack of power.
-
They did used to have dual pivot front and single pivot rear. Font know if they still do.
I've never owned a bike with Delta brakes, just know of the reputation for shittness and difficulty of servicing.
-
I used the Delta and worked on them. Reputations get exaggerated by smartarses. The only difficulty was getting the 3.5mm Allen key for the cable anchor bolt.
The single pivot model I'm referring to was well before dual pivots were created.
-
I used the Delta and worked on them. Reputations get exaggerated by smartarses. The only difficulty was getting the 3.5mm Allen key for the cable anchor bolt.
The single pivot model I'm referring to was well before dual pivots were created.
Jobst Brant was a notable critic, from a design point of view, but also because he heard sponsored pros were abandoning them after finding them dangerous.
See: http://yarchive.net/bike/brake_leverage.html
It isn't a design that lasted long.
-
On my mechanical (cable) BB7s that's an issue but not on my full hydraulics.
I've previously only used bb7s, going up to hydraulic currently. Hoping for the best!
Switching wheels would seem to take even longer if you have to loosen them retighten bolts. I wonder how that gets done in the case of a wheel change in a race?
-
Switching wheels would seem to take even longer if you have to loosen them retighten bolts. I wonder how that gets done in the case of a wheel change in a race?
I saw a rider on TV with disc brakes get a bike change instead of a wheel change (in the Tour of California I think it was) looked about as quick as a normal wheel change.
-
I used the Delta and worked on them. Reputations get exaggerated by smartarses. The only difficulty was getting the 3.5mm Allen key for the cable anchor bolt.
I too still have a bike with Delta brakes and share LWB's views. My understanding is that the thing that inhibited their take up by pro teams was that they were too difficult and complex to work on while hanging out of a team car. They were heavier. And, of course, equipment sponsors didn't have the commercial clout they do now.
-
I used the Delta and worked on them. Reputations get exaggerated by smartarses. The only difficulty was getting the 3.5mm Allen key for the cable anchor bolt.
The single pivot model I'm referring to was well before dual pivots were created.
Jobst Brant was a notable critic, from a design point of view, but also because he heard sponsored pros were abandoning them after finding them dangerous.
See: http://yarchive.net/bike/brake_leverage.html
It isn't a design that lasted long.
I read every single piece in that archive years ago. St Jobst is right 99 times out of 100 but he isn't with this one. Variable ratio brakes have worked satisfactorily on bikes and still do, when properly adjusted. Every single low profile cantilever brake and early roller cam brakes have a variable ratio.
Modolo's Kronos brake was a pure TT brake designed for zero weight and minimal frontal area and accordingly was about as efficient as Fred Flintstoning. The Delta had real power and modulation in normal use, though things went to pot if the barrel adjuster was overused to compensate for worn brake pads or too-narrow rims. You could easily tell when this happened because the arms didn't line up with the cover plate profile.
-
Never used them so I'll take your word for it. For my money, that era of the Record C and Delta brakes were when Campagnolo equipment was almost impossibly beautiful. Especially in contrast to the Japanese stuff at the time.
-
I can wholeheartedly agree with you on that.