Fed up Froome denounces disc brake wheels on Instagram Reel

Puzzled how you don't realize the sillines of your own argument: You argue against rim brakes because of the need to use two hands, but assume two people when referring to disc brake wheel change. And claim that tolerances are not tight on disc brakes when everybody knows that they are much tighter than when compared to rim brakes. And what on earth is the argument that on a rim brake bike you need to get the wheel centered?? On a disc brake bike you don't?
Sure, believe in all that, and those that actually use brakes and ride bikes, like Froome and millions of others, know that the reality is completely else.

This, on a properly built bike, there isn't a problem centering a wheel with correctly aligned drop outs.  Also two hands to operate the QR?  You may want to hit the weights.   Unlocking the caliper, you do that before you stop.

Because a pro bike will have the lawyer tabs filed off the front drop outs, and the spare wheels will have the quick releases set up with the correct amount of tension.

Also, a lot of pro bikes ran with the brakes a lot more 'open' than us amatuers tend to, hell some were deliberately set up with the brake release open as standard, so that the riders could tighten over a stage, if it was wet and miserable. Basically, a lot of bikes didn't even need you to touch the brake quick release to enable a wheel change.

So... rim braked bike... done right, requires the open of a quick release - one single movement; the wheel removed, new wheel slammed in, lever closed again, go!

Nobody had to physically undo a thru-axle, potentially with a tool. No one had to remove the thru-axle and put this somewhere whilst the wheels swap took place. No one had to carefully put the wheel in, to ensure the ~2mm wide rotor slipped into the ~4mm gap in the caliper (1mm for error either way). No one then had to reinsert the thru-axle, reapply the tool, and tighten back up again. Plus, as adjustments can't be done on the fly with a disc brake, no one had to check the wheel turned OK before sending the rider on their way. 

Night and day difference.

Quite right. So much so, that teams do not bother with wheel changes anymore, normally they change the whole bike now. But that way when the team car cannot get to you real quick it's over.

7 times Grand tour winner. Terrible workman obvs

Off the back wrote:

7 times Grand tour winner. Terrible workman obvs

Last gen tour winner who won against last gen kit and riders.  He's a legend but he's no Pog.  

Sebastian Vettel to George Russell.   (Not sure which pro cyclist Hamilton is in this crappy analogy - Thus endeth my F1 knowledge)..

Clearly not, however, it seems like he is trying to blame disc brakes for his performance when nearly everyone else is running discs too. 

He isnt the only rider to complain about disc brakes. Loads of riders in the pro peloton have complained about issues from changing wheels to disc rotors causing injuries (proven or not) they have still had negative things to say. He was dismissing them long before he had his big crash which is what ultimately ended his competitive edge. 

Wake up. The disc is a sheeple invention. It is unnecessarily more expensive, wasteful (hydraulic oil, WTF?) and the Corporate has brainwashed you.

Having worn a few wheels out in rim brakes, how are wheel manufacturers going to get any money out of me on discs ?
You aren't looking at the whole picture.

marmotte27 wrote:

I'm there with Chris. Disc brakes on racing bikes and similar: solution looking for a problem (i.e. money spinner for bike industry).

Surely, if the industry were conspiring to get more money off us, they would all want us buying bikes with rim brakes, and then selling us expensive carbon wheels with carbon brake surfaces that you wear through at a rediculous rate (given carbon is a terrible material when it comes to abbrasion).

Disc brakes mean carbon wheels last years, decades even. Rim brakes mean you have to go back in a couple of years or so and buy replacement rims/wheels. Which is the bigger money spinner for the industry?

"Which is the bigger money spinner for the industry?"
Selling a whole new fleet of new bikes to all and sundry at todays inflated prices. And trust them to come up with the next new thing soon. In fact they alread have, haven't they.

that's why there is only a riche-niche market for carbon rims in the auto industry isnt it? - because carbon works sooo much better on rough roads with potholes etc.

I agree here. I switched from rim brakes to disc when I replaced my winter bike. Previously, I had my LBS replace my worn rims every year after thousands of winter miles destroyed them, even having tyres peeling the rim edge off. 3.5 years old now, my disc winter bike wheels are still as good as new. But my best bike still has rim brakes, and a 'proper' mechanical groupset.

joules1975 wrote:

carbon brake surfaces that you wear through at a rediculous rate (given carbon is a terrible material when it comes to abbrasion)

Except the opposite is true. Carbon rims hardly wear at all from rim brakes. It's the pads that wear.

