How Do These Airborne Specs Look?



"Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>> length, and arm extension.
>
> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
> comfortable.
>
> IME there is not one perfect fit.

I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)
 
"Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>> length, and arm extension.
>
> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
> comfortable.
>
> IME there is not one perfect fit.

I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)
 
"Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>> length, and arm extension.
>
> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
> comfortable.
>
> IME there is not one perfect fit.

I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>>> length, and arm extension.
>>
>> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
>> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
>> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
>> comfortable.
>>
>> IME there is not one perfect fit.
>
> I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
> Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)

I was just gawking at the picture of Sheldon Brown's Thorn Raven,
c/w *two* (not one, but *two*) handlebars. Interesting ...

I don't have the link handy (I'm offline as I write this) but
if you'd like to take a look, just Google on:
Sheldon Brown Thorn Raven
and the URL should be there.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>>> length, and arm extension.
>>
>> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
>> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
>> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
>> comfortable.
>>
>> IME there is not one perfect fit.
>
> I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
> Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)

I was just gawking at the picture of Sheldon Brown's Thorn Raven,
c/w *two* (not one, but *two*) handlebars. Interesting ...

I don't have the link handy (I'm offline as I write this) but
if you'd like to take a look, just Google on:
Sheldon Brown Thorn Raven
and the URL should be there.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>>> length, and arm extension.
>>
>> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
>> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
>> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
>> comfortable.
>>
>> IME there is not one perfect fit.
>
> I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
> Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)

I was just gawking at the picture of Sheldon Brown's Thorn Raven,
c/w *two* (not one, but *two*) handlebars. Interesting ...

I don't have the link handy (I'm offline as I write this) but
if you'd like to take a look, just Google on:
Sheldon Brown Thorn Raven
and the URL should be there.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>>> length, and arm extension.
>>
>> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
>> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
>> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
>> comfortable.
>>
>> IME there is not one perfect fit.
>
> I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
> Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)

I was just gawking at the picture of Sheldon Brown's Thorn Raven,
c/w *two* (not one, but *two*) handlebars. Interesting ...

I don't have the link handy (I'm offline as I write this) but
if you'd like to take a look, just Google on:
Sheldon Brown Thorn Raven
and the URL should be there.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>>> length, and arm extension.
>>
>> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
>> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
>> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
>> comfortable.
>>
>> IME there is not one perfect fit.
>
> I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
> Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)

I was just gawking at the picture of Sheldon Brown's Thorn Raven,
c/w *two* (not one, but *two*) handlebars. Interesting ...

I don't have the link handy (I'm offline as I write this) but
if you'd like to take a look, just Google on:
Sheldon Brown Thorn Raven
and the URL should be there.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>>> length, and arm extension.
>>
>> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
>> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
>> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
>> comfortable.
>>
>> IME there is not one perfect fit.
>
> I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
> Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)

I was just gawking at the picture of Sheldon Brown's Thorn Raven,
c/w *two* (not one, but *two*) handlebars. Interesting ...

I don't have the link handy (I'm offline as I write this) but
if you'd like to take a look, just Google on:
Sheldon Brown Thorn Raven
and the URL should be there.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>>> length, and arm extension.
>>
>> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
>> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
>> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
>> comfortable.
>>
>> IME there is not one perfect fit.
>
> I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
> Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)

I was just gawking at the picture of Sheldon Brown's Thorn Raven,
c/w *two* (not one, but *two*) handlebars. Interesting ...

I don't have the link handy (I'm offline as I write this) but
if you'd like to take a look, just Google on:
Sheldon Brown Thorn Raven
and the URL should be there.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>>> length, and arm extension.
>>
>> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
>> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
>> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
>> comfortable.
>>
>> IME there is not one perfect fit.
>
> I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
> Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)

I was just gawking at the picture of Sheldon Brown's Thorn Raven,
c/w *two* (not one, but *two*) handlebars. Interesting ...

