Floating rotors are more expensive and I believe theoretically dissipate/cope with heat better. Is this true and the extra worth paying? I am doing a gravity focused build…..
TIA

Nope. Look nice though.

On a recent trip to the alps, the only one of our group (of 15) who had problems with rotors was running Hope floating rotor. It warped. He does use the brake a fair bit, but then so do others who had no issues on plain steel rotors

Just back from alps no issues with warping.

It’s all about the ting,ting,ting as they cool 8)

I have had problems with hope rotors in the past, the shimano floating rotors are far superior IMO (non icetech).

the shimano floating rotors

they are not floating. They are rigidly mounted to the aluminium spiders.

After I returned my second set of Hopes (excess play in the bobbins) I got lighter, more reliable, cheaper steel rotors which function just as well. It’s a bag o shite basically. Decent brakes should be able to deal with heat unless pushed ridiculously hard, at which point all bets are off anyway.

IMO 😉

they are not floating. They are rigidly mounted to the aluminium spiders.

Yawn

Yawn

Well he’s right, the Shimano ones aren’t floating, they’re riveted directly to an alloy spider, the Hope ones are floating in that there is no direct interface to the spider/carrier, they look similar but they are not the same design.

Either way not worth it in my opinion, marginal if any difference, especially in the UK, and my primary method of rotor failure is due to smacking them into things, so I’ll take the cheaper ones every time.

Well he’s right

Well yes and no, the accepted definition for floating rotors in cycling may not be accurate, but pretty much everyone knows that and doesn’t need a bore to remind them on every thread about rotors.

Well I appreciate someone pointing out that cycling has its own definition of floating rotor. I had always assumed it was the same definition as used in every other sport.

To be fair I’ve not seen any other floating rotor threads.

cycling has its own definition of floating rotor

it doesn’t, MSP might, but this is simply a case of one being a correct description and the other not, floating rotors Vs 2 piece rotors.

One of the useful things about knowledge sharing on internet forums is that misconceptions and misinformation can be highlighted and explained*, otherwise the misinformation perpetuates. I only waded in because I think it’s a bit off to put someone down for trying to add some genuine information to a thread that is relevant to the OPs question.

* even if it does make you a terrible bore, not that I started it 😉

What are some good non floating rotors then?

Shimano

🙂

I think it’s a bit off to put someone down for trying to add some genuine information to a thread that is relevant to the OPs question.

Ditto

Amedias +1

Plenty of folk use the two interchangeably but don’t realise they’re not the same. It’s misleading to call Shimano floating, folk usually do it because they don’t know as opposed to a special definition of floating in cycling circles.

Floating rotors aren’t worth it at all. Two piece rotors can be very good.

Used Hope floating and standard one piece rotors as well as Avid, Shimano and Formula standard one piece rotors. Noticed absolutely no difference.

So what’s a floating rotor compared to a 2 piece?

The ‘rivets’ don’t fully restrain the disc, it can move about a bit with respect to the ‘spider’

On a 2piece disc, the disc and spider are firmly attached. The spider is aluminium, I expect to save a little weight/allow for a more rigid design/bit o both.

The Hopes work well for me. The 160mm race ones are quite light and work really well. the 180mm ones are beefier and heavier and work good as well. Don’t really care of they are floating or not, they just work.

The idea is that the outer disc can expand differently to the central spider under constant braking.
Have a look at just about every motorcycle out there and they all use a floating type disc.

Motorbike generates a bit more heat though.

True but they are also 5.5-6mm thick and 300-320mm in diameter!
Downsized to 160/180mm and 1-2mm thick and the heat generated won’t be far off.
Because they can expand outwards separate to the carrier it prevents warping within reason.
Fix those points as on a normal rotor and that metal can’t move so twists and warps.
Do one single long trailing stop from cold and see if you can hold your fingers on one….

So what’s a floating rotor compared to a 2 piece?

The breaking area “floats” on the carrier it allows lateral movement to centre in the calliper.

I really like my 203 hope rotors on the DH bike – they seem smooth and controlled even after a long run and dont seem to warble or chatter as much as a conventional rotor. Mine came with one of my old bikes, I’m not sure I’d pay full retail for them.

