I have 110mm(rear sp.) Samson frame that I want to convert a bit. Put front/rear brakes and a front basket etc.
I am considering to either drill the top tube for cable inside cable routing and go with a fixed hub in the rear and two caliper breaks,

or a coaster brake, no drilling, and a caliper brake for the front wheel only.
Are there any decent 110mm coaster hubs available?
Any opinions on either of the two options?

Don't drill your frame, really. Go get some housing clamps if you're going to put a rear caliper brake

dia-compe, velo orange

if its not obvious enough, dont use the samson.

1. youll need clampon brakes and those clampon things rather than a pre internally routed frame
2. theres no brazeons on the fork
3. you need to deal with that 110 spacing
4. the frame is much too expensive for a townie
5. the frame's geometry will not be favorable for your use (toe overlap, unstable at low speeds).

its not worth the trouble.

Yeah, agree the geometry is not favorable. A road fork could help with that.
Other options is selling or trading the frame for a more relaxed geometry one.

Many people would kill for an undrilled track frame. If you want something with more relaxed geometry, brakes, and a rack sell the frame to an unsuspecting hipster for more than enough to buy an older road frame.

steep ht angle with a road fork wouldnt help the toe overlap much and would make the bike twitchy.

any frames you can recommend for building a townie?

maybe a Linus. idk

pretty much any steel road frame with horizontal dropouts.

btw coaster brake in back caliper front is a good combo, have it on my GF's mixte.

PLease dont make that Samson into a townie

what coaster hub are you using on her's?

Old Touring frames make nice townies.Decent clearence for fenders with wider tires, relaxed geo and front rack braze-ons.

actually shimano's
CB-E110 coaster brake hub fits perfectly in my 110mm rear spaced samson. Could be fun to try that.

I second the rec for coaster with a front brake. Its a fun setup that works well.
Unless you want to find a vintage Bendix Redline or something like that, go with a new Shimano E110. Properly set up they work really well and replacement parts are inexpensive and readily available.

Rear coaster plus a front caliper = win

Like a FG with no brakes a coaster equipped bike does not stop very well and can only skid... last time I rocked a coaster brake on it's own I ended up broad siding a car that pulled out in front of me from a blind alley.

As to frames... find a decent mid eighties Japanese road / touring frame and do it up as they tend to be very solid and most often have room for fenders, racks, and have the right geometry for more relaxed riding but can also perform very well too.

That's completely untrue of both fixed gears and coaster brakes. You can slow without skidding on both.
A properly set up coaster brake, ridden by someone who knows how to use it, stops just as well as any other rear brake...except on long hills where they overheat, go all to hell, and you die.

Just a rear coaster brake on a skinny tire is not very effective. You need a larger contact patch for them to work effectively, thus a front brake is a good idea.

That's true of all rear brakes.

Not true. Tire width and contact patch has nothing to do with braking traction. It is purely a function of vertical downward force and coefficient of rolling friction, which is a function of tire compound, tread design and road surface conditions. The reason that skidding is a less effective method of braking is that the coefficient of sliding friction is always less than the coefficient of rolling friction.

Of course skidding is less effective than non-skidding, but you're saying that with all the other variables held constant a 1/4" wide tire would have the same traction as a 4" wide tire? Or is braking traction different from how much resistance can be applied to the tire before it starts to skid?

It's not what I say, but the basic laws of physics. Tire width is not a factor in braking traction. The frictional force that can be generated is given by Coulomb's formula:

Ff = u Fn

where:

Ff = frictional force

u = coefficient of friction

Fn = normal (vertical Downward) force

Regardless of tire width or contact patch area, the traction force that can be generated is limited by vertical force and coefficient of friction. Furthermore, the normal force is due to the mass of the rider and bicycle, which cancels out since the force in braking is equal to the product of the mass and (de)cceleration, per Newton's 2nd law of motion. So, basically the only way to improve braking traction is to use a tire with a sticky compound that increases the coefficient of friction, but will wear out much quicker.

@TejanoTrackie, according to Wikipedia you're kind of right:
Kinetic friction is now understood, in many cases, to be primarily caused by chemical bonding between the surfaces, rather than interlocking asperities;[17]however, in many other cases roughness effects are dominant, for example in rubber to road friction.[16] Surface roughness and contact area, however, do affect kinetic friction for micro- and nano-scale objects where surface area forces dominate inertial forces.

@vladuz976 - Kinetic friction is the proper model to use when two objects are sliding relative to each other, as in the case of skidding. However, when the tire remains moving at the same relative speed of the road surface, it is effectively a case of static friction, where the Coulomb model is the correct theory to use. In this case, surface contact area does not affect the total integrated frictional force that is generated. If tire pressure is lowered, such that contact patch area is increased, the unit frictional force is reduced accordingly, such that the total normal force remains unchanged. I do agree that once skidding has occured, then a wide tire with low inflation pressure and a large contact patch area will generate more total traction force. Also, my argument applies only to hard surfaces such as road or track, and riding off-road on very soft surfaces does dictate the use of much wider tires with tractor treads and lower inflation pressures.

As to your original question regarding a rear coaster brake, I'll only say that of my current 20 bicycles, none have a coaster brake, and the last time I had a bicycle thus equipped was when I was 3 years old. My dad took it away from me after I split my lip open when it faded going down a hill and I slammed into a fire hydrant.

did you not have a front brake on that bicycle?
I am not convinced that a coaster brake is anymore prone to failing than a caliper brake.