John Betamus, thank you for making me not feel alone in the world of bicycle mechanics with regard to cables not stretching. I'm always shagrined (not crestfallen) when I hear someone who says their mechanic said this or that about cable stretch. I think of it this way: If you try to hang a car from a bridge with a bicycle cable, it will stretch...and then break. But the forces we put on these cables are not stretching them.
Chuck Hoefer
Pacific Coast Cycles
Oceanside, Ca.
> I've made a lot of improvement in the feel of previously bad brakes by
> replacing with modern inner and outer cables, carefully terminated by
> filing
> and with ferrules.
>
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 4:42 PM, John Betmanis <johnb@oxford.net> wrote:
>
>> On 04/01/2011 3:53 PM, Harry Travis wrote:
>>
>> Please someone, show me that new design stainless steel cables stretch
>>> less
>>> than old-skool zinc-plated ones (any more than bicycle chains
>>> "stretch.")
>>> Which is to say: Show me that they measurably stretch at all, as against
>>> simply having the ends bed and the housings move.
>>>
>>
>> Springiness or lost motion in brake cables is no more due to "stretch"
>> than
>> a worn-out chain is "stretched". It's the housing that's the culprit when
>> it
>> appears to "compress". If there is excessive clearance between the inner
>> cable and the housing, the housing will "buckle" in a series of "S"
>> curves
>> before any serious tension reaches the brake caliper. Moreover, if the
>> housing is made of round section wire rather than rectangular, the coils
>> can
>> also "slip" allowing more "compression". I believe the reason the better
>> modern cables have less "stretch" is due to better design and closer
>> tolerances.
>>
>> --
>> John Betmanis
>> Woodstock, Ontario
>> Canada
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ken Freeman
> Ann Arbor, MI USA