I don't really understand the logic either.

I do remember Brett Sutton being quite vocal about discs not being appropriate for female IM athletes due to their average speed not being high enough over that distance.

What I know on the subject (admittedly not a ton, but probably enough) tells me that that's invalid logic. Slightly lower speed means a little more yaw, so greater benefit from a disc.

In conclusion, I've got no idea why they didn't use them. If they were lower tier pros then they may not have wheel sponsors and it was simply a budget limitation. That's the only reason I can think of.

Exactly. The old 'you have to be going 40' rule has long since been proven wrong.
Even aside from optimal yaw, the disc will always be faster if you believe the wind tunnel data, and may actually benefit a slower rider more in terms of overall time savings, because the slower rider is out on course for a longer period of time.

As for being able to afford it, I think every pro can at least afford a disc cover. But really, given that most pro's at very -least- can probably get cost on something like that, hard to believe its a budget issue.

Unlike most male pros, most female pros don't average over 25mph, which is the speed that the aerodynamic advantage kicks it. *pink*

So what are the legit possible downsides?

1) Less control when windy

2) Sometimes harder to change a flat?

Can't think of anything else.

I think the only time it would be harder to change a flat is if you were using tubulars, and your spare tubular was not properly stretched. A tight fitting tubular tire can be challenging to get on a disc wheel.

If anything, a disc will "calm down" a deep front wheel. Apparently they provide balance to the forces experienced by the Jedi and the Sith.

I mean... the front and back wheel.

And yes, I agree with your points on budget.
I was pretty much scraping the barrel for reasons.

TIL Brett Sutton is an idiot.

In general I don't understand the discrepancies between the men and woman Pro for disc vs non-disc selection either. I know it took me 8 years to get my wife to ride a disc. She always said she didn't think she was fast enough to ride a disc, though she can bike a 1:08-1:10 40K in a OLY. I also wonder if some of the misinformation out there deters people.

For sponsored athletes specifically there are a lot of wheel companies that don't offer a disc. If you are sponsored by one of those companies, you'd either have to convince the company to do some type of prototype or go with a wheel cover.

x10

I'm always very surprised that especially the Pro Women pass up the great advertising space for sponsorship. There's always the off chance they have a wheel sponsor that doesn't make a disc but I can't think of any normal race situations that a disc wouldn't be faster. They should really consider the added marketing value of advertising space.

Not to say this in a bad way, but could vanity be involved? I know my wife simply will not ride anything she finds ugly, and most disc wheels look "bad" compared to a 60/90 setup with pretty graphics.

Obviously beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but women typically have a much different "what looks right/good" view then men, especially when performance is involved. Men will overlook ugly when it means going fast. Cars are an obvious example of ugly fast things that men find pretty.

---

"...the street finds its own uses for things"

I believe he thinks that disks are too harsh of a ride for women. Of course, he believe that even for HED disks that are just spoke wheels with a cover. So it clearly has no basis.

I can't speak for others' preferences, but I think a disc is by far the coolest looking set up

The argument is that a disk moves the center of pressure further towards the rear of the bike. But the total pressure on the bike is higher with a disk; and it does not change the force applied to the front wheel. I think people hear "center of pressure moved back" and assumed that translates to better handling or less influence/force applied to the front wheel. That is not the case.

---

2015 USAT Long Course National Champion (M50-54)

Any professional that is choosing looks over function is an idiot - "it will help me do my job better but I don't like how it looks"

Magali Tisseyre will be using a disc.

The pro women as whole are notorious for making equipment choices that baffle all logic.
It's really frustrating to see such poor decision making and often many minutes left on the table.
Obviously there are pro women who make smart decisions about equipment.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

I recall Rapp talking about his equipment choices and choosing a certain helmet because he "felt fast" wearing it, not because of any wind tunnel testing or anything. I think it's reasonable to assume that the pro-women are choosing to go sans disc for a similar thought process. I don't think its farfetched to go with your gut over numbers on a spreadsheet. Whatever makes you comfortable.

I thought we were talking about disc brakes? I am dissapoint

/pink

---

___________________________________
feltbicycles.com - wilcouchatfeltbicyclesdotcom - Facebook

It isn't far fetched to go with your gut over physics, it is just stupid.

Women tend not to use discs because they are afraid and men enable that fear. Same reason they have shitty upright positions so often. Their handlers fuck them up by treating them like they are weak.

Anyone who helps a woman get into the sport just start them out with an 808, disc, and slammed stem so they don't spend the rest of their life worried about stupid crap.

end rant

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

I am probably wrong, but will ask anyway-- I heard that discs are heavier, and that they may be a bad choice on a hilly course, that the weight of the wheel climbing will cancel at least some of the aero benefit.... or is that wrong?

shacking wrote:

I am probably wrong, but will ask anyway-- I heard that discs are heavier, and that they may be a bad choice on a hilly course, that the weight of the wheel climbing will cancel at least some of the aero benefit.... or is that wrong?

http://flocycling.blogspot.com/...-aero-vs-weight.html

Having done the math for this a few years back, the hilliest race in the USA (maybe the world?) is Savageman. The hills are many, and they are very steep.

A disc vs 808 there, is about a tie. Aside from a steep uphill only bike course, the disc will never be slower.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter