Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[Greg J]

None of your 7 considerations calls for switching your brakes.  If you're 
satisfied with the v-brakes you currently have, don't change them.  

To switch them out, depending on what you currently have, you may need new 
levers, new cables/housing, new cantis, front cable stop, lots of fiddling 
around to dial them in, and at the end of the day likely won't have any 
better-functioning brakes.  The only real benefit that *some* canti brakes 
could have over v-brakes is better modulation, but that depends on so 
much---the specific parts, set up, and your sensitivity to such things. 
 Don't forget that v-brakes were considered an improvement over cantis 
because they're easier to set up and are generally more powerful.

Of course, if you have the time/parts/money, go for it!  

Greg

On Saturday, October 29, 2022 at 4:09:17 PM UTC-7 Matthew Williams wrote:

> Hi everyone, based on the brake arrangement, I have a question.
>
> But first, some background: I’m making some changes/upgrades so my bike 
> will be better equipped for day rides, multi-day trips, and light touring.
>
> Here are some of the considerations:
>
>1. Bike is a Joe Appaloosa
>2. Wheels will be Atlas 700c with Panaracer Gravel Kings.
>3. My rides are almost all on asphalt or concrete with a few dirt 
>trails or fire roads.
>4. Bike currently has V-brakes.
>5. I am planning to add a rear rack with panniers, no front rack.
>6. I weigh about 165. 
>7. I’ll be carrying some gear but I won’t be overloading the bike.
>
>
> *Question: Should I switch to cantilevers, or keep the existing V-brakes? *
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/e78fad80-7539-4c04-bbd2-7b938fe30b59n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[Esteban]

Back when cyclocross race bikes had rim brakes, the mullet 
retro-front/touring-back was a preferred set-up so that the retros would't 
stab the rider when they had the bike on their shoulder. I've always just 
copied this stylistically when setting a bike up this way - just to try to 
be cool. 

On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 10:14:05 AM UTC-7 RichS wrote:

> Hi Matthew,
>
> I agree with Phillip and Collin; why switch to cantis when your existing V 
> brakes appear to work fine? If it's the desire to experiment or just make a 
> change, well, we've all been down that road — and I'm often on it!  A 
> friend of mine has a canti braked Appaloosa (very nice bike!). However, I 
> can see V brakes looking and working just fine on it. Good luck with your 
> decision.
>
> Best,
> Rich in ATL
>
> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 6:59:08 AM UTC-4 Garth wrote:
>
>> I've used cantilevers since the early 80's and while there are 
>> distinctions among brake models, how it is set up, the frame mounts 
>> themselves, brake cable and housing setup, and finally the riders own 
>> sensibilities, all play their part in the experience of braking. In other 
>> words, there's no putting a specific brake in a "box", saying it is this or 
>> that, and that's all there is too it. There's just too many variables to 
>> consider to distill it down into a box of words. 
>>
>> That said, I love me some low profile Suntour XC Pro canti's. For that 
>> matter, I love any canti that uses full post pads, the original type. I 
>> bought some low profile Dia Compe DC 988's a while ago and while they are 
>> quite similar to the Sun Tour, they're not quite as easily adjusted for the 
>> toe in as the XC Pro. Both come stock with road sized centered-in-the post 
>> pads, by far my favorite, and both brakes readily clear the stays. I don't 
>> why Riv laments there aren't any cantilevers that open fully anymore as 
>> these Dia Compe 988's are right in there catalog and readily available. 
>> They're popular with BMX riders too. Even with wonky offset post Koolstop 
>> pads they can be shortened easily to more road size. 
>>
>> So while I've never used any Paul brake, regardless of the type it still 
>> comes down to how the rider installs and applies it. That's the beauty of 
>> cantilevers, they allow for the lightest of touches to feather the brake as 
>> desired. It's not just on or off, one way only,.so saying one is 
>> more/less powerful the other is irrelevant when applied with some 
>> intelligence. 
>>
>> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 2:29:56 AM UTC-4 Philip Williamson wrote:
>>
>>> You should keep the v brakes.
>>> They already are on the bike, they’re quite powerful, they are more out 
>>> of the way of panniers, and aren’t affected by rack-top stuff pushing on a 
>>> cable. 
>>>
>>> Philip
>>> Sonoma County, Calif
>>>
>>> On Saturday, October 29, 2022 at 4:09:17 PM UTC-7 Matthew Williams wrote:
>>>
 Hi everyone, based on the brake arrangement, I have a question.

