Brakes

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 11:35:02 GMT, Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

V brakes are no less pain in the [censored] to set up - they are, after all,
just a slight variant on cantilevers.

I know that while in theory they shouldn't be easier, in practise I have
always found setting up cantis took me much longer. Why is this? Possibly
more practise setting up Vs, but I'm not so sure.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Also, what would you recommend for brakes?

Cane Creek Direct Curve - either DC2 or DC5. The advantage is no noodle.
Noodles are not merely a maintenance problem, they can allegedly[1] jump
out on rough sections and then you have no brakes.
<URL:http://www.canecreek.com/site/product/brakes/02_dc2.html>
<URL:http://www.canecreek.com/site/product/brakes/01_dc5.htm>

Never thought of the noodle jumping out before. Surely your cables would
have to be seized up?
Nice looking brakes though.

--
|C|H|R|I|S|@|T|R|I|N|I|T|Y|W|I|L|L|S|.|C|O|M|
Remove the bars to contact me

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 09:50:18 +0200, James Thomson <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Chris Davies said:

Has anyone fitted V-brakes to their touring bike? What sort
of results did you get?

I used to run V-brakes with 287V levers on a Raleigh Randonneur, and I
was
generally very happy with the results.

As for the levers themselves, all the steel parts rusted very quickly. I
replaced the plated clamps with stainless ones from an old pair of
Shimano
levers.

Someone has a pair for sale on the Cycling+ forum:

http://www.cyclingplus.co.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=34787

James Thomson

Cheers!

--
|C|H|R|I|S|@|T|R|I|N|I|T|Y|W|I|L|L|S|.|C|O|M|
Remove the bars to contact me

Chris Davies said:

Also, is it tig welded or lugged? This will make a difference to price.
It seems like a very good bike for the money, although I've never been
on one and suspect you could recycle some old mountain bikes into
something very similar for much less money.

If you can get a similar quality of manufacture of frame with all the
right braze-ons for touring in good steel I think you'd have quite a
long look ahead. And while you were at it you could enjoy teetering
about with a foot down with full touring luggage from an over-high
bottom bracket. And you'll probably want to redo the gearing while
you're at it, and add mudguards, and racks, and by the time you've done
all that I suspect the "saving" will be a moot point.

Thorn have embraced 26" designs as probably best for lot of reasons on a
tourer (they're stronger, more easily available, tyres are more easily
available and they give you more leeway for smaller riders with the
frame geometry), so the Sardar isn't the only one. It does seem a lot
of people expect 700c wheels on a tourer as the "proper" way to do it
though.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:37:07 +0100, Peter Clinch <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

If you can get a similar quality of manufacture of frame with all the
right braze-ons for touring in good steel I think you'd have quite a
long look ahead. And while you were at it you could enjoy teetering
about with a foot down with full touring luggage from an over-high
bottom bracket. And you'll probably want to redo the gearing while
you're at it, and add mudguards, and racks, and by the time you've done
all that I suspect the "saving" will be a moot point.

Not necessarily. There were plenty of good quality steel MTB frames made
in all sorts of materials. I have a Giant from circa 1994, triple-butted
cromoly, braze-ons for both front and rear racks along with water bottle
bosses. That's not even a particularly good example. Better steel frames
have been built by many firms - Dawes made some corkers back in the day,
so have Orange.
Why would you want to redo the gearing? My tourer has 22 front, 34 rear
for when I'm carrying a lot of luggage or am just not up for it. Gearing
is a question of rider preference, not genre of bike.
Looking at some of the promotional material for the Sardar, it mentions
how it has a higher bottom bracket for better ground clearance off road -
sound familiar?
A lot of early MTB designs had very relaxed geometry to give extra
stability on downhills - this seems to be less prevalent now that mountain
bikes have become more function specific, but was for quite a long time a
fashion. This lends itself to touring pretty well.

--
|C|H|R|I|S|@|T|R|I|N|I|T|Y|W|I|L|L|S|.|C|O|M|
Remove the bars to contact me

Chris Davies said:

Not necessarily. There were plenty of good quality steel MTB frames made
in all sorts of materials.

Note "were". You have to find one, and in the right size.

Quoted message said:

Why would you want to redo the gearing? My tourer has 22 front, 34 rear
for when I'm carrying a lot of luggage or am just not up for it. Gearing
is a question of rider preference, not genre of bike.

