Cantilever style booster for centerpulls?



Status
Not open for further replies.
RE/
> Has anyone here ever experienced complete brake failure, except maybe "I was riding a track bike
> with no front brake, and..."?

Not precisely, but pretty close to a functional equivalent.

I had has a minor crash and was on my way again.

Suddenly, total sidewall failure on the front wheel.

No, not brake failure - but IMHO the results would have been the same (or probably worse) at speed.

I wasn't at speed, so it was no problem. In that little crash, one of the pads had become misaligned
so that applying the brakes applied the pad to the tire's sidewall....
-----------------------
PeteCresswell
 
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, "Matt O'Toole"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>><[email protected]> wrote in message news:aN%[email protected]...
>>
>>
>>>The big negative for disc brakes is the failure mode and
>>
>>reliability
>>
>>>when descending something like passes in the Alps where
>>
>>missing a
>>
>>>hairpin turn is DEATH. It's a long way down. When you
>>
>>lose fluid or
>>
>>>get even a tiny leak, it is serious trouble.
>>
>>You don't even need a leak to have major brake failure with disks. The main problem, safety-wise,
>>is that they can overheat and "go away" very suddenly. Rim brakes' fade is much more gradual, and
>>when it does happen you still have some braking power left.
>>
>>Rim brakes also cool off a lot faster -- usually in seconds. Disks get hotter and hotter, and may
>>take several minutes to cool down. And it's not just the rotors and pads that get hot, but the
>>calipers, oil, etc.
>>
>>Matt O.
>
>
> Goodness, all these dangerous discs! I'm glad nothing important like my car or motorcycle uses
> these deadly brake types.
>
> PS: was I away when most bicycles stopped having two completely independent braking systems? Has
> anyone here ever experienced complete brake failure, except maybe "I was riding a track bike
> with no front brake, and..."?
>

I had instant rear brake failure with rim brakes when the retaining pin fell out (don't as me how,
but it did), and the rear brake pad was loosened by a slight pull back while I was stopped and the
brakes were on, then I took off down a fireroad. A downhill fire road. Only thing I got from the
rear was some awful metal-metal squealing.

Let me tell you, it doesn't matter if you have hydraulic or cables, if they break, or malfunction,
you're not going to have "some" break left - you won't have anything.

I've NEVER heard of hydraulic discs overheating so badly they completely went away. And don't tell
me braking power is a factor of how much heat they can dissipate - if you're heating up the disc,
its through friction. It doesn't matter where that heat goes, its still kinetic energy being
converted into heat. Disc brakes are designed to work at much higher temperatures than rim brakes,
and for good reason. Obviously, the smaller metal disc is going to heat up more, but excess heat
there really isn't going to cause any huge problems. Hydraulic systems accomodate for the heating of
the hydraulic fluid, or you can just use alittle less pressure on the levers. Every part of the
system is designed to take the higher heat levels, so heat really isn't too much of an issue. As
long as the pads can take it, the brake will still work fine (if not better, if designed that way.
If you've ever driven a car with drum brakes and compared it to a car with disc brakes, or a
motorcycle for that matter, then you'll see that the discs handle the heat just fine where some
other systems don't).

Jon Bond
 
Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Jonathan Bond <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Doug Taylor wrote:
> >> "Paul Southworth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:_A0qa.34735$A%[email protected]...
> >>
> >>> That's what I miss
> >>>
> >>>>most about my old cantis - I could get right to - but not beyond - the "edge" with ease. With
> >>>>my current linar pull brake, I have to stay away from that "edge" (it bites chunks out of me
> >>>>now!).
> >>>
> >>>OK, so why are you still using v-brakes? It's not like cantilevers are hard to find!
> >>
> >> But compatible (new) frames are.
> >
> >Not when you build them yourself, right Mark?
>
> True (and the reason I'm still running canti brakes on the back - a great idea for anyone since
> rear V-brakes tend to be on/off brakes where I ride).
>
> The problem is that it's nearly impossible to find a suspension fork that's set up for canti
> brakes. My last "upgrade" forced me into a V-brake mode and I've missed my cantis ever since.
>
> I should point out for those who haven't followed these threads before that my cantis were set up
> properly, with great pads - I could do one-finger nose wheelies and would regularly lift the rear
> wheel when descending. I can't do that now (the margin between "lift" and "launch" being far too
> narrow to exploit).
>
> Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

Speaking of which, do any of the SUS fork manufacturers offer an old school cantilever compatible
setup? What about the availability of rear brake stops if one wants to use cantilevers in back on a
frame without the cable stop?
 
