Discs brakes: are we heading towards a road bike 'standard'?

Thru axles are much better than QR. Faster to put wheels on, consistent position for discs, stiffer/no rotor rub. Discs are way better for normal people, i.e. 99.9% of us.

Consistent alignment and lack of disc rub under load perhaps. Not sure what descending would have to do with any benefit of either QR or thru-axle. Speed-wise, Focus RAT thru-axles seem faster when taking off the front wheel than a QR (lawyer tabs), all thru-axles would be much slower on the rear i'd imagine but then I try and avoid spending a huge amount of my time with the bike swapping wheels around willy-nilly.. YMMV. Is it really 'an issue'.. why are people so worked up about this ?

I can't begin to understand why they even use thru axles - compared to QR they're a total PITA - and there's absolutely no need for them on a road bike (a motorbike perhaps but not a bicycle). I've been using QR for 5 years in every condition imaginable (5 descents of The Alpe in a day? 0C to 33C across those descents etc etc) and never once thought I need a TA. I now have a gravel bike with TA and I really don't see the need. It's slower to get a wheel off and on too. 

Can anyone explain why we seem to have settled on 12mm for road when 15mm is the standard in MTB? I think this is just stupid.

SP. Your post confused me.  I thought that road traffic casualties in the UK were actually decreasing. So I looked up the DfT website and found some statistics.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/annual-road-fatalities

I don’t have time to go looking for the very latest figures (these are up to 2013). However, from the summary.

In 2013:

1,713 people were killed in reported road traffic accidents in Great Britain, 2% (41) fewer than in 2012. This is the lowest number of fatalities since national records began in 1926. The total number of people killed in 2013 was 39% lower than the 2005-09 baseline average

The number of fatalities decreased for pedestrians, pedal cyclists and car occupants, by 5%, 8% and 2% respectively, but increased for motorcycle users by 1%. Over the same period motor vehicle traffic remained broadly stable, with a small increase of 0.4% between 2012 and 2013

With the exception of 2011, road deaths have fallen every year since 2004. Adverse weather (heavy snow falls) experienced in the first and last quarters of 2010 but not in 2011, is likely to be the main factor behind the increase in fatalities recorded in 2011

Year / Road accident fatalities

2000   3,409

2001   3,450

2002   3,431

2003   3,508

2004   3,221

2005   3,201

2006   3,175

2007   2,946

2008   2,538

2009   2,222

2010   1,850

2011   1,901

2012   1,754

2013   1,713

I have not checked but I suspect that total mileage travelled has not gone down to account for these reductions.

So my question to you is; which of the following safety features found in cars likely to be on the road in the years covered by these accident statistics has caused an overall increase in casualties due to ‘driver risk compensation’.

ABS, dynamic stability / traction control, 3 point seat belts, seat belt pre tension systems, safety glass, airbags, pedestrian ‘friendly’ crumple zones, road tyre design,  isofix child seat restraints, anti burst door locking, head restraints, passenger compartment design and fittings. (I note that most of the current safety systems are about protecting car occupants in the event of a collision)

And which of these features appearing in newer vehicles are the most hazardous?

Active braking systems, auto emergency braking, collision avoidance, radar controlled cruise control / speed assistance, proximity alert (blind spot) sensors, adaptive lighting and ultimately self driving vehicles.  (I note that most of these new technologies are about avoiding collisions in the first place)

Or maybe despite all these dangerous and uneccesary driver aids, the overall standard of driving in the UK is improving?

Dear people waiting until there's 'a standard'; bloody communists, the lot of ya. Choice is good. 

Show me a major bike component, from a major mfr, that was widespread 30yrs ago and is now unobtainable.

<crickets chirp>...

If you are DESPERATELY CONCERNED that that 142x12 rear hub axle that you plan to keep until YOU DIE won't be available in 25 years time when it gets eaten by snakes, don't worry. There's always a burned-out bearded ex-aerospace engineer in Portland or somewhere woody that will make you one from Ti or stainless or something for maybe £50. Sorted. 

Quit whining and Just Buy Discs, OK?

ps the MTB world has been living with a bunch of utterly incompatible fluids, axles and mount designs for decades. I note that no-one ever rides MTB's anymore as a result. 

Hush now, didn't you hear? Campag are going to include disc brakes in their product line. It's OK to accept them as a valid method of stopping a bicycle.

Potentially greater control != dumbing it down.

Re standards, learn from the MTB world - there are a few standards (and separate out axle / wheel specs from brake specs) and mostly they all get along nicely.  

Personally, I love the modulation of hydraulic disc brakes.  Yes, they are can be too powerful in a club ride where some of the riders are on wet rim brakes but a bit of planning and forethought has meant my club hasn't had any issues so far (in fact we've had fewer near-misses than when some of us were on dirty rims and brake pads which weren't suitable for the conditions).

I like that we can have a choice when ignoring peer pressure.

Went for hydros on my CX and really happy with them.

Still using Ultegra 6700 'rubber pads' on my road bike and that feels solid too.

I'm not buying another road bike until the I.Std. is agreed.

I love disc brakes; the power, modulation and dependability when working correctly.

What I don't like about them is the frequency that you have to change pads due to contaniments glazing the surface.

On mtbs this happens but less so because the environment you spend most of the time doesn't usually have oil based contaniments. If anything gets in it'll be water, mud etc.

But cycling on the road is a different matter. There's all sorts of rubbish on the road surface; deisel, petrol,  the residue from roadworks that'll contain some sort of hydrocarbon, etc. Mix that with water it's bound to get into the pads. You could end up changing pads a few times a month if you're unlucky or several times a year generally speaking.

Post mount exists to make retro-fitting mid-range MTB calipers that equal or exceed performance of "high end" road calipers awkward and ugly with adapters etc...

If after all these years there's still no single standard for rim brakes, bottom brackets, tyre choices or in fact any component of a bicycle, it seems highly unlikely that there's going to be a single standard for disc brakes. Choose your poison and accept that whatever you buy into now will be horribly old fashioned next year. Best us poor mugs can hope for is a supply of spare parts and compatible replacements for years to come.

I bet it'll take near 5 years to sort this stuff out. I wouldn't go near a disc road bike purchase-wise for 7 to 10 years cause of this.

Nothing against disc brakes per se, but my rim brakes are powerful enough and modulate sufficiently well for me. Yeah, maybe discs'd be some marginal bit better - but... I don't really care.

Based on that, can you do a "Here's the top 10 bikes roundup, that support that spec" cos I would only buy a disc brake bike that supports that, from now on.