One big tech not and one small tech note from World Champs pit bits-
As y'all mentioned, Schwalbe now makes a 32" Radial Gravity Pro Magic Mary, which is a big deal because that makes it the first truly heavy duty 32" tire from any brand. Previously Neko was running an EXO+ Dissector up front on his 32" Frameworks DH bike at Mountain Creek. He said the EXO+ front tire felt fine and didn't bug him, which is nuts, and makes me suspect that the 32" front wheel could actually feel really really good with a proper DH tread, casing, and compound. Color me curious.
Also at 3:21 in the same video (Pit Bits rules) there is a shot of Troy’s bike with what looks like a 180mm? rotor on the back, with the pads only contacting half the rotor? Is it a meaningless during-the-build shot or something more? Try to verify in the Canyon photos above and the dude is just chilling in front of his back wheel 😂
One big tech not and one small tech note from World Champs pit bits-As y'all mentioned, Schwalbe now makes a 32" Radial Gravity Pro Magic Mary...
One big tech not and one small tech note from World Champs pit bits-
As y'all mentioned, Schwalbe now makes a 32" Radial Gravity Pro Magic Mary, which is a big deal because that makes it the first truly heavy duty 32" tire from any brand. Previously Neko was running an EXO+ Dissector up front on his 32" Frameworks DH bike at Mountain Creek. He said the EXO+ front tire felt fine and didn't bug him, which is nuts, and makes me suspect that the 32" front wheel could actually feel really really good with a proper DH tread, casing, and compound. Color me curious.
Finally. Bigger front rotors have never made any sense to me. The natural weight transfer induced by braking will make your front brake naturally more powerful, why would you amplify that effect with a bigger front rotor?
Finally. Bigger front rotors have never made any sense to me. The natural weight transfer induced by braking will make your front brake naturally more powerful...
Finally. Bigger front rotors have never made any sense to me. The natural weight transfer induced by braking will make your front brake naturally more powerful, why would you amplify that effect with a bigger front rotor?
What do you mean amplify. Weight transfer gives you more grip. It only makes sense to have more braking power (i.e. bigger rotor) in the front.
QED: literally every car on the road. If it has a rear weight bias (Porsche for example) or a near 50 50 split, the difference front to rear is smaller, but still present.
What do you mean amplify. Weight transfer gives you more grip. It only makes sense to have more braking power (i.e. bigger rotor) in the front. QED...
What do you mean amplify. Weight transfer gives you more grip. It only makes sense to have more braking power (i.e. bigger rotor) in the front.
QED: literally every car on the road. If it has a rear weight bias (Porsche for example) or a near 50 50 split, the difference front to rear is smaller, but still present.
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a lot of.
Yes weight transfer gives you more grip. In turn, you don’t have to brake as much to achieve the same reduction in speed as you would from the rear brake. Assuming you’re trying to brake somewhat evenly, your rear brake will naturally accumulate more heat over the duration of a run.
The race for the most powerful E-Bike motor is up and Bafang is now leading the pack with it's new M560RS motor delivering a whopping 1700W...
The race for the most powerful E-Bike motor is up and Bafang is now leading the pack with it's new M560RS motor delivering a whopping 1700W with 150NM of Torque.
People on endless sphere have been hot rodding the m560 for a while. You can easily get 1500 watts out of it just by disassembling it, adding PC thermal pads at the appropriate place, and flashing the firmware with a besst tool. Now it can come that way from the factory, it would appear.
Most of these ebike motor units have a motor that's way overbuilt. I bet the Bosch could easily output 1500 watts with some thermal pads too. The only benefit that the m560 has is an all metal gears variant (no nylon)
HPC is a blight, I used to get adds for them and they always pissed me off. Prime example of the problem.
I said this on PB and figured I should say it here. It would be awesome if reviewers and news sights would come together and refuse to review or cover any ebike that has a power output over a specific threshold, maybe like 1000 watts. I think that it would go a very long way in stopping the nonsense power output wars that are going on with ebike motors. People who need or want assistance while riding can still get it, and 1000 watts is more than enough, even exceeding the class 1 750w continuous power output limit, and it would prevent things from getting even more out of hand.