I had some, they didn’t warp any less than standard ones, and the spider rubbed the fork leg. Not great, went back to steel ones.

mcnultycop – Member

Motorbike generates a bit more heat though.

Well I’ve turned my Hope rotors (floating and non) blue numerous times, so I’d say they’re getting just as hot as motorbike ones.

So what’s a floating rotor compared to a 2 piece?

Like this: Floating rotors

The point is that they can expand radially but are still constrained side to side and located circumferentially so that the braking forces can be carried. They shouldn’t float sideways too, it’ll tend to knock the pads back and cause lots of dead travel in the brakes.

As you’ll know, 2-piece rotors are riveted together so this can’t happen, you are just getting strength and weight benefits.

Regardless of the exact classification (I have both floating and 2 piece rotors), I don’t find any difference over standard ones. They do look good though which is why I have them. Feel free to try and convince yourself that they have (real world) performance benefits though 😉

We have these clarks ones on three bikes between me and Mrdbcooper, which are pretty cheap anyway. Have so far done 2 weeks of Dh on them without any issues.

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/clarks-cfr-10fa-floating-disc-rotor/rp-prod120228

I was of the understanding that floating rotors (and Ice Tech rotors) help isolate the hub from the heat generated at the braking surface. I’ve always noticed the disc side bearing in my front hub deteriorates a lot faster than the other side.

I was also of the understanding that the floating aspect of Hope rotors allowed them to expand radially to stop any restriction to the material expansion causing them to buckle. I did not think they had any lateral movement for ‘centring’.

I did not think they had any lateral movement for ‘centring’.

They don’t which is why they are not really floating rotors, but it is quite normal to call them that anyway.

They don’t which is why they are not really floating rotors, but it is quite normal to call them that anyway.

No, lateral movement doesn’t make them floating, lateral movement makes them broken.
What makes them floating is if the outer, braking part of the rotor can expand radially without restriction, while being held laterally.

I was also of the understanding that the floating aspect of Hope rotors allowed them to expand radially to stop any restriction to the material expansion causing them to buckle. I did not think they had any lateral movement for ‘centring’.

This is correct and is the exact definition of a floating rotor. Sorry MSP, you are under a misconception here.

No, they are semi-floating rotors, they look like a floating rotor, and are often marketed as such, but the have no “float” which is the lateral movement.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJPCy2AsULo[/video]

None of these rotors are floating rotors, or even semi floating. I dropped one in the sink, it sank, it did not float.

Some Hope rotors are 183mm, worth checking before you try and use them with Shimano brakes.

I like the Ashima rotors as they are light and look nice. Not noticed any benefit from a ‘floating’ rotor of either sort.

Mine floated in the sink which happened to be full of mercury…

In my experience, ‘fixed’ rotors are fine for this country, never had a problem.

However, get into the Alps/Dolomites and things are very, very different given the length and ferocity of the downhills.

Which is odd, because most people in the alps use standard rotors. I guess maybe if you’ve got inadequate or badly maintained brakes, or you’re a brakedragger, it could be useful. Or you’re Kelly McGarry and riding down a load of steps.

Only issue I’ve had with Hope floating rotors is frame clearance so I run a floating disc on the front (both FS and HT) and a plain Hope rotor on the back.

Don’t really think the floaters make any difference but as the LBS ordered the wrong discs and then charged me the standard price so I kept them 🙂

MSP – Member

Well yes and no, the accepted definition for floating rotors in cycling may not be accurate, but pretty much everyone knows that and doesn’t need a bore to remind them on every thread about rotors.

MSP, any reason for being a complete twunt?

I simply corrected a wrong piece of information in a non-insulting and to the point manner. You are allowed to say “oh right, I made a mistake” you know.

One of the useful things about knowledge sharing on internet forums is that misconceptions and misinformation can be highlighted and explained*, otherwise the misinformation perpetuates. I only waded in because I think it’s a bit off to put someone down for trying to add some genuine information to a thread that is relevant to the OPs question.

Thank you 🙂 and you will note I kept my reply brief.