Bicycle Mechanics - Tektro Brakes R538 vs. R539AG - is there a difference?

Obviously the answer is yes, but will I notice?

http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/components/brakes/calipers/tektro-r539ag-long-reach-brakes.html

vs.

http://www.treefortbikes.com/cat/0/209/Brake-Parts-road.html#navbar=pro___333222344274___107

From what I can tell, the main difference is Dura Ace 7600 compatibility... which strikes me as silly. who's building dura ace bikes and using tektro breaks? oh well...

I'm just looking for a solid performing but reasonably priced break for my commuter.

PS. If you're still looking for more Tektro minutia, you can delve into the differences between the r200 levers and the rl340.

Other than the adjuster and cam styles the arms look the same. The Parts on the 538's appear to be plastic while the bits on the 539 appear to be metal. And the 539's are lower in price. Hell, I say buy TWO sets... :D

Note that these brakes are intended for frames that use recessed tube style nuts. So if you don't have that feature on your frame's rear bridge then these aren't the brakes for you. The fork isn't a big deal since it can easily be drilled to accept the recessed style nuts. But at the rear it's a different story. You can still do it but it's a bit more work. And if you do kee in mind that you still need a saddle washer that is drilled out as well to aoid crushing the bridge tube.

a) you will not notice.
b) people who require a longer brake reach but VO is just publishing dumb copy to impress their fred customers.
c) tektro brakes are just fine
d) there's plenty of difference between r200s and the new levers.

>>d) there's plenty of difference between r200s and the new levers.

would you mind expanding on that? or point toward a discussion? I haven't been able to find any info.

I have the new RL340 levers and they flare out quite a bit; whereas the old R200 doesn't. The hoods are also different, which I much prefer over the R200.