Are any of us getting front brake fade in a big way? Maybe if you have huge sustained steep trails? I've not experienced it at Pleney on rental bikes with 200 f&r, less knowledge of where the line goes, and lots of brake dragging.
I've been running 220r 200f on the park and ebike for a while now and have not experienced horrible brake fade on local steeps (XT's and now Mavens). Local steep with 1,500ft drop with 3 flat off the brakes sections in between the steeps. I've been able to get some fade on the ebike with the 220r on organic Maven pads. No fade using Galfer purples or sintered SRAM pads on that same setup and trail though. Never any on the 200 front with sintered pads. On "normal" trails I'm using my rear brake way more than my front.
One big tech not and one small tech note from World Champs pit bits-As y'all mentioned, Schwalbe now makes a 32" Radial Gravity Pro Magic Mary...
One big tech not and one small tech note from World Champs pit bits-
As y'all mentioned, Schwalbe now makes a 32" Radial Gravity Pro Magic Mary, which is a big deal because that makes it the first truly heavy duty 32" tire from any brand. Previously Neko was running an EXO+ Dissector up front on his 32" Frameworks DH bike at Mountain Creek. He said the EXO+ front tire felt fine and didn't bug him, which is nuts, and makes me suspect that the 32" front wheel could actually feel really really good with a proper DH tread, casing, and compound. Color me curious.
Finally. Bigger front rotors have never made any sense to me. The natural weight transfer induced by braking will make your front brake naturally more powerful...
Finally. Bigger front rotors have never made any sense to me. The natural weight transfer induced by braking will make your front brake naturally more powerful, why would you amplify that effect with a bigger front rotor?
Possibly more related to heat management than braking strength?
What do you mean amplify. Weight transfer gives you more grip. It only makes sense to have more braking power (i.e. bigger rotor) in the front. QED...
What do you mean amplify. Weight transfer gives you more grip. It only makes sense to have more braking power (i.e. bigger rotor) in the front.
QED: literally every car on the road. If it has a rear weight bias (Porsche for example) or a near 50 50 split, the difference front to rear is smaller, but still present.
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a...
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a lot of.
Yes weight transfer gives you more grip. In turn, you don’t have to brake as much to achieve the same reduction in speed as you would from the rear brake. Assuming you’re trying to brake somewhat evenly, your rear brake will naturally accumulate more heat over the duration of a run.
The weight transfer forward during braking improves the tire-to-round traction, which means that you can apply more brake force without skidding. The energy converted to heat will be higher if the front wheel is doing the heavy lifting. A bigger rotor provides more thermal mass and a larger radiator.
I'm curious if the move to larger rear rotors on some DH bikes is more about tracks been janky enough that you just can't use the front brake as much? makes more sense to put the larger rotor where the most braking is done.
The weight transfer forward during braking improves the tire-to-round traction, which means that you can apply more brake force without skidding. The energy converted to heat...
The weight transfer forward during braking improves the tire-to-round traction, which means that you can apply more brake force without skidding. The energy converted to heat will be higher if the front wheel is doing the heavy lifting. A bigger rotor provides more thermal mass and a larger radiator.
I'm curious if the move to larger rear rotors on some DH bikes is more about tracks been janky enough that you just can't use the front brake as much? makes more sense to put the larger rotor where the most braking is done.
I challenge anyone that believes they do more braking with the front than with the rear to mount some brake ace data acquisition and prove it
What do you mean amplify. Weight transfer gives you more grip. It only makes sense to have more braking power (i.e. bigger rotor) in the front. QED...
What do you mean amplify. Weight transfer gives you more grip. It only makes sense to have more braking power (i.e. bigger rotor) in the front.
QED: literally every car on the road. If it has a rear weight bias (Porsche for example) or a near 50 50 split, the difference front to rear is smaller, but still present.
