I read an article that said disc brakes were banned from UCI CX races....Anyone have any ideas why?
Disc brakes banned from UCI cylcocross races
- Thread starter Heidi
- Start date
http://www.velonews.com/tech/report/articles/5149.0.html
Arn't the UCI stupidly traditional?
Don't they ban non traditonal frames from their events as well?
It all appears a bit stupid to me.
Arn't the UCI stupidly traditional?
Don't they ban non traditonal frames from their events as well?
It all appears a bit stupid to me.
Not any more stupid than actually running discs on a CX bike. Honestly, I don't think they should outlaw discs but I still can't figure out why anyone would want them. Makes no sense.
Mud
Traditional CX brakes are more than enough. Plus, the stopping power is greater than the tires can handle. I can lock up my wheels with Avid cantis/ultegra levers no problem, mud or nor mud. CX racing is about minimalism- not tools, no bottles etc. Who would want disc brakes? I've never been in a situation that needed more stopping power than I had readily available.
I have raced and continue to race plenty of UCI 'cross events. If you have discs on your bike you are an idiot. The slight gain in wet weather braking is totally blown out of the water by wheel selection and ridicullos weight gains.\
At the worcester race on saturday the women were swapping bikes every lap in the pit because it saved about .25 of a second instead of going through a set of doubles.
In a sport where you need at least 3 bikes and two support people to be competitive there is really no excuse for the weight gain.
At the worcester race on saturday the women were swapping bikes every lap in the pit because it saved about .25 of a second instead of going through a set of doubles.
In a sport where you need at least 3 bikes and two support people to be competitive there is really no excuse for the weight gain.
In light of the fact that UCI allow disc brakes for XC mountainbike events, it makes no sense to also ban them from cross. It might be a case where no one has submitted disc brakes for aproval.
I'd want to run them if I were racing cross. I have raced cross quite a bit in the past. I've crashed and ridden off course because the brakes just weren't working. But with current technology there would be a significant weight penalty using them. On some courses it might be worthwhile.
I'd want to run them if I were racing cross. I have raced cross quite a bit in the past. I've crashed and ridden off course because the brakes just weren't working. But with current technology there would be a significant weight penalty using them. On some courses it might be worthwhile.
Why not? what pray-tell is the similarity between XC and CX?
It's like saying they don't allow brakes on track bikes so brakes should be forbidden on road bikes.
CX courses are rougher
Well lets see. Well they both involve racing two wheeled bicycles as fast as possible over rough ground, trails, some pavement at the same time as other guys are racing. Both require that the bike be controlled by steering pedaling and braking. Actually, the races are very similar except for duration. Although most mountainbike courses are rougher with longer faster downhills which would make a cross bike a disadvantage. Some cross courses in dry conditions would make the heavier discs a small disadvantage, but not much. If its wet an muddy, discs might provide braking which works so much better than any rim brake as to offer a winning advantage. One crash as the result of a poorly functioning brake can be the difference.
We are allowed our opinions. But I think calling some one an idiot is too much.
Have you ever raced cyclocross race?
Have you ever promoted a 'cross race?
Have you ever pitted for world's medalists?
Canada isn't exactly a hotbed of 'cross and if you took a little roap trip down to Portland you'd see that disc brakes are for Freds. The only similarity between CX and xc mtb races are pretty much shoes and Pedals,
Rough Ground and trails are specifically forbidden by UCI rules 5.1.012-.028
among the most pressing differences are the compostion of the course... "shall include roads, country roads, bridle trails and meadows.... no less than 3 meters wide... between 2.5 and 3.5 km in length...the course must be at least 90% ridable" over the course of the 2.5-3.5 km course there must be at least two pits.
the minimum length for an xc course is 6km and the recommend race duration is 2hr 15min for elite men, the course must be 100% ridable... xc mtb competitors must be self-supporting and finish the race with the same wheels and frame they started with, so the consitency of disc brakes is a plus, but the increased time it takes to change a flat is not.
The fundamental element of cyclcross is changes in pace. acceleration is grealty affected by mass. disc brakes add additonal mass and are not necessary in poor conditions because riders have a fresh, clean bike available to them on average every 2.5 minutes...
So in summation anyone who uses disc brakes in an cyclocross race is stupid, and is hindering their own perfromance.
if you think that is unfair so-be-it, the facts stand for themselves.