In article <[email protected]>, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jonathan Bond <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Doug Taylor wrote:
> >> "Paul Southworth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:_A0qa.34735$A%[email protected]...
> >>
> >>> That's what I miss
> >>>
> >>>>most about my old cantis - I could get right to - but not beyond - the "edge" with ease. With
> >>>>my current linar pull brake, I have to stay away from that "edge" (it bites chunks out of me
> >>>>now!).
> >>>
> >>>OK, so why are you still using v-brakes? It's not like cantilevers are hard to find!
> >>
> >> But compatible (new) frames are.
> >
> >Not when you build them yourself, right Mark?
>
> True (and the reason I'm still running canti brakes on the back - a great idea for anyone since
> rear V-brakes tend to be on/off brakes where I ride).
>
> The problem is that it's nearly impossible to find a suspension fork that's set up for canti
> brakes. My last "upgrade" forced me into a V-brake mode and I've missed my cantis ever since.
>
> I should point out for those who haven't followed these threads before that my cantis were set up
> properly, with great pads - I could do one-finger nose wheelies and would regularly lift the rear
> wheel when descending. I can't do that now (the margin between "lift" and "launch" being far too
> narrow to exploit).

You know, I have some nice Avid levers that have an adjustment that looks like it changes the
leverage ratio. Maybe something like this would be in order for you?

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club
 
In article <[email protected]>, Doug Taylor
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Add in steep hills and drop offs (anybody who has endo'd grabbing a load off front brake
> >> dropping onto a ledge knows this) and you have described off-road riding.
> >
> >You're not descending steep enough hills, then. I did a 30-minute XC race yesterday which could
> >charitably be described as "technical". Which is a way of saying it consisted of a brutal,
> >hard-to-negotiate climb followed by harrowingly steep descents with plenty of drops, turns, and
> >rough terrain.
> >
> >My experience was that the terrain was steep enough that the rear brake was nearly useless,
> >simply because I needed more stopping power on the descents than it could provide. Yes, I spent a
> >lot of time on the descents on the razor edge of endoing (and did go over once), but using my
> >rear brake any more would have been futile, since the rear wheel had little weight on it much of
> >the time.
>
> You must be a real stud muffin. Here's a test for you: remove your rear brake, enter a race, then
> post your results.

Okay, I'm not going to enter a race like that, but this is an interesting technical question. I'm
going to do some experimenting. If I forget to post the results, call me out about it in a few days.

> I had the unfortunate experience of breaking my rear brake lever in a race which involved a lot of
> technical descents and steep drops. I didn't last a lap, but rather learned that there's a reason
> that mtn. bikes have rear brakes (which I rarely ever use on the road).
>
> But, then, I'm not an animal like you.

Well, I am in the hunt for the Twoonie Race "B" Championship [blushes].

No, seriously, I was using my rear somewhat, though the more I use my front (and move back on the
bike) the happier I am on descents. I'm going to try to do a fairly gentle descent nearby with my
rear disabled, and see how that works out. Maybe further experiments will be called for.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club
 
"Ryan Cousineau" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> No, seriously, I was using my rear somewhat, though the more I use my front (and move back on the
> bike) the happier I am on descents. I'm going to try to do a fairly gentle descent nearby with my
> rear disabled, and see how that works out. Maybe further experiments will be called for.

It's in the very steep descents, and drops and ledges, where the rear brake is important, where you
really will endo if the front is grabbed with too much force at the wrong time. On a gentle descent,
you would brake like on the road: front brake.
 
[email protected] (WooGoogle) wrote:

>Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote...

>> I should point out for those who haven't followed these threads before that my cantis were set up
>> properly, with great pads - I could do one-finger nose wheelies and would regularly lift the rear
>> wheel when descending. I can't do that now (the margin between "lift" and "launch" being far too
>> narrow to exploit).
>
>Speaking of which, do any of the SUS fork manufacturers offer an old school cantilever
>compatible setup?

Not much out there - I think you can still order cable hangers for RST forks, but they don't
have anything I'd be interested in riding (not that they aren't decent forks for the "very
little money").

> What about the availability of rear brake stops if one wants to use cantilevers in back on a frame
> without the cable stop?

There are a couple options - there are a couple types that mount on the seastpost binder that work
pretty well.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame
 
Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

> Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I should point out for those who haven't followed these threads before that my cantis were set up
>> properly, with great pads - I could do one-finger nose wheelies and would regularly lift the rear
>> wheel when descending. I can't do that now (the margin between "lift" and "launch" being far too
>> narrow to exploit).
>
>You know, I have some nice Avid levers that have an adjustment that looks like it changes the
>leverage ratio. Maybe something like this would be in order for you?