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a...
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a lot of.
Yes weight transfer gives you more grip. In turn, you don’t have to brake as much to achieve the same reduction in speed as you would from the rear brake. Assuming you’re trying to brake somewhat evenly, your rear brake will naturally accumulate more heat over the duration of a run.
The weight transfer forward during braking improves the tire-to-round traction, which means that you can apply more brake force without skidding. The energy converted to heat...
The weight transfer forward during braking improves the tire-to-round traction, which means that you can apply more brake force without skidding. The energy converted to heat will be higher if the front wheel is doing the heavy lifting. A bigger rotor provides more thermal mass and a larger radiator.
I'm curious if the move to larger rear rotors on some DH bikes is more about tracks been janky enough that you just can't use the front brake as much? makes more sense to put the larger rotor where the most braking is done.
So theres a few things -
Most riders, even the best ones spend for more time on the rear brake so it will get hotter faster, and this only gets more pronounced on steeper/faster tracks.
The terrain is a lot more uneven and loose which makes it tricky to apply maximum front brake for every corner, plus a rider can shift their weight backwards much more than a car or motorcycle can.
The other thing is polymers have a non-linear relationship between load and friction, which means there are diminishing returns to loading the front wheel under braking. ie if you have a 50/50 weight split and identical tyres front and rear and jamming on the brakes gives you 500N of force at the tyre, there is 1000N acting against you. But if you shift your weight forward to 60/40 it won't be 600 + 400, but something like 570 and 420 or 990N total. At 70/30 it drops further and to maybe 650 + 320 or 970 total. I don't know the exact numbers (they could be more or less) but the point is that loading the front wheel doesn't help you slow down as much as you think.
Last thing is I think there is a circular logic with the rear wheel where everyone just assumes there is less grip so they run a narrower/faster tyre, which means a larger rotor locks too easily, and then they don't worry about how much grip they get from suspension set up so run it firmer or don't get any improvement when they try to make it better. But if you had better tyres and/or suspension you might find there is a huge amount of braking potential from the rear wheel
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a...
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a lot of.
Yes weight transfer gives you more grip. In turn, you don’t have to brake as much to achieve the same reduction in speed as you would from the rear brake. Assuming you’re trying to brake somewhat evenly, your rear brake will naturally accumulate more heat over the duration of a run.
It has little to do with engine braking. Everything to do with grip.
Tldr: Front slows you down with large bursts of power, rear keeps your speed in check with longer duration braking events.
Don't need data acquisition to try going 20km/h on just about any surface,then using each brake individually and see how fast can you stop.
Or ride down in'n'out burger with front only vs rear only. Pretty sure only one of those options is viable.
I imagine the reasoning behind big rotor in the back is heat dissipation, as you'll do a lot more braking in the rear overall. But if you need to abruptly shut down, the rear is pretty useless unless you're in some sort of a compression scenario. Not sure why not run 220 in the front as well, maybe there isn't that much hard braking going on, but the rear still works hard to maintain control, hence the bigger rotor in the rear.
Perhaps the rear brake rotor difference on the canyon team is similar to the anti rise difference on frameworks when angel was on there. Or maes last race with the orbea.
If you are pulling both brakes basically as hard as you can and don’t want to just straight up skid. You need a certain balance. If you are dragging some rear brake all the way down the track, the larger rotor means it’s not totally faded when you are half way down. And feeling more consistent with the front brake you are modulating as needed.
I've seen in interviews before WC DH pros talking about how on some (steeper) tracks they are dragging the rear brake a TON, which makes the bigger rear rotor make sense just from a thermals perspective; it's the thing that's probably doing 90% of the cooling.
Stole this pic from the other site, but Cube’s got an interesting spoke flange system that allows tuning more compliance by moving the flange inboard or stiffer by moving the flange out. Haven’t seen this approach before!
Stole this pic from the other site, but Cube’s got an interesting spoke flange system that allows tuning more compliance by moving the flange inboard or...