I don't have the link handy (I'm offline as I write this) but
if you'd like to take a look, just Google on:
Sheldon Brown Thorn Raven
and the URL should be there.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Gooserider" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> "Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> To be fair, Airborne does appear to have a pretty detailed online fit
>>> program. Whether a buyer will end up with a racer-type fit or a real
>>> world comfortable fit is unclear, but they do measure inseam, torso
>>> length, and arm extension.
>>
>> One of my most comfortable bikes is a "racer type fit." I've ridden up
>> to 125 miles in a day on it perfectly happily. Another really
>> comfortable bike is a Rivendell set up for brevets. Also really
>> comfortable.
>>
>> IME there is not one perfect fit.
>
> I'm very sensitive to bearing too much weight on my hands, so I need a more
> Rivendellish fit. The higher the bars the better for me. :)

I was just gawking at the picture of Sheldon Brown's Thorn Raven,
c/w *two* (not one, but *two*) handlebars. Interesting ...

I don't have the link handy (I'm offline as I write this) but
if you'd like to take a look, just Google on:
Sheldon Brown Thorn Raven
and the URL should be there.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
 
David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Mark Hickey <[email protected]>:
>>David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
>>>(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
>>An interesting (to me, at least...) data point is that I designed my
>>new tandem around regular road caliper brakes, never having been
>>really happy with the performance of canti brakes on my previous
>>tandem.
>
>Certainly plain ordinary calipers can work just fine, but did you try
>fiddling with the straddle cable? I've got it as high as will just permit
>me to bottom out the lever (higher, and you're just getting lower
>mechanical advantage; lower, and the input force is lower, as I'm sure you
>know) with maximum grip, and the front brake is certainly good enough to
>produce an alarming DOING sensation from the front fork...

I've set up the rear canti brake on my old Santana many times, looking
for adequate braking. As you mention, the "sweet spot" is with the
straddle low enough to produce good mechanical advantage, but not TOO
low. Going to the DiaCompe 287 T (?) lever (slightly longer pull)
helped a bit, but the real improvement came with a set of solid
straddles. There's just not enough extra pull in a typical road brake
lever to overcome even a little straddle "give".

But even so, the caliper brakes I'm running now (Campy Centaur dual
pivots) are head and shoulders better than I ever got the cantis...

>[The back brake's a Suntour self-energiser, so I've no idea how well a
>conventional canti works on a tandem.]

That's probably the one place that self-energizing brake makes sense
(since the back end of a tandem never gets TOO light under braking -
I've yet to see anyone do a nose wheelie on one). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Mark Hickey <[email protected]>:
>>David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
>>>(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
>>An interesting (to me, at least...) data point is that I designed my
>>new tandem around regular road caliper brakes, never having been
>>really happy with the performance of canti brakes on my previous
>>tandem.
>
>Certainly plain ordinary calipers can work just fine, but did you try
>fiddling with the straddle cable? I've got it as high as will just permit
>me to bottom out the lever (higher, and you're just getting lower
>mechanical advantage; lower, and the input force is lower, as I'm sure you
>know) with maximum grip, and the front brake is certainly good enough to
>produce an alarming DOING sensation from the front fork...

I've set up the rear canti brake on my old Santana many times, looking
for adequate braking. As you mention, the "sweet spot" is with the
straddle low enough to produce good mechanical advantage, but not TOO
low. Going to the DiaCompe 287 T (?) lever (slightly longer pull)
helped a bit, but the real improvement came with a set of solid
straddles. There's just not enough extra pull in a typical road brake
lever to overcome even a little straddle "give".

But even so, the caliper brakes I'm running now (Campy Centaur dual
pivots) are head and shoulders better than I ever got the cantis...

>[The back brake's a Suntour self-energiser, so I've no idea how well a
>conventional canti works on a tandem.]

That's probably the one place that self-energizing brake makes sense
(since the back end of a tandem never gets TOO light under braking -
I've yet to see anyone do a nose wheelie on one). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Mark Hickey <[email protected]>:
>>David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
>>>(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
>>An interesting (to me, at least...) data point is that I designed my
>>new tandem around regular road caliper brakes, never having been
>>really happy with the performance of canti brakes on my previous
>>tandem.
>
>Certainly plain ordinary calipers can work just fine, but did you try
>fiddling with the straddle cable? I've got it as high as will just permit
>me to bottom out the lever (higher, and you're just getting lower
>mechanical advantage; lower, and the input force is lower, as I'm sure you
>know) with maximum grip, and the front brake is certainly good enough to
>produce an alarming DOING sensation from the front fork...