Actually, that makes it worse.

First, the point at which the brake lever changes from "low leverage" to "high leverage" depends on
brake pad wear, dirt, lube and the phase of the moon. If there's one thing that brakes need to be,
it's absolutely consistent.

Second, the higher mechanical advantage of the V-brake is the very reason it has poorer modulation.
When the lever "shifts" to the "high leverage" mode, the difference in the force required for "not
quite enough" and "too friggin' much" shrinks into a hard to control range. And there are times and
places where you have to do a lot of braking in between those two points if you ride steep,
technical stuff.

OTOH, if you subsist on a diet of fast fire roads, almost anything will work just fine (who needs
brakes anyway?). ;-)

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame
 
Doug Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:

>You must be a real stud muffin. Here's a test for you: remove your rear brake, enter a race, then
>post your results.
>
>I had the unfortunate experience of breaking my rear brake lever in a race which involved a lot of
>technical descents and steep drops. I didn't last a lap, but rather learned that there's a reason
>that mtn. bikes have rear brakes (which I rarely ever use on the road).
>
>But, then, I'm not an animal like you.

I just did a 24-hour race (happily as part of a five-man "old fart" team). I had apparently
overshifted inside the big cog a time too many, and on the last night lap I did, started popping
drive side (errr, right) spokes. I ended up with six broken spokes (out of 16), so needless to say
the rear wheel wasn't too true. My only option was to disconnect the rear brake, which concerned me
because of some fairly steep, bumpy/rocky descents still ahead.

I got through it (and managed to finish still riding, though the tire was rubbing on the chainstay),
but wouldn't really want to do it again that way.

Rear brakes are really good at modulating speed on non-extreme descents (though they're hopeless for
actually stopping on a steepish hill). They are pretty much worthless on an "edge of the envelope"
descent (one where your butt is back over the rear axle, your chest is on the saddle, and the rear
tire is making only intermittent contact with mother earth).

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame
 
Jonathan Bond wrote:
>
> I've NEVER heard of hydraulic discs overheating so badly they completely went away.

The german bicycle magazine did a test of disk brakes, and found that many models of disk brakes can
fail due to overheating (often at power dissapations below the failure point of rim brakes):

http://www.ihpva.org/pipermail/hpv/Week-of-Mon-20020304/023003.html

Tandems put much higher demands on their brakes than single bicycles, and brake failure due to
overheating is a very real possibility with all types of brakes (rim, drum and disk). Disk brakes
and can and have failed due to overheating on tandems.

Here is some information on using disk brakes on tandems:

http://tandem-fahren.de/Mitglieder/Christoph_Timm/DiskFAQ.html

Not that this web page indicates that rim brakes combined with drum type drag brake is often
superior to dual disk brakes, due to overheating issues.

The only disk brake that is explicitly approved for use on tandems by their manufacturer is the
Gustav M model by Magura. Note the warning on brake overheating on their web page:

http://www.magura.com/english/frameset/default.htm?http://www.magura.com/english/bremsen/gustavm.ht-
m~Hauptframe

Mark McMaster [email protected]
 
"Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Rear brakes are really good at modulating speed on non-extreme descents (though they're hopeless
> for actually stopping on a steepish hill). They are pretty much worthless on an "edge of the
> envelope" descent (one where your butt is back over the rear axle, your chest is on the saddle,
> and the rear tire is making only intermittent contact with mother earth).

But an absolute necessity when dropping off ledges when grabbing the front brake on landing will
result in an endo.

The point, again, is simply that because of the nature of the terrain, a rear brake is more often
used off-road than on road. A discussion of brakes and braking should make that distinction.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Doug Taylor" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > Rear brakes are really good at modulating speed on non-extreme descents (though they're hopeless
> > for actually stopping on a steepish hill). They are pretty much worthless on an "edge of the
> > envelope" descent (one where your butt is back over the rear axle, your chest is on the saddle,
> > and the rear tire is making only intermittent contact with mother earth).
>
> But an absolute necessity when dropping off ledges when grabbing the front brake on landing will
> result in an endo.
>
> The point, again, is simply that because of the nature of the terrain, a rear brake is more often
> used off-road than on road. A discussion of brakes and braking should make that distinction.

A fair point, although most the discussions in r.b.t are presumed to refer to road bikes- the
MTB'ers having their own newsgroup(s) and tending to post their technical questions there. MTB'ers
also seem to have a lot of Web sites with tech bulletin boards, too, so basically we tend not to see
a lot of MTB threads in r.b.t.
 
