|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#341
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
John B. wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:10:38 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/11/2017 7:39 PM, Joerg wrote: Yes, if 10" were more mainstream I'd probably have taken those but 8" seems fine because I am not towing a brake-less trailer. A friend of mine does though. The extra cost is minimal. The adapters cost me $5.56 for both. The rotors were around $23.70 each and the cost difference towards the smaller versions will almost be made up by extended service life. BTW there is a new bike shop in Placerville and one of the owners had his MTB there the other day. 10" rotors on both wheels. He weighs less than I do and said 8" was too iffy on some of his rides. These guys know their stuff. Let's look at the big picture. How do we decide which disc size is big enough? And how do we decide how much how much tire puncture protection is enough? How do we decide how bright one's lights need to be? How do we decide how strong wheels need to be, how strong frames need to be, etc.? In each of those categories (as well as in everything else being designed) there is a tradeoff of benefits vs. detriments. Everyone else recognizes this, and shoots for some optimal compromise. Example: I had a flat about three days ago, but I prefer dealing with a few flats per year rather than riding tires that noticeably slow me. In each of those categories, Joerg's claim has been: if it's not as robust as an automobile it's not good enough. But A) that's total nonsense, because bikes and cars have very different uses and parameters. And B) he really doesn't believe it anyway; otherwise he'd be pedaling the de-motorized motorcycle that Sir Ridesalot has proposed many times. Joerg's real attitude is different. He's decided that the only acceptable equipment is what he desires or approves, and that the entire bicycle industry should cater to his wishes. But in its wisdom, the bicycling industry realizes there's only one Joerg. I don't think that you understand :-) You see, if it is "mine" then it must be better then anyone. My brakes are better; my legs are stronger; my beer is better; and on and on and on. As an aside, I just measured the front discs on my wife's Honda Jazz (I think it is called a "Fit"in the U.S.) and to my horror I find that they are only 240mm (9.4") in diameter. As the nominal weight of the car is about 1100 Kg (2400lb), as opposed to (probably) an all up weight of less then 250 lbs for a bicycle, it is obvious that they can't possibly be large enough to be safe. And Horrors, there isn't any room to fit larger :-( -- Cheers, John B. Bah... Think outside the box. You can probably rig up some cantilever rim brakes on there. That will probably get you up to 14" or so. :-) |
Ads |
#342
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 02:24:55 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote: John B. wrote: On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:10:38 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/11/2017 7:39 PM, Joerg wrote: Yes, if 10" were more mainstream I'd probably have taken those but 8" seems fine because I am not towing a brake-less trailer. A friend of mine does though. The extra cost is minimal. The adapters cost me $5.56 for both. The rotors were around $23.70 each and the cost difference towards the smaller versions will almost be made up by extended service life. BTW there is a new bike shop in Placerville and one of the owners had his MTB there the other day. 10" rotors on both wheels. He weighs less than I do and said 8" was too iffy on some of his rides. These guys know their stuff. Let's look at the big picture. How do we decide which disc size is big enough? And how do we decide how much how much tire puncture protection is enough? How do we decide how bright one's lights need to be? How do we decide how strong wheels need to be, how strong frames need to be, etc.? In each of those categories (as well as in everything else being designed) there is a tradeoff of benefits vs. detriments. Everyone else recognizes this, and shoots for some optimal compromise. Example: I had a flat about three days ago, but I prefer dealing with a few flats per year rather than riding tires that noticeably slow me. In each of those categories, Joerg's claim has been: if it's not as robust as an automobile it's not good enough. But A) that's total nonsense, because bikes and cars have very different uses and parameters. And B) he really doesn't believe it anyway; otherwise he'd be pedaling the de-motorized motorcycle that Sir Ridesalot has proposed many times. Joerg's real attitude is different. He's decided that the only acceptable equipment is what he desires or approves, and that the entire bicycle industry should cater to his wishes. But in its wisdom, the bicycling industry realizes there's only one Joerg. I don't think that you understand :-) You see, if it is "mine" then it must be better then anyone. My brakes are better; my legs are