Share.

21 Comments

  1. Not sure I’d want a brake rotor next to my unprotected leg. Plus, it looks like the caliper might interfere with whatever footwear you have on.

    * I’m not sure the crank could even rotate with the caliper in the way.

  2. So you add more parts, complexity, and weight for what benefit over traditional brakes?

  3. I initially thought it was a very good idea until you consider the long, ugly housing going down the downtube would be much less aesthetically pleasing than the much shorter housing required for the fork, even if it is disc. What if the brake line is internally routed? That is an internal tube and the designed and machined caliper mount that need to be brazed on. Not to mention a machinist to make a custom rotor carrier and spacers and crank spindle. At this point, most people would lean toward the simplicity of getting a $100 surly disc fork or carbon Chinese wonder and call it a day. Or a front rim brake is still very acceptable.
    It sounds like what would seem really cool is a brake that is totally hidden in the rear hub itself and doesn’t rely on a lever at all to use it. That way, you can have a completely brakeless look without any levers or cables. My daughter’s $20 bike actually has one. I’m waiting for her to outgrow it so I can use the hub.

  4. Plastic_Blood1782 on

    The real reason is mechanical advantage.  It is a lot easier to slow down a faster moving part.   Due to the gear ratio this disc moves a lot slower than the wheel.  So now you need a lot of force and you now have brakes that are reliant on your chain not breaking or slipping off which will happen eventually.

Leave A Reply