Thanks. Regarding alignment, I typically tighten the retaining nut tight enough that the shoe doesn't move on its own, but where I can still move it with force. I first set the depth by moving the arm up to the rim and setting the shoe in or out in relation to the brake arm. I then work on toe and angle together, trying not to change the depth of the shoe in the arm as I do that.

I bought and used a Tacx T4580 Brake Shoe Tuner and it did a great job of stabilizing all the moving parts and holding the brake shoes/pads in place (with a toe-in) while I tightened them.

After I had my way with the bike, I took it to my LBS and let the expert finish. He re-adjusted the brakes to be a little closer and with a little less toe-in.

In conclusion, the Tacx tool works well but maybe not as good as an experts hands and eyes.

These brakes respond to my grip quite nicely and I feel confident in my ability to stop. No squeal, no shudder, no shakes. I like my bike :).

Do you have quick release capability with that low an angle?

I don't see any spacers on the brake pads. I just put new pads on my 3 year old (V-Brake) hybrid. I got Kool Stops, they came with spacers for 3 different thicknesses. I always thought the older, smooth post cantilevers were more work to align. The old Dia-Comp (triangle arm) shape. Try the Park Tool website, recently got over hauled. I pull up a chair & take my time getting them adjusted. having the wheels trued helps the brakes too. Cheers everyone, Chris.

Yes, it's JUST enough clearance that I can sneak the barrel end of the straddle cable out of the fixed side brake arm (left side facing each brake set). And the brake shoes hit the inside of the fork/stays when open because these arms mount them inboard, but it's still just enough room to slide my tire out between them, fortunately. The tires are Continental Speed Ride in 42-622. They inflate up to an actual 38mm or so on 15mm inside width rims.

Pneumatic QR, a letting the air out of the tire, is always available.

That's right -- no spacers on smooth post shoes (at least not that I've seen). I definitely think they are harder to align, because you have three dimensions to consider rather than just two.

I have thought about using nuts or something similar as make-shift spacers for between the shoe and the arm, just so I could set the depth positively and worry only about the up-down/left-right adjustment while ignoring the in-out adjustment.

Has anyone used spacers with smooth post shoes in this manner? I've only ever seen spacers used with threaded post setups.

Because the original Mafac cantilevers had no radial adjustment*, getting the frame braze on had to be done accurately.

that was the first adjustment. * only rotational and pad post extension..


I noted BITD, once the MTB scene went mass market, the Asian companies began the height adjustment on the caliper arms,

and the frame factories did not have to be so carefull, so the boss heights were all over the place, enabled by that adjustment..



....

noting OP's original question

my opinion, with no real data or direct experience with those brakes to back it up

is that having the pads be inboard moves them closer to the base of the brake studs, potentially reducing the amount of flex.

not really a valid comparison, since all my bikes with cantis use newer threaded pad mountings (v-brake style) and not the smooth post. But those are definetly more similar to the 'inboard' position than 'outboard', and they seem to work better than I remember the old ones did from back when I used that kind...

I have several Mafac type brakes from them, Spooky (NL) and Modolo, Italy ,

and a set of Scott Matthauser SE brakes..

a bike with Magura Hydraulic rim brakes, and most recently one with V brakes..

I'm more a figure out the job in front of me than asking others to solve things for me on the internet,



so, although I try , I may not be the technical writer you want, but the price is right. :innocent:




...

The real hard part of that method is remembering to inflate the tire after it's back on the bike. I hate it when I make that mistake.

Junk the Cantilevers and fit V-Brakes. Less Art and Polishing or adjusting of Turds Involved. I hate Cantilevers Me.

So pleased you have posted this.

I have been tearing my hair out over what to do with my cantilevers.

They are also BR-MC16 Alivios on a Dawes Galaxy Tour 97 Series. I use the bike for training for time trials because the extra weight gives a better workout at nearly 14kg!!

But it can get quite hairy steaming down a hill at times over 50mph and not knowing if you could scrub speed off quick enough if something untoward happened.

I am going to now order some of these Tektro hangers. I am deliberating on what pads to go for. I was going to order the correct Shimano M70T2 pads but am also considering SwissStop Rat pads with GHP2 compound.

I actually bought a brand new pair of old Shimano Deore XT BR-MC70's yesterday thinking I needed to change my cantilevers but your timely write-up has given me confidence to stick with the existing setup for now.

Many thanks from the other side of the pond!

Adding my thanks to hokiefyd for getting this terrific thread going.

Found info on the cables originally supplied with some models of Shimano's low-profile brakes: the "A" wire (BR-CT91 "A" Link Wire for Cantilever Brakes) was 73 mm long, and the "B" wire (BR-CT91 "B" Link Wire for Cantilever Brakes) was 82 mm long. Both seem to be available for purchase from various suppliers.

Harris Cyclery labels the "B" link wire as a part for a Shimano Altus cantilever; they don't specify the brake(s) for the "A" link wire, so maybe that link wire is intended for use with all the other low-profile Shimano cantilevers.

The "A" and "B" link wires include a plastic tube on one side of the straddle wire. The idea is that, once you've installed the brake and adjusted the length of the free side of the straddle wire to match the length of the side with the plastic tube, you can go on to the next step: setting the position of the brake pads.

Also, Shimano provided cable length adjustment tools for use in setting up some other (slightly earlier?) models of their late-period low-profile cantilevers. The tools were designed for use specifically with the original "button" and straddle wire that were supplied with the brakes.

Found a partial kit of the cable length adjustment tools: Bike Tools Etc. - 1000's of bicycle tools and parts for the home mechanic! There were at least five differently colored versions of the tools.

People tend to complain about Shimano's endless churning of component designs, and fair enough. Those of us who working in bike shops in the '60s and '70s were familiar with the two prevailing bike component philosophies: the French approach---if it works, more or less, leave it alone---and the Italian (Campagnolo) approach---make it as close to perfect as possible and then leave it alone. Shimano, with their accelerating pace of innovation, effectively drove the French companies out of business and nearly did the same to Campagnolo.

The Shimano shop manuals listing the details for each successive design must include thousands of pages by now. But it's their R&D department, rather than their marketing department, that has always seemed to be in charge. Nostalgia for the golden era of bike components aside, that's a good thing.

those cable pieces in # 20 were developed to be safer, on knobby tire bikes when the cable broke.

they fail open, the transverce cable when the main cable broke failed to have the brakes springs pull the cable down,

and a knobby tire got clothes-lined , and if the front, you do a face-plant..

with mudguards that is less if an issue..




;)

....

You are perhaps referring to the Summerain tool? I have one, and it really does help with the setting procedure.
http://www.unitedbicyclesupply.com/i...justment_Tools