 But first, some background: I’m making some changes/upgrades so my bike 
 will be better equipped for day rides, multi-day trips, and light touring.

 Here are some of the considerations:

1. Bike is a Joe Appaloosa
2. Wheels will be Atlas 700c with Panaracer Gravel Kings.
3. My rides are almost all on asphalt or concrete with a few dirt 
trails or fire roads.
4. Bike currently has V-brakes.
5. I am planning to add a rear rack with panniers, no front rack.
6. I weigh about 165. 
7. I’ll be carrying some gear but I won’t be overloading the bike.


 *Question: Should I switch to cantilevers, or keep the existing 
 V-brakes? *

>>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/3bc2a241-24a9-4abb-a8f8-469e3044a9c2n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[RichS]

Hi Matthew,

I agree with Phillip and Collin; why switch to cantis when your existing V 
brakes appear to work fine? If it's the desire to experiment or just make a 
change, well, we've all been down that road — and I'm often on it!  A 
friend of mine has a canti braked Appaloosa (very nice bike!). However, I 
can see V brakes looking and working just fine on it. Good luck with your 
decision.

Best,
Rich in ATL

On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 6:59:08 AM UTC-4 Garth wrote:

> I've used cantilevers since the early 80's and while there are 
> distinctions among brake models, how it is set up, the frame mounts 
> themselves, brake cable and housing setup, and finally the riders own 
> sensibilities, all play their part in the experience of braking. In other 
> words, there's no putting a specific brake in a "box", saying it is this or 
> that, and that's all there is too it. There's just too many variables to 
> consider to distill it down into a box of words. 
>
> That said, I love me some low profile Suntour XC Pro canti's. For that 
> matter, I love any canti that uses full post pads, the original type. I 
> bought some low profile Dia Compe DC 988's a while ago and while they are 
> quite similar to the Sun Tour, they're not quite as easily adjusted for the 
> toe in as the XC Pro. Both come stock with road sized centered-in-the post 
> pads, by far my favorite, and both brakes readily clear the stays. I don't 
> why Riv laments there aren't any cantilevers that open fully anymore as 
> these Dia Compe 988's are right in there catalog and readily available. 
> They're popular with BMX riders too. Even with wonky offset post Koolstop 
> pads they can be shortened easily to more road size. 
>
> So while I've never used any Paul brake, regardless of the type it still 
> comes down to how the rider installs and applies it. That's the beauty of 
> cantilevers, they allow for the lightest of touches to feather the brake as 
> desired. It's not just on or off, one way only,.so saying one is 
> more/less powerful the other is irrelevant when applied with some 
> intelligence. 
>
> On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 2:29:56 AM UTC-4 Philip Williamson wrote:
>
>> You should keep the v brakes.
>> They already are on the bike, they’re quite powerful, they are more out 
>> of the way of panniers, and aren’t affected by rack-top stuff pushing on a 
>> cable. 
>>
>> Philip
>> Sonoma County, Calif
>>
>> On Saturday, October 29, 2022 at 4:09:17 PM UTC-7 Matthew Williams wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone, based on the brake arrangement, I have a question.
>>>
>>> But first, some background: I’m making some changes/upgrades so my bike 
>>> will be better equipped for day rides, multi-day trips, and light touring.
>>>
>>> Here are some of the considerations:
>>>
>>>1. Bike is a Joe Appaloosa
>>>2. Wheels will be Atlas 700c with Panaracer Gravel Kings.
>>>3. My rides are almost all on asphalt or concrete with a few dirt 
>>>trails or fire roads.
>>>4. Bike currently has V-brakes.
>>>5. I am planning to add a rear rack with panniers, no front rack.
>>>6. I weigh about 165. 
>>>7. I’ll be carrying some gear but I won’t be overloading the bike.
>>>
>>>
>>> *Question: Should I switch to cantilevers, or keep the existing 
>>> V-brakes? *
>>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/c3c6dd97-948a-4fc0-bed7-dc1d71553ee3n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[Garth]

I've used cantilevers since the early 80's and while there are distinctions 
among brake models, how it is set up, the frame mounts themselves, brake 
cable and housing setup, and finally the riders own sensibilities, all play 
their part in the experience of braking. In other words, there's no putting 
a specific brake in a "box", saying it is this or that, and that's all 
there is too it. There's just too many variables to consider to distill it 
down into a box of words. 

That said, I love me some low profile Suntour XC Pro canti's. For that 
matter, I love any canti that uses full post pads, the original type. I 
bought some low profile Dia Compe DC 988's a while ago and while they are 
quite similar to the Sun Tour, they're not quite as easily adjusted for the 
toe in as the XC Pro. Both come stock with road sized centered-in-the post 
pads, by far my favorite, and both brakes readily clear the stays. I don't 
why Riv laments there aren't any cantilevers that open fully anymore as 
these Dia Compe 988's are right in there catalog and readily available. 
They're popular with BMX riders too. Even with wonky offset post Koolstop 
pads they can be shortened easily to more road size. 

So while I've never used any Paul brake, regardless of the type it still 
comes down to how the rider installs and applies it. That's the beauty of 
cantilevers, they allow for the lightest of touches to feather the brake as 
desired. It's not just on or off, one way only,.so saying one is 
more/less powerful the other is irrelevant when applied with some 
intelligence. 

On Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 2:29:56 AM UTC-4 Philip Williamson wrote:

> You should keep the v brakes.
> They already are on the bike, they’re quite powerful, they are more out of 
> the way of panniers, and aren’t affected by rack-top stuff pushing on a 
> cable. 
>
> Philip
> Sonoma County, Calif
>
> On Saturday, October 29, 2022 at 4:09:17 PM UTC-7 Matthew Williams wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone, based on the brake arrangement, I have a question.
>>
>> But first, some background: I’m making some changes/upgrades so my bike 
>> will be better equipped for day rides, multi-day trips, and light touring.
>>
>> Here are some of the considerations:
>>
>>1. Bike is a Joe Appaloosa
>>2. Wheels will be Atlas 700c with Panaracer Gravel Kings.
>>3. My rides are almost all on asphalt or concrete with a few dirt 
>>trails or fire roads.
>>4. Bike currently has V-brakes.
>>5. I am planning to add a rear rack with panniers, no front rack.
>>6. I weigh about 165. 
>>7. I’ll be carrying some gear but I won’t be overloading the bike.
>>
>>
>> *Question: Should I switch to cantilevers, or keep the existing V-brakes? 
>> *
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/b0ab8598-4b4e-4644-b359-b2e7c83c7b26n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[Philip Williamson]

You should keep the v brakes.
They already are on the bike, they’re quite powerful, they are more out of 
the way of panniers, and aren’t affected by rack-top stuff pushing on a 
cable. 

Philip
Sonoma County, Calif

On Saturday, October 29, 2022 at 4:09:17 PM UTC-7 Matthew Williams wrote:

> Hi everyone, based on the brake arrangement, I have a question.
>
> But first, some background: I’m making some changes/upgrades so my bike 
> will be better equipped for day rides, multi-day trips, and light touring.
>
> Here are some of the considerations:
>
>1. Bike is a Joe Appaloosa
>2. Wheels will be Atlas 700c with Panaracer Gravel Kings.
>3. My rides are almost all on asphalt or concrete with a few dirt 
>trails or fire roads.
>4. Bike currently has V-brakes.
>5. I am planning to add a rear rack with panniers, no front rack.
>6. I weigh about 165. 
>7. I’ll be carrying some gear but I won’t be overloading the bike.
>
>
> *Question: Should I switch to cantilevers, or keep the existing V-brakes? *
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/7a3b6894-fb9d-43b8-be25-6d8f68b478b0n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[Collin A]

Personally, one of the few/only reasons I would change from v to canti 
would be to use short pull drop bar levers that fit my tiny hands 
betterthat and visuals, canti brakes just look nicer to my eye.

But given your circumstances, it doesn't seem worth it to go canti unless 
you specifically want to do it because you want to.

Collin, purposefully on purpose, sometimes, in Sacramento

On Saturday, October 29, 2022 at 4:09:17 PM UTC-7 Matthew Williams wrote:

> Hi everyone, based on the brake arrangement, I have a question.
>
> But first, some background: I’m making some changes/upgrades so my bike 
> will be better equipped for day rides, multi-day trips, and light touring.
>
> Here are some of the considerations:
>
>1. Bike is a Joe Appaloosa
>2. Wheels will be Atlas 700c with Panaracer Gravel Kings.
>3. My rides are almost all on asphalt or concrete with a few dirt 
>trails or fire roads.
>4. Bike currently has V-brakes.
>5. I am planning to add a rear rack with panniers, no front rack.
>6. I weigh about 165. 
>7. I’ll be carrying some gear but I won’t be overloading the bike.
>
>
> *Question: Should I switch to cantilevers, or keep the existing V-brakes? *
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/754d4f70-0866-4a3d-881a-1b4aaa9b43d3n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[Matthew Williams]

Hi everyone, based on the brake arrangement, I have a question.

