Originally Posted by
mstateglfr
So being an apparent luddite and using clearly inferior canti brakes that will eventually kill me or wont allow for enough modulation to keep me happy in life, i havent deeply explored disc brakes. I have set them up for a handful of friends, but I am not informed on the innerworkings of all the different ways to mount them and why each is better/worse.
I do have a new 26" MTB frame and fork waiting to be built this coming winter for my oldest daughter and thatll have disc brakes. Ill use whatever type(s) the front and rear need(pretty sure its post) and call it good.
Since you clearly have an opinion on the matter, can you explain why post mounts are so terrible that it requires 2 WTFs in your post? I genuinely dont get it.
The fork is a Whiskey No9...so AllCity used the type of brake thatll work with that fork, right? Its not like they could have used something different and chose post mount or something...right?
Seriously, those are questions as I dont get the hubub and why this is an issue. Are post mount brakes somehow inferior from a design or use perspective? Are flat mount easier to set up or do they work better?
Or is all this just vanity and one looks better than the other?
Per RocThrower is it post-mount front and back, my eyes were confused on the official PR photo....But it is an odd choice for a brand new frameset, since the disc brake universe is settling on flat-mount calipers going forward. Finding post-mount legacy equipment to work with newer groups will be a thing. Mixing caliper types would have been oddly infuriating with calipers sold in sets.
"AllCity" and "Whiskey" are both corporate pseudonyms for QBP...they have the industry connections and resources to get whatever they want made. They chose not to do flat-mount. For their build-kit choice, SRAM now makes Rival with flat-mount calipers-so they weren't limited by SRAM.