Shimano has added a new rotor option to their lineup, the RT-MT905, which allows riders with 6-bolt hubs to take advantage of the heat dissipation technology that was previously only available in a Centerlock version.
The Ice Technologies Freeza design consists of a layer of aluminum sandwiched between two outer steel layers, with a portion of that aluminum extending below the steel layers to act like a cooling radiator. Compared to stainless steel rotors, Shimano claims the IceTech rotors allow brake pads to last 10% longer, and create a 150°C (270°F) overall temperature reduction.
When the rotors become available in early 2022 there will be 180mm and 203mm versions. Shimano did release a 220mm stainless steel rotor a few months ago, so I wouldn't be surprised if a 220mm version of the RT-MT905 gets added in further down the road. For now, Shimano says that the heat dissipation benefits of IceTech make it possible to avoid going with larger or thicker diameter rotors.
The 180mm version is priced at $85.99 USD, and the 203mm version will retail for $94.99 USD.
Not sure how this is going to help braking performance. But if you just spent 95USD on one you should still be dick about it.
I live in The Netherlands. On an "early crisp summer morning" as I mentioned 15degC would be average I think. It may be warmer in places (though 32 to 35C for an early summer morning seems quite warm) and in the mountains these summer mornings are typically a good bit colder. Either way, it doesn't quite matter of course if it was merely meant to illustrate what happens when the temperature drops another 150degC.
But you can guesstimate the temperatures by the colors the disc shows right next to the braking surface after intense use. de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anlauffarbe
Looks like 300, maybe up to 400 degree centigrade are possible on steel discs, depends of course on ambient temperature and the amount of energy the brake needs to dissipate. That said, my freeza discs show no discoloration, so I guess it works. I always struggled with fading brake power, it's almost completely gone now. Really like them
As for the car, I suppose these rarely are being used heavily at a low speed (as might happen on a bike when riding a steep tech descend) so they get to cool quicker. If you expect to descend for a longer bit in a car (like on a descending road) obviously one should use engine braking and usually the road signs suggest that too.
Either way, this is all nice for research and all. The only question I had (and maybe it got lost in the discussion) is, what exact temperature did the reference/standard stainless steel rotor reach in the lab test which the Ice Tech rotor stood 150degC below?
So confused that you believe a “bike guru” is needed to mount a rotor.......
And now we have boost axles to improve the strength of a sub par axle diameter and wagon wheels... What a joke...
I've used both systems extensively and both are fine. I never had either one come loose in all my years of riding, nor have I had any "rocking" on my centerlock bikes. I have however had countless ISO bolt heads snap off and need drilling...that's something I don't have to worry about with centerlock. Centerlock is so much simpler and quite frankly, the future. People just haven't accepted it yet.
It doesn't matter if you neve get something loose, you could even use a stick.
I’m totally agnostic. I’ve got both and they both work great. I don’t really know what y’all are on about. With either standard, if you’re having rotors come loose mid-ride, there’s some pretty serious user error happening.
1. It’s easier to maintain
2. All though big tool required it make it easier to get the bike ready for flights and back to ride.
3. I never ever had a lose rotor , all you have to do is use the correct torque.
4. Hubs have a cleaner look
5. It is defiantly a better engineering solution which is unfortunately not excepted by closed minded riders. Every mechanic see the advantages. Same as racing cars single nut wheel changing set up. @thenotoriousmic:
I know folks who cack handedly could balls both up
Centerlock isn't simpler.
You need a cassette, or bb tool and a wrench.
While 6 bolt rotors can be installed with even the cheapest china multi tools.
6 bolt is much simpler than centerlock, in fact it can't get any more simpler.
And yes I have both.
1. Centrlock adoption has nothing to do with what the people want it's purely political as to weather brands want to align with Shimano standards or not, can you ever see Sram making a centrelock rotor and admitting it's better?
2. Those worrying about one bolt coming loose vs 6 havn't factored in the locking washer and toothed faces that make centrelock much more secure, and while some lockrings need a big BB tool, most use a Cassette tool which is much smaller (my little one up multi tool actually has a tool to tighten a cassette lockring) plus is anyone running around complainging about how thier cranks, cassettes, seatposts, rear mechs, pedals and even wheels are fixed with just one bolt.
3. I will admit that even though it has no impact on performance the slight wiggle back and forth that centrelock somtimes has is quite offputting.
