Paul Lew, the man behind the Reynolds range of wheels, has been nominated as the Vice Chairman on Wheel Committee after two years on the board. The committee is a sub-group of the Bicycle Technical Committee and deals with UCI on the issue of wheels.
Why would you care? Well, the committee has an ongoing conversation with the UCI on the approval of wheels for UCI-sanctioned events.
Currently, the UCI requires rupture testing of all “non-standard” wheels which have “rims taller than 2.5cm, fewer than 16 spokes and spoke thicknesses of over 2.4 mm". Here’s the current list. The UCI aims to ensure wheels are safe for racing, while the manufacturers say the UCI testing protocol is unrealistic and hard to reproduce.
The committee met most recently just before the Eurobike show, with a discussion about disc brakes. The UCI don't currently allow disc brakes in road events. Paul Lew has provided his observations coming out of that meeting. We'll print them in full...
"The day before Eurobike started, I participated in the most recent UCI disc brake discussion. In that meeting, compelling evidence was presented that indicates the UCI may postpone its approval of disc brakes indefinitely. With most of the industry’s key suppliers embracing the new technology, one might ask: “Why is UCI resisting the technology of road disc brakes?”
For some insight as to why the UCI is resisting the technology of road disc brakes, here is an excerpt from its presentation. Please excuse any typos, misspellings, or grammatical errors — these are the words, spellings and phrases from the UCI’s 27 August 2013 presentation (everything that follows in bold italics comes from that presentation).
1 Disc brakes are still considered as technical innovations on the road and have to be submitted to the UCI and approved by the Equipment Commission to be allowed in competition after one or several test events.
2 Until today no disc brakes adapted for the road cycling was never presented to the UCI.
3 Challenges on the road are very different from the mountain bike or cx with
• Higher speed
• Longer braking time
• Higher temperature accumulation
• Bigger disk which means bigger issue in case of crashes
• Braking behaviour that may block the wheel and make the bike slip
• Difference of braking performance between disk brakes and rim brakes that may cause crashes inside the peloton
The UCI don’t want to allow dangerous, non-adapted braking systems in competition that may cause even more crashes instead of improving safety
If disc brakes will be allowed on road events, enough time will be given to the industry to adapt to this decision
For cyclists who compete in UCI-sanctioned events or sanctioned events that adhere to UCI regulations, the message is clear: disc brakes are not allowed. UCI has made it clear that they have reasons not to accept disc brakes and if we take a historical perspective, UCI is not easily persuaded to adopt regulations that permit new equipment.
For cyclists who don’t compete in UCI events, it’s easier - and also a bit more complicated. Disc brakes are here to stay and they offer many benefits. Certainly, they are “allowed” for casual group riding and tours. Those who intend to compete on bicycles with disc brakes in local events will need to check regulations on a case-by-case basis.
The UCI attitude regarding disc brakes will influence the trajectory of disc brake technology, which is driven by the willingness of manufacturers to invest in developing and advancing disc brakes, and the consumers’ demand for purchasing them.
Reynolds Cycling has made commitments to embrace the new disc brake technology, and to simultaneously improve our rim brake technology. For example, in 2013, Reynolds has released both an upgraded rim braking system (the Cryo Blue Power brake pads), as well as its first disc brake road wheel, the Assault Disc. As one of the early adopters, Reynolds Cycling will invest a significant portion of their product development budget to lead the market place with innovative disc brake wheels and solutions.
Time will tell where the UCI goes with approving disc brakes on the road. Reynolds and I will remain committed to participating in the discussion, ensuring safety, and embracing innovation. Whatever the outcome, the cyclist and the sport are always better off for having new technology options."
So, according to Paul Lew, the UCI isn't in any great hurry to allow disc brakes in competition on the road, and it might never actually approve them.
Now, it must be said that these comments were made prior to today's election of Brian Cookson to the UCI presidency. Our next question to Paul Lew is whether he thinks the new change at the top is going to make a difference on this issue. We'll keep you posted.
Taking that a step further, will the new regime be changing other equipment rules any time soon? The best known rule, of course, is that complete road bikes aren't allowed to weigh any less than 6.8kg, but many maufacturers we speak to feel that other restrictions currently in place are also limiting the progress of bicycle design.
Wouldn't now be a good time for a wholesale review of the rules and regs?
Post script
We now have a reply from Paul Lew. Here's what he says...
"It's important to know that neither I, nor anyone else [on the committee], had any input [on UCI's position] - this was a word-for-word recap of UCI's position at that moment. That's not to say that in the future I and other committee members won't have input.
"In my position as a representative of manufacturers and cyclists, as well as a fair-minded ambassador for UCI, it is important that I stay balanced in my perspective. This means that people who have an opinion for or against disc brakes may from time-to-time find frustration with my opinion on the matter, which is to try to walk a narrow line, halfway between welcoming innovation while also working to see the UCI perspective.
"This IS a negotiation and taking a hard position from either side will stall progress. It is my job to try to find an agreeable way to encourage innovation while respecting the traditional attitudes of UCI. There is a gap and we must build a bridge, not stand on one side of the gap or the other and sling arrows."
The issue of disc brake use in road competition looks set to be a big topic of debate for the forseeable future. Whatever the eventual outcome, it surely needs to be addressed properly with serious examination of the facts, because right now nobody really knows how it would influence road racing or whether oft cited safety concerns are well-founded.
Add new comment
49 comments
I certainly wouldn't fancy riding with a load of newbies with hot, sharp disc brakes in a road race!!
Fine, have them on your road bike if you must, but not in road races please!
What I also don't understand is why we apparently need them so much? Braking in the dry, calipers work fine. So we need them when it rains then! But what happens when the braking forces outstrips the grip the tyres have in the wet and start to slide?