Tim McNamara:

> A fair point, although most the discussions in r.b.t are presumed to refer to road bikes- the
> MTB'ers having their own newsgroup(s) and tending to post their technical questions there. MTB'ers
> also seem to have a lot of Web sites with tech bulletin boards, too, so basically we tend not to
> see a lot of MTB threads in r.b.t.

Which technical MTB newsgroup are you referring to? I haven't seen an MTB newsgroup yet that didn't
pound my IQ a few points lower after skimming through the posts.
 
Mark McMaster wrote:

> The only disk brake that is explicitly approved for use on tandems by their manufacturer is the
> Gustav M model by Magura.

That's not true, the Hope DH4 brake is also approved for tandem use.

James
 
"Jose Rizal" <_@_._> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Tim McNamara:
>
> > A fair point, although most the discussions in r.b.t are
presumed to
> > refer to road bikes- the MTB'ers having their own
newsgroup(s) and
> > tending to post their technical questions there.
MTB'ers also seem to
> > have a lot of Web sites with tech bulletin boards, too,
so basically
> > we tend not to see a lot of MTB threads in r.b.t.
>
> Which technical MTB newsgroup are you referring to? I
haven't seen an
> MTB newsgroup yet that didn't pound my IQ a few points
lower after
> skimming through the posts.

After 10+ years of looking, I haven't found any useful ones either.

If you post MTB tech questions here, they *will* get answered -- probably better than anywhere else.

Matt O.
 
"Doug Taylor" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> Rear brakes are really good at modulating speed on non-extreme descents (though they're hopeless
>> for actually stopping on a steepish hill). They are pretty much worthless on an "edge of the
>> envelope" descent (one where your butt is back over the rear axle, your chest is on the saddle,
>> and the rear tire is making only intermittent contact with mother earth).
>
>But an absolute necessity when dropping off ledges when grabbing the front brake on landing will
>result in an endo.

That's the point I was making (though not exclusive to ledges).

>The point, again, is simply that because of the nature of the terrain, a rear brake is more often
>used off-road than on road. A discussion of brakes and braking should make that distinction.

Sorry, I thought that was obvious. I haven't gone down anything paved that comes close to the
description above (thankfully!!!). The technical riding I do off-road is mainly at South Mountain
in the Phoenix east valley - there are plenty of places to "explore the edge of the braking
envelope" there!

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame
 
In article <[email protected]>, James Annan <[email protected]> wrote:

> Mark McMaster wrote:
>
> > The only disk brake that is explicitly approved for use on tandems by their manufacturer is the
> > Gustav M model by Magura.
>
> That's not true, the Hope DH4 brake is also approved for tandem use.

Approved by whom? And on what basis? Do you really mean that it is markted by the manufacturer for
tandems, or that some independent body of analysts has examined the product and approved it- sort of
like Underwriter's Labs?
 
In article <[email protected]>, Jose Rizal <_@_._> wrote:

> Tim McNamara:
>
> > A fair point, although most the discussions in r.b.t are presumed to refer to road bikes- the
> > MTB'ers having their own newsgroup(s) and tending to post their technical questions there.
> > MTB'ers also seem to have a lot of Web sites with tech bulletin boards, too, so basically we
> > tend not to see a lot of MTB threads in r.b.t.
>
> Which technical MTB newsgroup are you referring to? I haven't seen an MTB newsgroup yet that
> didn't pound my IQ a few points lower after skimming through the posts.

I didn't reference a *technical* MTB newsgroup per se. In the past, many of the posts in
rec.bikes.off-road were of a technical nature (at least until Mike Vandeman hijacked the group for
his own personal axe-grinding). I also wasn't commenting on the quality of the posts or of the
thinking involved...
 
"Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>The point, again, is simply that because of the nature of the terrain, a
> >rear brake is more often used off-road than on road. A discussion of
brakes
> >and braking should make that distinction.
>
> Sorry, I thought that was obvious. I haven't gone down anything paved that comes close to the
> description above (thankfully!!!).

Fair enough.

One question: when you're doing a butt over the rear wheel, chest on saddle descent (i.e. a slope so
steep it would impossible to ride up if you were going in the other direction), why wouldn't the
rear wheel stay in contact with the ground, as you describe? Intuitively, virtually all the rider's
weight is concentrated at that locus, thus keeping the rear in contact. If it lost contact (i.e.
moved up), wouldn't the result be an endo (or close to), given the extreme slope?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.