stronger; my beer is better; and on and on and on. As an aside, I just measured the front discs on my wife's Honda Jazz (I think it is called a "Fit"in the U.S.) and to my horror I find that they are only 240mm (9.4") in diameter. As the nominal weight of the car is about 1100 Kg (2400lb), as opposed to (probably) an all up weight of less then 250 lbs for a bicycle, it is obvious that they can't possibly be large enough to be safe. And Horrors, there isn't any room to fit larger :-( -- Cheers, John B. Bah... Think outside the box. You can probably rig up some cantilever rim brakes on there. That will probably get you up to 14" or so. :-) I probably could but I think I'd have to change the rims to a different brand to get a wide enough rim for the caliper pads to be effective. Another thing that might enter into the equation. They refer to the wheels as "Mag Wheels". If they are in fact magnesium wheels they I'd have to be careful not to get them too hot. I knew that they made a movie called "Blazing Saddles" and I suspect that "blazing brakes" might be even more exciting :-( -- Cheers, John B. |
#343
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
John B. wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 02:24:55 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone wrote: John B. wrote: On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:10:38 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/11/2017 7:39 PM, Joerg wrote: Yes, if 10" were more mainstream I'd probably have taken those but 8" seems fine because I am not towing a brake-less trailer. A friend of mine does though. The extra cost is minimal. The adapters cost me $5.56 for both. The rotors were around $23.70 each and the cost difference towards the smaller versions will almost be made up by extended service life. BTW there is a new bike shop in Placerville and one of the owners had his MTB there the other day. 10" rotors on both wheels. He weighs less than I do and said 8" was too iffy on some of his rides. These guys know their stuff. Let's look at the big picture. How do we decide which disc size is big enough? And how do we decide how much how much tire puncture protection is enough? How do we decide how bright one's lights need to be? How do we decide how strong wheels need to be, how strong frames need to be, etc.? In each of those categories (as well as in everything else being designed) there is a tradeoff of benefits vs. detriments. Everyone else recognizes this, and shoots for some optimal compromise. Example: I had a flat about three days ago, but I prefer dealing with a few flats per year rather than riding tires that noticeably slow me. In each of those categories, Joerg's claim has been: if it's not as robust as an automobile it's not good enough. But A) that's total nonsense, because bikes and cars have very different uses and parameters. And B) he really doesn't believe it anyway; otherwise he'd be pedaling the de-motorized motorcycle that Sir Ridesalot has proposed many times. Joerg's real attitude is different. He's decided that the only acceptable equipment is what he desires or approves, and that the entire bicycle industry should cater to his wishes. But in its wisdom, the bicycling industry realizes there's only one Joerg. I don't think that you understand :-) You see, if it is "mine" then it must be better then anyone. My brakes are better; my legs are stronger; my beer is better; and on and on and on. As an aside, I just measured the front discs on my wife's Honda Jazz (I think it is called a "Fit"in the U.S.) and to my horror I find that they are only 240mm (9.4") in diameter. As the nominal weight of the car is about 1100 Kg (2400lb), as opposed to (probably) an all up weight of less then 250 lbs for a bicycle, it is obvious that they can't possibly be large enough to be safe. And Horrors, there isn't any room to fit larger :-( -- Cheers, John B. Bah... Think outside the box. You can probably rig up some cantilever rim brakes on there. That will probably get you up to 14" or so. :-) I probably could but I think I'd have to change the rims to a different brand to get a wide enough rim for the caliper pads to be effective. Another thing that might enter into the equation. They refer to the wheels as "Mag Wheels". If they are in fact magnesium wheels they I'd have to be careful not to get them too hot. I knew that they made a movie called "Blazing Saddles" and I suspect that "blazing brakes" might be even more exciting :-( -- Cheers, John B. It's a safety feature. When the magnesium catches on fire, it emits a blinding white light that signals other road users to get the hell out of your way. |
#344