Stole this pic from the other site, but Cube’s got an interesting spoke flange system that allows tuning more compliance by moving the flange inboard or stiffer by moving the flange out. Haven’t seen this approach before!
It's a Newmen system that came about from the 32" stiffness analysis.
Stole this pic from the other site, but Cube’s got an interesting spoke flange system that allows tuning more compliance by moving the flange inboard or...
Stole this pic from the other site, but Cube’s got an interesting spoke flange system that allows tuning more compliance by moving the flange inboard or stiffer by moving the flange out. Haven’t seen this approach before!
So moving the flange out will give more lateral stiffness, and more vertical compliance. I wonder if it's the vertical or lateral compliance that the rider feels?
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a...
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a lot of.
Yes weight transfer gives you more grip. In turn, you don’t have to brake as much to achieve the same reduction in speed as you would from the rear brake. Assuming you’re trying to brake somewhat evenly, your rear brake will naturally accumulate more heat over the duration of a run.
It has little to do with engine braking. Everything to do with grip. Tldr: Front slows you down with large bursts of power, rear keeps your speed...
It has little to do with engine braking. Everything to do with grip.
Tldr: Front slows you down with large bursts of power, rear keeps your speed in check with longer duration braking events.
Don't need data acquisition to try going 20km/h on just about any surface,then using each brake individually and see how fast can you stop.
Or ride down in'n'out burger with front only vs rear only. Pretty sure only one of those options is viable.
I imagine the reasoning behind big rotor in the back is heat dissipation, as you'll do a lot more braking in the rear overall. But if you need to abruptly shut down, the rear is pretty useless unless you're in some sort of a compression scenario. Not sure why not run 220 in the front as well, maybe there isn't that much hard braking going on, but the rear still works hard to maintain control, hence the bigger rotor in the rear.
Braking configurations are heavily influenced by vehicle dynamics. Roadrace bikes have huge front rotors because almost as soon as braking is initiated the rear tire has very little to zero weight on it, so no braking. The only time I touched the rear brake on my TZ250 was approaching the starting line. A Top Fuel dragster has no front brakes at all. The bulk of stopping for them is the parachutes. So much so that as the cars approached 300mph in the ‘80s they had to develop softer opening chutes because the drivers were starting to experience detached retinas. The rear(only) brakes are however huge and massively powerful.
Back to MTB, IIRC Troy B. said that the tracks were steep enough that the front brake became much less useful and that he had the big rotor in the back to fight heat. My V10 came with Code Bronze brakes and HS2 rotors. They would fade significantly towards the end of a run. I replaced them with Hope GR4s with 2.3mm rotors. No more fade problems.
The race for the most powerful E-Bike motor is up and Bafang is now leading the pack with it's new M560RS motor delivering a whopping 1700W...
The race for the most powerful E-Bike motor is up and Bafang is now leading the pack with it's new M560RS motor delivering a whopping 1700W with 150NM of Torque.
People on endless sphere have been hot rodding the m560 for a while. You can easily get 1500 watts out of it just by disassembling it, adding PC thermal pads at the appropriate place, and flashing the firmware with a besst tool. Now it can come that way from the factory, it would appear.
Most of these ebike motor units have a motor that's way overbuilt. I bet the Bosch could easily output 1500 watts with some thermal pads too. The only benefit that the m560 has is an all metal gears variant (no nylon)
HPC is a blight, I used to get adds for them and they always pissed me off. Prime example of the problem. I said this on PB...
HPC is a blight, I used to get adds for them and they always pissed me off. Prime example of the problem.
I said this on PB and figured I should say it here. It would be awesome if reviewers and news sights would come together and refuse to review or cover any ebike that has a power output over a specific threshold, maybe like 1000 watts. I think that it would go a very long way in stopping the nonsense power output wars that are going on with ebike motors. People who need or want assistance while riding can still get it, and 1000 watts is more than enough, even exceeding the class 1 750w continuous power output limit, and it would prevent things from getting even more out of hand.
