I prefer hydraulic disc brakes. On a road bike they are a small improvement over rim brakes. They are a can't live without them component on a mountain bike when you are descending a real mountain.

The drivetrain on the FX2 is also upgraded, easily worth the extra $100.

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
Not having ridden a bicycle for many years (it ended shortly after getting my driver's license), I can't say if they're "worth it" or not. It does look like the disc brake will complicate the removal of the front wheel for maintenance or fixing a flat. With quick-release axles and calipers, the front wheel comes right off. This won't without removing the caliper. On the plus side, the disc brake won't be dependent on a perfectly true wheel to work properly. I'm sure rough ground will tweak a rim out of true faster. A hydraulic also won't get out of adjustment. Also, rim brakes are a disc brake, just "inside out."

Maybe on some, but not on my son’s (Trek?). While helping pack his truck for his drive back to college last Sunday it became clear that the bike would fit better/easier with the front wheel off. No need to do anything with the brakes. Just undo the quick release on the axle and slide it out. Back when I was riding I always had to release the front brake, but apparently not with disc brakes.

You don’t have to do anything to the calipers or rotors to remove either wheel from any bike with disc brakes, you just take the wheel off and the rotor slides out of the caliper.

It can sometimes be slightly fiddly getting the rotor lined up to slide back into the caliper.

One issue you CAN run into is that bike disc brakes do not generally have any mechanism to retract the brake pads (for good reason - it would mess up the brake lever throw as the pads wear down). If you squeeze the brake lever with the wheel removed, the pads will clamp all the way closed and stay there, and you can’t get the wheel back on until you stick something in there to spread the pads back open.

Bikes with disc brakes usually come with little plastic clips you can snap into the calipers to keep the pads from being accidentally closed if you’re working on or transporting the bike with one or both wheels removed.

Rim brakes are fine, but disc brakes are much better, especially for any kind of aggressive riding or riding in wet weather.

Disc brake are also much better for folks who struggle with the hand strength required by rim brakes - disc brakes require MUCH less force applied to the levers for the same braking power. Rim brakes have to be able to handle flex or warp in the wheel so they have a lot of caliper travel. Disc brakes use a small, stiff, super-flat rotor. The amount of caliper travel is tiny. Less travel = more mechanical advantage = more braking force.

quote:

Originally posted by Krazeehorse:
You clearly want the disc bike. Is the extra $100 going to screw up your budget? If not then pull the trigger. QED

Yeah, I do want it. I "wanted" it from the moment I saw it.

I just needed justification before I could say I "need" it. . .

Thanks, everybody, for the input. I now have sufficient evidence to take to the Director of Finance for the Purchase Decision.


Oh, yeah, I'll pay the extra $100 for the extra gears and hydraulic disc brakes.

Heck, I don't ride much (it's been years, again, since I've ridden mine) and, for the $100 difference I wouldn't even think twice about it.

Then again: I've always loathed rim brakes and what they do to the rims. So much so, that, if the family CFO wouldn't raise the roof at the expense, I'd trade-in or donate my current bike just to get one with disc brakes before I started riding again.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Today, I ride pretty much the same terrain as you, oddly with the same mtn bike (which is in great condition) and my Bike Friday, both with cantilever brakes. They're easy for me to adjust and work on. Just biking around town on concrete bike trails, basically getting the heart pumping, getting exercise. For my type of casual riding, I see no need to upgrade to anything new. But if I was back in the mountains doing 20 mile rides again, I would have the latest stuff, including suspension and disc brakes.

quote:

Originally posted by preten2b:
Also above, both kinds have ample stopping power and capable of locking up the wheels, discs are heavier, more expensive and a new kind of maintenance I do not need.

^^^Here are a couple guys who know what they're talking about.

If your brakes can lock up your wheels, they've achieved maximum stopping force. A decent pair of rim brakes doesn't have any trouble doing that.

After that are effort & modulation. A 2-finger brake lever requires more hand strength & effort than a 4-finger lever. Cable actuated brakes require more effort than hydraulic. Effort is similar to trigger pull weight. Not everyone wants a sub-2 lb trigger. Brakes that feel too light are often described as touchy.

Modulation is a combination of the whole braking system, including cables & housing (or brake fluid) as well as tire grip. Any good brake system should have good modulation, although discs usually modulate better than rim at the upper end of the performance spectrum. If you aren't regularly descending hills in excess of 50mph, then I doubt it applies to you.

