Disc brakes now legit for 'crossers

Have we done this already?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-allows-disc-brakes-for-cyclo-cross

So, maybe there will be some developments on 'em from the 'big boys'.

Yes, covered in last few days. Thread on drop bar hydraulic levers among others.

I'll let you off this time though.

Ok. Sorry. It won't* happen again.

* This may be a lie.

Though I'm a bit of a traditionalist (I don't like the look of drop barred bikes with discs), I think the brake thing is a great choice, especially if they can get something really lightweight but effective out into the market.

It's amusing that the commentary says that Nys will turn up to races with fewer wheelesets because of the tyre ruling, and then says tyhat he will still have at least 20(!) sets with him. I know the man's a legend in Belgium, but 20 wheelsets per race? 😯

20 wheelsets is about right, if you've seen his service truck (yes, truck) you'll see 'em all racked up. They do however also bring 5 or 6 bikes to each event so thats only 2 or 3 pairs per bike. Some will be specific to the course also, ie. areas predomenatly on sand/ice needs different tread to mud and again to mixed terrain. all the tyres are tubular so once glued on can't be changed on the day for conditions.

Interesting bit on the wheel standards though – Cavendish's wheel in that fall the other day certainly didn't comply !

I wonder who is going to be the first one to enter a "drop bar 29er" and call it a cross bike for a publicity stunt

Does this mean Canondale will start building the old crosser with discs and headshock they once did? my ideal commuter that…

Interesting bit on the wheel standards though

Nothing new there though.

I wonder who is going to be the first one to enter a "drop bar 29er" and call it a cross bike for a publicity stunt

You'll have to explain to me what the difference between a crosser and a "drop bar 29er" actually is – and if there really is a difference whether anybody would notice or actually be that interested.

stronger frame and different angles?

what the difference between a crosser and a "drop bar 29er" actually is – and if there really is a difference whether anybody would notice or actually be that interested.

'cross bike

drop bar 29er

IMO of course. It's a greyish area, but in general a 'cross bike will be lighter, steeper and taller than a mountain bike. Not to mention tyre size and clearance.

what the difference between a crosser and a "drop bar 29er" actually is

one is ridden by a hardcore nutter cyclist who can rip your legs apart on any terrain the other by tall MTBers

Get a bit cross (no pun intended) by this. No crossers at 24s and quite rightly so, but fully rigid 29ers with what are clearly road wheels being allowed.

No crossers at 24s and quite rightly so

Why rightly so?

Coz I like rules. I suppose it's a case of if you allow crossers then what next.
I don't think there's anything wrong with mountainbike races being purely for mountainbikes and cyclocross for cyclocross bikes. I'm not sure I like the blurring of the boundries.
There are enough races and other events to support the individual diciplines

Because they'd be faster :-p

The line is blurring definitely,
Actually its being blurred quite rightly by guys like Sam – taking some of the technology from cross/road and bringing it across into MTB racing – for example proper size tubs and carbon deep rims etc.
At the end of the day, thats pretty much how mountain bikes were created. (Sam now I've put you in the same catgeory as Ritchey, Fisher et al. can I have a frame on the cheap please)

The fact that he has completely blurred the line by producing what is arguably the first "mass" produced (i.e. not built by a bloke with a beard in a shed) drop bar 29er in Europe I find a really good example

At the end of the day its what pushes bike technology onwards – if you ignore gear shifting (which is inherently outdated at the moment and pretty un mechanically sympathetic). Changes in wheel and ture tehnology (including sizes are really the only big difference we have seen in the last few years.
Suspension design has pretty much stagnated and shock technology is now changing in incremental steps rather than the giant leaps of a few years ago.

Its certainly not beyond the wit of man to build a 29er race frame up to cross bike weights – it wouldn't last long but then a Cross bike and its components I would imagine don't have a particularly long life span anyway when used in anger at a high level.

I disagree with the rules comment above. I think you should be able to use the best bike for the race. A mountain bike is faster on rough terrain but much slower when it gets fast. The courses should dictate what equipment is used, not the rules.

Give it a few years and cross bikes will be ridden in 24hr races , enduros etc, just like now you can ride mtbs in (most) cross races.
Mtb courses should be designed such that they are quicker done on an MTB. Just like cross courses are quicker on a cross bike.