Censorship never works. That would only make people want it more. I recently tried bosch powered Scott Patron with Boost mode maxed out i.e 120nm and a 800w battery dude it's so much! The only thing that limits the bike is the 25km/h speed limit! Would love to try even more power!
Are any of us getting front brake fade in a big way? Maybe if you have huge sustained steep trails? I've not experienced it at Pleney...
Are any of us getting front brake fade in a big way? Maybe if you have huge sustained steep trails? I've not experienced it at Pleney on rental bikes with 200 f&r, less knowledge of where the line goes, and lots of brake dragging.
I've been running 220r 200f on the park and ebike for a while now and have not experienced horrible brake fade on local steeps (XT's and now Mavens). Local steep with 1,500ft drop with 3 flat off the brakes sections in between the steeps. I've been able to get some fade on the ebike with the 220r on organic Maven pads. No fade using Galfer purples or sintered SRAM pads on that same setup and trail though. Never any on the 200 front with sintered pads. On "normal" trails I'm using my rear brake way more than my front.
I use the front brake way more than the back because it's the only brake that actually stops the bike. I usually change front pads twice before changing my rear ones. I run 203mm front rotor with ceramic pads and 180mm rear rotor with ceramic pads. I have a gully (chable) type trail which is basically 1:30mins of braking super hard and it's the ultimate brake test. Most of my front brakes fade down there.
Are any of us getting front brake fade in a big way? Maybe if you have huge sustained steep trails? I've not experienced it at Pleney...
Are any of us getting front brake fade in a big way? Maybe if you have huge sustained steep trails? I've not experienced it at Pleney on rental bikes with 200 f&r, less knowledge of where the line goes, and lots of brake dragging.
I've been running 220r 200f on the park and ebike for a while now and have not experienced horrible brake fade on local steeps (XT's and now Mavens). Local steep with 1,500ft drop with 3 flat off the brakes sections in between the steeps. I've been able to get some fade on the ebike with the 220r on organic Maven pads. No fade using Galfer purples or sintered SRAM pads on that same setup and trail though. Never any on the 200 front with sintered pads. On "normal" trails I'm using my rear brake way more than my front.
I use the front brake way more than the back because it's the only brake that actually stops the bike. I usually change front pads twice...
I use the front brake way more than the back because it's the only brake that actually stops the bike. I usually change front pads twice before changing my rear ones. I run 203mm front rotor with ceramic pads and 180mm rear rotor with ceramic pads. I have a gully (chable) type trail which is basically 1:30mins of braking super hard and it's the ultimate brake test. Most of my front brakes fade down there.
I'm pretty sure I've never come across anyone wearing out pads in the front twice as quick as the rear, are you riding a penny farthing :-)
more maes 32/27.5 pics - https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/2026-world-champs-val-di-sole?page=1#comment-841831
One big tech not and one small tech note from World Champs pit bits-
As y'all mentioned, Schwalbe now makes a 32" Radial Gravity Pro Magic Mary, which is a big deal because that makes it the first truly heavy duty 32" tire from any brand. Previously Neko was running an EXO+ Dissector up front on his 32" Frameworks DH bike at Mountain Creek. He said the EXO+ front tire felt fine and didn't bug him, which is nuts, and makes me suspect that the 32" front wheel could actually feel really really good with a proper DH tread, casing, and compound. Color me curious.
Second, a small note: in the recent Canyon team bike check photos in the World Champs thread, three out of five DH racers on the Canyon team are using the Troy Brosnan "bigger rotor in the back" method, which I thought was interesting. Aletha, Henri, and Troy are on the 200/220mm setup, while Luca and Marine are on dual 200's: https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/2026-world-champs-val-di-sole?page=1#comment-841831:~:text=Droolworthy%20pics%20from%20Canyon%3A
iirc, troy's used that rotor combo at VDS and other steep tracks before.
