thank you, Scott. I'll take your observations over my memories. harvey sachs mcLean VA
On 1/19/11 1:18 AM, Scott L. Minneman wrote:
> If you look at the actually geometry of a built frame, I don't think you'll
> find this assertion to be true (just checked a 79 Colnago, a 73 Bertin, an
> 84 Mercian, a 59 Soens, and a 76 Stout before I got sufficiently convinced).
> Brazed up, a road frame's dropout axle slots are not horizontal at all, but
> rather they are almost exactly perpendicular to the seat stays (when viewed
> from the side of the bike, of course).
> So, that means that mounting the brake behind the bridge puts the brake pads
> the same number of degrees off of perpendicular as mounting ahead of the
> bridge, it's simply two different directions.
> I, too, have left well enough alone on this particular topic...all my bikes
> have the brake behind the bridge. None of my bikes have racks of any sort.
> Scott Minneman
> San Francisco, CA USA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Harvey Sachs
> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 6:34 PM
> To: Classic Rendezvous
> Subject: [CR] Rear Brakes Attached Forward of the Bridge
> Consider a bike with horizontal drop-outs. In such a case, the brake
> mounted conventionally (rearward of the seat stays) is likely to
> tolerate more back-and-forth adjustment of the rear wheel w/o needing
> brake pad adjustment than one with the brake mounted forward. Of course,
> with vertical drop-outs, it doesn't matter.
> The only time I was tempted to mount forward of the stays was, as I
> recall, late one night with a caliper too long for the conventional
> position. Otherwise, I've left well enough alone.
> your mileage may vary.
> harvey sachs
> mcLean va