Because as a question of rider preference I can't see me having much use
for anything that low on the road compared with alternatives like closer
spacing. And nor can a lot of other people, which is why tourers don't
generally come with a 22" chainwheel by default. I've got 52/42/30, and
though I wouldn't mind changing that for 28/38/48 (or maybe 26-46) I
can't really see I'd want a 22. And I've been touring fully loaded and
"not up for it" with what I've got.

Quoted message said:

Looking at some of the promotional material for the Sardar, it mentions
how it has a higher bottom bracket for better ground clearance off road
- sound familiar?

Hadn't noticed that, though it strikes me as pretty pointless. If you
want to do serious off road you'd be better off with an MTB, and if you
don't then why make every time you touch down more difficult? The Thorn
26" tourers don't appear to have this affliction.

But perhaps more to the point, why doesn't your suggestion of "might as
well use an old MTB frame and save money on a tourer" apply to the (more
expensive) Galaxy as well as to the Sardar?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Chris Davies said:

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:37:07 +0100, Peter Clinch <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

If you can get a similar quality of manufacture of frame with all the
right braze-ons for touring in good steel I think you'd have quite a
long look ahead. And while you were at it you could enjoy teetering
about with a foot down with full touring luggage from an over-high
bottom bracket. And you'll probably want to redo the gearing while
you're at it, and add mudguards, and racks, and by the time you've done
all that I suspect the "saving" will be a moot point.

Not necessarily. There were plenty of good quality steel MTB frames made
in all sorts of materials. I have a Giant from circa 1994, triple-butted
cromoly, braze-ons for both front and rear racks along with water bottle
bosses.

Not a Sierra Sport, is it?
--
Michael MacClancy
Random putdown - "Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever
they go." -Oscar Wilde
www.macclancy.demon.co.uk
www.macclancy.co.uk

Peter Clinch said:

Quoted message said:

Why would you want to redo the gearing? My tourer has 22 front, 34 rear
for when I'm carrying a lot of luggage or am just not up for it. Gearing
is a question of rider preference, not genre of bike.

Because as a question of rider preference I can't see me having much use
for anything that low on the road compared with alternatives like closer
spacing. And nor can a lot of other people, which is why tourers don't
generally come with a 22" chainwheel by default. I've got 52/42/30, and
though I wouldn't mind changing that for 28/38/48 (or maybe 26-46) I
can't really see I'd want a 22. And I've been touring fully loaded and
"not up for it" with what I've got.

I currently have 28-48 on the MTB with a 32 largest rear sprocket. I
originally had 22-42 which I thought was a bit on the low side but was fine
for dragging kids in trailers up steep slopes off road (when the trick is to
keep the rear wheel from slipping and the front wheel on the ground.

My riding style is changing to a much faster cadence = lower gearing so I
can definitely see the utility in a 22 small ring for touring on steep
ground. At present I can ride up the local 1 in 8 with a reasonable cadence
(about 90) at about 8mph on a good day with 28x24. That is on an unloaded
MTB (with mudguards, rack, big SLA powered lights and so on, probably weighs

Quoted message said:

30lbs). Add luggage and I'd be hard put to go up anything steeper than 1 in

8 on whatever gears I have.

As you say, everybody has their own preferences. I think 22 is a good bottom
gear for a tourer. Not for an Audax bike though, 28 or 30 is probably better
or have 22 and a closer ratio block.

...d

David Martin said:

My riding style is changing to a much faster cadence = lower gearing so I
can definitely see the utility in a 22 small ring for touring on steep
ground.

I can't mash any more, does my knees in quite quickly. And I've just
come back from a fully laden tour with plenty of hills. And while I can
see it might be nice to come down from a 22" bottom gear to 20" or just
below, a 22 ring would give me a 16" bottom end. That really is /very/
low, lower than I really want on tarmac without a third wheel to keep me
from toppling over on a long drag.

Quoted message said:

(about 90) at about 8mph on a good day with 28x24. That is on an unloaded
MTB (with mudguards, rack, big SLA powered lights and so on, probably weighs
30lbs).

The Streetmachine as per my spec weighs slightly over 40 IIRC. And I
still get up big hills at a reasonable cadence with a 30 small
chainwheel, and I'm not in a Big Hurry.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Clive George pibbled:

Quoted message said:

"Triffid" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Anyhow, V brakes are if anything /harder/ to set up than cantilevers.
Disc brakes are a toy unless hydraulics are involved. I used to own a
cable-disc motorcycle, and cantilevers on the rim would been a boon!

