Something that's been briefly touched on in this thread is the MA (mechanical advantage) of brake levers.

Over the years there's been a lot of "research" done comparing the MA of different brands of levers. I remember the "test results" published back in the 70's when there were only a few brands to compare: Weinmann, Dia-Compe, MAFAC, Universal and Campagnolo plus a few others like Zeus. Before 1976-77 Shimano brakes didn't get no respect amongst the cognoscenti.

The general opinion was that the Universal levers that came with Mod. 61 CP and Mod. 68 SP brakes had the worst mechanical advantage among those evaluated.

Most of data resulted from measuring pivot points, fulcrum points plus lever reach and length. I don't recall any of them taking into consideration real life issues like hand size! DOH!


@noglider mentioned that he has large hands... I have large hands too but with short fingers. Universal and MAFAC levers were designed for large hands and long fingers - their reach is almost too long for me. Weinmann and Dia-Compe levers were at the opposite end of the spectrum with Campy levers in the middle.

We sold a lot of better quality bikes to riders with smaller hands. We always kept the small Weinmann 158 levers and MAFAC Course Infant 611 Levers in stock. See Pictures.


To everyone... Over the years, Weinmann changed the dimensions of their CP brake stirrups but by the bike boom era Weinmann and Dia-Compe calipers were indentical. There was a technology exchange between the two companies which resulted in Weinmann being able to manufacture and sell the Dia-Compe designed "suicide levers". At the beginning of the insanity the levers Weinmann provided were made by Dia-Compe!

The Weinmann Vainqueur 999 brakes on my 1965 Tigra are substantially beefier than the Wienmann (and Dia-Compe) CPs from the 1970's. See picture.


@T-Mar "Part of the difference may be due to the material and method of manufacture. The Gran Compe series is cold forged out of high strength aluminum alloy, while the standard series is likely hot forged or possibly melt forged, using a lower strength aluminum alloy. This was the difference between the Dura-Ace and Tourney centre-pull brakes, which were otherwise identical."

Interesting about Dura-Ace vs. Tourney CP brakes, makes sense....

Small aluminum parts are generally cold forged. Hot forging aluminum is used on larger parts like BART wheels where there is a lot of offsetting of the material.

"Melt Forged" is a Japanese Jinglish euphemism for pressure cast or die cast aluminum. In true forging the material becomes denser and generally stronger. In pressure casting there is no compaction of the metal.

Special aluminum alloys are used for casting. A360 is one of the most common aluminum alloys for casting. It's properties are similar to pre-heat treated 6061 alloy.

https://www.dynacast.com/aluminum-die-casting.


@crank_addict The rubber (elastomer?) compound was what made the difference in Scott - Mathauser pads. The fins were decorative because rubber is an insulator and not good for heat transfer...


Last point, as someone mentioned, cables and housings make a BIG difference in brake performance. During the bike boom era most lower priced bikes came with cheap cables and housings (brakes and well as derailleurs).

We didn't like to work on cheap bikes because no amount of lube would allow those thin, rough cables to work properly. When a customer insisted we work on their bike, it was with the understanding that we would replace all of the cables (and charge them for the service which was maybe $15 back then including parts).


Here's Eddy Merckx riding a Peugeot (Masi) in 1967 with MAFAC brakes and Universal hoods.... see picture.


BTW, All MAFAC CP brake calipers were forged. From the beginning MAFAC made a point of stamping "Dural Forge" into the stirrup - Dural meaning Dur-aluminum alloy. See Picture



verktyg

Chas.