Disc Brakes vs. Regular Brakes
Saturday October 3, 2009
If you want better brake performance in all conditions and aren't worried about expense or a bit more weight over conventional brakes, disc brakes may be for you.
Disc brakes--where the brake calipers squeeze on a rotor mounted on the hub of the wheel, as opposed to clamping down on the rim like conventional brakes--work better generally but see their real advantage in wet or muddy conditions. They're a touch heavier and will cost more compared to rim brakes, especially those that use hydraulic system, but you may consider want to consider them if the added performance may be worth it to you, especially if you ride a lot in wet or muddy conditions.
- Disc brakes: more information and explanation
Comments
Discs are more effective, but harder to adjust and harder to repair on the road. Excessive torque can be a problem if quick-release not tight enough. I watched a front wheel come off during hard braking. I wouldn’t have discs for long-distance cycling trips. I actually prefer the old cantelevers for in-the-middle-of-nowhere biking.
My latest commuter has disc brakes and I find them more effective for a heavier bike and rider with a load of gear attached. Yet, they do seem to be a bit more high maintenance and one needs to be very careful removing and replacing the wheels to get the rotor into its small notch. They will also squeal.
I have never used Disc Brakes ,but in spite of what I have heard about them being more Effective in Stopping Power I still prefer the Conventional Rim Brakes. Ordinary Rim Brakes are easier to fix and Adjust and are more cost Effective more Cheaper and far simpler to get the Parts for and like the other Respondents I think they are better for Long Distance Cycling. But each to their own whatever you prefer,they are getting very Popular now.I see an ever Increasing amount of Cyclists using them. I believe in Simplicity myself no need to make things to complicated.