The UCI has suspended the trial of disc brakes in the pro peloton but is there any solid evidence to back up the claims that disc rotors have been responsible for any injuries?
Rather than simply accepting the claims that have been bandied about, let’s examine them.
Movistar’s Fran Ventoso is at the centre of the controversy following an injury in Sunday’s Paris-Roubaix.
In a statement he said:
“Let me take you to 130km into the race: into a cobbled section, a pile-up splits the field, with riders falling everywhere. I’ve got to brake but I can’t avoid crashing against the rider in front of me, who was also trying not to hit the ones ahead. I didn’t actually fall down: it was only my leg touching the back of his bike.
“I keep riding. But shortly afterwards, I have a glance at that leg: it doesn’t hurt, there’s not a lot of blood covering it, but I can clearly see part of the periosteum, the membrane or surface that covers my tibia.
“I get off my bike, throw myself against the right-hand side of the road over the grass, cover my face with my hands in shock and disbelief, start to feel sick… I could only wait for my team car and the ambulance, while a lot of things come through my mind.
“15km after my incident, Nikolas Maes, a rider from Etixx-Quick Step, comes into the very same ambulance I’m sitting in. There’s a deep wound in his knee, produced by another disc.”
Let’s deal with the Nikolas Maes incident first because we can debunk that one straight away. Here are photographs of the crash that led to Maes abandoning the race.
You can see Maes in the white helmet in the centre of the shot still upright as Orica GreenEdge’s Mitchell Docker hits the ground. The black bike with green bar tape falling over is Docker’s. It’s a Scott without disc brakes.
Two teams racing Paris-Roubaix were using disc brakes: Lampre-Merida and Direct Energie.
We have many shots of this incident. As well as Orica GreenEdge and Etixx-Quick-Step, our pictures show riders from IAM Cycling, Lotto Jumbo, AG2R, Astana, FDJ, Trek Segafredo, Katusha, Wanty – Groupe Gobert, Bora-Argon, Fortuneo – Vital Concept, Cannondale, Tinkoff, Lotto-Soudal, Delko Marseille Provence KTM, Cofidis, Dimension Data, and Topsport Vlaanderen-Baloise – the vast majority of teams in the race – but none from Lampre-Merida or Direct Energie.
Here’s Maes landing on his right knee (above) behind a Lotto Jumbo rider.
And here’s Maes’ injury to his right knee (above, far left of the picture).
I’ve just filmed this shocking incident of the motorbike rider careering in Viviani at #ParisRoubaix @TeamSky pic.twitter.com/pGPFmRfFvf
— Guy Wolstencroft (@r8uge) April 10, 2016
And here’s a video shot by Guy Wolstencroft showing the incident from another angle.
See any Lampre-Merida or Direct Energie riders close to Maes?
Unless Maes was involved in an incident prior to this one, his injury wasn’t caused by a disc brake rotor.
What about the claim that Fran Ventoso’s own injury was caused by a disc rotor?
Ventoso’s injury is on the front of his left leg, on the outer side. It must be difficult to get a disc brake injury here if your own bike isn’t fitted with discs and you haven’t come off – not impossible, but difficult. If the injury was to his right leg you’d have an easier time understanding it, disc brakes being fitted to the non-driveside of bikes. Still, strange things happen in crashes.
Ventoso didn’t see a disc brake cause his injury or realise it in the immediate aftermath of the crash, he only came to the conclusion that a rotor was responsible once he was underway again.
Maybe he’s right – he could well be – but the evidence seems far from conclusive. Ventoso obviously believes he was injured by a disc rotor, but we don’t have to accept that without question. The rider has been hurt and our sympathies go out to him, but that doesn’t mean he is necessarily right.
People have been voicing safety concerns about disc brakes in the pro peloton ever since their introduction was first suggested. These have usually been based on the ability of a rotor to cut and the different stopping abilities of riders running disc brakes while others are using rim brakes.
It’s interesting that the UCI decided to go ahead with the disc brake trial despite those concerns and has apparently decided to suspend that trial based on evidence that’s some way short of categorical.