I have bikes w/ rim and disc brakes. I like & appreciate both. For the fitness, commute, & leisure riding I do, I've never felt underserved by rim brakes, and that includes riding in pouring rain.

quote:

Originally posted by iron chef:

If your brakes can lock up your wheels, they've achieved maximum stopping force. A decent pair of rim brakes doesn't have any trouble doing that.

On my ride today, I was really aware of my braking capabilities with my old bike (calipers). I did not lock up the wheels once. I haven't done so in ages. Last time I locked up the wheels on that bike was in Colorado riding trails (dirt and gravel). On pavement, I never lock them up.

I squeezed as hard as I could at over 20mph, and they squeaked and eventually stopped the bike. It wasn't raining, but it was very muggy and I kept riding through water patches (from new home construction and irrigation run-off) (most of the patches crossed the road, so I could not avoid them). This kept my rims wet/damp.

This convinced me that I "need" a bike with disc brakes.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
...It does look like the disc brake will complicate the removal of the front wheel for maintenance or fixing a flat. With quick-release axles and calipers, the front wheel comes right off. This won't without removing the caliper.

Not true. The caliper stays in place on the fork while the rotor comes off with the wheel. You do have to pay attention and line up the rotor between the pads when re-installing the wheel, but it isn't any more complicated than dealing with rim brakes. The only real place to go wrong (at least with hydraulic discs) is to squeeze the brake lever when the wheel is off. In that case you'll have to manually spread those pads apart (i.e. compress the pistons in the caliper) before putting the wheel back on.

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:

quote:

Originally posted by iron chef:

If your brakes can lock up your wheels, they've achieved maximum stopping force. A decent pair of rim brakes doesn't have any trouble doing that.

On my ride today, I was really aware of my braking capabilities with my old bike (calipers). I did not lock up the wheels once. I haven't done so in ages. Last time I locked up the wheels on that bike was in Colorado riding trails (dirt and gravel). On pavement, I never lock them up.

I squeezed as hard as I could at over 20mph, and they squeaked and eventually stopped the bike. It wasn't raining, but it was very muggy and I kept riding through water patches (from new home construction and irrigation run-off) (most of the patches crossed the road, so I could not avoid them). This kept my rims wet/damp.

This convinced me that I "need" a bike with disc brakes.

I'm a low-level coach for a MTB team and we teach the kids to run their [disc] brakes with only their index finger to avoid locking up the wheels. You can still do it in loose soil, but the technique eliminates most problems.

And yes, you "need" disc brakes. Once upon a time you were making the same decision while buying a car.

Y E S

Disc brakes are the way to go.

Having built an enduro hardtail that costs as much as an entry level motorcycle I can say without a doubt that disc brakes are absolutely superior.

My hydraulic 200mm front disc threw me over the bars and stopped WAAAAAAY quicker than I expected when I landed awkwardly, went off the trail and expected to crash into a bunch of trees on my brand new bike. My bike managed to stop in 1/4 the distance I expected when my bike flung me over the bars kinda sideways (while I held on to the brand new carbon handlebar for dear life) and made for an incredibly humorous crash according to my riding buddies. (I didn’t think the crash was funny at all) though I am glad I got slammed into the dirt and my bike avoided any impact with the trees I fully expected to ram into.

I had just installed a bunch of new parts and was glad I was flung like a rag doll and took the brunt of the impact instead of my $3500+ topshelf, custom assembled 4130 Oversized tube chromoly enduro freshly built hard tail on its maiden voyage down an expert trail….

There is a reason disc brakes are on the best bikes.

quote:

Originally posted by iron chef:

^^^Here are a couple guys who know what they're talking about.

If your brakes can lock up your wheels, they've achieved maximum stopping force. A decent pair of rim brakes doesn't have any trouble doing that.

Yeah, I currently have Shimano XT V brakes on both of of my bikes previously mentioned, and have zero problems with locking the wheels up, even with two-finger levers. It's all about proper setup; I have been on other people's bikes where the levers almost touch the grips, the pads were adjusted so far from the rims. In my past life as a mountain rider, brakes were never the components I thought about, it was all about tires- the best knobbie profile and sweet spot in tire pressure. And suspension- best sweet spot of travel and rebound.

But again, if I was mountain biking today, disc brakes would great.

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:

On my ride today, I was really aware of my braking capabilities with my old bike (calipers). I did not lock up the wheels once. I haven't done so in ages. Last time I locked up the wheels on that bike was in Colorado riding trails (dirt and gravel). On pavement, I never lock them up.

