Originally Posted by
corrado33
Why not just install a front rim brake as well if you want redundancy? People have toured on rim brakes, and you'd never use it unless you were in the unlikely event that the hydraulic brake failed.
I've found disk brakes to be far better, in terms of effectiveness, ease of setup, and reliability, than rim brakes. I have no desire to ever again own a bike with a front rim brake, certainly never on a fully-loaded tourer or a four-season commuter.
Originally Posted by
corrado33
Front rim brake + rear disk > front disk alone.
I strongly disagree. A disk brake up front, with no rear brake, is far better than a rim brake up front and a disk brake in the rear. My rear brake might get used as much as 1% of the time, but I doubt it's that frequent, probably only a tenth of that. I'd much rather have a more effective front brake, and no rear brake. Front and rear brakes are not equally important.