advice

"andy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I want a new bike. I have had a mountain bike for a couple of years, just

a

Quoted message said:

cheap heavy bugger but now I want to upgrade. I do mostly off road

what is best

full suspension or hard back?

Depends what you wanna do. I prefer full suss, YMMV.

Quoted message said:

v brakes or hydraulic disks?

Hydraulic discs.

Quoted message said:

any suggestions on make looking at around £500

One without full suss at that price point and I'm not sure if you'll get a
good hardtail with hydraulic discs at that price either.

Pete

andy said:

I want a new bike. I have had a mountain bike for a couple of years, just a
cheap heavy bugger but now I want to upgrade. I do mostly off road

what is best

full suspension or hard back?
v brakes or hydraulic disks?

Hardtail if you want to be best at climbing, FS if you tend more towards
downhilling or flat stuff.

Hydraulic discs are more powerful than V-brakes and certainly better
than mechanical discs (which work well but have few real advantages over
V's except eliminating rim wear - and MTB rims get trashed all the time
so rarely get ground all the way through). You might also like to
consider Magura hydraulic rim brakes, which are equally, if not, more
powerful.

Quoted message said:

any suggestions on make looking at around £500

For a limited budget, look at 2004 or 2003 models being sold off cheap.
It's a very good time of year to buy.

"Zog The Undeniable" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:41432e86.0@entanet...

Quoted message said:

andy wrote:

Quoted message said:

Hydraulic discs are more powerful than V-brakes and certainly better than
mechanical discs (which work well but have few real advantages over V's
except eliminating rim wear

Which mechanicals have you tried Zog ? I know lots of people who swear
by mechanical discs.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hydraulic discs are more powerful than V-brakes and certainly better

than

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

mechanical discs (which work well but have few real advantages over V's
except eliminating rim wear

Which mechanicals have you tried Zog ? I know lots of people who swear
by mechanical discs.

The tektro mechanical discs on my bike do a marvellous job at slowing it and
its 21 stone rider with sufficient sensitivity of control. Can't think what
the problems are meant to be with mechanicals. Loath to pay more for a set
up that does the same job in an impercepatably 'better' way.

"vernon levy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The tektro mechanical discs on my bike do a marvellous job at slowing it

and

Quoted message said:

its 21 stone rider with sufficient sensitivity of control. Can't think

what

Quoted message said:

the problems are meant to be with mechanicals. Loath to pay more for a

set

Quoted message said:

up that does the same job in an impercepatably 'better' way.

Having never used mechanical discs I don't know how good they are but...
Having used cable cantis and vees extensively I know that the feel becomes
less smooth as the cables age and suffer from water and dirt ingress, the
difference in feel between the front and rear brakes illustrates this
problem well where the front brake with its shorter cable feels smoother.
Hydraulics don't suffer from this, they remain super smooth.
This smoothness results in a better feel making modulation easier and better
to a degree that I imagine cables would struggle to achieve, whether you
want, need or
indeed can feel the difference is another matter.

Rgds,
Pete

Andy said:

Which mechanicals have you tried Zog ? I know lots of people who swear
by mechanical discs.

You misunderstand me - I said mechanical discs work well, but they don't
give any more power than mechanical rim brakes. Hydraulic brakes
eliminate cable friction and cable stretch so are always going to offer
more power.

FWIW I tried a bike with Tektro disc calipers and I was quite impressed,
although I was surprised that the discs were too hot to touch after a
hard stop from only about 15mph. I'd be slightly concerned about them
down a long hill with lots of hairpins, as in the North Pennines.

"Zog The Undeniable" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:41434b52.0@entanet...

Quoted message said:

Andy said:

Which mechanicals have you tried Zog ? I know lots of people who swear
by mechanical discs.

You misunderstand me - I said mechanical discs work well, but they don't
give any more power than mechanical rim brakes. Hydraulic brakes
eliminate cable friction and cable stretch so are always going to offer
more power.