I've got the one-up tool, and it's great. But it won't go over the axle to do up a CL rotor, I think.
Oh and for the one up tool most hubs have end caps that just pop off out the way for bearing access.
Nope debate is over 6 bolt has won again. There’s no straws to clutch that will change the fact 6 bolt is vastly superior. The simplest solution is always the best.
1 - Centerlock is absolutely simpler than 6-bolt. It's got two parts, including the rotor. You can put the rotor on the hub without the lockring and it would still work - which means that if the lockring comes loose or straight up falls off somehow during your ride, you still have that brake to get you back to your truck. Sure you might have to stop periodically to re-seat the rotor but there's no chance of this working with 6-bolt setups. Regardless, in my 22 years of riding, i've never seen or heard of a rider having either system so much as come loose.
2 - You don't need to carry a new tool with you because of centerlock. It uses the same tool your cassette does. Oh you don't take a cassette tool with you now because cassettes don't come loose? Yeah, neither does centerlock...for the same reasons. Oh you have the DT wheels that require the BB tool? Same situation.
3 - Centerlock is not a new or weird system. It's taken from automotive splined wheel hubs that have been used since the beginning of suspensions. 70 years ago, cars had splined hubs, and they still do today. Why? Because it's the best design for the job. F1 and SRO WCC racecars have used splined wheel and brake interfaces for decades. These are the absolute top of the food chain in racing, no expense spared exercises in automotive engineering...the best of the best, and they haven't found a better system.
4 - Centerlock hasn't been accepted as the future yet because people are scared of change. It took nearly 70 years for seatbelts to be accepted. Nuff said.
Centerlock costs more, it's not repairable on trail, it's not redundant, it's not backwards compatible, and it's much less common than 6 bolt.
It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. It was shimano's way of trying to maintain relevance in the hub market by creating a proprietary system, but all they did was take a standard that was nearly universal (6 bolt rotor mounts) and f*ck the whole system up by introducing another standard with limited adoption.
The pinkbike comment section likes to go on rants about new standards that are introduced for no apparent benefit to the end user. Centerlock is a case study in exactly that.
The vast majority of "innovations" in MTB are solutions to problems that didn't exist. Hub standards are the premier example of this. That said, Centerlock does improve on the rotor-to-hub interface, albeit in a relatively expensive way.
We agree on the unnecessary standards...but I rather like centerlock...it actually has a few benefits for a modest price - unlike constantly changing hub sizes that force you to buy a new frame for nothing at all.
6 bolts were the original disc standard, so there is nothing to be backwards compatible with. Centerlock is the new "standard," which is not backwards compatible.
If you nuke a rotor, you bend it back. If you nuke a rotor so bad that you can't bend it back sufficiently, you are going to have other problems that are going to keep you from riding out. These complaints referencing theoretical problems that never actually happen are pretty silly.
And yes, centerlock is backwards compatible in the context you are speaking:
None of what you posted is correct. You were never in the debate to begin with. No surprise you think it's over.
Sure I can lecture my buddy about not properly torquing stuff. But that doesn't do me much good when we're 15 miles from the car and his stupid centerlock rotor is loose.
If centerlocks solved some problem or had any clearly defined benefit, maybe that bullshit would be worth it. But they don't. They solve zero problems, they create problems that didn't previously exist, they're less likely to be in stock at shops, and they cost more. I have no idea why someone would willingly put them on their bike.
^^^^^^^^ CLEARLY DEFINED BENEFIT ALERT!!! ^^^^^^^^^
I think roadies like CL as they're clean looking and slightly more aero
@toast2266: And what do you do when your six bolts are sheared clean off? No riding out then. Yeah, I know, that would never happen. JUST LIKE CENTERLOCK COMING LOOSE WOULD NEVER HAPPEN.
@lognar: It doesn't ruin anything. That's exactly the point of the design. You can ride out with a loose or missing lockring, just like you can on a cassette.
@toast2266: I am, because it's the same logic. Both scenarios fall under "sh!t that doesn't happen"
I also have seen a broken AXS deraileur without an impact broken on the parallelogram.
Never assume it doesn't exist because I didn't saw it yet.
@TheRaven: I can’t tell if your trolling or just have learning difficulties, nobody can be this stupid. Why don’t you have a big think about the pro’s and cons of 6 bolt vs centre lock before commenting again or just go back through the comments and actually listen this time or maybe just wait another 20 years to see if centre lock finally takes off.
