How the hell do I adjust the pad on this brake?



<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mar 16, 2:23 am, "Chalo" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> > (Proud owner of a 1988 GT Avalanche (much higher
>> > zoot than a Tequesta, but #$!$% chainstay U-brakes))

>>
>> Hey, those work great if you use full fenders and keep them out of the
>> filth. Too bad they all got mounted on off-road bikes!

>
> Grrr. They make decent street bikes. Actually, I also
> had a Bridgestone MTB with chainstay Rollercams. Those
> were annoying and were replaced with a U-brake. I raced
> that bike for a while, but nearly always in fairly dry
> conditions. Riding it through mud was a mess.
> Chainstay brakes also make singlespeed conversion more
> awkward.
>
> The '88 Avalanche (a top of the line bike in its day)
> has a nice paint scheme and half-chrome forks and stays
> like an older road frame, which you almost never see on
> mountain bikes.
>
> Ben
>
>


'88 was the first year GT introduced their Triple Triangle design, no?
 
As Andy says, a _good_ socket wrench has better metal and thus thinner
walls and should fit.

I had a similar problem with the old Ritchey pedal. However, before I
could get myself to a good HW store to find a quality 8mm socket,
Ritchey sent me one gratis.

Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 wrote:
> http://209.208.180.5/upload/stupidbrake.jpg
> It's a Dia Compe XCE on a 1989 GT Tequesta (or 35lb "Tank-questa") mtb. The
> nut for the pad is in this recess in the brake arm, and my 10mm socket
> wrench bit won't even engage. Sheesh. Any idea what I should do, short of
> dumping the whole brake? TIA.
>
>
 
On Mar 17, 5:30 am, richard <[email protected]> wrote:
> As Andy says, a _good_ socket wrench has better metal and thus thinner
> walls and should fit.
>



Out of curiosity, the above statenent caused me to measure the wall
thickness of 10mm & 14 mm sockets, that I have from 2 sets of 3/8"
drive of 12 pt sockets. 1 set was Snap Ons, & one set was Craftsman.

The Snap On 10mm was marked;

FM 10 It measured from 0.052" to 0.059" (I did not measure all 12
slots of any of these sockets)
The Craftsman was marked;

v v 44302 It measured from 0.061 to 0.070"

So far the 'Higher quality = thinner walled/ lighter weight' theory
appears to be in tact.

Just for the hell of it, I measured a 14mm socket from their
respective sets from each mfg.

They were marked;

FM 14 It measured from 0.063" to 0.068"

v v 14305 It measured from 0.054" to 0.059"

Hmm?

I have always believed that lighter weight = better quality, and was
why I bought the Snap On sockets to stop rounding off nut problems
when a thin walled socket is required, about 10 yrs ago. Unfortunately
I have not observed any lessening of rounding off problems. And feel
the 4 or 5X extra expense of the Snap On set was money down the drain.
I always try to use a 6 pt socket if at all possible. In fact, I'm not
sure that 6 pt sockets are always thinner walled.

Regards, John
 
On 17 Mar 2007 21:35:13 -0700, "john" <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mar 17, 5:30 am, richard <[email protected]> wrote:
>> As Andy says, a _good_ socket wrench has better metal and thus thinner
>> walls and should fit.
>>

>
>
>I have always believed that lighter weight = better quality, and was
>why I bought the Snap On sockets to stop rounding off nut problems
>when a thin walled socket is required, about 10 yrs ago. Unfortunately
>I have not observed any lessening of rounding off problems. And feel
>the 4 or 5X extra expense of the Snap On set was money down the drain.
>I always try to use a 6 pt socket if at all possible. In fact, I'm not
>sure that 6 pt sockets are always thinner walled.
>


"Rounding off" happens because of poor fit between the socket and the
nut and low-strength material used in the nut.

It is possible that expensive sockets may fit better, but the
tolerance for nuts is such that socket manufacturers must allow for
the largest likely nut, and hence the smallest likely nut is likely to
round off. Cheap nuts will have a wider range of sizes and a lower
strenght material, and some of them will be (much) more likely to
round off.

There are sockets made which have the corners relieved so that they
bear on the flats of the nuts, this specifically done in an atempt to
reduce rounding off. If you still have this problem you could look
for those sockets.
 
> richard <[email protected]> loosely paraphrased:
>> As Andy says, a _good_ socket wrench has better metal and thus thinner
>> walls and should fit.


john wrote:
> Out of curiosity, the above statenent caused me to measure the wall
> thickness of 10mm & 14 mm sockets, that I have from 2 sets of 3/8"
> drive of 12 pt sockets. 1 set was Snap Ons, & one set was Craftsman.
> The Snap On 10mm was marked;
> FM 10 It measured from 0.052" to 0.059" (I did not measure all 12
> slots of any of these sockets)
> The Craftsman was marked;
> v v 44302 It measured from 0.061 to 0.070"
> So far the 'Higher quality = thinner walled/ lighter weight' theory
> appears to be in tact.
> Just for the hell of it, I measured a 14mm socket from their
> respective sets from each mfg.
> They were marked;
> FM 14 It measured from 0.063" to 0.068"
> v v 14305 It measured from 0.054" to 0.059"
> Hmm?
> I have always believed that lighter weight = better quality, and was
> why I bought the Snap On sockets to stop rounding off nut problems
> when a thin walled socket is required, about 10 yrs ago. Unfortunately
> I have not observed any lessening of rounding off problems. And feel
> the 4 or 5X extra expense of the Snap On set was money down the drain.
> I always try to use a 6 pt socket if at all possible. In fact, I'm not
> sure that 6 pt sockets are always thinner walled.


Good observation. In fact I did not say what was attributed to me above.
What I did say was that a Snap On 14mm socket fits in a 22mm crank. That
was the OP's immediate question

I implied but did not write "a 12-pt 3/8" Snap On" . A 1/2" drive or a
Snap On Impact Black 3/8" 6 point are over 22mm. Generally no-name
sockets are thicker but some combinations of nice quality sockets are
thick too as you note.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
 
On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <[email protected]> wrote:
> http://209.208.180.5/upload/stupidbrake.jpg
> It's a Dia Compe XCE on a 1989 GT Tequesta (or 35lb "Tank-questa") mtb. The
> nut for the pad is in this recess in the brake arm, and my 10mm socket
> wrench bit won't even engage. Sheesh. Any idea what I should do, short of
> dumping the whole brake? TIA.



Use a 1/4" drive, 10mm socket.

John McMurry
 

Similar threads