Newbie-ish q about brake levers on drop handlebars

Tumbleweed wrote:

> On my to-be-replaced 'tourer' with drops, the brake levers have additional
> levers which means you can operate them with your hands on the top bars. I
> wouldnt want to give this up on a new bike (which might be one I buy second
> hand) if I go for one with drops.

You do want to give them up.

> There was some derogatory comment on these secondary levers (whose name I
> forget)

Suicide levers.

> a few days ago, but I can't see what the problem is with them.
> However, more to the point, I havent seen any new bikes that come with
> these. Why not, arent they useful? And can someone remind me of the name for
> these "secondary levers" and the makers of whatever is the current
> equivalent? Also, how easy would it be to fit these to a s/h bike, is it a
> LBS job?

They can't exert the same amount of force as the proper levers. By the
time you've realized that you can't stop quickly enough with them, it's
too late to switch to the real levers.

Modern dual-pivot calipers and all the weird and wonderful mountain bike
brakes are so good that they are truly unnecessary. On my Roberts
(Campag Veloce levers, Shimano calipers), I can easily stop as quickly
as the bike is capable of doing with my hands on the brake hoods
reaching down to push the levers in.

Stopping hard with your hands on the top of the 'bars is hard - because
your hands are closer together, you can't control the steering as
accurately. On the rare occasion I'm on the 'bar tops (usually going
slowly uphill) and have to stop quickly, I move to the brake hoods and
then slam on the anchors.

I don't believe any suicide lever setup could stop quicker than me doing
that.

Avoid them.

--
Mark.

in message <[email protected]>, Tumbleweed
('[email protected]') wrote:

> On my to-be-replaced 'tourer' with drops, the brake levers have
> additional levers which means you can operate them with your hands on
> the top bars. I wouldnt want to give this up on a new bike (which
> might be one I buy second hand) if I go for one with drops.
>
> There was some derogatory comment on these secondary levers (whose
> name I forget) a few days ago, but I can't see what the problem is
> with them. However, more to the point, I havent seen any new bikes
> that come with these. Why not, arent they useful?

Brake levers with back levers are still available, but you're right
they're rare. There have been safety issues - they don't give
particularly good leverage and if the brakes aren't adjusted spot on
you're unlikely to be able to make an 'emergency stop' with them.
Furthermore if you do make an emergency stop your centre of gravity is
higher and you may be more likely to go over the bars. Finally they
don't work with modern gear change mechanisms, which are integrated
into the brake levers.

The additional levers which sit in the middle of the cable run should be
more powerful and more reliable, but I haven't used them. Examples
here:
<URL:http://www.sjscycles.com/store/vIndex.htm?item540.htm>
<URL:http://www.sjscycles.com/store/vIndex.htm?item63.htm>

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
Iraq war: it's time for regime change...
... go now, Tony, while you can still go with dignity.
[update 18 months after this .sig was written: it's still relevant]

"Tumbleweed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On my to-be-replaced 'tourer' with drops, the brake levers have
additional
> levers which means you can operate them with your hands on the top bars.
I
> wouldnt want to give this up on a new bike (which might be one I buy
second
> hand) if I go for one with drops.
>
> There was some derogatory comment on these secondary levers (whose name I
> forget) a few days ago, but I can't see what the problem is with them.


"Suicide levers" used to be the term of choice owning to their
perceived and all too real sponginess. The problem with them is,
is that they can wean you off of the habit of instinctively reaching
for the "proper" i.e. tecnically most effecient lever in an emergency.
Basically what may seem like a convenience most of the time, could
mean not stopping in time on the one occasion you most need to.

Curious

> --
> Tumbleweed
>
> email replies not necessary but to contact use;
> tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com
>
>

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:54:56 +0100, Mark Tranchant
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Tumbleweed wrote:
>
>> On my to-be-replaced 'tourer' with drops, the brake levers have
>> additional
>> levers which means you can operate them with your hands on the top
>> bars. I
>> wouldnt want to give this up on a new bike (which might be one I buy
>> second
>> hand) if I go for one with drops.
>
> You do want to give them up.

Absolutely. But, if you do want additional levers on the tops then get
some inline cyclo-cross levers fitted (Tektro do some.) These are separate
to the drop levers and push outer rather than pull cable. I have some on
my tourer and they are effective and useful.

