That truly is a forward-thinking article....considering it was written in the future! It was written in November of 2017! Do they have flying cars in the future?
Bill "Marty-McFly" Lindsay El Cerrito, CA On Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 3:42:39 PM UTC-7, René wrote: > > As I'm gearing up to enter the wonderful (hopefully for my wife) world of > tandem riding, and am getting set to build up my upcoming Hubbuhubbuh > sometime in the next month after the frame is delivered and in between my > business trips, I'm starting to do some research to better understand how > tandems work and behave. > > I was debating the merits of having the captain (me) control both front > and rear V Paul B-brakes and having my stoker control the disc brake, which > is supposed to be a drag brake (learning what that means), vs. me > controlling the rear disc brake and the stoker the rear V brake when I > discovered this excellent article on the Santana website (which is opposed > to what most people do with tandems). I really enjoyed the explanation, the > data supporting the claims and the enlightenment it gave me, that I decided > to share it here for the benefit of other (like me) total newbies to the > world of tandems. > > It all makes perfect Rivsense. > > *UNDERSTANDING BRAKING* > > Today, all of cycling is infatuated with disc brakes. A common belief is > that bicycles are finally catching up with the technology of cars and > motorcycles, where disc brakes proved superior decades earlier. If you > accept this common premise you might view rim brakes as old-fashioned, or > destined for the scrap heap. After all, you might be thinking, mountain > bikes have already switched to discs. Can road bikes be far behind? > > *“Shouldn’t my new tandem come equipped with a shiny pair of disc brakes?”* > > Actually, no… > > What’s missing is the simple realization that a bicycle’s rim brakes are, > in fact, disc brakes. Rim brakes have always been disc brakes. When cars > and motorcycles were fitted with disc brakes, they caught up to the braking > efficiency bicyclists had known for a half-century. > > But, you might ask, aren’t motorcycle-style disc brakes more powerful? > > Surprisingly, no. The engineers at Shimano and Avid (companies that > produce both types) have confirmed Santana’s test results. Even the newest > and most powerful bicycle disc brakes haven’t yet caught up the power of > the best V-style (or linear-pull) rim brake. > > The inescapable limitation for the motorcycle-styled brakes is that the > rotor (or disc) is too small. Anyone who understands bicycle disc brakes > will agree that with exactly the same hand lever, hand strength and > caliper, an 8-inch (203mm) disc will stop a bike about twice as effectively > as a 4-inch disc. This is true because braking power is a function of > leverage, and is directly proportional to the length of the lever arm > (which, in the case of all bicycle brakes, is the distance from the axle to > the braking surface). With a rotor twice as large, the same amount of hand > power provides doubled braking power, which allows you to stop twice as > quickly—and in half the distance. > > *More Leverage = Faster Stops* > > A rim brake’s advantage is the diameter of the rim. On a 700c road bike > the diameter is 622mm. From this we can appreciate that a road bike’s rim > brake applies power at a leverage point that’s over three times more > effective than that of an 8-inch disc. While bicycle rim brakes may seem > crude or old fashioned, a 300% difference in leverage (and braking power) > can’t be ignored. Additionally, those who value overall efficiency should > also consider that a rim brake’s “disc” is not only three times larger, the > weight savings of using an aluminum rim as your rotor saves a half-pound > per wheel. > > Single bike riders (along with the engineers at Shimano and Avid) will > reply that disc brakes have more than enough power for single bikes. We > agree. On a single bike, a rear 8-inch disc has enough power to lock the > rear wheel. On a tandem, however, an 8-inch disc isn’t powerful enough to > skid the rear tire. Think we’re wrong? Take any road tandem with a rear > disc and (with a stoker aboard) attempt a rear wheel skid on smooth, dry, > level pavement (without applying the front brake at the same time). People > who try this test are invariably disappointed when they fail to skid the > tire. Next, perform the same test on any tandem with a rear V-brake to > prove to yourself that rim brakes are considerably more powerful, and will > easily skid a tandem’s rear tire. > > Look at is this way: If a 6-inch rear disc is barely powerful enough for a > single, a twice-as-heavy tandem will need a 12-inch disc to obtain the same > degree of deceleration. If someone tells you an 8-inch disc is “powerful > enough” for a tandem, you should ask if a 4-inch rotor is a good enough for > a single. > > *In an Emergency, It’s the Front Brake that Matters Most* > > Because of “load transfer” the front brakes of cars, motorcycles and > bicycles provide over 80% of emergency stopping power. This explains why > bicycle and car manufactures typically supply bigger discs up front. While > a larger-than 8-inch rotor on the front of a single bike is questionable, > that’s only because a single bike’s stopping power is limited by the “over > the bars” factor. On tandems and cars, however, the limiting factor is > front wheel skid. In an emergency situation the load transfer causes rear > tires to skid with about 4x less braking power than a front brake. If disc > brakes aren’t powerful enough to skid the rear wheel of a tandem (and they > aren’t), putting this brake on the front of a road tandem (where four times > more braking power is needed) is worse than stylishly silly; it’s > undeniably dangerous. > > Is dangerous too strong a word? Consider the following real-world > scenario: You’re cruising through town on your road tandem when a > non-observant motorist turns left across your path. Lacking the time to > drop your hands to the more powerful braking position, you’ll instead apply > as much braking as possible from the tops of your brake hoods. If your > reaction time is slow and/or your brakes aren’t powerful enough, the car > will run into you. In collisions between a bicycle and a car’s front > bumper, the weight and speed of the car determines the force of the impact. > Death is not uncommon. If your braking and/or reaction time is a bit > better, you’ll run into the side of the car instead of having the car run > into you. Because the energy of the impact is likely to be reduced by a > factor of five, your injuries will be less severe. But if your reaction > time or tandem’s front brake is a bit better still, you’ll slow up just > enough to miss the car’s rear bumper by an inch. In this case you’ll only > have a laundry problem. Is the power of your tandem’s front brake > important? Ask your stoker. > > *In summary, a front disc brake on a road tandem is as silly as a road > single without a front brake. In either case emergency braking is > inadequate. Unless bike discs become 3x more powerful (which won’t happen) > the best answer for the front of a road tandem will continue to be a > long-armed (higher leverage) V-brake.* > > *Page last updated* > *Wednesday, November 2, 2017* > *© 2017 Santana Cycles, Inc.* > > > > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
