Brake reach, pads all the way up or all the way down?
#1
afraid of whales
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 4,306
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
Brake reach, pads all the way up or all the way down?
This is a purely cosmetic question. My 1978 AD Inter-10 frame has 57mm brake reach right on the button. I'm running a set of Tektro super-long reach 559s (55mm~73mm reach) with the pads all the way up . I have a project that requires a set of the 559s so I could buy some Tektro 539 (47mm~57mm) for the AD and run the pads all the way down.
I have always liked the look of pads all the way up, I tempted to leave things as they are and buy another set of 559s for my project.
Any comments are welcome.
I have always liked the look of pads all the way up, I tempted to leave things as they are and buy another set of 559s for my project.
Any comments are welcome.
#2
Banned
Typically a range is offered .. answered it yourself.. as you are writing..
(47mm~57mm) means slot is a CM long.
There are Brake pad holders that add a Little more offset..
A trifle of MA is gained with pad at the top since it's closer to the pivot.
(my Ideal is in the center of the slot. , but it's not up to me because I made neither the frame or the brake.)
/
(47mm~57mm) means slot is a CM long.
There are Brake pad holders that add a Little more offset..
A trifle of MA is gained with pad at the top since it's closer to the pivot.
(my Ideal is in the center of the slot. , but it's not up to me because I made neither the frame or the brake.)
/
Last edited by fietsbob; 07-18-16 at 09:51 AM.
#3
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,798
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1393 Post(s)
Liked 1,326 Times
in
837 Posts
If you ever might want the ability to use smaller-diameter rims, you will want the pads all the way up. Conversely, if you ever might want larger-diameter rims, you want to be all the way down. Otherwise, it does not really matter.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
#4
afraid of whales
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 4,306
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
Thanks for the replies. The choice is binary, all the way up, all the way down. Wheel size is 700c and will never change.
It's just an cosmetic question; given the choice, all the way up or all the way down?
It's just an cosmetic question; given the choice, all the way up or all the way down?
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 20,305
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3464 Post(s)
Liked 2,831 Times
in
1,997 Posts
As you are discussing dual pivots, I would look at the pivot locations. Closer to the pad is in general better mechanical advantage. The longer reach caliper MAY have different pivot placement, maybe just longer arms below the pivots.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,223
Mentioned: 654 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4722 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,038 Times
in
1,876 Posts
If you select the caliper where the pad is positioned at the top of the adjustment range, the caliper should also be marginally stiffer.
#7
aka Tom Reingold
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York, NY, and High Falls, NY, USA
Posts: 40,503
Bikes: 1962 Rudge Sports, 1971 Raleigh Super Course, 1971 Raleigh Pro Track, 1974 Raleigh International, 1975 Viscount Fixie, 1982 McLean, 1996 Lemond (Ti), 2002 Burley Zydeco tandem
Mentioned: 511 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7348 Post(s)
Liked 2,473 Times
in
1,436 Posts
I was thinking of saying the same thing, though I bet the difference isn't discernible. Calipers seem to be stiffer these days, and that's a good thing. I once installed no-name long-reach dual-pivots on a bike, and I was impressed.
__________________
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog
“When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments.” — Elizabeth West, US author
Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.
Tom Reingold, tom@noglider.com
New York City and High Falls, NY
Blogs: The Experienced Cyclist; noglider's ride blog
“When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments.” — Elizabeth West, US author
Please email me rather than PM'ing me. Thanks.
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,223
Mentioned: 654 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4722 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,038 Times
in
1,876 Posts
The difference probably isn't noticeable, except under controlled conditions, but it is accepted. During the boom is was not uncommon for frames to be designed with 10-15 mm of additional reach on the rear. Typically, this practice was used on entry level bicycles, where inexperienced cyclists tended to employ equal hand pressure on both brakes, especially in panic situations. The longer reach brake flexed more, decreasing the tendency to lock the de-weighted rear wheel. In the 1990s, Campagnolo specifically started to design increased flex into their rear calipers for this purpose.
#9
Señor Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,066
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
215 Posts
The statements above that the difference in leverage or brake power per unit hand force is a 'trifle' better, or 'probably isn't noticeable' are incorrect in my experience. The percent difference in leverage is equal to the percent difference in distance from the pivot to the pad. The distance to the top of the slot is never more than 20 or 30 mm, but the adjustment range is generally about 20mm, which could be between 60% and 100% difference in leverage.
I know that this is not what OP was asking, but it deserves mentioning.
I know that this is not what OP was asking, but it deserves mentioning.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Beaverton, OR
Posts: 14,744
Bikes: Yes
Mentioned: 525 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3230 Post(s)
Liked 3,868 Times
in
1,439 Posts
Apart from the placement of the pads, I like the look of the R539 better, but I'm probably in the minority in this group because the styling of the R559 is more like vintage brakes.
Otherwise, my vote would be for all the way down.
As for leverage, the R539 performs really well with the pads all the way down, and I say this as someone who likes a lot of leverage in my brakes. I haven't used the R559, so I can't say how it compares. Looking at pictures, it looks to me like the R559 has more metal between the pivots and the start of the slots, so I doubt there's much difference between an R539 all the way down and an R559 all the way up.
Otherwise, my vote would be for all the way down.
As for leverage, the R539 performs really well with the pads all the way down, and I say this as someone who likes a lot of leverage in my brakes. I haven't used the R559, so I can't say how it compares. Looking at pictures, it looks to me like the R559 has more metal between the pivots and the start of the slots, so I doubt there's much difference between an R539 all the way down and an R559 all the way up.
__________________
My Bikes
My Bikes
#11
Old fart
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Appleton WI
Posts: 24,790
Bikes: Several, mostly not name brands.
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3588 Post(s)
Liked 3,400 Times
in
1,934 Posts
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23,223
Mentioned: 654 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4722 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3,038 Times
in
1,876 Posts
The statements above that the difference in leverage or brake power per unit hand force is a 'trifle' better, or 'probably isn't noticeable' are incorrect in my experience. The percent difference in leverage is equal to the percent difference in distance from the pivot to the pad. The distance to the top of the slot is never more than 20 or 30 mm, but the adjustment range is generally about 20mm, which could be between 60% and 100% difference in leverage.
I know that this is not what OP was asking, but it deserves mentioning.
I know that this is not what OP was asking, but it deserves mentioning.
#13
What??? Only 2 wheels?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Boston-ish, MA
Posts: 13,434
Bikes: 72 Peugeot UO-8, 82 Peugeot TH8, 87 Bianchi Brava, 76? Masi Grand Criterium, 74 Motobecane Champion Team, 86 & 77 Gazelle champion mondial, 81? Grandis, 82? Tommasini, 83 Peugeot PF10
Mentioned: 189 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1222 Post(s)
Liked 645 Times
in
232 Posts
Huh (to a lot of what I see here)? The MA would vary with pad position only if the distance from pad to pivot changes. But the pad position is determined by the rim location, and the pivot is where it is from the brake design. Maybe the different Tektro models have their pivots in slightly different places, but I wouldn't bet on that without measuring.
So what else could be different? Well, JDT's comment might have some substance for this reason. If the pad is at the bottom of the range, the slotted part of the arm above the pad could be a bit more flexible than if the part above the pad were solid. So maybe the longer arm would be a bit stiffer. The existence of more arm, slotted or not, beneath the pad has no affect at all.
If the arms are longer than necessary you add a few grams to the weight.
Since you asked about aesthetics, I prefer the shorter arms. I doubt you could feel any difference in the two models.
So what else could be different? Well, JDT's comment might have some substance for this reason. If the pad is at the bottom of the range, the slotted part of the arm above the pad could be a bit more flexible than if the part above the pad were solid. So maybe the longer arm would be a bit stiffer. The existence of more arm, slotted or not, beneath the pad has no affect at all.
If the arms are longer than necessary you add a few grams to the weight.
Since you asked about aesthetics, I prefer the shorter arms. I doubt you could feel any difference in the two models.
__________________
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
Real cyclists use toe clips.
With great bikes comes great responsibility.
jimmuller
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Pinole, CA, USA
Posts: 17,392
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 443 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 27 Times
in
25 Posts
Pads all the way up or all the way down looks odd to me. I like them at or near center. That makes it a little harder to choose the right brakes, but that's okay with me.
Pads all the way up looks like I bought the wrong brakes. I replaced them with Weinmann 500's.
Pads all the way up looks like I bought the wrong brakes. I replaced them with Weinmann 500's.
Last edited by Grand Bois; 07-19-16 at 07:52 AM.
#15
Señor Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,066
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
215 Posts
While it's substantial on paper, can the average cyclist detect it in a real situation, without controlled conditions and measurement? The C&V membership is probably far more sensitive to this sort of thing, yet of the hundreds that have converted from 27" to 700C, I don't recall anybody commenting on the difference. A full pad drop will result in 3 to 4 times more difference than the conversion change but the average cyclist isn't as discerning as forum members and probably still wouldn't notice the difference in everyday use. Maybe I'm not giving the average cyclist enough credit but based on the bicycles that came though the LBS, most are blind to anything other than a catastrophic change.
I have done a few 27-700 conversions and always been astonished at how weak the brakes were after. More than once I went from 27" chrome steel rims to 700c aluminum rims, brake pads adjusted but all other variables kept constant, and experienced no increase in stopping power. Swapping from 27" aluminum to 700c aluminum rims makes a definitely noticeable decrease in stopping power.