Avid mechanicals are getting a good reputation among tandem riders, which
seems a pretty good recommendation for me.

Quoted message said:

The only proper professional riders in this country have drum brakes,
why aren't they commonly available?

?? (couriers?)

Postmen!

Michael MacClancy said:

Chris Davies said:

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:37:07 +0100, Peter Clinch
<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

If you can get a similar quality of manufacture of frame with all the
right braze-ons for touring in good steel I think you'd have quite a
long look ahead. And while you were at it you could enjoy teetering
about with a foot down with full touring luggage from an over-high
bottom bracket. And you'll probably want to redo the gearing while
you're at it, and add mudguards, and racks, and by the time you've done
all that I suspect the "saving" will be a moot point.

Not necessarily. There were plenty of good quality steel MTB frames made
in all sorts of materials. I have a Giant from circa 1994, triple-butted
cromoly, braze-ons for both front and rear racks along with water bottle
bosses.

Not a Sierra Sport, is it?

It's a Giant Track. Fab little bike, the rather dated exterior disguises
the fact that it's loads of fun to ride.

--
|C|H|R|I|S|@|T|R|I|N|I|T|Y|W|I|L|L|S|.|C|O|M|
Remove the bars to contact me

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:18:32 +0100, Peter Clinch <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Note "were". You have to find one, and in the right size.

I believe my exact words in the original post were "some old mountain
bikes". If you're not in a hurry, you can always get what you're looking
for, or something else that will do. I bought the Giant at a car boot sale
for £20.

Quoted message said:

Because as a question of rider preference I can't see me having much use
for anything that low on the road compared with alternatives like closer
spacing. And nor can a lot of other people, which is why tourers don't
generally come with a 22" chainwheel by default. I've got 52/42/30, and
though I wouldn't mind changing that for 28/38/48 (or maybe 26-46) I
can't really see I'd want a 22. And I've been touring fully loaded and
"not up for it" with what I've got.

If high, close ratio gears are your thing, then I hope you enjoy them. I'm
transferring the chainset and casette of my old bike to my new one. I like
them, that's the reason I chose them.

Quoted message said:

Hadn't noticed that, though it strikes me as pretty pointless. If you
want to do serious off road you'd be better off with an MTB, and if you
don't then why make every time you touch down more difficult? The Thorn
26" tourers don't appear to have this affliction.

But it isn't for serious off road. Neither is an MTB when you're running
it with slick tyres and tons of luggage, for that matter. But what if
you're on a tour, and you decided to do a bit of off roading? The whole
idea of the Sardar as I see it is a little more versatility than the
Galaxy. The designers obviously thought that it was worthwhile to design
this into the frame, and it was worth a small trade-off in ease when
starting. If people are happy riding the bike fully loaded isn't that
enough? BTW, what is serious off road anyway?

Quoted message said:

But perhaps more to the point, why doesn't your suggestion of "might as
well use an old MTB frame and save money on a tourer" apply to the (more
expensive) Galaxy as well as to the Sardar?

I like the Galaxy. I quite like the Sardar too for that matter, although
I've no personal experience of it. I was merely saying that I thought the
Sardar was very close as an idea to a lot of bikes that you can now pick
up for next to nothing. Pick one up, you might be delighted and ride it
for the rest of your life. Or you might decry it as a waste of good steel.
Like I've already said, it's a question of what you want, not what others
say you should have.

Chris.
--
|C|H|R|I|S|@|T|R|I|N|I|T|Y|W|I|L|L|S|.|C|O|M|
Remove the bars to contact me

Chris Davies said:

If high, close ratio gears are your thing, then I hope you enjoy them.

Errrr. They're not, and I don't have them. And nor do most tourers
unless they're Audaxy sort of things.

Quoted message said:

But it isn't for serious off road. Neither is an MTB when you're running
it with slick tyres and tons of luggage, for that matter. But what if
you're on a tour, and you decided to do a bit of off roading?

Well, on our fully laden recumbents we just went ahead and did it. On a
rather boggy section of the Formartine & Buchan way we passed a couple
of the sort of bikes that's allegedly ideal for this sort of touring
being pushed down the way as we rode up, and subsequently overhauled a
couple of kids on MTBs. Ever since the MTB became widespread there
seems to be a general misapprehension that you need some sort of special
bike the instant that the tarmac stops, but it isn't so.