Actually Mayhem this weekend would have been a prime example.

In the dry on my 29er on 2" tyres teh courswe was fun and pretty quick – on a cross bike the steepish decents would have been hard bloody going on a cross bike.

In the wet I would have put on some narrow tyres and ridden round – whihc actually would have made the wheels not dissimilar to a cross bike. It just would have been harder to carry and run up hills with. The fact that I wouldn't have run up hills due to fitness is largely irrelevant.

At the end of the day its all riding bikes so its all good.
From my side of things I need to work on the engine before worrying to much about what its driving !

what the difference between a crosser and a "drop bar 29er" actually is – and if there really is a difference whether anybody would notice or actually be that interested.

its to do with the riders?

Ones got a beard, sandals and a Marin full suss, the other is a roadie who likes it dirty?

I don't see what it's taken so long, especially with the Avid discs for road bikes. I would have thought Vs/Cantis would have been horrendous mud traps.

I did read one review of the rather lovely Genesis Croix De Fer (a disc'd up cross bike) as a road bike for mountain bikers. Works for me. Maybe this is only something mountain bikers get worried about?

Not that what I think matters, but this is what rule I would enforce.

Allow both, but 26" MTBs must have flat or riser bars. And 700C wheeled bikes must have drops.
That way both have advantages and disadvantages.

Mtb courses should be designed such that they are quicker done on an MTB

In a racing sense I agree. Plus you have tyre width. Cross is now even narrower at 32mm max. I reckon mtb needs to have a 40mm minimum width (I don't think there is any UCI min at present?) – wheel circumference and bar/brake type be damned.

Hows the Kite progressing BTW?

I suppose it's a case of if you allow crossers then what next.

I dunno, what else could there be?

I don't have a problem about what bikes should be allowed.

Anyway hopefully see some development for hydraulic discs/sti's soon.

OK then, open house for all bikes but no sub catagories, that'll be youre problem/choice.

matt_outandabout – Member
Does this mean Canondale will start building the old crosser with discs and headshock they once did? my ideal commuter that…

I'm kinda doing that with this one – not really a crosser though –

I guess if you stuck compliant tyres (sub 33mm without spikes or studs) and Drops (and therefore probably brake/gear levers too) on a disc equipped 29er MTB then it would be compliant as a crosser, but then it wouldn’t really be an MTB anymore.

Maybe the differentiation for MTBs should be tyre width 34mm or more (spikes and studs allowed) and Drop bars not allowed, that, to my mind is enough differentiation to keep the two separate, it would be a significant enough amount of faff to make a normal 29er MTB, compliant as a crosser and vice versa that it wouldn’t really be worth doing and thus the disciplines remain distinct and separate, with enough migration of common/similar equipment that competitors in one might take an interest in the other (hardly a bad thing in my view)….

As for discs appearing on road bikes, I suppose the only real resistance you might come across is riders/team not being keen on the additional weight of a rotor (of whatever size and material) at each wheel hub, you’d need to loose a lot of rim weight to offset that particular issue (plus of course tubs will now stay glued), it can be done, but I can see some potential for a little bit of resistance…

mangoridebike I like the look of that a lot. That would be ideal for a mix of bridleways and roads to get to work and back.

Cheers Mr P

Thats pretty much what I built it up for, a good bike for getting the miles in, allowing me to get to areas further from my front door for exploring new trails etc

Not ridden it too much yet but so far so good 🙂

I like that Cannondale, nice job

I would guess discs will make it on to time trial road bikes first. – people like Zipp can play around with wheel shape more when there's no brake track

Do you think? Testers often try and get away with as little brake as possible. I remember in the days of old they ignored Super Record and Dura ace in favour of cheap and nasty Weinmann 500s.

I would guess at a stupidly small and thin disk barely bigger than the hub and a rear caliper tucked/built into the seat or chain stays from someone like Felt to start with, then it'll spread out from there.

Zipp can really go to town with all of their toroidal rim shapes and pimplyness then !

I would guess discs will make it on to time trial road bikes first. – people like Zipp can play around with wheel shape more when there's no brake track

Is a disc calliper ever going to be more aerodynamic then an integrated rim brake, even with a slightly different shaped wheel?

Maybe this is only something mountain bikers get worried about?

Yep