Colin

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:05:03 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email protected]>
wrote:


> The additional levers which sit in the middle of the cable run should be
> more powerful and more reliable, but I haven't used them. Examples
> here:
> <URL:http://www.sjscycles.com/store/vIndex.htm?item540.htm>

Hmm, dynamo holder??

> <URL:http://www.sjscycles.com/store/vIndex.htm?item63.htm>

The ones I have are similar to these:

<URL:http://www.sjscycles.com/store/vIndex.htm?item7187.htm>

Colin

Tumbleweed wrote:

> There was some derogatory comment on these secondary levers (whose name I
> forget) a few days ago, but I can't see what the problem is with them.

Executive Summary: they're shite.

No, really. Compare and contrast the braking effectiveness of the
secondary levers, which act on the primary levers in a position to give
the worst possible mechanical advantage, to the main levers going
downhill in the wet.

> However, more to the point, I havent seen any new bikes that come with
> these. Why not, arent they useful?

They are, as I said above, shite.

If you ride on the brake hoods (or not too far behind) you'll have at
least as much braking power as with extensions. All the extensions do
is give you an option of using something that doesn't work very well.

> these "secondary levers" and the makers of whatever is the current
> equivalent?

There isn't a current equivalent, because the latest thing that does the
same actually works properly.
Can't remember the name offhand, but they work in an entirely different
manner than the original versions.

FWIW I thought I'd miss them on my old bike until I took them off.
After I did that my stopping distances got a whole lot sharper...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Tumbleweed wrote:
> On my to-be-replaced 'tourer' with drops, the brake levers have
> additional levers which means you can operate them with your hands on
> the top bars. I wouldnt want to give this up on a new bike (which
> might be one I buy second hand) if I go for one with drops.

As I mentioned in a recent reply, I was once in exactly the same position
as you: strongly thought I couldn't live without these things. I was
wrong. Modern brakes with modern drop-bar levers are so effecient and
comfortable (ie. "powerful") that you can entirely get by hapilly without
extension levers. The standard brake levers can be used well from the
hoods (from above) as well as from the lower drop position.

You do not have to be within a couple of inches reach of the brake levers
the whole time. Much of the time, even in urban traffic, you have at
least two or three seconds clear stopping time, if you know what I mean.
That's more than ample to switch hand positions. In fact, just moving
right hand to front brake is often good enough.

Just make sure the basic brakes are good and you'll be fine. Avoid bikes
that don't stop well as they are. Why not take advice from someone who's
"been there done that"?

> There was some derogatory comment on these secondary levers (whose
> name I forget) a few days ago, but I can't see what the problem is
> with them.

They don't work nearly as well as good proper levers, plus it's impossible
to fit the old type of extension levers to most modern brakes. There is a
(better) modern equivalent but that's still more gubbins to get in the way
and adds complication and expense.

> However, more to the point, I havent seen any new bikes
> that come with these. Why not, arent they useful?

Becuase they are not needed.

> And can someone
> remind me of the name for these "secondary levers"

Extension levers AKA suicide levers.

~PB

Peter Clinch wrote:

> There isn't a current equivalent, because the latest thing that does
> the same actually works properly.
> Can't remember the name offhand, but they work in an entirely
> different manner than the original versions.

Yes, I shouldn't have used the phrase "modern equivalent" in my previous
reply. Modern alternative, more like.

~PB

Mark Tranchant wrote:

> They can't exert the same amount of force as the proper levers. By the
> time you've realized that you can't stop quickly enough with them, it's
> too late to switch to the real levers.

For further clarification, the main reason that they give limited
braking force is an ergonomic one; unlike normal brake levers (on flats
or drops) where the lever is pulled in towards the bars the pressure on
the lever at the crunch point is not simply a matter of clenching your
hand as if into a natural balled fist, with fingers acting directly
against the palm of the hand (and using some muscles in the arms as well
as the hand). Instead you actually have to pull up with the top two
joints of your fingers against the bottom one to pull the lever
tangentially with respect to the handlebars, which is massively less
efficient (the effective length of the lever is also shorter, which
exacerbates the problem. In addition to that, this action compromises
your grip on the bars exactly when you want to be holding on tightly as
the deceleration (if you've managed to induce any) brings your body
weight forwards, while having your hands in the middle of the bars, as
has been noted, also limits your steering control.

So don't do it.

