Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Wed Jul 18, 2018 3:25 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 310 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 ... 31  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Is Retro faster?
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 12:12 pm 
Old School Grand Master

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:55 pm
Posts: 9109
Location: New Forest, UK
Discs need t oget bigger with cars to spread the heat energy out over a larger surface area - otherwise the pads get cooked. Similarly the mass of disc is important - the same kinetic energy has to be absorbed as heat. So put crudely doubling the weight means half the temperature rise.

What gets omitted in these discussions is that there is 700g of 'disc' available on a rim brake, which is why rims get warm while discs get very hot.

The main advantage of discs is that they stay clean and dry and can have a no-compromise design for optimum friction and heat dissipation without having to hold a tyre as well. This ability to optimise the braking system gives the advantage.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Retro faster?
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 12:25 pm 
Retro Guru

Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2013 2:57 pm
Posts: 1627
Location: Porto / Plymouth
I think most people on here ride in wet or muddy conditions most of the time, but in dry the mostly dry conditions round my way (Portugal) discs give essentially no advantage over well set up V brakes, as far as I can tell (I own both).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Retro faster?
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:55 am 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:16 pm
Posts: 5115
Ok, a bump to this long-arse thread :)

I had a great "test" of the whole "is retro faster / slower" are "29/27.5s faster than 26" are "fit people faster..." etc. etc. on Saturday at Swinley. I rode with 3 folks; 2 on 29ers, 1 on a 27.5er, both full suss, me on the 26er Team Explosif. Fitness wise, 1 dude was on par with me on a 29er, 2 were below - 1 27.5er 1 29er.

Simply put, the guy who had similar fitness to me on the 29er rinsed me on anything downhill - and by a notable distance. On the flat I could just about hold onto his tail but he was far, far smoother and less out of breath. On the up I won every single time and was in better nick.

For the other two, the guy on the 27.5 could hold my tail on the flat, beat me on the downhill but fell right off the back on anything pointing upwards. And the final chap on the 29er couldn't keep up after a few miles.

All this proves, in my opinion, is that riding styles have changed and will continue to do so. The amount of complaints from the 3 of them about going uphill really made me chuckle. They all raved how great 1*10/11/12 is but were spinning out on every decent and looked like hamsters on the climbs as I swept past them in the granny ring.

Their bikes are perfectly suited for bike parks and enduro's. Don't get me wrong, I'd 100% choose a modern bike if I lived next door to Bike Park Wales, Windrock or Les Gets. But I don't. These bikes are ill-suited for single-track in every respect; too heavy, poorly geared and cumbersome. They are extremely comfortable and there-in lies the real USP compared to retro; you can ride them for hours and you won't be aching anywhere near as much. Slack angles, "better" weight distribution, big fat wheels and progressive suspension - they are all improvements; you just need to use them in the right environment to get the best out of them.

I realise none of this is rocket science, I just thought this might provide a honest view through the not-so-rose tinted glasses.


Last edited by al-onestare on Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:07 am 
GOLD | PoTM | Rider | rBOTM
GOLD | PoTM | Rider | rBOTM
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:26 pm
Posts: 22142
Location: 54 Festive Road Winchcombe GLOUCS Yarp...
Sounds about right.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Retro faster?
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:25 am 
Retro Guru

Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:42 am
Posts: 2944
al-onestare wrote:
These bikes are ill-suited for single-track in every respect; too heavy, poorly geared and cumbersome.
So, shit bikes then?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:29 am 
GOLD | PoTM | Rider | rBOTM
GOLD | PoTM | Rider | rBOTM
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:26 pm
Posts: 22142
Location: 54 Festive Road Winchcombe GLOUCS Yarp...
Depends how big and manly you are really.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:51 am 
Gold Trader / MacRetro rider
Gold Trader / MacRetro rider

Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:05 pm
Posts: 7241
Location: Aberdeen
The History Man wrote:
Depends how big and manly you are really.


Quote:
It doesn’t get any easier, you just get faster. – Greg Lemond


Could equally apply to retro vs modern MTB.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:12 am 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:13 pm
Posts: 10603
Location: Skipton
I agree on the 1x bit. Don’t get me wrong, I have 1x11 on both my modern bikes but it brings very little to the party. Don’t agree with the single track bit as my slack, heavy 29” fs was great fun at the weekend. 8)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 11:24 am 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 8:01 pm
Posts: 4552
Another +1 for Al-onestare’s assessment. Modern bikes are too optimised for certain trail conditions and make you a bit too lazy imo. I know a good number of people who have various proper top end modern rigs and a fine collection of retro but their fav go-to ride is still retro.

My daughter made me chuckle the other evening. I asked her why she had switched from a smooth trail to ride over the dried out tractor tyre ruts, she said she liked it :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Is Retro faster?
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 1:37 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:16 pm
Posts: 5115
mattr wrote:
al-onestare wrote:
These bikes are ill-suited for single-track in every respect; too heavy, poorly geared and cumbersome.
So, shit bikes then?


No. Not at all.

al-onestare wrote:
Their bikes are perfectly suited for bike parks and enduro's.... you just need to use them in the right environment to get the best out of them.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 310 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 ... 31  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 51 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group