Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Hybrid Bicycles
Reload this Page >

Disc brakes vs rim brakes on Giant escape

Hybrid Bicycles Where else would you go to discuss these fun, versatile bikes?

Disc brakes vs rim brakes on Giant escape

Old 06-10-19, 07:23 PM
  #1  
Wishiwasabiker
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Disc brakes vs rim brakes on Giant escape

Found a Giant escape 3 with rim brakes for $250. Looking for a bike to get started with, but I was under the impression that disc brakes were the way to go. Any input?
Wishiwasabiker is offline  
Old 06-10-19, 10:51 PM
  #2  
EGBigelo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Western PA
Posts: 108
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
EGBigelo is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 02:06 AM
  #3  
HerrKaLeun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,338

Bikes: Giant Toughroad SLR1 and Motobecane Sturgis NX

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 653 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 15 Posts
If you go the used route, you have less choice for modern features.

For new I definitely would go disc, but for used older options are OK. That is part of the lower price. Same with drivetrain options etc.

Just make sure it is not that rotton bad bottom level Escape with freewheel, that will severely limit drivetrain options.
HerrKaLeun is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 03:36 AM
  #4  
DorkDisk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Kips Bay, NY
Posts: 969
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked 11 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Wishiwasabiker View Post
Found a Giant escape 3 with rim brakes for $250. Looking for a bike to get started with, but I was under the impression that disc brakes were the way to go. Any input?
On a new bike above a certain price point, yes.

However, realize that V brakes were a bigger game changer than disk brakes were. When Vs appeared, cantilevers instantly disappeared from all MTBs, it took disks about 15 years to take over MTBs.
DorkDisk is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 03:44 AM
  #5  
Trevtassie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Down Under
Posts: 1,124

Bikes: A steel framed 26" off road tourer from a manufacturer who thinks they are cool. Giant Anthem. Trek 720 Multiroad pub bike. 10 kids bikes all under 20". Assorted waifs and unfinished projects.

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 315 Post(s)
Liked 33 Times in 17 Posts
For 250 bucks it doesn't matter. Though unless its very new 250 for a 350 bike seems steep. Just get some good aftermarket brake pads like Koolstop or Jagwire with replaceable pads in metal holders, adjust them well and ride the wheels off it. V brakes work very very well when set up properly.
Trevtassie is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 07:04 AM
  #6  
hokiefyd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Northern Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 2,140

Bikes: 2018 Redline Zander, 2018 Giant Roam 2, 2015 Trek Verve 3, 1997 Trek 750, 1969 Peugeot PO-18

Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 724 Post(s)
Liked 26 Times in 25 Posts
Originally Posted by DorkDisk View Post
However, realize that V brakes were a bigger game changer than disk brakes were. When Vs appeared, cantilevers instantly disappeared from all MTBs, it took disks about 15 years to take over MTBs.
I think the primary reasons linear pull brakes took over almost immediately are:

  1. Cost; it costs less to build a bike with linear pull brakes (compared with cantilevers) because they're easier to setup and require fewer parts (no straddle cable, etc). Shimano's staddle cable simplified setup of cantilevers, but also worsened the performance of the brakes in many cases. Linear pull brakes cured all of that, and they were cheaper, too!
  2. Compatibility and standardization; no frame changes were required -- they were designed to work with standard cantilever mounts, so design changes to the frame could be avoided. They didn't even need different hubs; all they needed were long-pull brake levers (which are interchangeable, from a cost perspective, with short-pull brake levers). They were literally bolt-on parts using the then-standard design (cantilevers), which had been standardized across the industry for three or four decades or more at the time.
Disc brakes, of course, required more fundamental changes. You now needed a fork and frame with disc mounts, and hubs. What's our standard? In the beginning, we didn't really have one. We had the "International Standard" that wasn't adopted across the board, with its 51mm tabs. One problem with IS is the lateral distance from the caliper to the rotor was different for front vs. rear, meaning different adapters or calipers were required. There were also other proprietary standards, like Hayes and Manitou. The 74mm Post Mount has become the de facto standard for disc brakes as of late, and the reference design is 160mm front and rear, which is pretty common today. But just wait -- there's a relatively new player in town, and it's another proprietary standard: the Shimano Flat Mount. I think the reference design with Flat Mount is back to 160mm front/140mm rear, like IS, but I'm not sure on that.

