Braking technique for discs

Agent Orange

Agent Orange

Member
I don't go to Reddit for advice, but many poor souls do. I found myself reading a bicycle-related sub discussing how to "properly" use disc brakes. It was curious to me that a non-trivial amount of respondents said to intermittent hard brake application. Specifically, do that while alternating between front and rear in order to avoid overheating. Consistent, moderate "drag" braking was "bad" and to be avoided. No other wheeled sport I know of advocates such technique. I found it concerning, actually.

Is this actually a thing in cycling? If so, can someone explain the physics of why?
 
I was baffled because I didn't see how it would be possible. I'm frequently on downhills where a handful of both brakes is necessary to keep from....well, getting killed. On those slopes, releasing the brakes will have you going too fast again in seconds. There's no way to keep the brakes from getting really hot unless you crash and stop applying them. I've blued some of them. Bike brake rotors are generally made from 400 series stainless that has awful thermal transfer characteristics. A few seconds of radiating heat into the air isn't going to make a difference.

In fact, I made it a point to get larger rotors that have fewer holes (and thus more mass) in order to better handle prolonged hard braking. I'd get solid rotors if I could find them.
 
I have heard of a similar braking technique from a truck driver. Basically brake relatively hard to get your speed down, then release to allow the brakes time to cool. Gentle dragging will over heat them. On the one side, those are drum brakes and suffer from overheating issues. And the other side, road bikes do have relatively small discs.

I recently went from 203/180 discs to 220/203 discs on my MTB because I literally gave myself a second degree burn from a brake disc on the MTB. I can get my roadie up to some pretty high speeds.
 
Sidewalk said:
I have heard of a similar braking technique from a truck driver. Basically brake relatively hard to get your speed down, then release to allow the brakes time to cool. Gentle dragging will over heat them. On the one side, those are drum brakes and suffer from overheating issues. And the other side, road bikes do have relatively small discs.

I recently went from 203/180 discs to 220/203 discs on my MTB because I literally gave myself a second degree burn from a brake disc on the MTB. I can get my roadie up to some pretty high speeds.
Click to expand...
What brand(s) is/are your brake/rotor setup?
 
Understanding how brakes work (and more importantly, how they fail) is helpful in using them properly - but the technique of doing front and then back is one of the stupidest things I've heard. I can't believe I am about to say this, but @DangerDirtyD hit the nail on the head - "It won't take long to figure out what feels stable..."
I will add that new mt bikers are notoriously fearful of using the front brake. With today's suspension and head angles, the likelihood of being pitched over the bars has been further diminished, requiring even less rearward movement of one's hips and CG while using the only brake that actually works to stop you.
 
I can think of no instance when only using the front brake is a good idea... unless you are at riding at a walking pace. At speed, even a small bump can (and will) launch you.

Of course, I'm not telling people on this site what they don't already know. I use rear brake only, or when things get gnarly, rear AND front in combination. I try not to drag my rear brake, but I don't hesitate to do so when conditions warrant. I've got a drawer full of brake pads, and they take less than ten minutes to change.
 
BonsaiNut said:
I can think of no instance when only using the front brake is a good idea... unless you are at riding at a walking pace. At speed, even a small bump can (and will) launch you.

Of course, I'm not telling people on this site what they don't already know. I use rear brake only, or when things get gnarly, rear AND front in combination. I try not to drag my rear brake, but I don't hesitate to do so when conditions warrant. I've got a drawer full of brake pads, and they take less than ten minutes to change.
Click to expand...
At the bottom of a fast run, when I need to stop, I use 90% front brake. Rear brake only is for slight corrections in line or attitude. Or a super cool monster skid!
 
BonsaiNut said:
I can think of no instance when only using the front brake is a good idea... unless you are at riding at a walking pace. At speed, even a small bump can (and will) launch you.

Of course, I'm not telling people on this site what they don't already know. I use rear brake only, or when things get gnarly, rear AND front in combination. I try not to drag my rear brake, but I don't hesitate to do so when conditions warrant. I've got a drawer full of brake pads, and they take less than ten minutes to change.
Click to expand...
Can't tell if you're being serious or messing with us... but if you can actually get away with rear brake only this says a lot about the trails you're riding in NC :p
 
evdog said:
Can't tell if you're being serious or messing with us... but if you can actually get away with rear brake only this says a lot about the trails you're riding in NC :p
Click to expand...

Not sure why you want to throw shade on some of the best mountain biking in the country... particularly if you have never ridden any of the trails. Have you ever even VISITED North Carolina?

But no, I'm talking about ALL of my biking, including SoCal. I never use the front brake by itself. Let me know about all your instances of using only the front brake on the Motorway or Joplin... how'd that work out for you?
 
BonsaiNut said:
Not sure why you want to throw shade on some of the best mountain biking in the country... particularly if you have never ridden any of the trails. Have you ever even VISITED North Carolina?

But no, I'm talking about ALL of my biking, including SoCal. I never use the front brake by itself. Let me know about all your instances of using only the front brake on the Motorway or Joplin... how'd that work out for you?
Click to expand...
I don't think @evdog is throwing shade on NC trails per se, just saying that if you can use rear brake only, it must not be very steep.

I think you may be overly scared of the front brake. I’m not a great rider but I could easily use 80% front brake on Joplin and Motorway with no problem. I wouldn’t want to use only front brake - not for fear of going over the bars - but because modulating front and rear helps distribute traction and keep the bike aligned. And that brings it back to the title of the tread - alternating your braking (front -rear -front - rear) to save wear on your pads or discs is pretty silly.

But I think if I had to have one brake fail, I would be more comfortable with rear only vs front only - even though the rear doesn't slow the bike very well on steep terrain. Front-only would require some very careful modulation every time you pull the lever.

And Motorway isn’t steep, so there’s that.
 
Last edited:
herzalot said:
I think you may be overly scared of the front brake. I’m not a great rider but I could easily use 80% front brake on Joplin and Motorway with no problem. I wouldn’t want to use only front brake - not for fear of going over the bars - but because modulating front and rear helps distribute traction and keep the bike aligned.
Click to expand...

This seems like such a pointless argument to be having. I can absolutely ride with 100% front brake in cases of mechanical failure. I've lost my rear brake before (for one reason or other) when up in the mountains, and have limped home with the front brake only. There is just no instance when I would prefer to use 100% front while descending. Can I? Yes. Do I think it is best? No. Will I go as fast using only the front brake versus front/rear combo? Not even close.

So I guess I am going to have to agree to disagree with the "100% front brake FTW!" crowd.
 
I just get on the bike and ride, and I don't even really know what I am doing most of the time. :cautious:
That said, I rarely touch the front brake before the rear. I usually start rear and then add front. The only time I use front only is slow speed U-Turns on tight trails.

^ Probably why I am slow, but it works for me. Also, don't take riding advice from me. :Roflmao
 
BonsaiNut said:
Not sure why you want to throw shade on some of the best mountain biking in the country... particularly if you have never ridden any of the trails. Have you ever even VISITED North Carolina?
Click to expand...
I thought Bend - oh wait, no - Bentonville... has the best mountain biking in the country? Sorry but that singletracks.com list is even more questionable than the one @mtbMike posted a while back :Roflmao


BonsaiNut said:
This seems like such a pointless argument to be having. I can absolutely ride with 100% front brake in cases of mechanical failure. I've lost my rear brake before (for one reason or other) when up in the mountains, and have limped home with the front brake only. There is just no instance when I would prefer to use 100% front while descending. Can I? Yes. Do I think it is best? No. Will I go as fast using only the front brake versus front/rear combo? Not even close.

So I guess I am going to have to agree to disagree with the "100% front brake FTW!" crowd.
Click to expand...
I don't see anyone advocating for 100% front brake only. Can you point them out to us? Or maybe have them stand up and wave?

You were the one who said you use rear brake only (and both when the trail gets gnarly). It's quite mind blowing, actually, that someone who seems to be an experienced rider would think rear brake only is a good idea at almost any time....unless like @herzalot said, your trails are flat and slow.
 
I use both brakes 95% of the time amd I can say that most of the time I am squeezing the front brake harder than the rear. I only squeeze them equallly hard when I need to stop fast in order to not be decapitated by a downed tree. The odd thing is, my rear pads ALWAYS wear out faster than the front. Rotors are the same size.
 
Faust29 said:
Front pads- 1100 miles. Rear pads- 600 miles. :poop: But at least they're quieter than those godforsaken Trucker Co. Pads. @Lost Kiwi .





:Roflmao
Click to expand...

Damnit, and I just got a new set in the mail today. :laugh: To be fair, only the front ones occasionally make noise.

20221006_131917.jpg
 
Faust29 said:
Front pads- 1100 miles. Rear pads- 600 miles. :poop: But at least they're quieter than those godforsaken Trucker Co. Pads. @Lost Kiwi .

:Roflmao
Click to expand...



Yep, that's about what I get, 2 rear sets to every front set of pads.

And haven't really thought about it, but I'd say I'm 80% front for stopping. Serious suck to only have front or rear, but it happens.

So far the nukeproof pads are doing ok, but only been on for a month or so.... Time will tell.
 
I thought I used both front and back fairly evenly... definitely if I want to stop I use both.
When I put new brakes on last spring, the mechanic said my rear rotor had more wear than my front. I think steep fast descents.. yes, I do use a lot of front, but also rear. However.. when it starts to get techy ala El P, winter creek... i tend to feather the front and use more consistant force on the rear. Rolls over the chunk/tech with decent momentum but with the front free (ish) but controls speed using the rear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top