Have you ever promoted a 'cross race?
Have you ever pitted for world's medalists?
Canada isn't exactly a hotbed of 'cross and if you took a little roap trip down to Portland you'd see that disc brakes are for Freds. The only similarity between CX and xc mtb races are pretty much shoes and Pedals,
Rough Ground and trails are specifically forbidden by UCI rules 5.1.012-.028
among the most pressing differences are the compostion of the course... "shall include roads, country roads, bridle trails and meadows.... no less than 3 meters wide... between 2.5 and 3.5 km in length...the course must be at least 90% ridable" over the course of the 2.5-3.5 km course there must be at least two pits.
the minimum length for an xc course is 6km and the recommend race duration is 2hr 15min for elite men, the course must be 100% ridable... xc mtb competitors must be self-supporting and finish the race with the same wheels and frame they started with, so the consitency of disc brakes is a plus, but the increased time it takes to change a flat is not.
The fundamental element of cyclcross is changes in pace. acceleration is grealty affected by mass. disc brakes add additonal mass and are not necessary in poor conditions because riders have a fresh, clean bike available to them on average every 2.5 minutes...
So in summation anyone who uses disc brakes in an cyclocross race is stupid, and is hindering their own perfromance.
if you think that is unfair so-be-it, the facts stand for themselves.
because they are stupid.
I am about as libertarian as it gets, but when it comes to Sport I am very draconian, and i really just don't want to see neophyte racers getting bamboozeled into using something stupid.
The 'Dale folks are already scrambling to get discs approved, for no reason better than they invested a little bit of money into tooling and cps road discs.
I share a common vision with the cyclorazzi of Western Mass, cross is what we think it is, Groenendal is God, and 'cross is what it's all about.
You find poop in your cornflakes this morning? Your entitled to your opinion. I don't believe your entitled to call others stupid because you disagree.
Yes I know the rules differences. I hadn't referred to them lately but thnks for the refresher. I have put on XC races with my former club as well as weekly crits and larger crits. I have been a commisaire. I raced up to Cat 2 on the road and Pro elite off road. In my first year of racing I won the cyclocross series in Novice class and was second the following year in Cat 4.
You think disc brakes on a cross bike are stupid just because of the weight? Might be a pound heavier for the pair. How much will that actually slow a person down? I suspect not too much. If a serius cross racers has 3 bikes, and a crew to help change bikes and wheels, wheel changes are not a factor.
It is a different game than XC, no disagreement there. We're only talking brakes here. I don't get the vehement animosty.
Yes I know the rules differences. I hadn't referred to them lately but thnks for the refresher. I have put on XC races with my former club as well as weekly crits and larger crits. I have been a commisaire. I raced up to Cat 2 on the road and Pro elite off road. In my first year of racing I won the cyclocross series in Novice class and was second the following year in Cat 4.
You think disc brakes on a cross bike are stupid just because of the weight? Might be a pound heavier for the pair. How much will that actually slow a person down? I suspect not too much. If a serius cross racers has 3 bikes, and a crew to help change bikes and wheels, wheel changes are not a factor.
It is a different game than XC, no disagreement there. We're only talking brakes here. I don't get the vehement animosty.
I agree disc brakes are not needed for CX. And I do race CX as well as in the rain and mud.
Brakes are lame in general they just slow you down what the fun in that?
Brakes are lame in general they just slow you down what the fun in that?
I say the UCI should ban clipless pedals from all Cross races and Helmets, and Spandex..
Toe Clips, Hairnets and Wool Jerseys!!!! retro4lyfe!!!!
Toe Clips, Hairnets and Wool Jerseys!!!! retro4lyfe!!!!
An extra pound is going to add at least 5-8 seconds over the course of a one hour race. That is often the difference between first and 5th place... that is very significant.
I am rightously pissed about clueless product managers designing bikes that outright suck and foisting them upon newbee consumers.
Next years trend will be carbon rear trainangles that are heavier than aluminum, and then what, a suspension seatpost? all this useless crap does not belong on a race bike.
And having to dismount and run a section because your brakes are too buggered up to modulate and remount will loose you 8.31 seconds. And the wide open stays which won't collect any or at least much less mud will weigh less than the mud clogged cantis and the rider might not need a bike swap which is faster. If the brakes work well the rider can enter a turn and brake later which will let the person pass at corners. A lighter bike is not always the faster bike. I think you need a balance between weight and function.