I've set up the rear canti brake on my old Santana many times, looking
for adequate braking. As you mention, the "sweet spot" is with the
straddle low enough to produce good mechanical advantage, but not TOO
low. Going to the DiaCompe 287 T (?) lever (slightly longer pull)
helped a bit, but the real improvement came with a set of solid
straddles. There's just not enough extra pull in a typical road brake
lever to overcome even a little straddle "give".

But even so, the caliper brakes I'm running now (Campy Centaur dual
pivots) are head and shoulders better than I ever got the cantis...

>[The back brake's a Suntour self-energiser, so I've no idea how well a
>conventional canti works on a tandem.]

That's probably the one place that self-energizing brake makes sense
(since the back end of a tandem never gets TOO light under braking -
I've yet to see anyone do a nose wheelie on one). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Mark Hickey <[email protected]>:
>>David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
>>>(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
>>An interesting (to me, at least...) data point is that I designed my
>>new tandem around regular road caliper brakes, never having been
>>really happy with the performance of canti brakes on my previous
>>tandem.
>
>Certainly plain ordinary calipers can work just fine, but did you try
>fiddling with the straddle cable? I've got it as high as will just permit
>me to bottom out the lever (higher, and you're just getting lower
>mechanical advantage; lower, and the input force is lower, as I'm sure you
>know) with maximum grip, and the front brake is certainly good enough to
>produce an alarming DOING sensation from the front fork...

I've set up the rear canti brake on my old Santana many times, looking
for adequate braking. As you mention, the "sweet spot" is with the
straddle low enough to produce good mechanical advantage, but not TOO
low. Going to the DiaCompe 287 T (?) lever (slightly longer pull)
helped a bit, but the real improvement came with a set of solid
straddles. There's just not enough extra pull in a typical road brake
lever to overcome even a little straddle "give".

But even so, the caliper brakes I'm running now (Campy Centaur dual
pivots) are head and shoulders better than I ever got the cantis...

>[The back brake's a Suntour self-energiser, so I've no idea how well a
>conventional canti works on a tandem.]

That's probably the one place that self-energizing brake makes sense
(since the back end of a tandem never gets TOO light under braking -
I've yet to see anyone do a nose wheelie on one). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Mark Hickey <[email protected]>:
>>David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
>>>(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
>>An interesting (to me, at least...) data point is that I designed my
>>new tandem around regular road caliper brakes, never having been
>>really happy with the performance of canti brakes on my previous
>>tandem.
>
>Certainly plain ordinary calipers can work just fine, but did you try
>fiddling with the straddle cable? I've got it as high as will just permit
>me to bottom out the lever (higher, and you're just getting lower
>mechanical advantage; lower, and the input force is lower, as I'm sure you
>know) with maximum grip, and the front brake is certainly good enough to
>produce an alarming DOING sensation from the front fork...

I've set up the rear canti brake on my old Santana many times, looking
for adequate braking. As you mention, the "sweet spot" is with the
straddle low enough to produce good mechanical advantage, but not TOO
low. Going to the DiaCompe 287 T (?) lever (slightly longer pull)
helped a bit, but the real improvement came with a set of solid
straddles. There's just not enough extra pull in a typical road brake
lever to overcome even a little straddle "give".

But even so, the caliper brakes I'm running now (Campy Centaur dual
pivots) are head and shoulders better than I ever got the cantis...

>[The back brake's a Suntour self-energiser, so I've no idea how well a
>conventional canti works on a tandem.]

That's probably the one place that self-energizing brake makes sense
(since the back end of a tandem never gets TOO light under braking -
I've yet to see anyone do a nose wheelie on one). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Mark Hickey <[email protected]>:
>>David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
>>>(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
>>An interesting (to me, at least...) data point is that I designed my
>>new tandem around regular road caliper brakes, never having been
>>really happy with the performance of canti brakes on my previous
>>tandem.
>
>Certainly plain ordinary calipers can work just fine, but did you try
>fiddling with the straddle cable? I've got it as high as will just permit
>me to bottom out the lever (higher, and you're just getting lower
>mechanical advantage; lower, and the input force is lower, as I'm sure you
>know) with maximum grip, and the front brake is certainly good enough to
>produce an alarming DOING sensation from the front fork...