Except the opposite is true. Carbon rims hardly wear at all from rim brakes. It's the pads that wear

Well, I have no experience at all of carbon rims, and no intention of ever getting another rim brake bike, but I find this statement very difficult to believe. The problem is that anybody claiming rim brakes and carbon rims on here is likely to be a crazed anti-disc propagandist. Any reasoned comments in favour or against this proposition: carbon rims do not wear out from abrasion, even though we know aluminium ones most certainly do? Is it just that carbon rims are on best bikes that don't go out in bad weather on gritty roads?

marmotte27 wrote:

I'm there with Chris. Disc brakes on racing bikes and similar: solution looking for a problem (i.e. money spinner for bike industry).

Sort of agree.

Discs have been game changers for mountain bikes and cross bikes.  They're also great on winter bikes, commuter bikes and in wet conditions.  

But I do think they're unecessary for race bikes when competing on dry roads - especially when racing in  the UK where dedicated closed circuits are sweeping all before them.

It's not entirely clear what the "compatibility" issue was, but my hunch would be that the tolerances on different hubs aren't good enough to ensure perfect rotor alignment. I think Froome's original wheels were Black Inc where as it appears the neutral service supplied Roval wheels. It's therefore quite possible that the difference in rotor alignment meant that the wheel supplied would not spin freely. (This would also mean it is very much part and parcel of the disc vs rims debate).

So on paper the wheels supplied by neutral service would have been "compatible", but would require adjusting the brake caliper position to be usable.

I've got two sets of wheels for my gravel bike, both on Hope hubs (one pair RS4 and the other Pro4) and I had to shim out the rotors on one of the sets to avoid rubbing. 

That sounds plausible. Forgive my ignorance though, aren't hydraulic brakes meant to be self adjusting, and so surely a few squeezes on the lever should be sufficient to reset the pads to the new rotor? Or are wheel manufacturers so out of sync with each other that the tolerances are so different they are too much for the self-adjustment to cope with?

You can certainly buy a very thin 'washer' to add to your wheel so that where you swap wheels over, the rotor will line up.
It was illustrated recently but I can't remember which article or forum it was.

Hydraulic disc brakes can self-adjust for pad/rotor wear (the pistons symmetrically push out further as the pads/rotor get thinner), but the issue with installing a different wheel is that, due to small variations in hub tolerances, the new rotor might not be properly centered in the caliper/between the pads, causing either rubbing or asymmetric clamping on the rotor.

The self-adjusting feature of hydraulic discs can't do anything about that; you either need to adjust the rotor offset on the wheel itself (for example, by using a shim), or loosen the caliper bolts and re-center the caliper/pads over the new rotor.

I see, thanks. I wasn't aware of that, although I should have been as I have had several times to reset calipers for new wheels. It's absurd that manufacturers can't agree on a standard width though.

I don't *think* it's about agreeing on a standard. I believe the problem is more that the pad-to-rotor clearance--and therefore the room for error--is so incredibly small that even tiny incidental variations in the manufacturing of hub shells and end caps, centerlock mounts, rotor mounts and blades, etc., can throw things off enough to make trouble, even across products from a single manufacturer. Call it a fundamental problem with disc brakes perhaps (I'm still a fan).

This is the spacer that was mentioned
https://www.wiggle.co.uk/hope-rotor-spacer

My guess is it's this. Peak Torque (on YouTube) has mentioned this sort of issue before - different hubs space the rotor different distances from the end-cap, and this can require adjusting the pistons/pads to avoid rub.

Would that mean that every team must change the sponsored equipment they use to align with what neutral service carries? Would a Shimano wheel work in a bike running Campagnolo or SRAM? I'm assuming not but not sure. 

Although neutral service is sponsored by Shimano in most European races, they also carry Campag and SRAM spares. They carry replacement rear wheels from their competitors but not fronts, so I assume it's possible to fit a Shimano front disc wheel into SRAM and Campag calipers and the spare rears are due to drivetrain incompatibility, not brake caliper incompatibility.