I think it's fair to say that disc brakes have completely disrupted the cycling industry, from design considerations (all of the various standards) to regulatory considerations (what will be allowed in racing). Linear pull brakes, such as Shimano's V-brake, were an evolutionary design from the already-standard cantilever, making its adoption cheap and fast.
hokiefyd is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 07:18 AM
  #7  
hokiefyd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Northern Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 2,140

Bikes: 2018 Redline Zander, 2018 Giant Roam 2, 2015 Trek Verve 3, 1997 Trek 750, 1969 Peugeot PO-18

Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 724 Post(s)
Liked 26 Times in 25 Posts
Originally Posted by Wishiwasabiker View Post
Found a Giant escape 3 with rim brakes for $250. Looking for a bike to get started with, but I was under the impression that disc brakes were the way to go. Any input?
I think it's mostly up to personal preference. The good thing is you have a lot of options to try. You can go to any bike dealer and try bikes with linear pull brakes, mechanical disc brakes, and hydraulic disc brakes. Ride all three options with an open mind and see what feels the best to you. I suspect you'll walk away from that experience knowing exactly what you want. If not, if one type doesn't speak any stronger to you than another, then that's good to know also -- you have more choice in the used market!
hokiefyd is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 07:38 AM
  #8  
MRT2
Senior Member
 
MRT2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 5,875

Bikes: 2012 Salsa Casseroll, 2009 Kona Blast, 1997 Bianchi Advantage, 1994 Trek 930.

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 828 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by HerrKaLeun View Post
If you go the used route, you have less choice for modern features.

For new I definitely would go disc, but for used older options are OK. That is part of the lower price. Same with drivetrain options etc.

Just make sure it is not that rotton bad bottom level Escape with freewheel, that will severely limit drivetrain options.
It probably is, but what can you expect for $250?
MRT2 is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 07:50 AM
  #9  
MRT2
Senior Member
 
MRT2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 5,875

Bikes: 2012 Salsa Casseroll, 2009 Kona Blast, 1997 Bianchi Advantage, 1994 Trek 930.

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 828 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Wishiwasabiker View Post
Found a Giant escape 3 with rim brakes for $250. Looking for a bike to get started with, but I was under the impression that disc brakes were the way to go. Any input?
The industry is pushing consumers to hydraulic discs, just as it always pushes consumers to the next big thing. That said, you are looking at a bike for $250. Unless you are prepared to spend, maybe $600 or $700, you have to compromise somewhere, and going with inexpensive V brakes that still work fine is a sensible compromise.

Besides, old fashioned V brakes are inexpensive, replacement pads are cheap, and they are easy to set up and work great.

IMO, you don't really need disc brakes on a hybrid or a road bike, unless you live in the mountains and/or ride a lot in the rain.

I understand that it is s concern not having the latest technology, but to a certain extent, almost every cyclist who has been riding for more than a couple of years is probably riding on yesterday's technology. My preferred bike has cantilever brakes, which are really old school. Yet somehow, I have managed to survive and keep my bike in good repair. (and I have no plans to replace it)
MRT2 is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 07:51 AM
  #10  
Alloyboy
Member
 
Alloyboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Guelph.Canada. 43.54N 80.25W
Posts: 28

Bikes: Triumph DX, Trek 800. Empire 3 speed. Renegade Mtn. Comp. K2 T-Nine Crosswind.

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Wishiwasabiker View Post
Found a Giant escape 3 with rim brakes for $250. Looking for a bike to get started with, but I was under the impression that disc brakes were the way to go. Any input?
Welcome to the forum. You have received good advice from others, try the three types of brakes as mentioned.
I would keep your eyes peeled on CL now that summer is almost here. Folks are cleaning out their basements and garages these days. I wish you lived next door, we would have fun getting you into the best of pastimes.
Alloyboy is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 08:39 AM
  #11  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 41,401

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6700 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 120 Times in 101 Posts
Cool stil your choice..

Originally Posted by Wishiwasabiker View Post
Found a Giant escape 3 with rim brakes for $250. Looking for a bike to get started with, but I was under the impression that disc brakes were the way to go. Any input?
Marketing has created a demand, for them .. I have 2 bikes with out rim brakes ..

Oldest is drum brakes , no issue in 3 decades.. , newer is disc brake ,
these Bikes see use in the foul weather..


summer and good weather recreational rider , probably don't need disc brakes ..

Particularly if you are so cost conscious..














...