I've set up the rear canti brake on my old Santana many times, looking
for adequate braking. As you mention, the "sweet spot" is with the
straddle low enough to produce good mechanical advantage, but not TOO
low. Going to the DiaCompe 287 T (?) lever (slightly longer pull)
helped a bit, but the real improvement came with a set of solid
straddles. There's just not enough extra pull in a typical road brake
lever to overcome even a little straddle "give".

But even so, the caliper brakes I'm running now (Campy Centaur dual
pivots) are head and shoulders better than I ever got the cantis...

>[The back brake's a Suntour self-energiser, so I've no idea how well a
>conventional canti works on a tandem.]

That's probably the one place that self-energizing brake makes sense
(since the back end of a tandem never gets TOO light under braking -
I've yet to see anyone do a nose wheelie on one). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Mark Hickey <[email protected]>:
>>David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
>>>(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
>>An interesting (to me, at least...) data point is that I designed my
>>new tandem around regular road caliper brakes, never having been
>>really happy with the performance of canti brakes on my previous
>>tandem.
>
>Certainly plain ordinary calipers can work just fine, but did you try
>fiddling with the straddle cable? I've got it as high as will just permit
>me to bottom out the lever (higher, and you're just getting lower
>mechanical advantage; lower, and the input force is lower, as I'm sure you
>know) with maximum grip, and the front brake is certainly good enough to
>produce an alarming DOING sensation from the front fork...

I've set up the rear canti brake on my old Santana many times, looking
for adequate braking. As you mention, the "sweet spot" is with the
straddle low enough to produce good mechanical advantage, but not TOO
low. Going to the DiaCompe 287 T (?) lever (slightly longer pull)
helped a bit, but the real improvement came with a set of solid
straddles. There's just not enough extra pull in a typical road brake
lever to overcome even a little straddle "give".

But even so, the caliper brakes I'm running now (Campy Centaur dual
pivots) are head and shoulders better than I ever got the cantis...

>[The back brake's a Suntour self-energiser, so I've no idea how well a
>conventional canti works on a tandem.]

That's probably the one place that self-energizing brake makes sense
(since the back end of a tandem never gets TOO light under braking -
I've yet to see anyone do a nose wheelie on one). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:

>Quoting Mark Hickey <[email protected]>:
>>David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>You cannot have more braking than that, so the theoretical brake "power"
>>>(which tandems find out, with surprising results) is quite irrelevant.
>>An interesting (to me, at least...) data point is that I designed my
>>new tandem around regular road caliper brakes, never having been
>>really happy with the performance of canti brakes on my previous
>>tandem.
>
>Certainly plain ordinary calipers can work just fine, but did you try
>fiddling with the straddle cable? I've got it as high as will just permit
>me to bottom out the lever (higher, and you're just getting lower
>mechanical advantage; lower, and the input force is lower, as I'm sure you
>know) with maximum grip, and the front brake is certainly good enough to
>produce an alarming DOING sensation from the front fork...

I've set up the rear canti brake on my old Santana many times, looking
for adequate braking. As you mention, the "sweet spot" is with the
straddle low enough to produce good mechanical advantage, but not TOO
low. Going to the DiaCompe 287 T (?) lever (slightly longer pull)
helped a bit, but the real improvement came with a set of solid
straddles. There's just not enough extra pull in a typical road brake
lever to overcome even a little straddle "give".

But even so, the caliper brakes I'm running now (Campy Centaur dual
pivots) are head and shoulders better than I ever got the cantis...

>[The back brake's a Suntour self-energiser, so I've no idea how well a
>conventional canti works on a tandem.]

That's probably the one place that self-energizing brake makes sense
(since the back end of a tandem never gets TOO light under braking -
I've yet to see anyone do a nose wheelie on one). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back