I squeezed as hard as I could at over 20mph, and they squeaked and eventually stopped the bike. It wasn't raining, but it was very muggy and I kept riding through water patches (from new home construction and irrigation run-off) (most of the patches crossed the road, so I could not avoid them). This kept my rims wet/damp.

This convinced me that I "need" a bike with disc brakes.

I should clarify my non-disk brakes. Apparently there are different types but I lumped them all together as caliper. I specifically have V-brakes with somewhat long pads. They brake extremely well and want for nothing. There are only two cases where I would prefer the function of disk brakes over the V-brakes: 1) extended downhills, 2) water / wet rims. But I do neither of these hence my general indifference between V and Disk brakes.

For me and my riding, I wouldn't seek out disk brakes. But I'd get them if I were price indifferent. I guess I would say, otherwise, I wouldn't be averse to V-brakes if I liked a particular bike subject to my ride needs.

Disc brakes can save you from serious injury. I was mtn. bike riding once, but not on my normal bike which had been stolen. This temporary bike had weak brakes, but with strong hands that was not a problem. However on a sunny day I went for a fairly long ride. At the top of the mountain there was some fog. I thought nothing of it.

On the way down I was on a common trail, but rangers had cut drainage ditches across it. I was going about 22 mph, came around a bend, and jammed on the brakes. I noted that I was not slowing down at all.

Woke up 20 minutes later, hikers had found me unconscious and an ambulance was on the way. I broke first lumbar vertebrae into 53 pieces, almost severed the spinal cord, spent a year recovering. If I had brakes that were not sensitive to moisture, and this was fog not rain, I would not have been injured.

So, don't cut corners! Plan for the unexpected!

Yes, get them. I am currently shopping for new wheels for my road bike. My bike has rim brakes and I cannot find wheels anywhere. Every wheel I see are for disc brakes. Also, every wheel seems to be for tubeless. I can switch to the tubeless no problem, but nothing I can do about the disk brakes. Point I'm getting at is that if you go the rim brake route, you could have future issues replacing components.

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:

I should clarify my non-disk brakes. Apparently there are different types but I lumped them all together as caliper. I specifically have V-brakes with somewhat long pads.

Well, I was today years old when I learned that 'V-brakes' are different than 'caliper brakes.' I'm really such a noob.

My current bike has V-brakes; not calipers.

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:

Disc brakes can save you from serious injury.

This is my main concern, and the reason I'm considering a new bike at all, since my present one is such a great bike.

I wonder though that if the disc brakes allow you to stop on a dime, would you be able to hold on?

I remember braking on my bicycle with normal caliper brakes while I was coasting (not fast) in order not to hit the back of a car that suddenly turned right. The bike stopped but I flew over the handle bars.

2 pages to state the obvious? This is a no brainer improvement. Just do it.

Shouldn't you have a bell and light first?

quote:

Originally posted by Rey HRH:

I wonder though that if the disc brakes allow you to stop on a dime, would you be able to hold on?

I don't know, but I did notice today that it took me about 100 feet to stop from only 20mph going down hill. That is WAYYYY too far in case somebody opens a car door in my path or an SUV pulls out in front of me. Not to mention deer that are pretty common on my route.

I will just have to practice and find out the hard way. I rarely use my front brakes now, as that is typically the best way to go sailing over the handlebars. I will have plenty of time to practice - I'm going to start a Conqueror Virtual Challenge and 'ride' Route 66 from Chicago to San Diego (?). It's over 2000 miles, and I'm gonna try to do it in a year.

quote:

Originally posted by 21bubba:
Shouldn't you have a bell and light first?

Don't need a light. I don't ride at night. I don't need a bell, since I can yell 'on your left!' just fine.

Hey, I just realized that rhymed. . .

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:
I don't know, but I did notice today that it took me about 100 feet to stop from only 20mph going down hill. That is WAYYYY too far in case somebody opens a car door in my path or an SUV pulls out in front of me. Not to mention deer that are pretty common on my route.

Sorry to say; to be fair, it is not the hardware choice, but poor adjustment and/or poor technique in your inability to stop quickly. Casual riders and pro racers have been using V/cantilever style brakes for eons. In a fast run, the right combination of applying both front and rear brakes is essential for a quick stop.

I have ridden down this hill decades ago at Mammoth, never raced it. These guys are going 45-55 MPH using V brakes, hell Tomac is on a hardtail with a front fork that maybe travels 1". Of course you're not doing this type of riding, but V brakes have worked for years. I'm not putting down disc brakes at all, I think they're great, but my point is they are not the end-all product in bicycling. The other stuff works fine too, especially outside of the extreme type of rides.