aka Bill Baka wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
aka Bill Baka wrote:
I went and I read and it seems that disc brakes are not perfect.
Never have I heard of a front wheel making it past the 'Lawyer Lips',
but the article makes a good point about safety.

It? This:
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/disk_and_quick_release/?

Why not also have the standard rim brakes also?

In addition to disc brakes? Too much expense and weight for unneeded
redundancy.

Cosmetics over safety?

The main points for disc brakes are they do not get fouled as easily
as rim brakes with water, dirt and snow, and do not wear the rim side
wall. Otherwise, rim brakes work just as well or better.

Disc brakes have a theoretical advantage in long winding descents,
since they do not heat the rim which can lead to tire blow off.
However, it is reported that most disc brakes rated for single (as
opposed to tandem) use do not have adequate heat capacity for this use.

Redundancy is what I meant. Weight is not a factor when you absolutely
MUST stop. I was thinking of safety, and the idea would be to use the
disc unless you squeezed handle **very** hard.
Just a back up.

Well, bikes generally have two independent braking systems, except for
coaster brake cruisers intended only for low speed use and brake-less
fixies ridden by hipster morons (velodrome only use excluded). Failures
of both brakes are almost unheard of.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
LOCAL CACTUS EATS CYCLIST - datakoll