But first, some background: I’m making some changes/upgrades so my bike 
will be better equipped for day rides, multi-day trips, and light touring.

Here are some of the considerations:

   1. Bike is a Joe Appaloosa
   2. Wheels will be Atlas 700c with Panaracer Gravel Kings.
   3. My rides are almost all on asphalt or concrete with a few dirt trails 
   or fire roads.
   4. Bike currently has V-brakes.
   5. I am planning to add a rear rack with panniers, no front rack.
   6. I weigh about 165. 
   7. I’ll be carrying some gear but I won’t be overloading the bike.


*Question: Should I switch to cantilevers, or keep the existing V-brakes? *

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8564bbe6-de73-432a-b7eb-cf78275f3cc2n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

['Sean, PNW' via RBW Owners Bunch]

The line of logic, as I understand it, is according to Paul, the 
'Neo-Retro' brakes are more powerful, yet pose heel clearance issues when 
used in the rear, so are most often relegated to the front where the bulk 
of stopping power is needed while their 'Touring' cantis fit better in the 
rear.

However, in my experience, Paul 'Touring' cantis have typically been more 
powerful than 'Neo-Retros', as addressed here:

*"So I would guess that the narrow-stance Touring Canti, if set up with a 
low straddle cable as described by Sheldon Brown...would actually be more 
powerful than the wide-stance Neo-Retro – the opposite of what the Paul 
site says." *- Lennard Zinn / 
https://www.velonews.com/gear/technical-faq-with-lennard-zinn-a-detailed-look-at-brake-shudder/

Regardless of the model, cantis of all flavors benefit heavily from proper 
set up:

https://blackmtncycles.com/get-the-most-out-of-your-canti-brake/





On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 10:25:00 AM UTC-8 Sam Perez wrote:

> A local mechanic reasoned that the touring canti has the same mechanical 
> advantage as the neo retros that were modeled after vintage canti’s , the 
> implication is they are equal. Something about the neo’s being more 
> sensitive to brake ware.   Can anyone verify  this?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 17, 2021, at 9:43 AM, iamkeith  wrote:
>
> I have that setup on a bike.   Like others have said, heel clearance was 
> the original consideration.  But the wide profile neo retro has more 
> modulation/subtlety to it, which is good for a front wheel.  The low 
> profile touring is more on/off binary, which is ok for a rear wheel.  But, 
> as others have said, the neo retro is quite strong and I HAVE done an 
> over-the-bars endo on that bike as a result.
>
>
>
> On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 10:17:23 AM UTC-7 lconley wrote:
>
>> I have the same arrangement on my Bombadil. It was for pannier clearance 
>> as much as heel/leg clearance - my Bombadil is a later, longer chainstay 
>> version with less heel/leg clearance issues. I had originally bought the 
>> brakes for the Hubbuhubbuh, but changed it to Paul V-brakes and moved the 
>> Paul Cantis to the Bombadil.
>>
>> Laing
>>
>> On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 11:23:44 AM UTC-5 Matthew Williams wrote:
>>
>>> In this build, the brakes appear to be Paul touring cantis up front, and 
>>> neo retros in the rear. 
>>>
>>> I've seen this setup elsewhere, and I'm curious: what is the reason for 
>>> this setup? What are its advantages and disadvantages? Is the setup easier 
>>> to maintain, does it have better braking power, or is it just a personal 
>>> preference?
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.rivbike.com/blogs/news/braxtons-riv-custom-pre-fenders-and-lights
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
>
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/23ec8c62-24a9-4278-869c-172c230dc42fn%40googlegroups.com
>  
> 
> .
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/67f73927-ea71-45ee-97ad-07a98e6e5642n%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[Frank Brose]

Those are neo retro up front and touring in the rear. I have the same set 
up on three different bikes. Here's a link to Pauls and you can see the 
difference.
https://www.paulcomp.com/product-category/components/brakes/cantilever-brakes/
On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 10:23:44 AM UTC-6 Matthew Williams wrote:

> In this build, the brakes appear to be Paul touring cantis up front, and 
> neo retros in the rear. 
>
> I've seen this setup elsewhere, and I'm curious: what is the reason for 
> this setup? What are its advantages and disadvantages? Is the setup easier 
> to maintain, does it have better braking power, or is it just a personal 
> preference?
>
>
> https://www.rivbike.com/blogs/news/braxtons-riv-custom-pre-fenders-and-lights
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f9920439-b53f-4e81-af30-cd9ed023c4fdn%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[James / Analog Cycles]

Neo Retros are not as powerful as Touring cantis, because you can not get 
the straddle wire close to 90 degrees in relation to the brake arm.  That 
angle is the key to high mechanical advantage.  See: V brakes.  The idea 
that they're stronger is simply based on lever feel.  They feel firmer, 
which is an indicator of lower mechanical advantage.  If you have ever set 
up Cantis with V brake levers, you have felt this.  It feels great in the 
stand, barely works out of the stand.  