FWIW I tried a bike with Tektro disc calipers and I was quite impressed,
although I was surprised that the discs were too hot to touch after a hard
stop from only about 15mph. I'd be slightly concerned about them down a
long hill with lots of hairpins, as in the North Pennines.

Don't think I misunderstood. I know lots of mechanical disc users who
would disagree with your assertion that they don't give more power
than V's. Mechanicals also have some advantages over hydros e.g.
won't suffer from pump-up.

Also I would think that any disc system would generate rotor heat
under a 15mph hard stop, mine certainly do.

Quoted message said:

Having never used mechanical discs I don't know how good they are but...
Having used cable cantis and vees extensively I know that the feel becomes
less smooth as the cables age and suffer from water and dirt ingress, the
difference in feel between the front and rear brakes illustrates this
problem well where the front brake with its shorter cable feels smoother.
Hydraulics don't suffer from this, they remain super smooth.
This smoothness results in a better feel making modulation easier and

better

Quoted message said:

to a degree that I imagine cables would struggle to achieve, whether you
want, need or
indeed can feel the difference is another matter.

As someone mad enough to ride an FJ1200 Yamaha every day for three years
through rain, hail, snow and on very treacherous metalled road surfaces I
feel confident and qualified enough to offer the view that the degree of
control offered by hydraulic discs was no better or worse than those of
tektro mechanicals on loose surfaced descents on a mountain bike after two
years of fairly hard use. In fact I've taken the Yamaha down some loose
surfaced off road descents with the same degree of confidence and control.
No problems with dirt and water ingress. Debatable whether the cable
adjustement was due to cable stretch or pad wear. What I fear is that many
opinions offered are based upon imagination rather than direct experience.

Tektros do a good stooping job for a 21 stone rider. They have needed
little maintainance or adjustment. They are cheaper than hydraulics. They
are less faff to service. All facts and not suposition.

in message <[email hidden]>, andy

(') said:

I want a new bike. I have had a mountain bike for a couple of years,
just a cheap heavy bugger but now I want to upgrade. I do mostly off
road

what is best

full suspension or hard back?

I love full suspension but it doesn't come cheap. If you're doing all
day rides and particularly if you like coming downhill fast full
suspension definitely improves things, and it will flatter your ability
when doing technical stuff - you'll find really challenging surfaces
quite a bit easier to ride. However, you need to be spending more than
£1,000 - there are real problems getting the engineering to work and
cheap full suspension tends to be awful.

Quoted message said:

v brakes or hydraulic disks?

Hydraulic disks are better in seriously wet muddy conditions. In other
conditions they're no better and are heavier.

Quoted message said:

any suggestions on make looking at around £500

Hardtail. Specialized do some good stuff around that price, so do Giant,
so do Scott. Claud Butler Cape Wrath at £400 is reckoned to be really
good value (though the forks aren't great) or with disks at £469 if you
think you need them. Frankly I think if you're looking at what to
prioritise, air forks are much more important than disk brakes because
it's easy and quick to tune air forks, difficult or impossible to tune
sprung ones.

Or look on the second hand market - you can get real bargains and you
might well get a good full suspension bike second hand for your £500.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Sending your money to someone just because they've erected
;; a barrier of obscurity and secrets around the tools you
;; need to use your data does not help the economy or spur
;; innovation. - Waffle Iron Slashdot, June 16th, 2002

in message <[email hidden]>, Andy

(') said:

"Zog The Undeniable" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:41434b52.0@entanet...

Quoted message said:

Andy said:

Which mechanicals have you tried Zog ? I know lots of people who
swear by mechanical discs.

You misunderstand me - I said mechanical discs work well, but they
don't
give any more power than mechanical rim brakes. Hydraulic brakes
eliminate cable friction and cable stretch so are always going to
offer more power.

FWIW I tried a bike with Tektro disc calipers and I was quite
impressed, although I was surprised that the discs were too hot to
touch after a hard
stop from only about 15mph. I'd be slightly concerned about them
down a long hill with lots of hairpins, as in the North Pennines.

Don't think I misunderstood. I know lots of mechanical disc users who
would disagree with your assertion that they don't give more power
than V's.

Well then they're plain wrong. Think about it: V brakes are effectively
disk brakes with a 26" rotor. No disk brakes are as good as good V
brakes in the dry. The reason I have disks on my mountain bikes (Hayes
HFX-9 and Hope Mini) is that they're better in the mud.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

I'm fed up with Life 1.0. I never liked it much and now it's getting
me down. I think I'll upgrade to MSLife 97 -- you know, the one that
comes in a flash new box and within weeks you're crawling with bugs.

Simon Brooke said:

Well then they're plain wrong. Think about it: V brakes are effectively
disk brakes with a 26" rotor. No disk brakes are as good as good V
brakes in the dry. The reason I have disks on my mountain bikes (Hayes
HFX-9 and Hope Mini) is that they're better in the mud.

Think some more. Rotors are flat and don't move around under wheel
loading and fork flex. Look at the rotor to pad clearance on your discs
and then compare with the rim to pad clearance on your V's. The smaller
separation of the pad in discs means you can apply a greater mechanical
advantage between lever and pad movement.

Tony

Tony Raven said:

The smaller
separation of the pad in discs means you can apply a greater mechanical
advantage between lever and pad movement.

You might also say "the smaller radius of the disk means that you must
apply a greater mechanical advantage in order to get any braking effect
at all". Once the wheel is locked, it is locked, and in dry conditions
any decent brake should manage that much.

James
--
If I have seen further than others, it is
by treading on the toes of giants.
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/

Simon Brooke said:

Well then they're plain wrong. Think about it: V brakes are effectively
disk brakes with a 26" rotor.

Except they're effectively disk brakes with much more onerous
constraints on material selection for disk, and consequently pad. On
a disk brake, you can do what you like (within reason) on the
nmaterials, because your only constraints are for the operation of teh
braking. You've also got scope to work with smaller movements because
you need accomodate smaller tolerances, and don't need to accomodate
variable geometry.

All things things could (note - could) result in disks (mechanical or
hydraulic) working better than V-brakes. It's simply not true that
the only thing that matters is disk diameter - otherwise there'd be no
variation between brake response at all - sinmce evryone would have
identical performing brakes (except those with 700c wheels would have
slightly better than those with 26"😉.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

in message <[email hidden]>, Tony Raven

(') said:

Simon Brooke said:

Well then they're plain wrong. Think about it: V brakes are
effectively disk brakes with a 26" rotor. No disk brakes are as good
as good V brakes in the dry. The reason I have disks on my mountain
bikes (Hayes HFX-9 and Hope Mini) is that they're better in the mud.

Think some more. Rotors are flat and don't move around under wheel
loading and fork flex.

Notice that both the rotor and the wheel are mounted on exactly the same
hub, and thus suffer identically from wheel loading and fork flex.
Calipers for both disk and V brakes are mounted on exactly the same
fork, and thus...

Agreed the pressures achievable with disk brakes are higher, but they
have to be because the rotors (and pads) are so much smaller. The
pressures achievable aren't *much* higher, because it's the same hand
putting the same energy into a lever of equal length.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Semper in faecibus sumus, sole profundum variat.

Simon Brooke said:

Notice that both the rotor and the wheel are mounted on exactly the same
hub, and thus suffer identically from wheel loading and fork flex.
Calipers for both disk and V brakes are mounted on exactly the same
fork, and thus...

Yes but you are forgetting the rim is mounted on the end of spokes
attached to the hub, the rotor is bolted rigidly to the hub. The fork
flex at the caliper is much less because it it so much closer to the
rotor mounting point than the cantilever mounts and thus.....

Tony