You obviously haven't seen the start of the Three Peaks CX race. Although it's CX, it starts on road for about 6 miles and you have a peloton of 500+ riders, some on discs, some on rim brakes. It's bloody terrifying. I've seen crashes caused by one guy having great brakes and the guy behind having rubbish ones.
Whether or not it's actually true when you look at the bigger picture is debatable but it's certanly one of several issues that need to be looked at before you can say "yes, go ahead and use them"
The other main one is neutral service at WorldTour races - it's already a nightmare with 10sp & 11sp and the mix of Campag & Shimano - now double the types of wheel by having a disc variant of each one too.
This from personal experience crazy legs? Nice to know we've got a pro reading road.cc
Odd that people are worried about hot rotors but not pointy chainrings
So there's a danger from rotors but there's isn't a problem with chainrings? This is the problem with leaving these things to people with too much interest in the outcome - it wouldn't be too difficult to make a lightweight rotor protector in carbon fibre for example.
Personally I dont fancy 50-100 bikes coming at me with knife sharp rotors if the peleton goes down. We had a crash this week racing which took a few riders out.
Most suffered pretty nasty abrasions but are ok.
I hate to think what an unshielded rotor could do... especially to fingers/arms etc which could get caught up in a tangle.
All for innovation and for solo endurance rides I'm sure its a great idea... but im not sure it would work in a large crash situation at 40+ mph.
That's a good point. I imagine you could also get a few slashed / popped tyres resulting from relatively innocuous bumps. A hot rotor and thin tubular probably don't go together well.
Sharp thinking!
"Whatever the outcome, the cyclist and the sport are always better off for having new technology options."
Yes of course, this is nothing to do with manufacturers wanting everyone to replace their wheels with disc brakes does it ? How very altruistic of them.
Very disappointed that Road CC is just giving a verbatim and uncritical platform to someone who clearly has a substantial vested interest.
Dunno about the sport, but I think it's fair to say that cyclists generally benefit from new technologies.
And I don't have a problem with road.cc giving this guy a platform, he's in 2 positions of interest so why not hear what he's got to say? I don't think it's their job to criticise what he's saying, and I'd hope it was more or less verbatim!
I agree with caaad10. What about reducing the weight limit too, the argument that bikes will be unsafe if they are made too light is absurd when you think that pro teams are adding several hundred grams of ballast (which does nothing to improve strength) just to reach the weight limit.
Come on Brian, make a bold move as your welcome to the poisoned chalice!
A thought re complementary pricing.
For any individual, there is a certain amount they're willing to spend on a bike, and that amount is distributed across the sales channel, the bike manufacturer and the assorted component suppliers. By adding cost to the braking system (levers, callipers, frame, disk), you're effectively having to reduce cost elsewhere. Disc systems require more complex and expensive components than rim systems, so value shifts from wheel to component supplier.
So if you're a large and dominant wheel or (especially) rim vendor, it's probably against your interests to have the technology and cost shift away from your products to someone else's. So you'd probably prefer to keep the status quo.
I will speculate that the major wheel/rim vendors are largely against, the frame and component vendors are supportive, and the more innovative wheel/rim vendors will also support because the shift from rim to disk braking gives them an opportunity to differentiate themselves from the pack.
Imagine : if disc brakes had been the norm, can you possibly imagine just how absurd a new design for a rim brake would appear? There is no way it would be allowed (or even considered) by the UCI.... The UCI is making a complete fool of itself (again). With road cycling becoming more and more popular somebody should remind them it is 2013
I have to say what the UCI is saying does make some sense, if we were all disc brakes no issue, all on rim brakes again no issue, mix and match...
Seen enough calves tattooed by hot rotors to be aware there is an issue there, Spinergy got banned because there were definite issues. Quite how we go from no discs to discs being acceptable is going to be an interesting one. Imagine cat4 races with very different brakes...
Don't agree mrmo.
UCI are completely wrong and their argument is fatuous.
Back in the 1950's Jaguar experimented with the first disc brakes on a racing car, Jaguar D Type, when everybody else was still using drum/shoe brakes. Were there massive crashes because the Jaguar's out-braked the inferior drum braked cars? No, and the same will apply to a peloton where some have discs and some have rim brakes.
If the argument is about safer braking then they should ban rim brakes completely and specify disc brakes only as they are more efficient, reduce stopping distances and aren't so easily affected by dirt and water.
which goes completely against the UCI remit of widening participation. There are two reasons behind the weight limit, one is safety which is questionable, the other is keeping the price of competetive bikes down. Yes you can buy a $10k bike but you can get an equally light and functional bike for a lot less.
If we were starting elsewhere then discs would make sense. But we're not.
Le Man's 1955:
"Hawthorn's Jaguar, with the new disc brakes, decelerated much faster than other cars using drum brakes, such as Levegh's Mercedes. The sudden, unexpected braking by Hawthorn caused Macklin in the Healey to hit his brakes, throwing up a small cloud of dust in front of Levegh, who trailed close behind"
Results: 84 human beings died in one fiery crash!!!!
I don't think there will be much (if any) mix & match, EVERYONE will adopt disc brakes as they have definite advantages, I'm pretty certain of that. Why would you want to be at a disadvantage?
Regarding the question of rotor burn, yes this is an issue - but then again so is gravel rash. Rims can also get extremely hot, but no-one seems to worry too much about rim burns. I think the danger is outweighed by the safety gains in braking in general... just my thoughts.....
Now think about Amateur racing where people are buying there own bikes.
Are you expecting everyone to buy a new bike?
The problem is that you will have a transition period caliper to disc and how do you manage it?
I agree and even when it comes to buying a new bike who's to say a bike with discs will be worth it. You are likely going to pay hundreds of pounds more and pay a weight penalty. Not to mention many won't like the look of the shifters.
Pages