Last edited by fietsbob; 06-11-19 at 08:43 AM.
fietsbob is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 09:45 AM
  #12  
HerrKaLeun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,338

Bikes: Giant Toughroad SLR1 and Motobecane Sturgis NX

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 653 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by MRT2 View Post
It probably is, but what can you expect for $250?
I just realized it is the 3, with freewheel. It only cost $400 new. $250 is a ripoff. The components are almost Walmart level. The only thing it has over a Wally bike is a sealed cartridge BB, which cost $15. At least get a 2 with freehub. Or negotiate price to $100.

The low level LBS bikes basically trick you with the brandname. You basically never upgrade anything on those economically due to the bad base. For example upgrading to a cassette for 8+ speed would require a new hub/wheel.
HerrKaLeun is offline  
Old 06-11-19, 12:07 PM
  #13  
fat2fit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked 11 Times in 10 Posts
The only thing I disliked about my rim brakes when I owned my road bike vs my disc brakes on my dual sport 2 is the fact that my disc brakes stop slowly or instantly depending how hard i pull the brake lever, the rim brakes either didn't stop fast enough or they were too abrupt in how quick they stopped if I pulled the handle hard. Honestly though, they both work great and for $250 I wouldn't be picky. I just like my disc brakes because they require less maintenance and look better on the bike.
fat2fit is offline  
Old 06-12-19, 03:37 AM
  #14  
DorkDisk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Kips Bay, NY
Posts: 969
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked 11 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by hokiefyd View Post
I think the primary reasons linear pull brakes took over almost immediately are:

  1. Cost; it costs less to build a bike with linear pull brakes (compared with cantilevers) because they're easier to setup and require fewer parts (no straddle cable, etc). Shimano's staddle cable simplified setup of cantilevers, but also worsened the performance of the brakes in many cases. Linear pull brakes cured all of that, and they were cheaper, too!
  2. Compatibility and standardization; no frame changes were required -- they were designed to work with standard cantilever mounts, so design changes to the frame could be avoided. They didn't even need different hubs; all they needed were long-pull brake levers (which are interchangeable, from a cost perspective, with short-pull brake levers). They were literally bolt-on parts using the then-standard design (cantilevers), which had been standardized across the industry for three or four decades or more at the time.
Disc brakes, of course, required more fundamental changes. You now needed a fork and frame with disc mounts, and hubs. What's our standard? In the beginning, we didn't really have one. We had the "International Standard" that wasn't adopted across the board, with its 51mm tabs. One problem with IS is the lateral distance from the caliper to the rotor was different for front vs. rear, meaning different adapters or calipers were required. There were also other proprietary standards, like Hayes and Manitou. The 74mm Post Mount has become the de facto standard for disc brakes as of late, and the reference design is 160mm front and rear, which is pretty common today. But just wait -- there's a relatively new player in town, and it's another proprietary standard: the Shimano Flat Mount. I think the reference design with Flat Mount is back to 160mm front/140mm rear, like IS, but I'm not sure on that.

I think it's fair to say that disc brakes have completely disrupted the cycling industry, from design considerations (all of the various standards) to regulatory considerations (what will be allowed in racing). Linear pull brakes, such as Shimano's V-brake, were an evolutionary design from the already-standard cantilever, making its adoption cheap and fast.
I recall brake performance being what made MTBers adopt V brakes overnight in 96. It was the big news out of the blue (inb4 Ben Capron, Kestrel Bontrager) and everybody uninstalled their expensive aftermarket levers and cantis and bought XT or XTR when before, nobody bought Shimano brakes. XTR M950 killed the entire aftermarket brake and crank market overnight. It was a monumental metallurgical smackdown and the XTR and XT calipers and levers were directly responsible for the disruption in the MTB brake market. Large, important companies went out of business and parts disappeared until ebay, the interwebs, and N+1 became a big thing.

For the industry, it freed frame design from the constraints of having a centered hanger. This was huge and opened the way for modern suspension design. Marketing took over and pushed strong brakes on consumers, but this was a win win. Slight changes were required -stops and beefier stays but were minor.

Most bike parts are bolt-on; but to keep it relevant, suspension at this point in time had just been accepted as the way forward and was heavily marketed as an aftermarket item. However, many (including I) held out and rigid steel is still a thing - unlike cantis. Even thumbies are a thing, but not riding cantis on MTBs. Another example is X+1 speeds - its just a few parts away...

After disks were mainstream in MTBs, many high end XC rigs were still Vs for a long time. High end V performance and lower weight kept Vs viable. Many rigs were disk front and V rear.

Road bikes and the UCI have understandebly have been slow to adopt to disks, but seeing how far back disks on bikes go, its hard for me to see them as disruptive. News of Camapgnolo working on disks was out for years. Read about disks in 92, got disks in 99, road bikes get disks deep into the 2ks..... Hard to see it as disruptive IMO.

V brakes are bolt on, but nobody would have bolted them on if they weren't an improvement.

Back to OP, 250 for a G Escape is too much IMO.
DorkDisk is offline  
Old 06-12-19, 06:22 AM
  #15  
hokiefyd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Northern Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 2,140

Bikes: 2018 Redline Zander, 2018 Giant Roam 2, 2015 Trek Verve 3, 1997 Trek 750, 1969 Peugeot PO-18

Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 724 Post(s)
Liked 26 Times in 25 Posts
Originally Posted by DorkDisk View Post
For the industry, it freed frame design from the constraints of having a centered hanger. This was huge and opened the way for modern suspension design. Marketing took over and pushed strong brakes on consumers, but this was a win win. Slight changes were required -stops and beefier stays but were minor.
This is a good point, about suspension fork design. Traditional cantilevers can work with suspension forks, but it's a more difficult design, with a cable stop required on a tall arch. It's not a very elegant solution (though some forks designed for this look pretty cool), and linear pull brakes made this a lot easier.

Originally Posted by DorkDisk View Post
Most bike parts are bolt-on; but to keep it relevant, suspension at this point in time had just been accepted as the way forward and was heavily marketed as an aftermarket item. However, many (including I) held out and rigid steel is still a thing - unlike cantis. Even thumbies are a thing, but not riding cantis on MTBs. Another example is X+1 speeds - its just a few parts away...
This is what I meant about "disruptive". Most bike parts are bolt-on, but disc systems are not. They required fundamental design changes to bicycles, including considerations for fork design (including blade structure, etc), frame design, etc. It started with simply welding on an IS tab on the rear seat stay, but this has evolved slowly into disc-only frame designs. Disc brakes took over the MTB world fairly rapidly, but have seen much slower adoption in the road cycling world. I think a lot of this has do to do with the nature of the two segments. MTBs themselves grew out of a very non-traditionalist mindset, where cyclists cobbled together whatever they needed to build something to go off road. There was no tradition, no "right way" to do something. You made what you had work and any new component that improved your performance was welcomed. Linear pull brakes and front suspension in the 1990s. Disc brakes and full squish in the 2000s. Etc. In comparison, road cycling tends to be driven by tradition and provenance as much as anything else...and of course the heavy hand of the UCI.

Back to cantis, there are some very good ones made today, and many feel that their performance is every bit the equal of linear pull brakes with similar pad compounds and correct setup. That's where linear pull brakes really took an edge -- they're dead easy to setup. Traditional cantilevers can be very enjoyable to tune and use, if you're inclined to that. With some understanding of the maths involved, one can tune the mechanical advantage in a variety of ways, and really get superb performance out of them. It takes time and effort, though, which are two things linear pull brakes don't require to set working well. You bolt them on and go. I'm not saying that's a bad thing -- quite the opposite in fact. It make good braking accessible to those who didn't know how to, or what to, fiddle with their cantilever brakes all day.

I have a set of modern cantis on my 1997 Trek 750. Great bike, and great brakes. I had linear pulls on it for a while, but switched back to cantilevers for the more traditional look. And I still have my first "big boy" bike, a 1993 gas pipe MTB. It came with low profile Shimano cantis back in the day, and I put Avid linear pull brakes on it some years ago. I still use that bike some, though admittedly fairly infrequently.
hokiefyd is offline  
Old 06-12-19, 07:18 AM
  #16  
rumrunn6
Senior Member
 
rumrunn6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 25 miles northwest of Boston
Posts: 22,660

Bikes: Bottecchia Sprint, GT Timberline 29r

Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2956 Post(s)
Liked 47 Times in 42 Posts
my rim brake road bike slows &/or stops just fine. my MTB has disc brakes & I like them cuz sometimes I have steep descents & they do a much better job than the marginally effective rims brakes in those situations. if you don't think you be going down steep hillsides, I suspect rim brakes will be fine
rumrunn6 is offline  
Old 06-12-19, 07:44 PM
  #17  
Wishiwasabiker
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HerrKaLeun View Post
I just realized it is the 3, with freewheel. It only cost $400 new. $250 is a ripoff. The components are almost Walmart level. The only thing it has over a Wally bike is a sealed cartridge BB, which cost $15. At least get a 2 with freehub. Or negotiate price to $100.