What next? The UCI has now officially suspended the disc brake trial but the World Federation of the Sporting Goods Industry (WFSGI), representing the bike industry (or at least a large part of it) insists that discs are still very much part of the future of road racing.
Read what the UCI and the WFSGI have said here. 
When Campagnolo revealed its new disc brakes last month we reported the brand’s marketing and communication director Lorenzo Taxis as saying, “Professional teams are not pushing for disc brakes, so let’s see what happens in the race season.”
Sean Kelly told us the same thing at a Vitus product launch earlier in the year, and we’ve heard similar from numerous current professionals.
In the aftermath of Paris-Roubaix several pro riders have reiterated that they’re opposed to the use of disc brakes in the peloton.
We as riders should have a voice and a choice. Open letter: Fran Ventoso – https://t.co/0SwxPl8FO9 via @Movistar_Team
— Rory Sutherland (@rorysutherland1) April 13, 2016
Much of the bike industry, on the other hand, is keen for disc brakes to be used by the pros. The big races serve as a shop window for their products, after all. It’ll be interesting to see how things develop.
What do you think? Over to you.
55 thoughts on “Have disc brakes really led to injuries in peloton?”
Ventoso’s injury could
Ventoso’s injury could definitely be caused by dropping that knee onto an upright disc wheel on a sideways bike.
DrJDog wrote:
“Could” definitely. It could definitely have been caused by a bloke with a knife running onto the pave where he crashed and slashing his leg then running off again (just like the basketball gorilla game). Jesus.
I once crashed my bike (ironically in the old P-R sportive, although I wasn’t far out of Compiegne). I did what we all do when we crash, which is get straight back on bike and keep riding. It wasn’t until several minutes later than I realised that what I had thought was rain falling on my thing was in fact blood from a cut to my right elbow. I think I hit a gutter with my elbow, pulling back a massive flap of skin (needed 16 stitches, thank you St Quentin hospital). But maybe I didn’t, maybe I collected my chainring, or a spoke, or even just hit the road.
Ventoso is entitled to his own recollection of what happened and the riders’ voice (as expressed by the CPA) should be heard.
But making rules based on anecdote is a dumb idea.
surly_by_name wrote:
It’s not making rules based on rider stories that I have an issue with – after all, in a bunch pile up it will always be difficult for cameras to show exactly what caused an injury, and we’ll have to rely on the riders to tell us what happened. The issue here seems to be that he didn’t actually see what caused it himself. How can a decision be based on something that nobody actually appears to have seen?
If the UCI has some better evidence of a lack of safety, then fair play to them for acting quickly. If only they could be so rapid in sorting out the use of motorbikes in races, they might solve a really safety problem…
step-hent wrote:
I totally agree with this comment…..how many moto / rider crashes have there been in the last few seasons, some resulting in the passing of a rider, for the UCI to be restricting the numbers involved / following the riders?
I recently had to endure the golf on the telly….my other half likes it because of the well-kept plants for some strange reason….and each time they switched back to the “studio” it was because of the host broadcater going to adverts.
Surely, having just one broadcaster (who “sells” the viewing rights to the various channels), with just 3 motos would be better, numbers-wise, than having multiples of French, Dutch, Belgian, Italian, and Eurosport bikes all following the action. Do we really need to have 4 “still” cameramen following on bikes too?
Bring in “drones” for the Arenberg section, where the vehicles are prohibited, and make it accessible by “doctor” vehicles only…..but please stop the riders getting hurt (or worse) because of idiots getting too close to the action, be they in cars or on motos.
The technology is there for everyone, but the “nerves” in the peleton because of terrain, or the possibility of being ridden into by a neutral service vehicle, TV camera bike, team car, must make the rider’s nerves worse.
They can cause their own crashes with wheel overlapping, or riding in high winds, just don’t let any morerider injuries / deaths involve “other” vehicles, and don’t let one incident with disc brakes stop the technology reaching the top echelon of the sport.
We can get “trickled-down” technology from the top level….namely hydraulic brakes, electronic groupsets, carbon “everything”, etc., so why shouldn’t they be able to use technology from lower levels of the sport?