Splines are great when they’re machined to tolerance and tightened down to prevent all movement. And without movement a properly tightened lock ring won’t back out. But a slightly loose spline interface messes all that up and leads to problems like movement in the parking lot and repeatedly loosening lock rings no matter how carefully it’s tightened.
And the bike industry is simply awful at achieving tight tolerances. Even on top of the line equipment as Hambini demonstrates.
So I’m sure plenty of people - yourself included - have had fine experiences with center lock. It may even be the technically superior design when made to tolerance. But that doesn’t make it a better design for the real world bike industry, it doesn’t mean it improves the user experience, it doesn’t change the fact the existing design worked perfectly fine, and it doesn’t invalidate the bad experiences of all the people who have had them back out despite having no issue with 6 bolt.
Anyway, good luck with your hub after riding out with that loose rotor. Hopefully you won’t need a new one. Thanks for helping me clarify why I dislike centerlock.
But you do bring up a great example of another tool we don't have on the trail that we sometimes need - a big enough wrench to re-tighten crank bolts. I've had the same thing happen to me and it also eventually destroyed the cranks. But the splined interface on that type of crank is very different than the one on centerlock. That difference is why the splines on Shimano's pinch-bolt cranks are also very different, and unsurprisingly very much like axle and hub splines on race cars. It's a better system.
All this Passionate discussion is great and all, but none of it matters—- I’m introducing a new standard to rule them all: Spoke Mount!!!! No new fasteners at all, all you have to do to change rotors is remove your tire, detention your wheel, thread 11 of your spokes through these little loops on the back of the rotor, and put it all back together. KISS principal of course.
You're flatly dismissing the lockring issue as user error, but you weren't there when they tightened the lockring, and you haven't measured the spline interface of the rotor/hub. And the cycling population seems perfectly competent to tighten lockrings on cassettes, yet they become ham fisted monkeys when a brake is involved?
What's interesting is that people seem to report no problems, or constant problems. This would be very strange if human error was to blame since we are inherently variable and generally pay close attention when working on something that failed recently. It seems far more likely that in some cases the hub/rotor is made correctly and the users ride along with no issues for years, while others receive a defective product that allows the ring to loosen. OR... the spline interface eats itself the first time you make a mistake.
I do agree that the SRAM interface is a particularly poor design, which combined with their sloppy manufacturing is why I'll always avoid their cranks. And yes, shimano cranks employ a far better spline, with a redundant pinch bolt system. It's funny though - centerlock does not use redundant pinch bolts. It uses the same high torque end cap approach as SRAM cranks. And I'm going to bet that if you loosened the pinch bolts on a Shimano crank and go for a ride it will eat itself as effectively as any SRAM crank. If you don't agree feel free to try it and report back.
@TheRaven: I doubt it was as much fun as watching you shout and strop on the internet because somebody poked fun at something silly you’d said. I look forward to more of the same next week when your banging on about how great cup and cone bearings are or something equally as stupid.
The bottom line is this - both systems are in the same category when it comes to problems - if someone is having chronic loosening issues on either one, they are doing something wrong. I'm not going to get into "proper torque" because I don't even do it. I just make it tight, and go ride. Centerlock lockrings have ridges that interface with ridges on the hub so that they can't back out. That means, by physical law, if the ring backs out, it wasn't tight. I'm not going to speculate on the user's mechanical ability cause it doesn't matter. I've NEVER had a single issue of any kind out on the trail with either system. I have had plenty of bolts shear off though when trying to swap discs. Fortunately that happens on the bench and not on the trail.
Took about 8 minutes this time.
You keep circling back to faith in the design and tolerances, plus your N=1 experience. Maybe you've never had an issue because you've been lucky enough to get products that happened to be within the required tolerances? You're just one datapoint. There are enough others reporting issues that it's reasonable to ask if there's a fundamental issue with the implementation.
Why are you so defensive about this? Like, if people were attacking your personal experience I would get it. But it's the opposite - No one is saying your rotor is loose, but you're speaking with complete certainty about others experiences without ever seeing the parts in question. Saying things like "if someone is having chronic loosening issues on either one, they are doing something wrong." You simply don't know that. You don't know that their parts are in spec. It's weird that this is so important to you.