32" wheels excite me about as much as headset cable routing
Jordan’s bike also has the Push-looking knob, although with damper side on the left like a normal Ohlins fork https://youtu.be/6stLc-C4xik?t=706&is=ELN4aWITAHkqKePl
Also at 3:21 in the same video (Pit Bits rules) there is a shot of Troy’s bike with what looks like a 180mm? rotor on the back, with the pads only contacting half the rotor? Is it a meaningless during-the-build shot or something more? Try to verify in the Canyon photos above and the dude is just chilling in front of his back wheel 😂
The bolt in plate could also hold an adjustable weight system and/or TMD?
Finally. Bigger front rotors have never made any sense to me. The natural weight transfer induced by braking will make your front brake naturally more powerful, why would you amplify that effect with a bigger front rotor?
You're preaching to the choir, here.
What do you mean amplify. Weight transfer gives you more grip. It only makes sense to have more braking power (i.e. bigger rotor) in the front.
QED: literally every car on the road. If it has a rear weight bias (Porsche for example) or a near 50 50 split, the difference front to rear is smaller, but still present.
I always figured it was about reducing brake fade, which the front needs more.
Motos follow this pattern too. You'll notice that, despite the front rotor already being much larger, there are two of them
Cars and motos have engine braking and can take some of the load off the rear brake, particularly when coasting downhill, something downhill bikes do a lot of.
Yes weight transfer gives you more grip. In turn, you don’t have to brake as much to achieve the same reduction in speed as you would from the rear brake. Assuming you’re trying to brake somewhat evenly, your rear brake will naturally accumulate more heat over the duration of a run.
photo PIT BITS from World Champs
https://www.vitalmtb.com/features/pit-bits-2026-world-championships-val-di-sole
HPC is a blight, I used to get adds for them and they always pissed me off. Prime example of the problem.
I said this on PB and figured I should say it here. It would be awesome if reviewers and news sights would come together and refuse to review or cover any ebike that has a power output over a specific threshold, maybe like 1000 watts. I think that it would go a very long way in stopping the nonsense power output wars that are going on with ebike motors. People who need or want assistance while riding can still get it, and 1000 watts is more than enough, even exceeding the class 1 750w continuous power output limit, and it would prevent things from getting even more out of hand.
Are any of us getting front brake fade in a big way? Maybe if you have huge sustained steep trails? I've not experienced it at Pleney on rental bikes with 200 f&r, less knowledge of where the line goes, and lots of brake dragging.
I've been running 220r 200f on the park and ebike for a while now and have not experienced horrible brake fade on local steeps (XT's and now Mavens). Local steep with 1,500ft drop with 3 flat off the brakes sections in between the steeps. I've been able to get some fade on the ebike with the 220r on organic Maven pads. No fade using Galfer purples or sintered SRAM pads on that same setup and trail though. Never any on the 200 front with sintered pads. On "normal" trails I'm using my rear brake way more than my front.
Possibly more related to heat management than braking strength?
The weight transfer forward during braking improves the tire-to-round traction, which means that you can apply more brake force without skidding. The energy converted to heat will be higher if the front wheel is doing the heavy lifting. A bigger rotor provides more thermal mass and a larger radiator.
I'm curious if the move to larger rear rotors on some DH bikes is more about tracks been janky enough that you just can't use the front brake as much? makes more sense to put the larger rotor where the most braking is done.
A 32"/27,5" is basically a full 29".
I challenge anyone that believes they do more braking with the front than with the rear to mount some brake ace data acquisition and prove it
So theres a few things -
Most riders, even the best ones spend for more time on the rear brake so it will get hotter faster, and this only gets more pronounced on steeper/faster tracks.
The terrain is a lot more uneven and loose which makes it tricky to apply maximum front brake for every corner, plus a rider can shift their weight backwards much more than a car or motorcycle can.