The UCI need to pull their head out of the sand and deal with the riders as people, not commodities. They have feelings, families, and bleed like the rest of us.
surly_by_name wrote:
your thing is much more sensitive than mine, i would never have felt blood or rain falling on it.
Perhaps I need a new saddle?
juniper bushes wrote:
Thigh, apologies. Thank you for pointing out my error.
What a ‘knee jerk’ reaction
What a ‘knee jerk’ reaction from the UCI!
Hysterical rider blaming a technology that wasn’t involved. I can see the UCI backing away from disc brakes without evidence
UCI is inherently
UCI is inherently conservative and in it’s desire to standardise the race bike it stifles innovation. If UCI was around in 1880 we would still be racing on penny-farthings.
ron611087 wrote:
Already now bikes available to non-pros can be lighter, more aero and with better brakes.
Manufacturers will hate if this is getting worse, because it makes sponsoring team less important.
I waited until disc brakes were available for road bikes until I bought my first one. I love them and had them on my mountain bike and urban since 2004. Going bake to rim brake would indeed feel like racing on a penny-farthing.
And I don’t care that it doesn’t have an UCI sticker.
(I have to confess I am more conservative in regards to electronic shifting)
cdamian wrote:
I assume you are racing sportives as neither BC or even LVRC allow discs in road racing in the UK
I think we can take Ventosa’s
I think we can take Ventosa’s version as being fairly accurate, he was there, he knows what he knows…
DrJDog has helped me visualse how that could have happened now…
I’m not comfortable with people calling him a liar, looking to fulfill his own personal agenda, when the guy is clearly sporting a very atypical crash injury.
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
Did you read the article?
“Ventoso didn’t see a disc brake cause his injury or realise it in the immediate aftermath of the crash, he only came to the conclusion that a rotor was responsible once he was underway again. – See more at: http://road.cc/content/tech-news/186146-have-disc-brakes-really-led-injuries-peloton#sthash.pqQI6bFY.dpuf“
I haven’t seen anyone call him a liar, only state that we don’t have any evidence that disc rotos were the cause of his injury. Given the other rider had a similar injury that definitely wasn’t caused by a rotor then you also cannot conclude a rotor caused the injury just from appearance alone.
The P-R surface is hardly typical so that may account for ‘atypical’ injuries (although I’m not quite sure what you mean by this).
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
The fact he was there isn’t particularly conclusive and certainly doesn’t make his version of events “fairly accurate”. There have been a multitude of studies over several decades that have demonstrated that eye witness testimony isn’t especially reliable, see for example http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm
I don’t think he’s lying (and I don’t think he has any personal agenda – I imagine, for example, that Canyon would quite like to have some of their teams on the CF SLX D when they release it later this year) inasmuch as he clearly believes his version of events. Doesn’t make it true.
The facts are: he crashed. He has a nasty gash to his leg. There were people riding bikes with disc rotors in the same event as him. I think this is about it. The rest is speculation.
I hope Ventoso recovers and is back riding soon.
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
So although he didn’t know he had received an injury at the time, he knows that the injury he didn’t know about was caused by a disc?
I wonder how many nasty
I wonder how many nasty chainring injuries there have been over the years in pro-cycling? Will they ban chainrings now too?!! Belt drive and hub gears would be much safer, with no exposed teeth!
I have inflicted a few chain-ring injuries on myself over many many years of cycling but in the 16 or so years I have been riding with discs (MTBs, then road hybrids, then pure road bikes) I have never sustained a disc related injury whilst cycling*!
*I came close to taking the tip off my finger once whilst my bike was in the workstand due to almost being sliced by the disc and me having my finger where it shouldn’t have been but no blood was drawn!
That Etixx rider has an
That Etixx rider has an injury that looks much more disc like.
The proof Fran Ventoso cut
The proof Fran Ventoso cut was not made from a brake disc is in the direction of the cut. In the picture above it clearly runs horizontally across his shin. This would very difficult to achieve as the rest of the wheel is in way. This natural shield does a far better job than the exposed teeth of a chainring (which is most likely culprit for that cut). A disc brake cut is almost always going to run horizontally down a riders body. If it happened as DrJDog said the cut would knee to ankle, not horizontal.