Certainly on some courses disc brakes are not needed. Other times they will offer a braking advantage, I think, sufficient to offset whatever the weight gain might slow a person.
And just for added factual reference
Avid mechanical disc and rotor weighs 353 grams, plus the added weight of the disc hub which if you have the right ones is not much. Hugi 240 disc hubs are only a few grams heavier than the non disc counterpart.
Spooky cross canti's weigh 152 grams plus about 40 grams for pads. The canti studs on the frame probably weigh more than the adaptor needed to mount the avid disc caliper.
So the actual weight difference will be about 350 grams give or take. That's less than pound and non rotational weight. Plus the Cannondale disc cross frames weigh less than the canti frames as the seat stays are lighter. They don't need the beef at the canti mount.
Certainly on some courses disc brakes are not needed. Other times they will offer a braking advantage, I think, sufficient to offset whatever the weight gain might slow a person.
And just for added factual reference
Avid mechanical disc and rotor weighs 353 grams, plus the added weight of the disc hub which if you have the right ones is not much. Hugi 240 disc hubs are only a few grams heavier than the non disc counterpart.
Spooky cross canti's weigh 152 grams plus about 40 grams for pads. The canti studs on the frame probably weigh more than the adaptor needed to mount the avid disc caliper.
So the actual weight difference will be about 350 grams give or take. That's less than pound and non rotational weight. Plus the Cannondale disc cross frames weigh less than the canti frames as the seat stays are lighter. They don't need the beef at the canti mount.
seems to me like your going about it all wrong...
shouldn't you want everyone else to be riding the heavier stuff? If it was legal and all the dump n00bies were using it, wouldn't it be in your advantage to let them?
I don't know about you guys but I'm all for slowing down the competition.
I have a teammate that is racing the Giant in the mens B class with disc brakes and he is kicking my ars and alot of others as well. He was third overall in the seattle series, he missed the last race so he dropped a little.
But I am slow though so maybe this is not a good example?
But I am slow though so maybe this is not a good example?
It's almost as valid as me pointing out that no major pro has used discs that I can recall.Originally posted by gofstdh
I have a teammate that is racing the Giant in the mens B class with disc brakes and he is kicking my ars and alot of others as well. He was third overall in the seattle series, he missed the last race so he dropped a little.
But I am slow though so maybe this is not a good example?
"They are stupid"
"They are too heavy"
"I don't like them".....
Are all geat reasons for choosing not to run disc brakes on a CX bike.
How about a good reason to BAN them???
"They are too heavy"
"I don't like them".....
Are all geat reasons for choosing not to run disc brakes on a CX bike.
How about a good reason to BAN them???
To keep cross bikes different from mtb's
they've already banned flat bars and tires wider than 35mm , so i think that it makes sense to go ahead and get rid of discs.
banning the brakes gets rid of the incentive for major manufacturers to develop new high-end bikes that are disc combatible, making whole tons of wheelsets obsolete.
This rule affects about 350 people in the entire world, and of those 350 people I'd say that maybe 5 of those people (curt davis, chris peck, and the 3 swiss kids who ride cannondales) are going to be affected by it.
There are 3 swiss under 23's on optimo cross frames,
Even if the no discs rule is overturned by cannondale's lobbying i doubt you will ever see anyone in the UCI top 100 with discs on there bike, but the b and c field at US races will be full of them.
You know they use to say no Pro XC ride would ever race a full suspension bike. And didn't Filip Meirhaeghe finsh off the season by taking the final World Cup XC on his S-Works Epic bike that helped him earn the rainbow jersey. Interesting how things change as tech. gets better. Disc brakes are only going to get lighter and better. :devil:
:devil:I remember hearing that no one would ever use these "new" technologies too... clipless pedals, disk wheels, aero-time trial bars, STI, cleated shoes and way back in the day *gasp* mountain bikes...
but the same could be said for the doh-dohs like Bio-Pace, Delta Brakes, and Campy MTB groupo's...
but the same could be said for the doh-dohs like Bio-Pace, Delta Brakes, and Campy MTB groupo's...
Originally posted by gofstdh
You know they use to say no Pro XC ride would ever race a full suspension bike. And didn't Filip Meirhaeghe finsh off the season by taking the final World Cup XC on his S-Works Epic bike that helped him earn the rainbow jersey. Interesting how things change as tech. gets better. Disc brakes are only going to get lighter and better.
he won on that bike b/c he has to ride that bike according to his contract.......
I had read it was because the discs had a possibility of cutting you when you where hopping barriers. Wish I could remember where I read it...
As someone who has recieved stitches as a result of avid rotor i can attest to the fact that they can do damage... No one has yet been injured by a rotor (cuz 8 people in the world ride discs), but i think the "injury risk" propositon is from Cyclocrossworld.com
there's a # of possibilities, that being one of em. i'm w/ suspect on this, disc's don't make a whole lot of sense on a CX bike for numerous reasons. the main one being that your wheel is going to start skidding all over the place before your brake even reaches near it's max braking potential.
That's my main issue with the whole thing. Cantis have more power than I need if adjusted correctly. The tires don't have enough grip to necessitate anything more.
No I don't think so. He was quoted as saying he chose the Epic for the Worlds because he thought the course made full suspension an advantage. I'm pretty sure he has the option to use one or the other. He used his hardtail at most of the other events too. Most of the top guys do get the option to use fs or ht. Cannondale might be an exception. I think they have to ride the Scalpel.
I fully understand the need for the rules to keep cross different. And I support the rules to a certain extent. Cross to me is supposed to be a race with "road" bikes on terrain where the road bike is not the best tool. So in that sense it is logical to set a rule to not allow disc brakes. I don't think disc brakes would really change the essence of cross racing. racing should be about the athlete more than the machine. But the rules need to allow technological advances. We certainly wouldn't want all riders on identical 25# steel framed bikes with wooden rimed wheels. Nor do you want one teams riders to win because they have 10 pound carbon wunder bikes and no other team does.
And disc brakes are not really about the power but about the control of braking power. I've been using disc brakes on my XC bikes for 4 years now. I've been riding my old Hardtail with XT v brakes for commuting and off road rides too the last week because my other frame has been sent back. Its dry here right now so I don't realize the all weather advantage of discs but the v brakes do not modulate as well as the discs. I keep locking up the back wheel and brake too abruptly because the power comes on too quick. I would with enough time adapt my techniques, but throw some water in the mix and in comparison to discs the rim brakes will suck.
wtf is wrong with the UCI. They are hellbent on holding back technology!
And if the disc brakes are a disadvantage, why ban them? Should they also ban the use of wood or copper as a frame material? How about filling ones tires with water instead of air...maybe that should be banned as well. Oh...and that new fangeled "indexed" shifting...gotta ban that. How about composite wheels?
Come to think of it, we should all go back to using highwheelers with solid rubber tires. If the UCI had the same attitude 100 years ago that they do today that is exactly where we would be.
Why hold back technology? Shouldn't racing better the breed? I think any bike should be able to be used on any course. Seriously- why not? If you want to run the TDY on a recumbent, good for you. If you want to take a road bike to an XC race, fine. A downhill bike to a cyclocross race? Sure, if you think you can handle it. If they are a supposed disadvantage, go ahead and let them run it. It is better for you that way.
And if the disc brakes are a disadvantage, why ban them? Should they also ban the use of wood or copper as a frame material? How about filling ones tires with water instead of air...maybe that should be banned as well. Oh...and that new fangeled "indexed" shifting...gotta ban that. How about composite wheels?
Come to think of it, we should all go back to using highwheelers with solid rubber tires. If the UCI had the same attitude 100 years ago that they do today that is exactly where we would be.
Why hold back technology? Shouldn't racing better the breed? I think any bike should be able to be used on any course. Seriously- why not? If you want to run the TDY on a recumbent, good for you. If you want to take a road bike to an XC race, fine. A downhill bike to a cyclocross race? Sure, if you think you can handle it. If they are a supposed disadvantage, go ahead and let them run it. It is better for you that way.
The "nature of the sport"?! Puh-lease! Uhhh...when you squeeze them, you slow down, right? It takes kinetic energy and turns it to heat. It is not like it is a regenerative braking system or something!
been thinking about this, so MTB gets discs but you get disqualified for a mate passing you his tire lever, but CX, has no discs, but can get a complete bike change per lap ??
Exactly! that is the difference in the "nature of the sport".