The other thing is polymers have a non-linear relationship between load and friction, which means there are diminishing returns to loading the front wheel under braking. ie if you have a 50/50 weight split and identical tyres front and rear and jamming on the brakes gives you 500N of force at the tyre, there is 1000N acting against you. But if you shift your weight forward to 60/40 it won't be 600 + 400, but something like 570 and 420 or 990N total. At 70/30 it drops further and to maybe 650 + 320 or 970 total. I don't know the exact numbers (they could be more or less) but the point is that loading the front wheel doesn't help you slow down as much as you think.
Last thing is I think there is a circular logic with the rear wheel where everyone just assumes there is less grip so they run a narrower/faster tyre, which means a larger rotor locks too easily, and then they don't worry about how much grip they get from suspension set up so run it firmer or don't get any improvement when they try to make it better. But if you had better tyres and/or suspension you might find there is a huge amount of braking potential from the rear wheel
Downhill algorithm just released for the astars airbag system!
It has little to do with engine braking. Everything to do with grip.
Tldr: Front slows you down with large bursts of power, rear keeps your speed in check with longer duration braking events.
Don't need data acquisition to try going 20km/h on just about any surface,then using each brake individually and see how fast can you stop.
Or ride down in'n'out burger with front only vs rear only. Pretty sure only one of those options is viable.
I imagine the reasoning behind big rotor in the back is heat dissipation, as you'll do a lot more braking in the rear overall. But if you need to abruptly shut down, the rear is pretty useless unless you're in some sort of a compression scenario. Not sure why not run 220 in the front as well, maybe there isn't that much hard braking going on, but the rear still works hard to maintain control, hence the bigger rotor in the rear.
Perhaps the rear brake rotor difference on the canyon team is similar to the anti rise difference on frameworks when angel was on there. Or maes last race with the orbea.
If you are pulling both brakes basically as hard as you can and don’t want to just straight up skid. You need a certain balance. If you are dragging some rear brake all the way down the track, the larger rotor means it’s not totally faded when you are half way down. And feeling more consistent with the front brake you are modulating as needed.
I've seen in interviews before WC DH pros talking about how on some (steeper) tracks they are dragging the rear brake a TON, which makes the bigger rear rotor make sense just from a thermals perspective; it's the thing that's probably doing 90% of the cooling.
Stole this pic from the other site, but Cube’s got an interesting spoke flange system that allows tuning more compliance by moving the flange inboard or stiffer by moving the flange out. Haven’t seen this approach before!
It's a Newmen system that came about from the 32" stiffness analysis.
So moving the flange out will give more lateral stiffness, and more vertical compliance. I wonder if it's the vertical or lateral compliance that the rider feels?
Braking configurations are heavily influenced by vehicle dynamics. Roadrace bikes have huge front rotors because almost as soon as braking is initiated the rear tire has very little to zero weight on it, so no braking. The only time I touched the rear brake on my TZ250 was approaching the starting line.
A Top Fuel dragster has no front brakes at all. The bulk of stopping for them is the parachutes. So much so that as the cars approached 300mph in the ‘80s they had to develop softer opening chutes because the drivers were starting to experience detached retinas. The rear(only) brakes are however huge and massively powerful.
Back to MTB, IIRC Troy B. said that the tracks were steep enough that the front brake became much less useful and that he had the big rotor in the back to fight heat.
My V10 came with Code Bronze brakes and HS2 rotors. They would fade significantly towards the end of a run. I replaced them with Hope GR4s with 2.3mm rotors. No more fade problems.
Censorship never works. That would only make people want it more.
I recently tried bosch powered Scott Patron with Boost mode maxed out i.e 120nm and a 800w battery dude it's so much! The only thing that limits the bike is the 25km/h speed limit! Would love to try even more power!
I use the front brake way more than the back because it's the only brake that actually stops the bike. I usually change front pads twice before changing my rear ones. I run 203mm front rotor with ceramic pads and 180mm rear rotor with ceramic pads. I have a gully (chable) type trail which is basically 1:30mins of braking super hard and it's the ultimate brake test. Most of my front brakes fade down there.
I'm pretty sure I've never come across anyone wearing out pads in the front twice as quick as the rear, are you riding a penny farthing :-)
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker