Tripleshot Cycling

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to- ... ompetition

Check it out.

Boo.

I second that "Boo"

Complete rule changes:

-Disc brakes are now permitted in cyclocross races.

-The maximum allowed tire width has been reduced from 35mm to 33mm.

- The old “6 obstacle limit” has been changed to a “6 man-made obstacle limit”.

- Barriers are no longer required to have a height of 40cm. However, 40cm remains the maximum height for barriers.

- Barriers are now required to be separated by 4-6m.

- Man-made sand pits are now allowed in ’cross races.

- Commissaires are now allowed to authorize feeding when the temperature is above 20 degrees C.

- Feeds are to be done in the pit lane, but are not permitted during the first two and final two laps.

- Commissaires may now invoke an “80% rule” and pull riders who are behind by more than 80% of the leaders lap time.

- The UCI has established Continental Cyclocross Championships.

The rest of the changes are positive, more obstacles! more sand! small tires! Actually the smaller tires may offset some of the benefit of disc brakes. One plus about disc brakes will be rims will last more than 2 seasons.

Josh.E wrote:I second that "Boo"

Just curious. Why don't you guys like discs? Not enough Alce Elegante Euro Flair? I was thinking you could weave streamers in and out of the disc cooling holes to replace the look of white non-functional cantilevers that certain oracles of cycling fashion gush over. (Oh god, I just realized I criticized an old technology. I'm going straight to retro-grouch hell. )

I like the "gong show" aspect of cross racing.
Part of the what makes it so fun, and what makes it such a unique skill set is that the bikes are completely ill-suited to the terrain being ridden. Fatter tired, full suspension bikes would obviously be able to get around a lot of courses quicker, but that would make it a different sport too. I think of it along the same lines as I wouldn't want to see time trials ridden on fully faired recumbants, even though they would be faster. I do like that they reduced the tire width along with allowing discs.

Besides which, I think for the vast majority of situations in cross racing where disc brakes would work better, slippery conditions and traction will dictate how much braking force you can apply before skidding, or the sloppiness of the conditions will keep the speeds down anyway. Cantis may actually be better suited to force you to ride to the conditions. For all the years of mountain biking I used to do, the only place I found disc brakes to be a real advantage over the hydraulic rim brakes I had at the time was on tight, super slow, rocky lines in the wet. For riding singletrack, no advantage at all aside from increasing rim life.

I think the UCI decision is being pushed by bike manufactures eager to push and sell some new technologies. There's been quite a few pro racers interviewed already who see no advantage to using them in racing. The main market seems like it would be recreational cross bike owners who do not actually race. I think the fact that some engineering development teams will be unleashed on creating light weight cross-specific discs is going to result in some interesting new products in the next couple years, even disc brakes for road bikes. Pros will probably end up on them as well if they are getting pushed by their sponsors to do so.

Lister Farrar wrote:

Josh.E wrote:I second that "Boo"

Just curious. Why don't you guys like discs?

Last season I bought a titanium frame that was supposed to last 'for life'. Now it's obsolete and I need a new frame, brakes and new wheels.

There are lots of benefits to disc brakes. Rims won't wear out, more consistent breaking, better stopping power, no squeal or chatter. I've heard Shimano was the one pushing for the change, so I'm guessing they've got some lighter disc brakes coming out soon. I think it's going to be great for people who use cross bikes as commuter/winter/do everything bikes. I bet within 5 years we'll see disc brakes on road bikes, once the weight comes down. Rim weight will come down as well since a breaking surface will no longer be required.

As for the 'boo', I always thought the point of cross was racing offroad on the least suitable bike possible. But I realize it's hard to sell a bike based on the fact that it sucks at it's intended use. If cross bikes are going to be getting better, than the courses need to get harder.

Josh.E wrote:I like the "gong show" aspect of cross racing.

Yes, there is that. I'm having a bit of trouble reconciling 'gong show' and 'flair' though.

Besides which, I think for the vast majority of situations in cross racing where disc brakes would work better, slippery conditions and traction will dictate how much braking force you can apply before skidding, or the sloppiness of the conditions will keep the speeds down anyway. Cantis may actually be better suited to force you to ride to the conditions.

You sound like Ferrari (the car guy, not the blood guy) talking about his early poor brakes. "I make my cars to go, not to stop"!

For all the years of mountain biking I used to do, the only place I found disc brakes to be a real advantage over the hydraulic rim brakes I had at the time was on tight, super slow, rocky lines in the wet. For riding singletrack, no advantage at all aside from increasing rim life.

Really? I went from cantilevers to hydraulic discs in one jump and found them good for everything except euro-flair, tho I didn't try hyd. rim brakes. (wha? No lightening bolt? Is there no retro-grouch god at all?)

Roland wrote: Last season I bought a titanium frame that was supposed to last 'for life'. Now it's obsolete and I need a new frame, brakes and new wheels.

Well, you'll be wanting to sell it cheap then, right? I'll be right over.