UCI to allow disc brakes for all pro road teams starting in 2016

And this summer’s tour de france will be worth watching for the hourly pile ups alone.

Um, you linked to an old press release…

Ed: Thanks, corrected!

uci- unified clowns int’l

“And this summer’s tour de france will be worth watching for the hourly pile ups alone.”

Which will make it different from the last several years… how exactly?

Imagine the car racing world analog: “Formula 1 will allow cars to ditch their drum brakes starting in the 2018 season.”

(deleted)

I really am concerned about the mix use in the peloton. Whatever your views on disc brakes are (I still am not sold as the end-all-be-all since they are heavier, less aero, more expensive, louder, ride rougher when used with thru-axles, and more complex with hyrdo systems), there is no question that they brake significantly better than rim brakes. So by UCI allowing mixed-use, I think this actually increases the risk by a rim-brake rider not stopping as quickly as the disc rider. More-so when they are riding so extremely close to each other. Plus, not all manufacturers in the pro peloton make a comparable disc model to the race-oriented bikes the racers are used to riding. They should make it one way or the other – that’s fine. Mixed is the most dangerous option.

@Jbikes:
RTFM: http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/80/73/1-GEN-20150313-E_English.pdf

1.3.017 The distance between the internal extremities of the front forks shall not exceed 10.5 cm; the distance between the internal extremities of the rear triangle shall not exceed 13.5 cm.

1.3.020 For road competitions other than time trials and for cyclo-cross competitions, the frame
of the bicycle shall be of a traditional pattern, i.e. built around a main triangle. It shall be
constructed of straight or tapered tubular elements (which may be round, oval,
flattened, teardrop shaped or otherwise in cross-section) such that the form of each
element encloses a straight line. The elements of the frame shall be laid out such that
the joining points shall follow the following pattern: the top tube (1) connects the top of
the head tube (2) to the top of the seat tube (4); the seat tube (from which the seat post
shall extend) shall connect to the bottom bracket shell; the down tube (3) shall connect
the bottom bracket shell to the bottom of the head tube. The rear triangles shall be
formed by the chain stays (6), the seat stays (5) and the seat tube (4) with the seat
stays anchored to the seat tube at points falling within the limits laid down for the slope
of the top tube.
The maximum height of the elements shall be 8 cm and the minimum thickness 2.5 cm.
The minimum thickness shall be reduced to 1 cm for the chain stays (6) and the seat
stays (5). The minimum thickness of the elements of the front fork shall be 1 cm; these
may be straight or curved (7). (See diagram «Shape (1)»).
The top tube may slope, provided that this element fits within a horizontal template
defined by a maximum height of 16 cm and a minimum thickness of 2.5 cm.
The effective width of the head tube zone may not exceed 16 cm at the narrowest point
between the inner join of the top tube and down tube and the front of the box for the
head tube.

ED: I didn’t link this as I didn’t see any update reffering to thru axle and disc mounts.

Does anyone have any stats (or even some anecdotes) on how many crashes have been caused by a mix of aluminum and carbon rims? Those don’t stop equivalently either. Or at least, didn’t used to.

“Ride rougher when used with thru-axles.” What? Evidence please.

All you haters realize we’re talking about pro cyclists, right? These guys will adapt to the stronger disc brakes and use them accordingly. I highly doubt they’ll all be grabbing a handful of lever at every little thing that startles them on the road and causing massive pileups.

A few valid points above:

-When rim brakes went from single pivot to dual pivot the difference in stopping power was remarkable. No issues from the peloton.

-When carbon rims started getting used the brakes stopping power on the carbon rim surface was very poor, much less than on an aluminium rim. No issues from the peloton.

-My guess with disc brakes? No issues from the peloton.

About freakin TIME.
Love my R785, M785, Saint & Guide discs..!!

I’m just going to register a big ol’ “whatever” on this one. Unless it’s raining, I find discs on the road to be essentially overkill, but all this hub bub over safety seems overblown (both the more dangerous and the more safe camps). Any roadies on discs care to comment on their performance? (Yeah, I already know discs are orders of magnitude better on mountain and cross bikes… kind of irrelevant on the road though).

@Mike

Performance? I’d say meh so far. As you noted, the most noticeable difference is in the wet. I’m in Seattle so better wet weather performance is a pretty big plus. If I still lived in Phoenix…not so much.

I think for recreational riders the real improvements could be more on the maintenance side. No cable stretch, no cables developing friction from grit/grime and requiring regular replacement. Pads automatically adjust as they wear. Pads can be changed in a few seconds and without any tools. Rims never wear out from braking. All of these are pretty awesome bonuses for the recreational rider.

I ride for adventure and fun in Oregon; some of the rides on the forest service and blm roads have lots of climbing…and lots of down hill

my wrists/arms use to get very tired braking on the down hill…so when disc brakes for road bikes came out I decided to try them

GREAT! no issues with wrist/arms

***note- been riding 20+ years and I did not stop riding because my wrist/arms hurts but now that I have choice, I go with my disc road bike

Does nobody else here realize that we’ve been riding on bikes that have “clamps”, that mash the actual wheel which is designed for holding a tire? Think of how 1920’s that sounds.

Discs allow better and lighter rim design sans braking surface (decreased outer rotational weight), consistent braking in ALL weather conditions, and if you warp a wheel, it likely won’t ruin your ride if the wheel isn’t rubbing the brake pads. Drawbacks? Some really nitpick stuff that is a drop in the bucket compared to the benefits.

Sickboy, although much of what you say is true, the term “clamps”, seemingly used to make rim brakes seem archaic and crude, can just as easily be applied to disc brake calipers – they just clamp a different surface.
For most riding, rim brakes are an incredibly simple and effective tool. I do welcome disc brakes though.

With disks carbon rims should be lower cost, no high temperature resins required and no track treatment. Lower weight and more aero shapes too.

@Sickboy, your argument is specious. As an engineer (some aero back ground) and former A grade rider what can I say other than that brakes only slow you down. Aero will make you faster but I suppose new gimmicks are loved by the marketing department to sell bikes. Let’s look at some scenarios, you are a sprinter: do you choose discs of some low spoke count aero wheels? or you primarily ride crits and often cover breaks or make breaks yourself: do you choose discs or go for a low spoke count set of aero wheels? or, I could go on. The least number of spokes for a wheel in tension is twelve and they will be radial and not crossed, since when would a wheel like this work with a disc hub? Push the boundaries and one might attempt a 24 spoke disc wheel to take advantage of the stopping power for descents. So Sickboy a disc system make a bike better for what? Stopping, heck I thought these were for race bikes. Improved rim profile is not an argument, it’s a non-issue. But I guess history will give us more insight.

Apparently, they have only ratified some specifications while others are just recommendations at this point.

100 x 15mm thru axle front is only a recommendation, not official yet.
142 x 12mm thru axle rear is also just a recommendation.
160mm diameter discs are official.

Shimano spinge sui dischi per nascondere il fatto che è indietro tecnologicamente sul cambio elettronico rispetto a sram