> You upgraded to mechanical disk brakes? What were you running before? V brakes? Yes, V-brakes. > I wouldn't run anything less than hydrolic disks on somethi

> You upgraded to mechanical disk brakes? What were you running before? V brakes? Yes, V-brakes. > I wouldn't run anything less than hydrolic disks on something that fast. Preferably dual piston like the ones Sram are making now. I actually didn't specify anything about the speed of my bike in the post, but mostly I ride below 25km/h. The 35-40km/h quoted was coasting down a steep hill, and I would have gone the same speed without the motor. It's just that the added load caused the V-brake stirrup to bend open over time, and then it finally popped out in that situation. I think idea that disc brakes, mechanical or hydraulic, are "more powerful" than V-brakes or canti's is a misunderstanding. If you think about it, the absolute limit to a bicycle's braking power is as much force as possible without locking the front wheel and sending the rider over the handlebars. Any bicycle brake can do that, and if it can't it should be returned to the store as defective. The reason I switched to discs was that the whole assembly seemed more solid than V-brakes (no loose coupling like in the harness). The other big reason to switch is the feel of the lever (better control over braking modulation), and needing to put less force on the lever for more braking power, so your hands get tired less. The main reason I went for mechanical disc brakes vs hydraulics is the ability to service them on long trips. I'm not going to bring tools to bleed the hydraulic system on touring trips. EDIT: Another reason I picked mechanical is that it's simpler to wire a motor safety shut-off switch to mechanical brakes. For hydraulics you need to do the reed-switch mod I mentioned which is a bit more finicky, or install a hydraulic sensor which requires bleeding the system.