Riders need to be told to stop whining about it and do their jobs. Manufacturers sponsor teams to sell bikes. If the cycling public want disc brakes – which it appears they do, manufacturers will make them and pro’s will be forced to ride them. If pro’s refuse, the manufacturers won’t bother sponsoring them and the cost of running a pro team will increase, putting many riders’ jobs at risk.
Warren85 wrote:
I recall the same statements being directed at Sir Jackie Stewart.
neildmoss wrote:
Apples and oranges – in F1 drivers were losing their lives. The rider had a non-life/career threating cut – a similar and less severe injury than others on day.
Warren85 wrote:
Do they? The difference between ‘want’ and ‘need’ is always the fine point of selling.
I wouldn’t kid myself that I need disk brakes when I don’t. Cleats, ergo shifters and computers were major kit improvements . Disk brakes aren’t but fair play to the manufacturers for pushing the new revenue stream of disks as hard as they can.
I have three bikes I can’t retro fit for disks and wouldn’t want to if I could. I’ve never crashed due to calliper failure – rain or over heating. I think disks look awful and for me their marginal benefits are not worth the aesthetic compromise.
WolfieSmith wrote:
I have three bikes I can’t retro fit for disks and wouldn’t want to if I could. I’ve never crashed due to calliper failure – rain or over heating. I think disks look awful and for me their marginal benefits are not worth the aesthetic compromise.
— WolfieSmithMarginal benefits! Being able to stop more quickly and more safely is about the least marginal benefit I can think of. Not to mention that the major advantantage of better brakes is being able to go faster. Riding a bike with rim brakes is retrograde and at times scary they are so inferior to discs.
Wittering on that there is no benefit is as dumb as climate change denial, the facts really are not on your side.
As an owner of a disc
As an owner of a disc equipped road bike (for well over two years now, and MTB’s for a LOT longer!) I am totally convinced that for many riders disc brakes are a big advantage. I know I will never go back regardless off any decision by the UCI. It really makes me laugh/swear when I see so many ill-informed and/or close minded comments from those whove never actually used them, as most of their arguments are complete bo##ox!
However having said that, whilst I disagree with most arguments against them, I have always felt that discs (in their current form) in the pro peleton ‘could’ increase the risk of injury during crashes. The edges of most rotors are indeed very sharp. They don’t get any sharper during use as some suggest, but rotors that have been stamped or lazer cut from sheet metal do have sharp edges. The Shimano finned rotors (as fitted to many bikes including one of my own) are partcularly sharp. However they don’t need to be. One of my old MTB’s had early Shimano rotors and the edges had been rounded off during manufacture. It meant the edges were actually very blunt and you would be very unlucky to get any sort of cut from them. Imagine trying to cut yourself with a thick blunt butter knife!
I suspect the latest rotors are sharp only because it costs more to have them ground during manufacture. Perhaps the UCI should stipulate that all rotors being fitted to pro bikes should be free from sharp edges, and have outer edge radiused or ground smooth. Problem solved!
And before anyone claims otherwise, no they wouldn’t get ‘sharpened’ again during use. The rotors really don’t wear that much, it would take years of use!
Dicklexic wrote:
As @Dicklexic says above, disc brakes performance far outstrips rim brake perfromace epecially when you introduce carbon fibre as a braking surface and even aluminium. I currently have a disc (trp spyre) and a rim (ultegra 6800) brake bike, the disc brake setup is superior in all situations and weather conditon. I now find myself using my disc equipped bike (winter aluminium bike) equally as much if not more that my higher spec more expensive rim braked carbon bike.
I have tried multiple brands of rim brake pads at different price points and all of them deteriorate in perfromance terms quite quickly due to the fact that road muck and rim detritus get imbeded into the pad surface, this is not such a problem with disc brakes as the disc rotor is a resonable distance from the road. This problem can be some what alleviated by inspecting and cleaning the pads and rim braking surface after every ride (something i used to do after every 3-4 rides, its a slow and mind numbing task) Once water is introduced to the mix, rim brakes are now where near as effective as disc brakes.
