Originally Posted by
Miles2go
When a rider buddy makes this point (which I do agree with as far as ultimate braking performance), I often ask, "Tell me about all the times rim brakes let you down, or failed you." Crickets, and sometimes even an amazed realization in response.
Rim brakes have worked very well for decades. They get the job done, no doubt and I'm not about to ditch my Wilier because it doesn't brake quite as well as my Trek.
For me personally and why I do see a place for discs as an option, I wouldn't ask "how many times have they let me down" though - albeit I have had some late stops in the wet before but nothing to phase me and deter me. The real advantage of discs for me personally is on fast descents. An example would be a local 6km 7-10% descent I often do where speeds are high and it is twisty. My PR on that descent is on my disc-braked bike and for good reason: I can brake later, more confidently. My rim-braked bike has me wondering at 80km/h if it is going to make the corners; I am braking earlier to make sure.
There is absolutely no doubt that in high speed descents, discs make you faster. I ride with plenty of Pro's who agree. It is less about being let down by failing to brake and more about speed gains from braking later, faster for many of us. The "let me down" issue only comes into play in the wet and where pads meet carbon. Alu rims not so much an issue in the wet. Discs are better for speed - sorta like aero is better for speed. A non-aero bike will work just fine, not let you down, but aero will save watts, make you faster. I see discs in a similar light.
