Aerobrake lever advantages over standad brake levers

[ddog]

It is hard to believe the cables aerodynamics have any negligable
effect for a rider over 230 lbs. Keeping water out may be an advantage.
But to have hard 90 degree turns with cables taped down to handle bars
(based on where your grip is 'not') seems like the friction would wear
and stretch the cable more than direct lines with one smooth curve and
then direct cable routing.

Does anyone have any valid comparison information or quantitative data
between the two?
Rather than subjective opinions alone, I am looking for factors like:

- efficiency,
- control,
- response,
- braking power,
- maintenance required/ease,
- replacement life, and/or
- safety issues.


Thanks!!

 

[bfd]

ddog wrote:
> It is hard to believe the cables aerodynamics have any negligable
> effect for a rider over 230 lbs. Keeping water out may be an advantage.
> But to have hard 90 degree turns with cables taped down to handle bars
> (based on where your grip is 'not') seems like the friction would wear
> and stretch the cable more than direct lines with one smooth curve and
> then direct cable routing.
>
> Does anyone have any valid comparison information or quantitative data
> between the two?
> Rather than subjective opinions alone, I am looking for factors like:
>
> - efficiency,
> - control,
> - response,
> - braking power,
> - maintenance required/ease,
> - replacement life, and/or
> - safety issues.
>
>
Hey, its 2007, is this really an issue?!! Haven't "Aero" brake levers
been around at least 20+year?

Since just about every brake lever, including Ergo and STI (do you know
about those?) have "aero" routing, I think any concerns have been
addressed.

If you like non-aero, then keep on using them. Otherwise, GET WITH IT!

Btw, I believe Rivendell still sells brand new non-aero levers.

 

[David L. Johnson]

On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 13:57:17 -0800, ddog wrote:

> It is hard to believe the cables aerodynamics have any negligable
> effect for a rider over 230 lbs. Keeping water out may be an advantage.

Of course the aerodynamic advantage is negligible. Water is hardly kept
out by not having that one hole in the top, since brake levers are exposed
underneath.

> But to have hard 90 degree turns with cables taped down to
handle bars
> (based on where your grip is 'not') seems like the friction would wear
> and stretch the cable more than direct lines with one smooth curve and
> then direct cable routing.

Here is the issue. Sure, there would be "more" wear from snaking the
cable around on the bars, than there would be with more gentle bends. But
there is not significantly more wear. I don't have numbers, but
certainly many riders have long experience with aero brakes, and cable
wear is not a problem.

> Does anyone have any valid comparison information or quantitative data
> between the two?

Only having ridden with both, for many years. No real difference in
performance.

> Rather than subjective opinions alone, I am looking for factors like:
>
> - efficiency,
> - control,
> - response,
> - braking power,
> - maintenance required/ease,
> - replacement life, and/or
> - safety issues.

You may not find numbers for all of this, because it doesn't matter. Aero
brake routing is efficient enough to stop safely, has plenty of control
(what is your worry here), response is fine, I have plenty of braking
power, maintenance is essentially the same as with non-aero levers, as is
lifespan. There is a safety issue, though, in that exposed brake levers
can catch up in your hand, or can get caught on a branch, either of which
could cause you to fall. Other than that, and the fact that aero levers
make for a better-looking bike, it's a wash.

But it's actually hard these days to find non-aero brake levers, so it
doesn't matter in the end.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Become MicroSoft-free forever. Ask me how.
_`\(,_ |
(_)/ (_) |

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 2 Jan 2007 13:57:17 -0800, "ddog" <[email protected]> wrote:

>It is hard to believe the cables aerodynamics have any negligable
>effect for a rider over 230 lbs. Keeping water out may be an advantage.
>But to have hard 90 degree turns with cables taped down to handle bars
>(based on where your grip is 'not') seems like the friction would wear
>and stretch the cable more than direct lines with one smooth curve and
>then direct cable routing.
>
>Does anyone have any valid comparison information or quantitative data
>between the two?
>Rather than subjective opinions alone, I am looking for factors like:
>
>- efficiency,
>- control,
>- response,
>- braking power,
>- maintenance required/ease,
>- replacement life, and/or
>- safety issues.

There was an extensive thread about this recently -- a couple of
months ago I think. Check the archives at groups.google.com.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[ddog]

Thanks for the information Guys!

I'm upgrading my 1971 Raleigh Supercourse, so everything is a project.
So far dura ace crank/ultegra bb (the most important thing) and Tiagra
front derailleur. Now I'm working on adding Swift Shift to my Profile
Century aero bar with Suntour Power Shift rachet levers (click, click,
click, ...). I'll have Sturmey Archer wheel clamps on right side base
lugs, so the shift cables will go straight to stops to wheel clamps to
front/rear derailleur: instead of sliding through rear derailleur metal
trough and plastic slide on bottom of seat post to front derailleur.
Rest of parts should arrive by next week.

My brake lever question was just relooking at what already had planned
next for brakes project: Tektro 200 levers, cable/housing, (donuts on
all open cables,) and Scott Mathauser brake pads. Never can confirm
things too many times with complex biomechanical vehicles like bikes.
I've already got a little pool of 'odd' inventory parts that are each
less cost than the shipping or gas to LBS; so I'm asking more questions
as I go now, lol.

Still have to install ultegra rd, IRD 5 sp freewheel, fenders, maybe
wheels, maybe powder coat and other small projects to go. Now I can see
the importance of isolating upgrades to guide my next moves better. But
the main thing is it is riding great in Florida flat lands now while
I'm upgrading piece by piece. I just use 53-17t combo spinning
constantly now.

Its a Reynolds 531 dinasaur with 27" tires, but it flies with my big
self, lol. I appreciate the instant responses, and will be happy to
show any system that works decently. The bike community is great, and
saw this link on Sheldon's site: where I did my initial learning curve
late Summer last year, 2006.


Again, Thanks guys!
Phil Bailey
Sarasota, FL

 

[ddog]

Thanks for the information Guys!

I'm upgrading my 1971 Raleigh Supercourse, so everything is a project.
So far dura ace crank/ultegra bb (the most important thing) and Tiagra
front derailleur. Now I'm working on adding Swift Shift to my Profile
Century aero bar with Suntour Power Shift rachet levers (click, click,
click, ...). I'll have Sturmey Archer wheel clamps on right side base
lugs, so the shift cables will go straight to stops to wheel clamps to
front/rear derailleur: instead of sliding through rear derailleur metal
trough and plastic slide on bottom of seat post to front derailleur.
Rest of parts should arrive by next week.

My brake lever question was just relooking at what already had planned
next for brakes project: Tektro 200 levers, cable/housing, (donuts on
all open cables,) and Scott Mathauser brake pads. Never can confirm
things too many times with complex biomechanical vehicles like bikes.
I've already got a little pool of 'odd' inventory parts that are each
less cost than the shipping or gas to LBS; so I'm asking more questions
as I go now, lol.

Still have to install ultegra rd, IRD 5 sp freewheel, fenders, maybe
wheels, maybe powder coat and other small projects to go. Now I can see
the importance of isolating upgrades to guide my next moves better. But
the main thing is it is riding great in Florida flat lands now while
I'm upgrading piece by piece. I just use 53-17t combo spinning
constantly now.

Its a Reynolds 531 dinasaur with 27" tires, but it flies with my big
self, lol. I appreciate the instant responses, and will be happy to
show any system that works decently. The bike community is great, and
saw this link on Sheldon's site: where I did my initial learning curve
late Summer last year, 2006.


Again, Thanks guys!
Phil Bailey
Sarasota, FL

 

[Joe Riel]

"ddog" <[email protected]> writes:

> It is hard to believe the cables aerodynamics have any negligable
> effect for a rider over 230 lbs. Keeping water out may be an advantage.
> But to have hard 90 degree turns with cables taped down to handle bars
> (based on where your grip is 'not') seems like the friction would wear
> and stretch the cable more than direct lines with one smooth curve and
> then direct cable routing.
>
> Does anyone have any valid comparison information or quantitative data
> between the two?
> Rather than subjective opinions alone, I am looking for factors like:
>
> - efficiency,
> - control,
> - response,
> - braking power,
> - maintenance required/ease,
> - replacement life, and/or
> - safety issues.

The cable friction is proportional to the exponential of the total
curvature in the cable:

F = exp(mu*Theta)

where
mu = coefficient of friction
Theta = total curvature (in radians)

For a front brake the total curvature is approximately Pi radians,
regardless whether aero or "standard" levers are used. For a rear
brake cable the curvature may be less for an aero lever.

--
Joe Riel

 

[ddog]

Frank,

Great insight on cable lash, and on the same bike too.
I will look out for the cable bend you are talking about,
since haven't seen aerobrake mechanism yet.


Thanks,
Phil Bailey
Sarasota, FL


This is one great site!!

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
"ddog" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Frank,
>
> Great insight on cable lash, and on the same bike too. I will look
> out for the cable bend you are talking about, since haven't seen
> aerobrake mechanism yet.

Phil, you must have been hiding under a rock for the past 20 years. ;-)

Aero levers are the standard in road bikes. They work fine for large or
small riders. There is no practical issue with cable friction as modern
cable housings are lined with plastic or some similar substance to
reduce friction. Current aero levers pull more cable so that reduces
the friction issue further.

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/brake-levers-drop.html

Note that the change in cable pull changes the mechanical advantage of
the lever, and some people don't care for how that feels with single
pivot brakes (reduces the mechanical advantage of the whole system).
Personally I think it feels fine, don't actually notice any difference
with my old Sun Tour Superbes. The difference I do notice is in
comfort. At 6'4" I have big hands and the larger bodies of aero levers
are much more comfortable, particularly the Campy "Ergo" shape that is
also used in the Tektro/Cane Creek brakes.

The only downside to aero levers IMHO is that changing brake cables is a
bit more complex and it can be very hard to feed the cable through the
brake lever into the end of the housing.

 

[ddog]

Tim,

No, not under a rock. Just sold my bike and rebought it back. Had a
cheap mountain bike in between briefly, but mainly ran instead of
biking when
lived in big cities or 'way' out in the hills. Too dangerous I thought
at the time.

I can now see there is a time(brake cable to stabilize) and a
time(brake activation).
So the cof is not the only force during cable waves oscillating in the
time(brake cable to stabilize).

Brakes are no benefit to reengineer, but did make gains in shifters,
saddles, and cranks. I'm just going through each system and completed
seat, crank/pedals, and shifter. Now on handle/aero bars fine
adjustments. Brakes don't look too difficult now I've gotten great
input from this site.

One spin at a time. Its not a real easy industry to figure what will
work: together, for your needs, and/or on your bike. Before you buy it
anyway :-o


Thanks,
Phil Bailey

 

[[email protected]]

Tim McNamara wrote:
> with my old Sun Tour Superbes. The difference I do notice is in
> comfort. At 6'4" I have big hands and the larger bodies of aero levers
> are much more comfortable, particularly the Campy "Ergo" shape that is
> also used in the Tektro/Cane Creek brakes.

I'll add a "what he said" to that, but my preference runs to STI.

Joseph

 

[mark]

ddog wrote:
> It is hard to believe the cables aerodynamics have any negligable
> effect for a rider over 230 lbs. Keeping water out may be an advantage.
> But to have hard 90 degree turns with cables taped down to handle bars
> (based on where your grip is 'not') seems like the friction would wear
> and stretch the cable more than direct lines with one smooth curve and
> then direct cable routing.
>
> Does anyone have any valid comparison information or quantitative data
> between the two?
> Rather than subjective opinions alone, I am looking for factors like:
>
> - efficiency,
> - control,
> - response,
> - braking power,
> - maintenance required/ease,
> - replacement life, and/or
> - safety issues.
>
>
> Thanks!!
>
My own experience:

Everything I've read on the subject says that "aero" cables offer no
detectable aerodynamic advantage over old style cables.

Modern teflon lined cable housings and modern tightly wound, possibly
teflon coated cables mean that there is no functional difference in
performance, durability, or reliability between aero cable routing and
old school cable routing. When I finally made the switch to Campy Ergo I
found that not having cables in the way made moving my hands between
positions on the handlebars easier, viewing the cycle computer was
easier, and it was easier to mount a handlebar bag and access the
handlebar bag. (Shimano STI will interfere with mounting a handlebar
bag, Campy Ergo, barend shifters or downtube shifters will not). On the
negative side, replacing cables/housings, re-taping the bars and
installing a computer are a little more difficult. IMO, the differences
are really not all that significant.

mark

 

[Clive George]

"mark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...

> Modern teflon lined cable housings and modern tightly wound, possibly
> teflon coated cables mean that there is no functional difference in
> performance, durability, or reliability between aero cable routing and old
> school cable routing.
<...>
> IMO, the differences are really not all that significant.

The most significant difference I noticed is that the brake hoods actually
work on aero levers. The old levers had that horrible tan rubber, which fell
apart in the way that the stuff they put on aero levers doesn't. It also
gives you another hand position (palm over the top of the lever) which I
occasionally use.

cheers,
clive

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<[email protected]>
,
"ddog" <[email protected]> wrote:

> It is hard to believe the cables aerodynamics have any negligable
> effect for a rider over 230 lbs. Keeping water out may be an advantage.
> But to have hard 90 degree turns with cables taped down to handle bars
> (based on where your grip is 'not') seems like the friction would wear
> and stretch the cable more than direct lines with one smooth curve and
> then direct cable routing.
>
> Does anyone have any valid comparison information or quantitative data
> between the two?
> Rather than subjective opinions alone, I am looking for factors like:
>
> - efficiency,
> - control,
> - response,
> - braking power,
> - maintenance required/ease,
> - replacement life, and/or
> - safety issues.

I am a slow change artist; nevertheless my aesthetic
judgments are not based on vintage or modern. I prefer
the look of the hidden cable routing to the loops of
the older system. Also when I got the hidden cable
routing on the new bike, I discovered that the looped
cables actually get in my way. I will be replacing the
old levers on my old bike soon.

--
Michael Press