The whole Ventoso injury situation doesn’t add up to me, left leg being injured “sliced” (sensationalist reporting at it best) by running into the rear of the bike ahead of you with left side mounted disc rotor??? Could be a general ill feeling in the pro peleton or just a team / rider opinion regarding use of disc brakes. One final note, Ventoso’s team Movistar rides Campagnolo drivetrains and brakes. The same Campagnolo who are a bit behind the other groupset manufacturers in development of disc brakes. Bit of a coincidence!!!
Riders using disk brakes
Riders using disk brakes crashed at the Roubaix?! But surely disk brakes are so superior to calliper brakes crashing is a thing of the past…?
I’m getting a bit bored of
I’m getting a bit bored of the road.cc obsession with disc brakes. I can’t remember the last bike review on here that wasn’t all about discs. And every second article seems to be about gravel bikes(?), discs or wide tyres. These are all things invented pretty much purely to sell bikes. Between this, click-bait articles and endless reporting of the dangers of cycling I think I’m off.
I realise a lot of people have disc brakes on the road and are very happy. Me, I’ll stick with being able to swap wheels between bikes, not having to throw the frame away because I bought a Betamax axle system, riding nice wheels and braking a bit more gently in the wet.
bobbypuk wrote:
Me too. But those nice carbon tubs that I use for cross have disc rotors on them and 135mm rear spacing …
The ability to swap wheels between bikes assumes a level of standardisation that generally isn’t. Although perhaps in terms of rear road wheels we currently have the closest thing to a standard that I’ve seen during my life as a cyclist inasmuch as all 11 speed wheels work across all drive trains. It won’t last – bottom bracket standards, rear wheel spacing, axles – look at mountain biking (where new technology is embraced with a little less reluctance), where Boost rear spacing (148mm) has only recently pushed the proliferation of BB “standards” off top spot as current thing to moan about on internet forums.
Its good to have choices. I imagine the vast majority of us will be riding road bikes with disc brakes within 5 years. Although now cross season is well and truly over I’ve been riding my road bike a bit more and you know what – my brakes work pretty well, certainly well enough for me for now. I’d go so far as to say that they are excellent foor what they are. But in 3 years time when I buy a new frame I will probably go for discs in part because I think that will be more future proof.
And as for the comments on
And as for the comments on todays articles, it reads like a moon landings conspiracy forum 🙂
Hmm.
Hmm.
I think the left leg / right leg thing could be a bit of a red herring. Crashes are funny things and with limbs/bikes going everywhere (well, not precisely everywhere, but you know what I mean), you can end up with some unexpected injuries.
I still have some (now very faint) gouges on the inside-front of my LEFT shin, which were made by my chainring when I had a fairly big crash a few years ago (bike failure – thankfully no-one else involved). Yes, it was definitely the chainring – I remember cleaning up the black oily chainring tooth shapes that were printed on my leg.
I still can’t work out how my left leg could make such contact with the chainring on the other side of my bike.
Still, really great that road.cc is questioning this point. While I am not at all convinced about the need for disc brakes on pro road bikes for the most part, I agree that such a strong decision made with no firm evidence is not necessarily the right way forward.
Tjuice wrote:
But according to Ventoso bikes weren’t going everywhere. He was upright and on his bike, the bike he supposedly hit was upright with the rider on it, neither of them went down (or even fully stopped?).
Al__S wrote:
Ah! Sorry, I missed that bit – was being a bit too hasty yesterday. I stand corrected.
On the face of it, that does seem rather perculiar.
Tjuice wrote:
Quite. He’d have had to have been unclipped and got his leg into a weird position round someone else’s wheel to have got the injury. Weird things happen, but given the other holes in his tale (eg Maes not being anywhere near a rider with discs) it kind of looks like someone- indeed, given some private conversations I’ve had, an entire team organisation- that just doesn’t like disc brakes and is borderline fabricating tales to pin injuries on them deliberately.
I say ban Motorbikes and cars
I say ban Motorbikes and cars that follow the cyclists. Afterall they have killed and injured cyclists.