Neo retros exist currently for two reasons:  Classic cross racing bikes, 
where mud clearance is critical.  High profile canti pads sit further from 
the rim, better for mud to pass by.  And because people like the look.  Not 
because it's a better brake.  

>From Sheldon Brown: 
*"Feel" vs. Function*
*With automobile brakes, a nice "hard" pedal feel is a sign that the brakes 
are in good condition. A soft, "spongy" feel at the brake pedal is a sign 
of trouble, perhaps air in the hydraulic lines. This is not the case with 
bicycle brakes. A hard, crisp feel to the brakes on a bicycle may be a sign 
that the brakes don't have much mechanical advantage. You squeeze them 
until the brake shoes hit the rim, then they stop. Brakes with a high 
mechanical advantage will feel "spongy" by comparison, because the large 
amount of force they deliver to the brake shoes will squash the shoes 
against the rim, deforming them temporarily under pressure. You can feel 
this deformation in your fingers. The brakes with the rock-hard feel may 
seem nice on the work stand or the showroom floor, but when it comes to 
making the bike actually stop, the spongy set-up will do the job better, 
with less finger pressure and greater margin for safety in wet conditions.*
*Definitions*
*For purposes of this article, I have defined 1 distance, 2 arms, and 3 
angles as shown in the illustration. Pivot-Cable distance (PC)The shortest 
distance from the center of the pivot to the line of the transverse 
cable.In the case of low-profile 
 brakes, this is 
the shortest distance from the pivot to the imaginary line extending from 
the transverse cable.*

 

 

*Types of Cantilevers*
*Conventional cantilevers fall into three types, defined by their 
cantilever angle:*
   
   - *Wide-profile cantilevers have a cantilever angle 
    much 
   greater than 90 degrees. The best example of this type is the old Mafac 
   cantilevers, in which the anchor arm actually sloped downward from the boss 
    in some installations. 
   This design is now pretty much obsolete. Wide-profile cantilevers have 
   rather low mechanical advantage, and work well only with levers with a high 
   mechanical advantage.*
   - *Medium-profile cantilevers have a cantilever angle 
    of around 90 
   degrees. Most late-1980's cantilevers belong to this family. Medium-profile 
   cantilevers are very forgiving and give excellent all-around performance 
   with a wide range of set-ups.*

He also talks about low profile cantis, but those are super rare these 
days.  Paul used to make one, the best low profile canti I have used, 
called the stop lite.  

When in doubt, consult Sheldon.  

Best, James 
Analog Cycles / Tanglefoot Cycles / Discord Components / Fifth Season Canvas

On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 1:25:00 PM UTC-5 Sam Perez wrote:

> A local mechanic reasoned that the touring canti has the same mechanical 
> advantage as the neo retros that were modeled after vintage canti’s , the 
> implication is they are equal. Something about the neo’s being more 
> sensitive to brake ware.   Can anyone verify  this?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 17, 2021, at 9:43 AM, iamkeith  wrote:
>
> I have that setup on a bike.   Like others have said, heel clearance was 
> the original consideration.  But the wide profile neo retro has more 
> modulation/subtlety to it, which is good for a front wheel.  The low 
> profile touring is more on/off binary, which is ok for a rear wheel.  But, 
> as others have said, the neo retro is quite strong and I HAVE done an 
> over-the-bars endo on that bike as a result.
>
>
>
> On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 10:17:23 AM UTC-7 lconley wrote:
>
>> I have the same arrangement on my Bombadil. It was for pannier clearance 
>> as much as heel/leg clearance - my Bombadil is a later, longer chainstay 
>> version with less heel/leg clearance issues. I had originally bought the 
>> brakes for the Hubbuhubbuh, but changed it to Paul V-brakes and moved the 
>> Paul Cantis to the Bombadil.
>>
>> Laing
>>
>> On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 11:23:44 AM UTC-5 Matthew Williams wrote:
>>
>>> In this build, the brakes appear to be Paul touring cantis up front, and 
>>> neo retros in the rear. 
>>>
>>> I've seen this setup elsewhere, and I'm curious: 