Cheers

Roger

Roger Hughes wrote:
> For further clarification, the main reason that they give limited
> braking force is an ergonomic one; unlike normal brake levers (on
> flats or drops) where the lever is pulled in towards the bars the
> pressure on the lever at the crunch point is not simply a matter of
> clenching your hand as if into a natural balled fist, with fingers
> acting directly against the palm of the hand (and using some muscles
> in the arms as well as the hand). Instead you actually have to pull
> up with the top two joints of your fingers against the bottom one to
> pull the lever tangentially with respect to the handlebars, which is
> massively less efficient (the effective length of the lever is also
> shorter, which exacerbates the problem. In addition to that, this
> action compromises your grip on the bars exactly when you want to be
> holding on tightly as the deceleration (if you've managed to induce
> any) brings your body weight forwards, while having your hands in the
> middle of the bars, as has been noted, also limits your steering
> control.

Even more of a problem is lever travel. Suicide levers have to be pulled
so far to pull enough cable that they will hit the bar (or get to that
level) unless the brake blocks are set extremely close the rims (if you're
lucky) -- ideally within 1mm. This requires the brakes and wheels to be
in absolutely tip top condition: something that tends to be difficult to
achieve with the sort of bikes that have these levers.

~PB

Pete Biggs wrote:

> Even more of a problem is lever travel. Suicide levers have to be pulled
> so far to pull enough cable that they will hit the bar (or get to that
> level)

They don't generally pull towards the bar, but at a tangent to it
(otherwise the suicide lever hitting the bar will act as a stop for the
main lever, which would be an even more Bad Thing), hence the fingers
doing all the work lifting the lever *away* from the bar at the critical
point. The cable pull itself shouldn't be an issue because the radius
from the pivot to the hand is shorter on the top lever (with a
consequent reduction in leverage, of course...) - it will necessarily be
the same as the cable pull from the main lever, since the two hand
positions are on a single piece of metal.

Cheers

Roger

"Roger Hughes"
<[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> Pete Biggs wrote:
>
> > Even more of a problem is lever travel. Suicide levers have to be
pulled
> > so far to pull enough cable that they will hit the bar (or get to that
> > level)
>
> They don't generally pull towards the bar, but at a tangent to it
> (otherwise the suicide lever hitting the bar will act as a stop for the
> main lever, which would be an even more Bad Thing)

On the ones I had, the spare lever wasn't attached to the main lever, so
wouldn't act as a stop in the way you describe. Thus you could get more
cable by pulling the main lever.

cheers,
clive

Roger Hughes wrote:
<snip arguments of why suicide levers are shite>

This is all rather secondary to the fact that they /are/ shite, however.
Had them for ~15 years, can't think of anything that would persuade me
I'd want them back if I was riding drops.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Roger Hughes wrote:
> Pete Biggs wrote:
>
>> Even more of a problem is lever travel. Suicide levers have to be
>> pulled so far to pull enough cable that they will hit the bar (or
>> get to that level)
>
> They don't generally pull towards the bar

Ok, "or get to that level" I wrote -- effectively same thing with respect
to my point.

> , but at a tangent to it
> (otherwise the suicide lever hitting the bar will act as a stop for
> the main lever, which would be an even more Bad Thing), hence the
> fingers doing all the work lifting the lever *away* from the bar at
> the critical point.

I don't follow that. The extension levers don't move or interfere when
the main lever is pulled, as far as I can remember. Nevermind, it's all
accademic. As the other Pete says, this is secondary to the fact that
they are shite.

> The cable pull itself shouldn't be an issue
> because the radius
> from the pivot to the hand is shorter on the top lever (with a
> consequent reduction in leverage, of course...) - it will necessarily
> be the same as the cable pull from the main lever, since the two hand
> positions are on a single piece of metal.

It is very much an issue in practice: an ergonomical issue. Extension
levers can't be operated with any decent hand forcer when they are nearly
at the level of the bars therefore less travel is required. I found this
was by far the biggest problem with them.

~PB

in message <[email protected]>, Colin Blackburn
('[email protected]') wrote:

> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:05:03 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>> The additional levers which sit in the middle of the cable run should
>> be more powerful and more reliable, but I haven't used them. Examples
>> here:
>> <URL:http://www.sjscycles.com/store/vIndex.htm?item540.htm>
>
> Hmm, dynamo holder??
>
>> <URL:http://www.sjscycles.com/store/vIndex.htm?item63.htm>
>
> The ones I have are similar to these:
>
> <URL:http://www.sjscycles.com/store/vIndex.htm?item7187.htm>

Hum. Those are the ones I meant. No idea how I c*cked up.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; All in all you're just another hick in the mall
-- Drink C'lloid

in message <[email protected]>, Clive George
('[email protected]') wrote:

> "Roger Hughes"
> <[email protected]>
> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> Pete Biggs wrote:
>>
>> > Even more of a problem is lever travel. Suicide levers have to be
> pulled
>> > so far to pull enough cable that they will hit the bar (or get to
>> > that level)
>>
>> They don't generally pull towards the bar, but at a tangent to it
>> (otherwise the suicide lever hitting the bar will act as a stop for
>> the main lever, which would be an even more Bad Thing)
>
> On the ones I had, the spare lever wasn't attached to the main lever,
> so wouldn't act as a stop in the way you describe. Thus you could get
> more cable by pulling the main lever.

<aol>

Which kind of says it all, really.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; All in all you're just another nick in the ball
-- Think Droid

Roger Hughes
<[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> Pete Biggs wrote:
>
> > Even more of a problem is lever travel. Suicide levers have to be
pulled
> > so far to pull enough cable that they will hit the bar (or get to that
> > level)
>
> They don't generally pull towards the bar, but at a tangent to it
> (otherwise the suicide lever hitting the bar will act as a stop for the
> main lever, which would be an even more Bad Thing

This is no different from the situation with "normal" brake levers - they
also hit the bars at the limit of travel; not only that, but most additional
levers are (as described below) NOT a positive limit for the "normal" ones.
When the additonal ones hit the bars, if you are on the drops, you can still
brake harder.

The big problem with additional brake levers is that they typically are
manufactured with a lip that fits over the top of the original, "normal",
ones; this reduces the total travel available and THAT is a bad thing.

I have seen additional levers which transmit torque through a keyed shaft.
Not ever having used either variety, I suspect that this solution is no
better; although it removes the reduction in travel, is does key the
additional lever positively (giving the disadvantage noted above by Hughes)
; and in addition I would not like to rely on the small key doing its job in
an emergency stop.

There is no substitute for properly adjusted, properly placed brake levers.

Pete Biggs wrote:

>>, but at a tangent to it
>>(otherwise the suicide lever hitting the bar will act as a stop for
>>the main lever, which would be an even more Bad Thing), hence the
>>fingers doing all the work lifting the lever *away* from the bar at
>>the critical point.
>
> I don't follow that. The extension levers don't move or interfere when
> the main lever is pulled, as far as I can remember.

Yep, I stand corrected - it's a long time since I was a Saturday boy at
H*lfords and I haven't had many dealings with them since

> Nevermind, it's all
> accademic. As the other Pete says, this is secondary to the fact that
> they are shite.

I think we can accept this as a reasonable consensus.
>
>>The cable pull itself shouldn't be an issue
>>because the radius
>>from the pivot to the hand is shorter on the top lever (with a
>>consequent reduction in leverage, of course...) - it will necessarily
>>be the same as the cable pull from the main lever, since the two hand
>>positions are on a single piece of metal.
>
>
> It is very much an issue in practice: an ergonomical issue. Extension
> levers can't be operated with any decent hand forcer when they are nearly
> at the level of the bars therefore less travel is required. I found this
> was by far the biggest problem with them.

Like I said; it's because you are pulling away from the bars with your
fingers at an unnatural angle. But that's not length of cable pull, just
lack of pulling force.

Roger

Tumbleweed wrote:
> On my to-be-replaced 'tourer' with drops, the brake levers have additional
> levers which means you can operate them with your hands on the top bars. I
> wouldnt want to give this up on a new bike (which might be one I buy second
> hand) if I go for one with drops.
>
> There was some derogatory comment on these secondary levers (whose name I
> forget) a few days ago, but I can't see what the problem is with them.
> However, more to the point, I havent seen any new bikes that come with
> these. Why not, arent they useful? And can someone remind me of the name for
> these "secondary levers" and the makers of whatever is the current
> equivalent?

"GT levers", "brake lever extensions" etc. I rather liked them (if
adjusted properly so you could make a hard brake application without
them hitting the bars) but modern levers pull so well from the top that
they're unnecessary.

Also, how easy would it be to fit these to a s/h bike, is it a
> LBS job?

They're no longer made, but there are in-line levers that do something
similar. Probably an LBS job to get it right unless you're experienced.
Really good bar taping is an art in itself.