I think it is just stupid.
hsiaolc wrote:
Yeah pretty hard to run a race with no team cars, commisaires, press following.
Why don’t they just modify
Why don’t they just modify the brake unit to pull the brake shoe closer to the hub and cover the exposed edge of the disk with a thin rubber coating or something similar.
Like a mobile phone bumper style case.
Why don’t the uci ban chain
Why don’t the uci ban chain rings or require a chain guard to be mandatory.. Muppets..
Alankk wrote:
Because 90% of the time the chain is on the big ring – so its hard to get jabbed by it.
Also chainsets dont carry on spinning unlike discs.
fenix wrote:
Doesn’t need to be spinning – ditto cassettes and other bits of lumpy metal, even discs. All it needs is one of you to have a bit of velocity compared to the other, and not much velocity for chainset or cassette believe me.
fenix wrote:
Why don’t the uci ban chain rings or require a chain guard to be mandatory.. Muppets..— fenix
Because 90% of the time the chain is on the big ring – so its hard to get jabbed by it.
Also chainsets dont carry on spinning unlike discs. — Alankk
Whether they spin or not is completely irrelevent as it doesn’t make them sharper. Plus they can only spin if entire wheel is spinning as they are not independent rotating masses. Bike wheels tend to stop turning when a bike stops, so again point doubly not relevent.
Alankk wrote:
Becaue the chainring is invariably covered by the chain and in so doing, by the way, has about 2.5 times the width of a disc.
Walo wrote:
Invariably? So the small chain ring and the front mech on all the bikes is there purely for ballast to meet the UCI minimum weight then?
I’m sure I could think of cheaper ways to add 150 grams or so.
Also the cassette occupies a near identical position to the disc is just as likely to be spinning and the chain is rarely on the largest or second largest sprocket.
Walo wrote:
But actually they are not completely covered by the chain. If the pedal is in the forward position, the large chain ring is still exposed on the backside – could easily land on the that portion. The other is if the chain is on the small ring at the time of the crash then the large ring is completely exposed.
Alankk wrote:
Becaue the chainring is invariably covered by the chain and in so doing, by the way, has about 2.5 times the width of a disc.
It’s not limited to Ventoso
Others are now coming forward with disc brake injuries, and some people are going to get sued soon
http://www.ukcyclocross.co.uk/articles/news/action-man-scar-caused-disc-brake-injury/
How many riders have
How many riders have definitely been injured due to the erratic performance of carbon rims and rim brakes? Tubs rolling off the rim? Personally I’d prefer the risk of a slice by a disk rotor than the thought of disappearing over the edge of a mountain pass as my/someone else’s carbon rims braked erratically with rim brakes.
Just a thought.
Could a fairing be the answer
Could a fairing be the answer to all this? I am sure that a lightweight affair can be easily produced in carbon fibre to keep spinning rotors from fragile flesh.
Manglier wrote:
It would have to be a 2 part affair to suround the disc, slowing down wheel changes, and wouldn’t be UCI legal
Manglier wrote:
Great idea, I’ve seen them on recumbents and they are much faster too, no more sticking out bits anywhere
It seems to be a bit horses
It seems to be a bit horses for courses here. The pro teams don’t feel the need for disc brakes. It just complicates the mechanics, wheel changing etc. And the riders are happy enough with rim brakes. This makes sense. Their bikes are cleaned every day so their brakes are always in great condition.
For the average commuting or weekend cyclist, who doesn’t clean their bike that often then discs make total sense. Everyone knows how badly scored rims get after a winter of commuting – and how ineffective rim brakes can become in the wet.
The manufacturers are left in an unenviable position though. Obviously their customers are influenced a lot by what they see the pros using – and if the pros aren’t using discs then they might be less keen to make the upgrade to discs.
I think Ventoso, stating that
I think Ventoso, stating that Maes has an injury caused by ‘another disc’, indicates to me that there will be lots of ‘assumption’ that disc are to be blamed for everything. The evidence above tells me that Maes’ injury was just caused by hitting the cobbles. But they’ll blame discs because it’s the hot topic atm.