The low level LBS bikes basically trick you with the brandname. You basically never upgrade anything on those economically due to the bad base. For example upgrading to a cassette for 8+ speed would require a new hub/wheel.

Thanks to all for the info, very helpful. It's hard to get solid information online since most of what I read is someone trying to sell me the bike. I'm sure things will make more sense after I get some actual miles in and see what works -- just don't want to start completely blind. I'm not opposed to spending a bit more if I know it's going to be decent.

What I've learned -- embarrassing but I assumed the Escape 3 was an upgrade from the Escape 2.. obviously not so I'm going to hold off. Would make sense to buy new at that price.

I also need to consider my terrain, I'm in the mountains and will have some hills. Also don't mind short rides to work in rainy weather so would like my bike to handle that too.

Still on the hunt.
Wishiwasabiker is offline  
Old 06-13-19, 08:01 PM
  #18  
DorkDisk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Kips Bay, NY
Posts: 969
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked 11 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by hokiefyd View Post
This is a good point, about suspension fork design. Traditional cantilevers can work with suspension forks, but it's a more difficult design, with a cable stop required on a tall arch. It's not a very elegant solution (though some forks designed for this look pretty cool), and linear pull brakes made this a lot easier.



This is what I meant about "disruptive". Most bike parts are bolt-on, but disc systems are not. They required fundamental design changes to bicycles, including considerations for fork design (including blade structure, etc), frame design, etc. It started with simply welding on an IS tab on the rear seat stay, but this has evolved slowly into disc-only frame designs. Disc brakes took over the MTB world fairly rapidly, but have seen much slower adoption in the road cycling world. I think a lot of this has do to do with the nature of the two segments. MTBs themselves grew out of a very non-traditionalist mindset, where cyclists cobbled together whatever they needed to build something to go off road. There was no tradition, no "right way" to do something. You made what you had work and any new component that improved your performance was welcomed. Linear pull brakes and front suspension in the 1990s. Disc brakes and full squish in the 2000s. Etc. In comparison, road cycling tends to be driven by tradition and provenance as much as anything else...and of course the heavy hand of the UCI.

Back to cantis, there are some very good ones made today, and many feel that their performance is every bit the equal of linear pull brakes with similar pad compounds and correct setup. That's where linear pull brakes really took an edge -- they're dead easy to setup. Traditional cantilevers can be very enjoyable to tune and use, if you're inclined to that. With some understanding of the maths involved, one can tune the mechanical advantage in a variety of ways, and really get superb performance out of them. It takes time and effort, though, which are two things linear pull brakes don't require to set working well. You bolt them on and go. I'm not saying that's a bad thing -- quite the opposite in fact. It make good braking accessible to those who didn't know how to, or what to, fiddle with their cantilever brakes all day.

I have a set of modern cantis on my 1997 Trek 750. Great bike, and great brakes. I had linear pulls on it for a while, but switched back to cantilevers for the more traditional look. And I still have my first "big boy" bike, a 1993 gas pipe MTB. It came with low profile Shimano cantis back in the day, and I put Avid linear pull brakes on it some years ago. I still use that bike some, though admittedly fairly infrequently.
I was referring to rear suspension. By going linear the space needed for hangers can be reallocated, can fit within the foot circle, and routing is easier and more immune from motion. Most post '96 suspension bikes with canti posts cannot accommodate cantilevers. Cantis were holding back frame design.

If you think that disks were (are?) more disruptive, that's great but that was not my point: The performance increase from cantis to Vs was much larger than the one from Vs to disks.

In 93 I was in college, working in bike shops, and occasionally racing XC mountain bikes. Bike-wise, I just bent the forks on my beloved Haro Extreme and was building up this 21 lb steel hardtail

I still have cantis also, but that's not the point. V brakes were the first brakes that worked for off-road biking. Just about any brake is adequate for city riding. V brakes gave suspension design more freedom, and the increased traction benefited from the increased braking power. Cantis were not up to the task due to routing issues, vulnerability from monkey motion, placement issues, and lack of performance in off-road steeps.
DorkDisk is offline  
Old 06-14-19, 12:09 PM
  #19  
CarloM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
For those who follow GCN on youtube, they just released a video on the benefits and drawbacks of both brake systems on their Tech Show Ep. 76. The video is 34m long but don't worry, the rim vs. disc section is only the first 12m. I thought they did a very balanced and thorough job of talking about pros and cons for both, which reinforced my purchasing decision (hydraulic disc) but also made me fully understand why someone else with different riding needs and priorities would choose rim brakes.
CarloM is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.