Disc brakes are almost completely pointless for commuter bicycles
Ignore this comment. Year-round commuting is the prime reason to buy a bike with disc brakes. Is it overkill not to burn through a set of rims each winter? Is it overkill to have decreased stopping distance in the rain?
Anyone want to go back to drum brakes on their “commuter” car? Yeah, didn’t think so.
I have short-reach dual pivot brake calipers on a bike which sees >2000 miles year-round each year in NYC, and my rims are still fine after 7 years.
From my experience, stopping distance is usually dictated by road conditions more than the brakes. This is with 34mm wide tires, and properly adjusted brakes (a lot of times when people complain about rim brakes, the issue is that they are not working properly).
Sure and the point is discs will much more easily stop you, the limit of the stopping power is not the brake (friction on rim) like they are in cantilevers, but with the overall physics of the system. Discs are generally in alignment, or very very obviously out of alignment (rubbing loudly), canti's have a lot more room for error.
I'd much rather have a brake system that out performs the rest of the equation than not have enough stopping power.
> I’m not the only one on my race team that would eat rims every year or two.
This really says it all. When I am cycling to work, I am not trying out for the tour de france or trying to beat someone else's strava record.
> Fact is, rim brakes are inferior in every way to just about every alternative, save two: they’re inexpensive and lightweight.
It doesn't matter if they are inferior. My regular disc brakes on my Ford Focus is inferior in every way compared to whatever they put on a Ferrari. However they are perfectly is sufficient and safe for driving to work and back.
The best argument you can make for discs vs traditional rim brakes would be that the modulation is slightly better.
It really annoys me that a lot of cyclists seem to push very expensive kit that for the commuter is completely unnecessary.
> Is it overkill not to burn through a set of rims each winter?
I dunno how you are doing this. A set of brake pads last quite a while usually. I have rims from the 1990s I am still using.
> Is it overkill to have decreased stopping distance in the rain?
Your stopping distance is more about how much grip you got on the road from the tyres. You can easily lock the wheel with a rim brake, especially if you have a good set of dual pivot or V-brakes.
For commuting you don't need anything flashy or complicated (because it will be a magnet for thieves). I literally get a basic but decent bike. If the parts are basic and ubiquitous you can go to any bike shop and get it repaired or by the parts yourself. If you have fancy equipment, then it more difficult to buy a replacement.
When I was commuting on the bike still, I used an old 90s mountain bike with V-brakes and I converted it to Single Speed (the gears were knackered) and stuck some touring tyres on there. However I was cycling in Manchester which is mostly flat. It really depends where you are.
I commute year round in Germany and never had to replace my rims because of wear. They last years until I hit a curb too hard with barely any wear. Maybe it's different in other climates?
Ignore this comment. Year-round commuting is the prime reason to buy a bike with disc brakes. Is it overkill not to burn through a set of rims each winter? Is it overkill to have decreased stopping distance in the rain?
Anyone want to go back to drum brakes on their “commuter” car? Yeah, didn’t think so.