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 03:41:11 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote: John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 02:24:55 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone wrote: John B. wrote: On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:10:38 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/11/2017 7:39 PM, Joerg wrote: Yes, if 10" were more mainstream I'd probably have taken those but 8" seems fine because I am not towing a brake-less trailer. A friend of mine does though. The extra cost is minimal. The adapters cost me $5.56 for both. The rotors were around $23.70 each and the cost difference towards the smaller versions will almost be made up by extended service life. BTW there is a new bike shop in Placerville and one of the owners had his MTB there the other day. 10" rotors on both wheels. He weighs less than I do and said 8" was too iffy on some of his rides. These guys know their stuff. Let's look at the big picture. How do we decide which disc size is big enough? And how do we decide how much how much tire puncture protection is enough? How do we decide how bright one's lights need to be? How do we decide how strong wheels need to be, how strong frames need to be, etc.? In each of those categories (as well as in everything else being designed) there is a tradeoff of benefits vs. detriments. Everyone else recognizes this, and shoots for some optimal compromise. Example: I had a flat about three days ago, but I prefer dealing with a few flats per year rather than riding tires that noticeably slow me. In each of those categories, Joerg's claim has been: if it's not as robust as an automobile it's not good enough. But A) that's total nonsense, because bikes and cars have very different uses and parameters. And B) he really doesn't believe it anyway; otherwise he'd be pedaling the de-motorized motorcycle that Sir Ridesalot has proposed many times. Joerg's real attitude is different. He's decided that the only acceptable equipment is what he desires or approves, and that the entire bicycle industry should cater to his wishes. But in its wisdom, the bicycling industry realizes there's only one Joerg. I don't think that you understand :-) You see, if it is "mine" then it must be better then anyone. My brakes are better; my legs are stronger; my beer is better; and on and on and on. As an aside, I just measured the front discs on my wife's Honda Jazz (I think it is called a "Fit"in the U.S.) and to my horror I find that they are only 240mm (9.4") in diameter. As the nominal weight of the car is about 1100 Kg (2400lb), as opposed to (probably) an all up weight of less then 250 lbs for a bicycle, it is obvious that they can't possibly be large enough to be safe. And Horrors, there isn't any room to fit larger :-( -- Cheers, John B. Bah... Think outside the box. You can probably rig up some cantilever rim brakes on there. That will probably get you up to 14" or so. :-) I probably could but I think I'd have to change the rims to a different brand to get a wide enough rim for the caliper pads to be effective. Another thing that might enter into the equation. They refer to the wheels as "Mag Wheels". If they are in fact magnesium wheels they I'd have to be careful not to get them too hot. I knew that they made a movie called "Blazing Saddles" and I suspect that "blazing brakes" might be even more exciting :-( -- Cheers, John B. It's a safety feature. When the magnesium catches on fire, it emits a blinding white light that signals other road users to get the hell out of your way. So... no requirement for a helmet if using Mag wheels :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
#345
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
On 11/12/2017 7:46 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:10:38 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/11/2017 7:39 PM, Joerg wrote: Yes, if 10" were more mainstream I'd probably have taken those but 8" seems fine because I am not towing a brake-less trailer. A friend of mine does though. The extra cost is minimal. The adapters cost me $5.56 for both. The rotors were around $23.70 each and the cost difference towards the smaller versions will almost be made up by extended service life. BTW there is a new bike shop in Placerville and one of the owners had his MTB there the other day. 10" rotors on both wheels. He weighs less than I do and said 8" was too iffy on some of his rides. These guys know their stuff. Let's look at the big picture. How do we decide which disc size is big enough? And how do we decide how much how much tire puncture protection is enough? How do we decide how bright one's lights need to be? How do we decide how strong wheels need to be, how strong frames need to be, etc.? In each of those categories (as well as in everything else being designed) there is a tradeoff of benefits vs. detriments. Everyone else recognizes this, and shoots for some optimal compromise. Example: I had a flat about three days ago, but I prefer dealing with a few flats per year rather than riding tires that noticeably slow me. In each of those categories, Joerg's claim has been: if it's not as robust as an automobile it's not good enough. But A) that's total nonsense, because bikes and cars have very different uses and parameters. And B) he really doesn't believe it anyway; otherwise he'd be pedaling the de-motorized motorcycle that Sir Ridesalot has proposed many times. Joerg's real attitude is different. He's decided that the only acceptable equipment is what he desires or approves, and that the entire bicycle industry should cater to his wishes. But in its wisdom, the bicycling industry realizes there's only one Joerg. I don't think that you understand :-) You see, if it is "mine" then it must be better then anyone. My brakes are better; my legs are stronger; my beer is better; and on and on and on. As an aside, I just measured the front discs on my wife's Honda Jazz (I think it is called a "Fit"in the U.S.) and to my horror I find that they are only 240mm (9.4") in diameter. As the nominal weight of the car is about 1100 Kg (2400lb), as opposed to (probably) an all up weight of less then 250 lbs for a bicycle, it is obvious that they can't possibly be large enough to be safe. And Horrors, there isn't any room to fit larger :-( Modern tandems stop well with a single 10" disc for roughly 400lb~500lb of vehicle/riders/cargo. In fairness, you'd also have to compare Honda pedal travel to puck travel and mass of the rotors. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#346
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
John B. wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 03:41:11 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone wrote: John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 02:24:55 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone wrote: John B. wrote: On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:10:38 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/11/2017 7:39 PM, Joerg wrote: Yes, if 10" were more mainstream I'd probably have taken those but 8" seems fine because I am not towing a brake-less trailer. A friend of mine does though. The extra cost is minimal. The adapters cost me $5.56 for both. The rotors were around $23.70 each and the cost difference towards the smaller versions will almost be made up by extended service life. BTW there is a new bike shop in Placerville and one of the owners had his MTB there the other day. 10" rotors on both wheels. He weighs less than I do and said 8" was too iffy on some of his rides. These guys know their stuff. Let's look at the big picture. How do we decide which disc size is big enough? And how do we decide how much how much tire puncture protection is enough? How do we decide how bright one's lights need to be? How do we decide how strong wheels need to be, how strong frames need to be, etc.? In each of those categories (as well as in everything else being designed) there is a tradeoff of benefits vs. detriments. Everyone else recognizes this, and shoots for some optimal compromise. Example: I had a flat about three days ago, but I prefer dealing with a few flats per year rather than riding tires that noticeably slow me. In each of those categories, Joerg's claim has been: if it's not as robust as an automobile it's not good enough. But A) that's total nonsense, because bikes and cars have very different uses and parameters. And B) he really doesn't believe it anyway; otherwise he'd be pedaling the de-motorized motorcycle that Sir Ridesalot has proposed many times. Joerg's real attitude is different. He's decided that the only acceptable equipment is what he desires or approves, and that the entire bicycle industry should cater to his wishes. But in its wisdom, the bicycling industry realizes there's only one Joerg. I don't think that you understand :-) You see, if it is "mine" then it must be better then anyone. My brakes are better; my legs are stronger; my beer is better; and on and on and on. As an aside, I just measured the front discs on my wife's Honda Jazz (I think it is called a "Fit"in the U.S.) and to my horror I find that they are only 240mm (9.4") in diameter. As the nominal weight of the car is about 1100 Kg (2400lb), as opposed to (probably) an all up weight of less then 250 lbs for a bicycle, it is obvious that they can't possibly be large enough to be safe. And Horrors, there isn't any room to fit larger :-( -- Cheers, John B. Bah... Think outside the box. You can probably rig up some cantilever rim brakes on there. That will probably get you up to 14" or so. :-) I probably could but I think I'd have to change the rims to a different brand to get a wide enough rim for the caliper pads to be effective. Another thing that might enter into the equation. They refer to the wheels as "Mag Wheels". If they are in fact magnesium wheels they I'd have to be careful not to get them too hot. I knew that they made a movie called "Blazing Saddles" and I suspect that "blazing brakes" might be even more exciting :-( -- Cheers, John B. It's a safety feature. When the magnesium catches on fire, it emits a blinding white light that signals other road users to get the hell out of your way. So... no requirement for a helmet if using Mag wheels :-) -- Cheers, John B. Well, to be fair, it's only a safety feature for other people, so you may wish to keep the helmet on. Unless your line of thinking is that you would prefer NOT to be conscious after crashing your flaming vehicle |
#347
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
On 2017-11-12 17:58, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 09:37:54 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2017-11-12 09:10, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/11/2017 7:39 PM, Joerg wrote: Yes, if 10" were more mainstream I'd probably have taken those but 8" seems fine because I am not towing a brake-less trailer. A friend of mine does though. The extra cost is minimal. The adapters cost me $5.56 for both. The rotors were around $23.70 each and the cost difference towards the smaller versions will almost be made up by extended service life. BTW there is a new bike shop in Placerville and one of the owners had his MTB there the other day. 10" rotors on both wheels. He weighs less than I do and said 8" was too iffy on some of his rides. These guys know their stuff. Let's look at the big picture. How do we decide which disc size is big enough? Big enough so they won't overheat on the longest descent on the usual routes on a 105F day without overheating. Now that was simple. I guess I'd have to ask "what is over heating"? You see a F1 car's brakes work perfectly when they are red hot, around 1200 degrees (C), in fact I understand that at ambient temperatures they are less effective then when hot. So, what is too hot? Simple: When the point comes where the brake fades away, as happened to an MTB rider in front of me at the last sharp turn down a long hill. If he hadn't been a seasoned dirt bike rider he probably would have gone off. [...] BTW, the most common excuse I hear from cyclists not to have made a particular trip by bike is "It's got a flat right now". I have never heard that from a motor vehicle user, ever. But to be honest, I never heard a bicyclist say that, or a motorcyclist say that, or a auto driver say that, or even a big 18 wheel trucker say that. Is that something they say in Germany? In California, Washington State, and so on. In Germany the standard excuse is "Es ist gerade platt" which isn't logically correct but common. "C'mon, let's fix it and ride" ... "Ahm, maybe next time". -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#348
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
On 2017-11-12 17:46, John B. wrote:
[...] As an aside, I just measured the front discs on my wife's Honda Jazz (I think it is called a "Fit"in the U.S.) and to my horror I find that they are only 240mm (9.4") in diameter. As the nominal weight of the car is about 1100 Kg (2400lb), as opposed to (probably) an all up weight of less then 250 lbs for a bicycle, it is obvious that they can't possibly be large enough to be safe. And Horrors, there isn't any room to fit larger :-( Of course, you didn't bother to measure the rotor thickness and didn't notice the fact that it is rather solid. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#349
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 14:57:49 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote: John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 03:41:11 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone wrote: John B. wrote: On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 02:24:55 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone wrote: John B. wrote: On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:10:38 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/11/2017 7:39 PM, Joerg wrote: Yes, if 10" were more mainstream I'd probably have taken those but 8" seems fine because I am not towing a brake-less trailer. A friend of mine does though. The extra cost is minimal. The adapters cost me $5.56 for both. The rotors were around $23.70 each and the cost difference towards the smaller versions will almost be made up by extended service life. BTW there is a new bike shop in Placerville and one of the owners had his MTB there the other day. 10" rotors on both wheels. He weighs less than I do and said 8" was too iffy on some of his rides. These guys know their stuff. Let's look at the big picture. How do we decide which disc size is big enough? And how do we decide how much how much tire puncture protection is enough? How do we decide how bright one's lights need to be? How do we decide how strong wheels need to be, how strong frames need to be, etc.? In each of those categories (as well as in everything else being designed) there is a tradeoff of benefits vs. detriments. Everyone else recognizes this, and shoots for some optimal compromise. Example: I had a flat about three days ago, but I prefer dealing with a few flats per year rather than riding tires that noticeably slow me. In each of those categories, Joerg's claim has been: if it's not as robust as an automobile it's not good enough. But A) that's total nonsense, because bikes and cars have very different uses and parameters. And B) he really doesn't believe it anyway; otherwise he'd be pedaling the de-motorized motorcycle that Sir Ridesalot has proposed many times. Joerg's real attitude is different. He's decided that the only acceptable equipment is what he desires or approves, and that the entire bicycle industry should cater to his wishes. But in its wisdom, the bicycling industry realizes there's only one Joerg. I don't think that you understand :-) You see, if it is "mine" then it must be better then anyone. My brakes are better; my legs are stronger; my beer is better; and on and on and on. As an aside, I just measured the front discs on my wife's Honda Jazz (I think it is called a "Fit"in the U.S.) and to my horror I find that they are only 240mm (9.4") in diameter. As the nominal weight of the car is about 1100 Kg (2400lb), as opposed to (probably) an all up weight of less then 250 lbs for a bicycle, it is obvious that they can't possibly be large enough to be safe. And Horrors, there isn't any room to fit larger :-( -- Cheers, John B. Bah... Think outside the box. You can probably rig up some cantilever rim brakes on there. That will probably get you up to 14" or so. :-) I probably could but I think I'd have to change the rims to a different brand to get a wide enough rim for the caliper pads to be effective. Another thing that might enter into the equation. They refer to the wheels as "Mag Wheels". If they are in fact magnesium wheels they I'd have to be careful not to get them too hot. I knew that they made a movie called "Blazing Saddles" and I suspect that "blazing brakes" might be even more exciting :-( -- Cheers, John B. It's a safety feature. When the magnesium catches on fire, it emits a blinding white light that signals other road users to get the hell out of your way. So... no requirement for a helmet if using Mag wheels :-) -- Cheers, John B. Well, to be fair, it's only a safety feature for other people, so you may wish to keep the helmet on. Unless your line of thinking is that you would prefer NOT to be conscious after crashing your flaming vehicle I'm not sure I'd want to be conscious WHEN I'm crashing my flaming vehicle :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
#350
|
|||
|
|||
Why do some forks and frames have brake rotor size limits?
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 10:06:52 -0800, Joerg
wrote: On 2017-11-12 17:58, John B. wrote: On Sun, 12 Nov 2017 09:37:54 -0800, Joerg wrote: On 2017-11-12 09:10, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 11/11/2017 7:39 PM, Joerg wrote: Yes, if 10" were more mainstream I'd probably have taken those but 8" seems fine because I am not towing a brake-less trailer. A friend of mine does though. The extra cost is minimal. The adapters cost me $5.56 for both. The rotors were around $23.70 each and the cost difference towards the smaller versions will almost be made up by extended service life. BTW there is a new bike shop in Placerville and one of the owners had his MTB there the other day. 10" rotors on both wheels. He weighs less than I do and said 8" was too iffy on some of his rides. These guys know their stuff. Let's look at the big picture. How do we decide which disc size is big enough? Big enough so they won't overheat on the longest descent on the usual routes on a 105F day without overheating. Now that was simple. I guess I'd have to ask "what is over heating"? You see a F1 car's brakes work perfectly when they are red hot, around 1200 degrees (C), in fact I understand that at ambient temperatures they are less effective then when hot. So, what is too hot? Simple: When the point comes where the brake fades away, as happened to an MTB rider in front of me at the last sharp turn down a long hill. If he hadn't been a seasoned dirt bike rider he probably would have gone off. [...] It must be a problem with small discs as I've never had that problem with my 700C rim brakes which operate quite similar to disc, i.e. a rotating surface with pads that squeeze against both sides of the rotating surface. Although, of course, my "discs" are about 27 inches in diameter, not little puny 10 inch discs. BTW, the most common excuse I hear from cyclists not to have made a particular trip by bike is "It's got a flat right now". I have never heard that from a motor vehicle user, ever. But to be honest, I never heard a bicyclist say that, or a motorcyclist say that, or a auto driver say that, or even a big 18 wheel trucker say that. Is that something they say in Germany? In California, Washington State, and so on. In Germany the standard excuse is "Es ist gerade platt" which isn't logically correct but common. "C'mon, let's fix it and ride" ... "Ahm, maybe next time". Seriously? California cyclists can't fix a flat tire? -- Cheers, John B. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: High End Wheels / Rotor Cranks / Frames / TT Helmet etc. | Mike | Marketplace | 3 | April 24th 05 04:30 AM |
FS: Wheels / Rotor Cranks / Bike Frames etc. | Mike | Marketplace | 0 | January 21st 05 09:28 PM |
FS: Wheels / Frames / Aerobars / Rotor Cranks etc. | Mike | Marketplace | 0 | January 13th 05 02:41 PM |
disc brake rotor size, 6 or 8? | Colin Song | Mountain Biking | 9 | October 28th 03 10:35 PM |
Disc brake rotor size | Michael | Techniques | 9 | July 14th 03 04:43 AM |