Cobbled sections are slippery when wet (and dry!) and many a nasty accident has been had on them. Perhaps the UCI should ban cobbled sections if they want a reduction in injuries? And to think they’ve banned the disc trials with ‘immediate effect’ as rider safety is paramount….pfffft
UCI to ban internal cables
UCI to ban internal cables
Disc brake injuries
The problem is that chainrings so far cannot be removed from road bikes and still have a functional bike. They also are about 50%+ covered/protected by the chain. You are correct, chainrings and uncovered drive trains are indeed dangerous, and that’s why we don’t need ADDITIONAL cutting surfaces like disc brakes added to the bike for little or no benefit. Disc brakes are not a required technology for bicycle operation. Modern direct mount rim brakes perform very well, but won’t stop a wheel as fast as a disc brake in wet conditions. It should be noted that almost all disc brakes on other vehicles use anti-lock technology primarily for wet conditions. This is to prevent the tire from skidding. On a light vehicle or bike this problem is even worse. Rim brakes already have the ability to lock up the wheel, but assuming a reasonably skilled operator not so quickly as to put the bike in a skid in wet conditions, and they rarely grab.
However, if disc brakes without anti-lock MUST be used then the manufacturers owe it to us to provide more than a warmed over design copied from 1960s motorcycle technology. Motorcycle brakes are several millimeters wide however, and don’t have sharp edges. I think it would be relatively easy for the manufacturers of disc brakes to provide a brake with a lightweight fully round 1/8 inch slick bead on the outside edge of the disc so it won’t cut the riders. A self closing cam opening device could be made to close automatically when the disc is inserted into the brake. This would not fully protect a rider from a hot brake, but might provide a small amount of protection from heat as well. There may be other ways to provide a better margin of safety as well, and as an ex-engineer, I can think of a couple more I don’t have time to detail. That’s why there’s a disc brake trial period, so these type of issues can be addressed. We don’t have to give the bike industry carte blanche on safety so they can make a profit . If they want to sell products, someone should ensure they’re safe. If they complain too much about UCI, perhaps the US Consumer Product Safety Commission should get involved, but if they do, bikes could come under a great deal of scrutiny none of the manufacturers are prepared for. Better that for the exorbitant prices they intend to charge for these Rube Goldbergs that they expend a little money and engineering on the safety and BTW light weight most Pro’s want. Note that professionals typically are not the fussiest people about safety, so the average consumer should really consider what they say when they think a product is unsafe and tell you it sucks.
RGRHON wrote:
You are putting the cart before the horse. Manufacturers aren’t going to spend money on R&D unless they think know they can sell product. The UCI’s position – to the extent that it affects market penetration for disc brake equipped bikes among non-professional road cyclists – will delay improvements.
Rounded edges
Biased judgement or not, sharp rotor are not really a necessity. The edges could be milled to be blunt. The sharp edges occur because the aluminium sheeting is cut with a laser, as it is very cheap. Pro level could absorb the cost of higher cost rotors. The bike industry would probably make more money with two price levels of rotors, rounded and not rounded. Especially if rounded becomes required for amateur racing.
Given that sock related
Given that sock related injuries account for some 12,000 A&E attendances and average 10 fatalities a year in the UK, there must now be enough disc brake equipped bicycles around for someone to have had a bona fide disc related injury. Because it would appear to me from the evidence so far that no pro peloton rider has.
So;
1. Has anyone here actually had first hand experience of a genuine disc brake related injury in a race or indeed any situation?
2. On the other side of the coin, do any disc brake users have a credible “disc brake saved my life when a rim brake wouldn’t have” anecdote? (I don’t by the way).
Ban on disc brakes
Having worked as a paramedic for a number of years and looking at the injury, though on a slight off angle, the cut looks more like a laceration rather than an incision. Disc brakes would cut in a very precise, straight line. From this picture it looks like trauma second to blunt force since the cut seems irregular along it’s edge. We would see this in a car accident where a head an arm etc, is thrown into a windshield and torn open, often to the bone. A disc brake would either slice it perfectly straight down or slice a piece of tissure off like a meat cutter. It’s hard to know what he hit but just the force of a knee plowing into the ground or whatever could create a similar injury.