Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    169

    Handling difference between rim and disc brakes?

    So I was looking at my bike today contemplating things and I got to thinking...for a bike to be easier to toss around, you'd want the mass of the brakes closer to your center of gravity and at less opposite ends of the bike. Seems like if you have a disc and caliper on the end of your fork instead of rim brakes 1 foot closer to the handle bars, the bike will be harder to throw around because of the mechanical advantage the disc has compared to the rim brake (as in the lever between your handlebars and mass of the brakes). Has anybody noticed a handling difference when going from one to the other?

  2. #2
    I post too much.
    Reputation: snaky69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,448
    A V is less heavy than a disc brake, I think that what you are stating would only be true if a disc and a V brake had the same mass and that the rotor wasn't rotating(another force which you didn't take into account).

    Basically the handling difference would be seen mostly due to a weight reduction rather than a slightly different placement of mass on the frame.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rocpyro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    356
    Quote Originally Posted by sovietspyguy
    Has anybody noticed a handling difference when going from one to the other?
    Nope!

  4. #4
    AW_
    AW_ is offline
    locked - time out
    Reputation: AW_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by sovietspyguy
    So I was looking at my bike today contemplating things and I got to thinking...for a bike to be easier to toss around, you'd want the mass of the brakes closer to your center of gravity and at less opposite ends of the bike. Seems like if you have a disc and caliper on the end of your fork instead of rim brakes 1 foot closer to the handle bars, the bike will be harder to throw around because of the mechanical advantage the disc has compared to the rim brake (as in the lever between your handlebars and mass of the brakes). Has anybody noticed a handling difference when going from one to the other?
    No, but I have noticed I can pedal faster when I am not wearing socks due to decreased rotating weight and increased aerodynamic efficiency.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Hardtails Are Better's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    6,298
    Quote Originally Posted by AW_
    No, but I have noticed I can pedal faster when I am not wearing socks due to decreased rotating weight and increased aerodynamic efficiency.
    I hope you're being sarcastic.




    The difference would be so minute (for both of these examples) as to be imperceptable.

  6. #6
    Meh.
    Reputation: XSL_WiLL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    17,516
    Depends on what brakes and how you set them up.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    169
    Quote Originally Posted by AW_
    No, but I have noticed I can pedal faster when I am not wearing socks due to decreased rotating weight and increased aerodynamic efficiency.

    Only unlike what you said, what I asked was completely legitimate and reasonable.

  8. #8
    Rollin' twenties.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,635
    wow! i cant believe im not the only one who noticed the connection betweeen socks and speed!

  9. #9
    AW_
    AW_ is offline
    locked - time out
    Reputation: AW_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by sovietspyguy
    Only unlike what you said, what I asked was completely legitimate and reasonable.
    Are you inferring that I am incorrect? I did the math. I can pedal faster without socks.

  10. #10
    Portland, OR
    Reputation: todd_freeride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,112
    I really wish my bike had V brake mounts. if it did, I would just always run rear V brakes. a lot simpler, when set up right they can stop just as good as mechanical and even some hydrolic brakes. also just cool, because no one runs them much anymore.
    [SIZE="4"]Ibex bikes[/SIZE]

    2007 Ibex Trophy SS
    2006 Jamis Komodo 3.0
    2006 Ibex Zone FR-1
    2004 Special-Ed P.2 A.1

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ebfreerider510's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    3,575
    as someone already said....the difference in what you are talking about will be so small that you shouldn't notice.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    169
    Quote Originally Posted by todd_freeride
    I really wish my bike had V brake mounts. if it did, I would just always run rear V brakes. a lot simpler, when set up right they can stop just as good as mechanical and even some hydrolic brakes. also just cool, because no one runs them much anymore.
    Hydraulic rim brakes are pimp. Will have to try those one day...

  13. #13
    Local Paperboy Hero
    Reputation: Cru Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    986

    Sockless...

    Quote Originally Posted by aggiebiker
    wow! i cant believe im not the only one who noticed the connection betweeen socks and speed!
    Word. Sockless works for me!!!

    Nac-Nac3.jpg
    Last edited by Cru Jones; 11-02-2006 at 12:05 PM.

  14. #14
    Me hates pinchflat
    Reputation: 545cu4ch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2,419
    I can bunny hop 3% higher if I do not grow my mustache
    Quote Originally Posted by sriracha
    "jesus would huck it"
    Quote Originally Posted by FoShizzle
    i have found the 1.5" headtubes to be slightly larger in diameter than 1 1/8", plus or minus

  15. #15
    I post too much.
    Reputation: snaky69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,448
    I can 180 2% faster if I remove dirt and grit from my tires, less rotating mass.

    I think I shouldn't be spamming.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    169
    Ok, ok, but seriously if people complain about an extra 200g on their tires, I'd think someone might notice an entire pound moved a foot to the rear making the bike harder to swing around.

  17. #17
    I post too much.
    Reputation: snaky69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,448
    Quote Originally Posted by sovietspyguy
    Ok, ok, but seriously if people complain about an extra 200g on their tires, I'd think someone might notice an entire pound moved a foot to the rear making the bike harder to swing around.
    The weight on tires is artificially increased by the fact that they are rotating.

    F = ma, or force = mass * acceleration, so the bigger the mass, the more force you need to get the same acceleration going. That's what light tires are for.

    On the other hand, moving weight around on the bike will slightly change the center of gravity's location, but the change will be so minute that it'd be hard to notice. removing 200g of brake on the rear of my norco 416 wouldn't do much, when the whole bike weighs in at 15 900g.

    (200/15 900)*100, we're talking a 1.15% difference in weight, and the weight is distributed more towards the center of gravity of the bike. So yeah, the difference would be hella small.

  18. #18
    Me hates pinchflat
    Reputation: 545cu4ch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2,419
    Quote Originally Posted by snaky69
    I think I shouldn't be spamming.
    Me neither Actually, the OP's question was valid...
    Quote Originally Posted by sriracha
    "jesus would huck it"
    Quote Originally Posted by FoShizzle
    i have found the 1.5" headtubes to be slightly larger in diameter than 1 1/8", plus or minus

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •