Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

brake mystery

Started by Callistus Valerius · · Last activity · 3 posts · 556 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
25 April 2007
Last activity
25 April 2007
Original author
Callistus Valerius
Posts
3
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
556
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–3 of 3
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Having been a recipient of a '92 Trek that's been hanging in my
    brother-in-laws garage for 11 years, I have a new mystery I can't figure
    out. I noticed it takes longer to stop than my other road bikes. It has
    shimano 600 brakes. I took the Matrix wheel (they suck!) off the front and
    replaced it with one of my other wheels. Don't have an extra rear wheel so
    I left that on, thinking most of the stopping power is in the front anyway.
    The 600 brake looks identical to 105 brake of 2004. I sanded the pad,
    thinking there is problem there, but it didn't change much. Maybe it's the
    shoe, but I noticed Excelsports still sells the 600 shoe (gray, plastic), so
    can't be problem there. Is it the rubber compound, or is it that brake
    doesn't have enough power? Another weird thing about the Matrix wheel, is
    it looks like where the brake pad hits the wheel is waxed. So I sanded it,
    thinking someone accidentally waxed it. But it still feels the same. I
    guess I could change the pads, to see what happens, but I'm still wondering
    if those 600 brakes are up today's standards.

    In another unrelated question, if anybody knows. For a '92 Trek 2300,
    if I was to switch it to a compact crank (haven't ever done that before),
    what would be the bb size to use? 68 x ? Would I have to change the
    shimano 600 FD also?

  2. "Callistus Valerius" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Having been a recipient of a '92 Trek that's been hanging in my
    brother-in-laws garage for 11 years, I have a new mystery I can't figure
    out. I noticed it takes longer to stop than my other road bikes. It has
    shimano 600 brakes. I took the Matrix wheel (they suck!) off the front


    and

    Quoted message said:

    replaced it with one of my other wheels. Don't have an extra rear wheel


    so

    Quoted message said:

    I left that on, thinking most of the stopping power is in the front


    anyway.

    Quoted message said:

    The 600 brake looks identical to 105 brake of 2004. I sanded the pad,
    thinking there is problem there, but it didn't change much. Maybe it's


    the

    Quoted message said:

    shoe, but I noticed Excelsports still sells the 600 shoe (gray, plastic),


    so

    Quoted message said:

    can't be problem there. Is it the rubber compound, or is it that brake
    doesn't have enough power? Another weird thing about the Matrix wheel, is
    it looks like where the brake pad hits the wheel is waxed. So I sanded


    it,

    Quoted message said:

    thinking someone accidentally waxed it. But it still feels the same. I
    guess I could change the pads, to see what happens, but I'm still


    wondering

    Quoted message said:

    if those 600 brakes are up today's standards.

    In another unrelated question, if anybody knows. For a '92 Trek 2300,
    if I was to switch it to a compact crank (haven't ever done that before),
    what would be the bb size to use? 68 x ? Would I have to change the
    shimano 600 FD also?

    Single pivot vs. dual pivot?

    Lou

  3. Callistus Valerius said:

    In another unrelated question, if anybody knows. For a '92 Trek 2300,
    if I was to switch it to a compact crank (haven't ever done that before),
    what would be the bb size to use? 68 x ? Would I have to change the
    shimano 600 FD also?

    The bb size doesn't depend upon the frame (except for the 68-part, which
    you already know about). It does depend on the crank you use. Often
    there is a bit of fungability in the size of the bottom bracket for
    special circumstances, but your situation seems pretty normal.

    --

    David L. Johnson

    Arguing with an engineer is like mud wrestling with a pig...
    You soon find out the pig likes it!

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.