Covet

[dplasters]

@Sunyata 119397 wrote:

(I went to JMU)

Go Dukes.

[DaveK]

@Sunyata 119397 wrote:

Yeah, I will go out and ride bits of the course several times over the next two months. Luckily, I am super familiar with all of the trails (I went to JMU, which is where I learned to ride a mountain bike and go back 4-5 times a year and ride). Lynn and I have a hate/hate relationship on the best day… But, I know it is coming and can plan accordingly – the soul crushing hike-a-bike is more of a mental drain than a physical one. Hopefully I will be with a group of good spirited folks that will appreciate my odd sense of humour on that section.

I knew the course well before I raced it but I always just figured that I can hike, why would I need to train that? The Hankey climb was trouble for me after that because my legs just weren’t used to it in the middle of a ride. I recovered for Death Climb but I was cramping at the top of Hankey and considered bailing.

[AFHokie]

Interesting rear light & situational awareness tool from Garmin: [URL] http://www.outsideonline.com/1996171/garmin-just-made-commuting-much-safer-and-strava-even-more-addicting?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=facebookpost%5B/URL%5D

[vvill]

Paul mechanical disc brake calipers.
http://www.paulcomp.com/klamper-disc-caliper.html

Big image here.

[mstone]

@vvill 119561 wrote:

Paul mechanical disc brake calipers.
http://www.paulcomp.com/klamper-disc-caliper.html

I just might need that.

[vvill]

I will probably go with them for my next disc brake build (whenever that happens to be).

[hozn]

@vvill 119595 wrote:

I will probably go with them for my next disc brake build (whenever that happens to be).

They look nice … but heavy and single-piston. I will stick with TRP or maybe Rever (though not sure why I would pay more for the Rever).

[vvill]

They’re lighter than the BB7s I have already. But yeah I guess dual-piston is a good reason to actually try the TRPs. Who knows, by the time my next bike comes up there’ll be something new anyway.

[hozn]

Yeah, TRP are half price and 25% lighter (and dual piston). But we’ll all be on hydro in a couple years!

[mstone]

I’ve heard mixed reviews on the performance of the spyres, and they only support rotors to 160mm. The new pauls say they’ll go to 11, uh, 203mm. Tool-free adjustment seems like an obvious no-brainer of the “shut up and take my money” variety which also eliminates much of the dual-caliper advantage in practical terms. It’ll be interesting to see how they compare to the hy/rds.

Most importantly they’ve got orange highlights, which matches the color scheme of my bike.

[hozn]

Spyres are awesome. Perform as well, or a little better than BB7s, even pad wear, easier adjustment than BB7 — just turn the barrel adjuster. (Eventually you do need to dial in the pads with a 3mm wrench; luckily my multi-tool has one.). But TRP rotors are not so great, which may be contributing to any negative reviews of the brakes. (Pauls don’t come with rotors anyway.)

I have no idea why one would want larger than 160mm rotors for the road/cx. 160/140 works great with single-finger braking. I might switch to 160/160 someday for a little extra grab in back for the off-road. Are there even road forks that clear a larger rotor?

[mstone]

@hozn 119641 wrote:

I have no idea why one would want larger than 160mm rotors for the road/cx. 160/140 works great with single-finger braking.

Well, you’re light. When I’m touring and pushing 300 pounds a larger rotor seems like a win. For actual lightweight recreational road riding, disc brakes in general seem like a stupid idea and I just use rim brakes.

[hozn]

@mstone 119647 wrote:

Well, you’re light. When I’m touring and pushing 300 pounds a larger rotor seems like a win. For actual lightweight recreational road riding, disc brakes in general seem like a stupid idea and I just use rim brakes.

Yeah, that sounds heavy. Are there road/cx frames that support larger than 160mm rotors? (And I assume steel forks allow for larger rotors up front? My cx fork specs 160 as max rotor size.) Obviously if it was a mountain bike, but then we wouldn’t be talking about Spyres at all

[mstone]

@hozn 119649 wrote:

Yeah, that sounds heavy. Are there road/cx frames that support larger than 160mm rotors? (And I assume steel forks allow for larger rotors up front? My cx fork specs 160 as max rotor size.) Obviously if it was a mountain bike, but then we wouldn’t be talking about Spyres at all

I assume that’s a problem for people who like skinny tires. It’s got a metal fork with plenty of room for 37s with fenders; rotor clearance isn’t an issue.

[hozn]

@mstone 119650 wrote:

I assume that’s a problem for people who like skinny tires. It’s got a metal fork with plenty of room for 37s with fenders; rotor clearance isn’t an issue.

On the road bike, I believe clearance would be an issue, yeah. My CX fork fits 50mm tires, but specs a max rotor size of 160, so probably not clearance there. Not sure if the size limit is due to load or what.

Edit: in looking more closely, I’m not sure whether I could fit anything larger than 180 (if that) in the cx fork.

Edit2: TRP sells 180 and 203 rotors for use with “all their disc brakes”. Does TRP say the Spyre can’t be used with larger rotors?

Edit3: the TRP Spyre even includes an adapter for 180F when you choose the 160mm rotor.

[Author]

Posts