Quoted message said:

idea of the Sardar as I see it is a little more versatility than the
Galaxy. The designers obviously thought that it was worthwhile to design
this into the frame, and it was worth a small trade-off in ease when
starting. If people are happy riding the bike fully loaded isn't that
enough? BTW, what is serious off road anyway?

Serious off road is something that is very unlikely to happen with a
fully loaded tourer, whether that be a capable MTB with racks or
anything else.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Chris Davies said:

Has anyone fitted V-brakes to their touring bike? What sort of
results did you get? I find cantilevers a pain in the a**e to set up,
and I reckon I deserve a decent set of brakes now I'm only to have
one bike.
The Dia-compe 287 lever is interesting, never seen a bike with one
fitted - does anyone have a set?

I changed my tourer from cantis to V-brakes (Avid of some sort) a couple of
years ago, using the Dia-Compe V287 levers. Braking is marginally better
than it was before, but I have a suspicion that the bosses may be too close
together for them to work properly. Also they interfered a bit with the
upper rack mounts, requiring a certain amount of bodgery...

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

Dave Larrington said:

Chris Davies said:

Has anyone fitted V-brakes to their touring bike? What sort of
results did you get? I find cantilevers a pain in the a**e to set up,
and I reckon I deserve a decent set of brakes now I'm only to have
one bike.
The Dia-compe 287 lever is interesting, never seen a bike with one
fitted - does anyone have a set?

I changed my tourer from cantis to V-brakes (Avid of some sort) a couple
of
years ago, using the Dia-Compe V287 levers. Braking is marginally better
than it was before, but I have a suspicion that the bosses may be too
close
together for them to work properly. Also they interfered a bit with the
upper rack mounts, requiring a certain amount of bodgery...

Cheers! That's exactly what I wanted to know.

--
|C|H|R|I|S|@|T|R|I|N|I|T|Y|W|I|L|L|S|.|C|O|M|
Remove the bars to contact me

I think this is going in circles now, don't you? I've said all I have to
say about it.
Originally I was only asking a question about brake levers - on reflection
don't think I'll bother running v-brakes. Thanks to everyone for their
advice.
I am glad you enjoy using your bike as it is. It's not the way I have
chosen to use mine, but there you go. They're the most personal piece of
machinery there is, so maybe we should be glad our bikes aren't the same!
Certainly, diverse bikes and their equally diverse riders is one of the
things I love about cycling. I hope one day we can meet and go for a
trundle together. You certainly know your stuff and I'd be interested to
see your bike.
BTW, my new Galaxy is a babe! Picked it up yesterday, it's stood next to
the computer glinting at me as I type this message. Time to get out with
it. (;

Chris.
--
|C|H|R|I|S|@|T|R|I|N|I|T|Y|W|I|L|L|S|.|C|O|M|
Remove the bars to contact me

Chris Davies said:

They're the most personal piece of machinery there is

<pedant> surely a replacement hip joint is rather more personal than a
bike? </pedant> ;-)

Quoted message said:

I'd be interested to see your bike.

http://www.personal.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/tourdunord.htm and following
has some pix. Gears setup is standard for the bike, brakes were the
standard Vs but have now been changed for the Maguras which are
definitely a worthwhile step up IMHO.

Quoted message said:

BTW, my new Galaxy is a babe! Picked it up yesterday, it's stood next to
the computer glinting at me as I type this message. Time to get out with
it. (;

En-joy! :-)

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Chris Davies said:

They're the most personal piece of machinery there is

<pedant> surely a replacement hip joint is rather more personal than a
bike? </pedant> ;-)

Also: Watch. Knife. Pen. Colostomy bag.

But it's the most fun of them all.
--
Mark South, Super Genius: World Citizen, Net Denizen

Mark South [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

Also: Watch. Knife. Pen. Colostomy bag.

But it's the most fun of them all.

You don't enjoy your colostomy bad more? Are you sure you've got it set
up right for you?

Jon :-)

"Jon Senior" <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mark South [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

Also: Watch. Knife. Pen. Colostomy bag.

But it's the most fun of them all.

You don't enjoy your colostomy bad more? Are you sure you've got it set
up right for you?

Glad to say I do NOT enjoy a colostomy bag :-)

Now I'm wondering which of those other items I have the most of....

Of course, on a bike I have them all, since the seatpack contains notebook and
pen, plus Alien with knifeblade. The computer contains a clock.

Therefore cycling is the most fun, since it goes so well with those gadgets and
GPS, HRM, mobile phone, camera etc etc etc.
--
Mark South, Super Genius: World Citizen, Net Denizen