Re: [RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[sam . perez . 2002]

A local mechanic reasoned that the touring canti has the same mechanical 
advantage as the neo retros that were modeled after vintage canti’s , the 
implication is they are equal. Something about the neo’s being more sensitive 
to brake ware.   Can anyone verify  this?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 17, 2021, at 9:43 AM, iamkeith  wrote:
> 
> I have that setup on a bike.   Like others have said, heel clearance was the 
> original consideration.  But the wide profile neo retro has more 
> modulation/subtlety to it, which is good for a front wheel.  The low profile 
> touring is more on/off binary, which is ok for a rear wheel.  But, as others 
> have said, the neo retro is quite strong and I HAVE done an over-the-bars 
> endo on that bike as a result.
> 
>> On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 10:17:23 AM UTC-7 lconley wrote:
>> I have the same arrangement on my Bombadil. It was for pannier clearance as 
>> much as heel/leg clearance - my Bombadil is a later, longer chainstay 
>> version with less heel/leg clearance issues. I had originally bought the 
>> brakes for the Hubbuhubbuh, but changed it to Paul V-brakes and moved the 
>> Paul Cantis to the Bombadil.
>> 
>> Laing
>> 
>>> On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 11:23:44 AM UTC-5 Matthew Williams wrote:
>>> In this build, the brakes appear to be Paul touring cantis up front, and 
>>> neo retros in the rear. 
>>> 
>>> I've seen this setup elsewhere, and I'm curious: what is the reason for 
>>> this setup? What are its advantages and disadvantages? Is the setup easier 
>>> to maintain, does it have better braking power, or is it just a personal 
>>> preference?
>>> 
>>> https://www.rivbike.com/blogs/news/braxtons-riv-custom-pre-fenders-and-lights
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/23ec8c62-24a9-4278-869c-172c230dc42fn%40googlegroups.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/ACF30A32-2093-4AD3-B562-9DC8DB239422%40gmail.com.

[RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[iamkeith]

I have that setup on a bike.   Like others have said, heel clearance was 
the original consideration.  But the wide profile neo retro has more 
modulation/subtlety to it, which is good for a front wheel.  The low 
profile touring is more on/off binary, which is ok for a rear wheel.  But, 
as others have said, the neo retro is quite strong and I HAVE done an 
over-the-bars endo on that bike as a result.

On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 10:17:23 AM UTC-7 lconley wrote:

> I have the same arrangement on my Bombadil. It was for pannier clearance 
> as much as heel/leg clearance - my Bombadil is a later, longer chainstay 
> version with less heel/leg clearance issues. I had originally bought the 
> brakes for the Hubbuhubbuh, but changed it to Paul V-brakes and moved the 
> Paul Cantis to the Bombadil.
>
> Laing
>
> On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 11:23:44 AM UTC-5 Matthew Williams wrote:
>
>> In this build, the brakes appear to be Paul touring cantis up front, and 
>> neo retros in the rear. 
>>
>> I've seen this setup elsewhere, and I'm curious: what is the reason for 
>> this setup? What are its advantages and disadvantages? Is the setup easier 
>> to maintain, does it have better braking power, or is it just a personal 
>> preference?
>>
>>
>> https://www.rivbike.com/blogs/news/braxtons-riv-custom-pre-fenders-and-lights
>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/23ec8c62-24a9-4278-869c-172c230dc42fn%40googlegroups.com.

[RBW] Re: Touring Front, Neo-Retro Back?

[lconley]

I have the same arrangement on my Bombadil. It was for pannier clearance as 
much as heel/leg clearance - my Bombadil is a later, longer chainstay 
version with less heel/leg clearance issues. I had originally bought the 
brakes for the Hubbuhubbuh, but changed it to Paul V-brakes and moved the 
Paul Cantis to the Bombadil.

Laing

On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 11:23:44 AM UTC-5 Matthew Williams wrote:

> In this build, the brakes appear to be Paul touring cantis up front, and 
> neo retros in the rear. 
>
> I've seen this setup elsewhere, and I'm curious: what is the reason for 
> this setup? What are its advantages and disadvantages? Is the setup easier 
> to maintain, does it have better braking power, or is it just a personal 
> preference?
>
>
> https://www.rivbike.com/blogs/news/braxtons-riv-custom-pre-fenders-and-lights
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/0cdcbbe0-fb0f-4bd9-ab98-c491e8f8f8c0n%40googlegroups.com.