My experience is not "N=1". I've been riding for over 20 years, and cannot even begin to count the riders i've met and ridden with in that time, not to mention the hundreds of bikes i've wrenched on. But I guess you're right...you know what they say "you can trust everything you read on the internet!".
I'm not the one who's defensive. I posted up a few facts to clarify things, and the anti-change trolls swarmed. Don't even think about pinning this on me son.
You've convinced yourself that the people reporting problems are some sort of conspiracy, and obviously there's no rigorous data source to prove otherwise. Just to confirm to myself though, I googled "6 bolt rotor loosening" and compared to "centerlock rotor loosening". The results are dramatically different, with a raft of frustrated forum posts over centerlock. The issue has also been reported by Andrew Major - a prominent and mechanically competent member of the cycling media:
So it's more than a few trolls on pinkbike.
I hope centerlock keeps treating you well. But regardless of how many years you've ridden you're still just one guy, and you weren't on centerlock for most of those years. No matter how many years you've ridden you're not qualified to substitute your intuition for others experience and observations without even seeing the problem.
I have made no claim of conspiracy anywhere, and i'd appreciate if you'd stop putting words in my mouth. You continue to inflate my claims to try to make me seem more concerned than I really am. Again, my points are very simple and have not changed.
Also, I call BS on your google search. I searched "rotor bolt loose" vs. "centerlock rotor loose" and all I found on centerlock were questions about what some call "rocking". Granted I didn't go through all 532000 results so I have no doubt there are authentic instances of the issue you are talking about. I also did not go through all 12.5M loose bolt results either but I think I can let the total results speak for themselves there.
I don't know why you are so defensive about 6-bolt rotors man, no one is saying your rotor is loose.
Probably because i use centerlock.
Can't believe you've had other components come loose. I would've figured a superior mechanic such as yourself would've figured out how to torque everything (not just rotors) CORRECTLY.
They are 'torx' screws by the way, not 'torque' screws.
No adapters needed, but calipers need to be upgraded, too..They are direct bolt-ons for 3rd gens. You can run 199mm or 231mm rotors and calipers from a (for example) 2005 Tundra V8 4X4 on any 1996-2002 4runner. 199mm are truly mod-free but the 231mm do require a minor trim of the dust shield to fit the caliper and they don't fit inside all stock wheels. The benefit is the much thicker rotor's heat dissipation and brake power. The weight of an armored-up 3rd gen can cause the stock rotors to warp over time leading to feedback at the wheel and some fade.
Like ya I have a bike equipped with 6 bolt ice techs too but it’s not these
This version just extends the aluminum down to act act as a radiator. Not sure how much difference that tweak makes, but the originals work well enough for me already.
6 bolt must be near 100% of what they sell, no?
Pretty sure it says "no longer in production"
Well I won't buy them now , haha.
I’m not sure exactly when the switch was, but it’s real recent. When they put out the new limited colors—the gold and the two-tone—that’s when it was. A couple few months ago.
Those who want reliable hubs get them cheaper and lighter from DT swiss and the high engagement fetishists get their fix from I9.
Then I remembered that I was on the Internet, where everyone’s opinion is the only correct option.
Centerlock is not bad - let's face it. It may rock back and forth in the parking lot.
But it provides a much faster and easier mounting and removal.
So much so that I now only have a single pair of freeza rotors for both of my DT Swiss wheelsets.
I have never had a rotor come loose, but I still carry this little gem.
It will fix a loose cassette too, and doubles as an extremely nice spoke wrench.
Now this 6-bolt rotor is of course a wise move by Shimano. Too bad they didn't do that years ago.
Current MTB CL rotors come with an updated lockring, regardless of their diameter, with which that dude’s tool would not work. Those rings have a 16 notch bb tool pattern.
The old style that used a cassette tool are compatible with 12mm thru axles though, so I think the road series rotors still use those. And, CL has taken much more of a foothold in road/gravel than it has in MTB.
Bike standards are weird shit…
I'm sold on those freeza rotors.
And I'm also heavier than him
Shimano: we have a new rotor! Gold star!
I deal with both.
That Centerlock ever had a reason to exist? No it didn't, 6 bolts is fine, and, Thankfully, became a near universal fitment.
Just Shimano doing Shimano, as ever . Ho flamin' Hum.
Yes I know the difference is indeed neglectible.
But "they run cooler." Screw it just stop and piss on em if you ride brakes that hard. True with a crassant wranch in the shop.
Way cheaper than Shimano.