|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
What are the benifits of disk brakes over V-brakes, other then the
disks do not get as wet on the trails? After the recent run-in with a dog on a downhill stretch of trail, I am now in the process of replacing my rims and brakes on my mountain bike, and am looking into the possibility of going disk. My areas of concern with moving to disks, is the weight differences, as well as the stopping range between none, and fully locked. My current V-brakes are easly able to lock the tires up, even at a speeds over 30mph. From my understanding, V-brakes should be able to provide a larger range of control over the disk (based on the diameter of the wheels, over the diameter of the disks). Is this incorrect? Any insight into this? Most of my riding is cross-country, single track if I can find it. Mike mlawrenc(at)gmail.com |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
In article . com,
mike wrote: What are the benifits of disk brakes over V-brakes, other then the disks do not get as wet on the trails? After the recent run-in with a dog on a downhill stretch of trail, I am now in the process of replacing my rims and brakes on my mountain bike, and am looking into the possibility of going disk. My areas of concern with moving to disks, is the weight differences, as well as the stopping range between none, and fully locked. My current V-brakes are easly able to lock the tires up, even at a speeds over 30mph. From my understanding, V-brakes should be able to provide a larger range of control over the disk (based on the diameter of the wheels, over the diameter of the disks). Is this incorrect? Any insight into this? The confounding variable you are not considering is that discs can be set so their pads run very close to the discs, thus allowing massive leverage ratios. This makes every other variable (modulation, lever effort) a lot more flexible Around here, the freeriders praise the easy modulation, light effort, and consistent action (which I think is largely a function of staying drier and less muddy than rim brakes) of discs. The current trend seems to be to prefer cable-actuated discs over hydraulics, mainly for maintenance reasons I think. Most of my riding is cross-country, single track if I can find it. The weight penalty is minimal, and there is a reason most non-XC MTBs now use discs. But it sounds like you have your V-brakes set up just fine, and they are more than adequate for your needs (unless the problem was you couldn't stop for the dog...). There isn't a decisive right answer in your case. If you race XC, I'd say use the weight as an excuse to keep the Vs. If you add light hucking or jumping to your rides, or ride in wet conditions much, I'd say go for the discs. In all other cases, go for the cheapest option, which is surely the Vs. -- Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/ "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
In article . com, mike wrote: What are the benifits of disk brakes over V-brakes, other then the disks do not get as wet on the trails? After the recent run-in with a dog on a downhill stretch of trail, I am now in the process of replacing my rims and brakes on my mountain bike, and am looking into the possibility of going disk. My areas of concern with moving to disks, is the weight differences, as well as the stopping range between none, and fully locked. My current V-brakes are easly able to lock the tires up, even at a speeds over 30mph. From my understanding, V-brakes should be able to provide a larger range of control over the disk (based on the diameter of the wheels, over the diameter of the disks). Is this incorrect? Any insight into this? The confounding variable you are not considering is that discs can be set so their pads run very close to the discs, thus allowing massive leverage ratios. This makes every other variable (modulation, lever effort) a lot more flexible Around here, the freeriders praise the easy modulation, light effort, and consistent action (which I think is largely a function of staying drier and less muddy than rim brakes) of discs. The current trend seems to be to prefer cable-actuated discs over hydraulics, mainly for maintenance reasons I think. Eh? I thought (I'm no expert here) that hydraulic disk brakes actually had *less* maintenance than their cable counterparts. No cable stretch, no need to lube, no frayed ends. I'm assuming mineral oil of course. My objection is a bit more philosophical, I don't like my braking surface to be a part of the wheel structure and anyway, disks have so much more bling! snip |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
Per Tosspot:
Eh? I thought (I'm no expert here) that hydraulic disk brakes actually had *less* maintenance than their cable counterparts. No cable stretch, no need to lube, no frayed ends. I'm assuming mineral oil of course. Bleeding comes to mind. Why mineral oil "of course"? BCO water take-up by brake fluid? I've got a hydraulic on the front - where the better modulation is a significant benefit for me - and a mech on the rear. Couple reasons for putting the mech on the rear, but one of my after-the-fact rationalizations is that the different medium gives a little more bullet-proofness. Never had - and still don't have - a clue why this might be, but I assume that there are variables that I know nothing about. -- PeteCresswell |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
On May 7, 7:10 am, mike wrote:
After the recent run-in with a dog on a downhill stretch of trail, I am now in the process of replacing my rims and brakes on my mountain bike, and am looking into the possibility of going disk. While there are undeniable benefits to disc brakes, personally I have continued to use V-brakes simply because I have never had any need to do otherwise. Braking has never been an issue for me, even at 120+ kg riding in a variety of on and off-road conditions. They have been reliable, inexpensive and easy to maintain. I'd suggest the same test for you: have you ever experienced a need for more or different braking? If the answer is yes, maybe think about discs, but otherwise if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Either way, it's probably more important that what you have is installed and set up correctly. Regards, Anthony |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
On 2007-05-07, Tosspot wrote:
Eh? I thought (I'm no expert here) that hydraulic disk brakes actually had *less* maintenance than their cable counterparts. No cable stretch, no need to lube, no frayed ends. I'm assuming mineral oil of course. Hydraulics may require less routine maintenance, especially as most (all?) are self-adujusting, but they're not necessarily as field-serviceable. For instance, a friend of mine once had his front brake line come loose where it attaches to the caliper. Fortunately there were warning signs -- the brake felt very spongy -- so we played with it a bit in the parking lot before hitting the trail. After a few good hard stops all the fluid squirted out onto the rotor with a *pop*. Fixing that required new brake fluid, new pads (the old ones were ruined by the fluid), a bleed kit, and a torch to bake the fluid off the rotor. All that meant a two-hour round trip to the nearest bike shop, since we weren't carrying that kind of equipment. The closest equivalent task on a mechanical setup is cable replacement, which doesn't require anything that won't fit easily in a seat pack. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
On May 7, 2:26 pm, Tosspot wrote:
Ryan Cousineau wrote: In article . com, mike wrote: What are the benifits of disk brakes over V-brakes, other then the disks do not get as wet on the trails? After the recent run-in with a dog on a downhill stretch of trail, I am now in the process of replacing my rims and brakes on my mountain bike, and am looking into the possibility of going disk. My areas of concern with moving to disks, is the weight differences, as well as the stopping range between none, and fully locked. My current V-brakes are easly able to lock the tires up, even at a speeds over 30mph. From my understanding, V-brakes should be able to provide a larger range of control over the disk (based on the diameter of the wheels, over the diameter of the disks). Is this incorrect? Any insight into this? The confounding variable you are not considering is that discs can be set so their pads run very close to the discs, thus allowing massive leverage ratios. This makes every other variable (modulation, lever effort) a lot more flexible Around here, the freeriders praise the easy modulation, light effort, and consistent action (which I think is largely a function of staying drier and less muddy than rim brakes) of discs. The current trend seems to be to prefer cable-actuated discs over hydraulics, mainly for maintenance reasons I think. Eh? I thought (I'm no expert here) that hydraulic disk brakes actually had *less* maintenance than their cable counterparts. No cable stretch, no need to lube, no frayed ends. I'm assuming mineral oil of course. My objection is a bit more philosophical, I don't like my braking surface to be a part of the wheel structure and anyway, disks have so much more bling! snip- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I believe that the "bling" factor is more a reason to aviod disk brakes. As for hitting the dog, the brakes might have been a little too touchy. After the whole thing, I looked back up the trail, and could see the 10+ feet long marks where I had both tires locked up. In the end, the dog faked left, and went right. The reason I am looking into the brakes, is that I have had to replace a good part of my steering components and front rim (handlebars, stem, headset...), and figured that this would be a good time to consider alternatives to the current hardware. The bike is 7 years old, and at the time of purchase, I could not afford disk brakes (college student). Mike |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Tosspot: Eh? I thought (I'm no expert here) that hydraulic disk brakes actually had *less* maintenance than their cable counterparts. No cable stretch, no need to lube, no frayed ends. I'm assuming mineral oil of course. Bleeding comes to mind. Why mineral oil "of course"? BCO water take-up by brake fluid? Yep, the DOT stuff should be changed annually, and I'd do it because water in it could be a big issue. Mineral, iirc, can go 5 years between changes, and to be honest, I'm not sure why it couldn't go longer. I've got a hydraulic on the front - where the better modulation is a significant benefit for me - and a mech on the rear. Couple reasons for putting the mech on the rear, but one of my after-the-fact rationalizations is that the different medium gives a little more bullet-proofness. Never had - and still don't have - a clue why this might be, but I assume that there are variables that I know nothing about. shrug I'm partly convinced by this argument. A major snag on a hydraulic system means no brakes, on a cable system you might be able to cobble something together. Otoh, anyone totalled a cable system in circumstances where they thought this was possible? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
mike wrote:
On May 7, 2:26 pm, Tosspot wrote: Ryan Cousineau wrote: In article . com, mike wrote: What are the benifits of disk brakes over V-brakes, other then the disks do not get as wet on the trails? After the recent run-in with a dog on a downhill stretch of trail, I am now in the process of replacing my rims and brakes on my mountain bike, and am looking into the possibility of going disk. My areas of concern with moving to disks, is the weight differences, as well as the stopping range between none, and fully locked. My current V-brakes are easly able to lock the tires up, even at a speeds over 30mph. From my understanding, V-brakes should be able to provide a larger range of control over the disk (based on the diameter of the wheels, over the diameter of the disks). Is this incorrect? Any insight into this? The confounding variable you are not considering is that discs can be set so their pads run very close to the discs, thus allowing massive leverage ratios. This makes every other variable (modulation, lever effort) a lot more flexible Around here, the freeriders praise the easy modulation, light effort, and consistent action (which I think is largely a function of staying drier and less muddy than rim brakes) of discs. The current trend seems to be to prefer cable-actuated discs over hydraulics, mainly for maintenance reasons I think. Eh? I thought (I'm no expert here) that hydraulic disk brakes actually had *less* maintenance than their cable counterparts. No cable stretch, no need to lube, no frayed ends. I'm assuming mineral oil of course. My objection is a bit more philosophical, I don't like my braking surface to be a part of the wheel structure and anyway, disks have so much more bling! snip- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I believe that the "bling" factor is more a reason to aviod disk brakes. As for hitting the dog, the brakes might have been a little too touchy. After the whole thing, I looked back up the trail, and could see the 10+ feet long marks where I had both tires locked up. In the end, the dog faked left, and went right. The reason I am looking into the brakes, is that I have had to replace a good part of my steering components and front rim (handlebars, stem, headset...), and figured that this would be a good time to consider alternatives to the current hardware. The bike is 7 years old, and at the time of purchase, I could not afford disk brakes (college student). shrug My mountain bike has Hopes, my commuting bike no-name V's (but they are well setup), to be brutally honest, they're ain't much in it in terms of braking, I might even go so far as to say the V's are better, but I'm not *dead* confident I got the Hopes set up correctly. So, for me, and this imho, for pure braking, then I'd say nothing in it. To go to discs you need other reasons, maybe particularly muddy trails, maintenance, you can ding a rim without affecting braking (or even crisp one), and of course the aforementioned bling. As I said, I'm no expert. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Disk vs. V-Brakes
On May 7, 12:48 pm, mike wrote:
On May 7, 2:26 pm, Tosspot wrote: Ryan Cousineau wrote: In article . com, mike wrote: What are the benifits of disk brakes over V-brakes, other then the disks do not get as wet on the trails? After the recent run-in with a dog on a downhill stretch of trail, I am now in the process of replacing my rims and brakes on my mountain bike, and am looking into the possibility of going disk. My areas of concern with moving to disks, is the weight differences, as well as the stopping range between none, and fully locked. My current V-brakes are easly able to lock the tires up, even at a speeds over 30mph. From my understanding, V-brakes should be able to provide a larger range of control over the disk (based on the diameter of the wheels, over the diameter of the disks). Is this incorrect? Any insight into this? The confounding variable you are not considering is that discs can be set so their pads run very close to the discs, thus allowing massive leverage ratios. This makes every other variable (modulation, lever effort) a lot more flexible Around here, the freeriders praise the easy modulation, light effort, and consistent action (which I think is largely a function of staying drier and less muddy than rim brakes) of discs. The current trend seems to be to prefer cable-actuated discs over hydraulics, mainly for maintenance reasons I think. Eh? I thought (I'm no expert here) that hydraulic disk brakes actually had *less* maintenance than their cable counterparts. No cable stretch, no need to lube, no frayed ends. I'm assuming mineral oil of course. My objection is a bit more philosophical, I don't like my braking surface to be a part of the wheel structure and anyway, disks have so much more bling! snip- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I believe that the "bling" factor is more a reason to aviod disk brakes. As for hitting the dog, the brakes might have been a little too touchy. After the whole thing, I looked back up the trail, and could see the 10+ feet long marks where I had both tires locked up. In the end, the dog faked left, and went right. The reason I am looking into the brakes, is that I have had to replace a good part of my steering components and front rim (handlebars, stem, headset...), and figured that this would be a good time to consider alternatives to the current hardware. The bike is 7 years old, and at the time of purchase, I could not afford disk brakes (college student). With all the parts you apparently need to replace, is costs an issue? If so, how much would it cost to add disc brakes? For example, will you need to replace the fork because of the damage? If not, then you need to factor in the cost of a new fork that will accept disc brakes. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Disk vs. V-Brakes | mike[_3_] | Mountain Biking | 5 | May 11th 07 12:49 PM |
Disk brakes? | Sticky Wicket | Techniques | 112 | February 8th 07 04:27 PM |
Disk brakes | General | 13 | July 3rd 06 03:44 PM | |
Disk brakes? Hot! | ain | Mountain Biking | 20 | May 5th 04 12:57 PM |
Disk Brakes | john | Mountain Biking | 4 | January 22nd 04 01:44 AM |