BRAKE BLOCK PUZZLE

[michael franks]

I always thought that canti brake blocks were fitted with the short end towards the front. However, I've got cartridge shoes/blocks which show them to be set up with the short end towards the front on the rear wheel but the long end towards the front on the front wheel. Should I change the blocks I've fitted in the past :?

 

[silverclaws]

Odd, I have just looked at mine and the front brake pads are set up with the longer bit towards the front, ( the original blocks), which to me seems a bit weird, but thinking about it, when you apply your brakes the canti swivels slightly when the block first contacts the rim and so digs in the tail of the brake block, which is the shorter part and there I should think is the stronger part of the block because the tail is nearer to the centre, if that makes sense. Am thinking the rotation of the wheel aids the braking by pulling the braking surface onto the rim in an almost Scott Pedersen fashion.

The blocks on the rear wheel are the other way around, what I would before writing this, think the right way round, I wonder.

But anyway got some Clarks cartridge brakes coming, I will think about it then, unless someone more knowledgable explains it all.


But thinking about the action, I have come across some banana shaped blocks before,( the old tufftrax when I first got it), banana shaped across the braking surface, I wonder if this was the result of blocks the wrong way around and just yanked on at speed bending the breaking surface.

 

[michael franks]

Thanks for your thoughts on it - it does seem odd. Is it to do with more or less leverage? Hhmmm...

 

[pete_mcc]

Depends on the blocks... shimano used the long bit forward on the front on their XTR and similar blocks but Eagleclaw and many others rely on long bit going back. Eagleclaw have to be used that way as they have a 'toe-in lip' on their blocks at the back of the long bit to reduce squeal.

Just buy aztecs as they are equal sizes either side of the post!

 

[matttromans]

I always thought the long bit of the brake cartridge/block faced towards the back of the bike and was to do with toe-in setting and achieving even wear on the pads. Thats how i've always set my brakes up anyway, so i'm sticking to it!

 

[michael franks]

I could use Aztecs but then I couldn't use the pad holder. I'll fit them the way they're supposed to be fitted and if I really don't like it - or I keep going over the bars - I could always fit another pair of rears on the front

 

[silverclaws]

Perhaps I am I like you, I have opted for pad holders for the simple reason that when you have gone to the trouble to get the pads so precisely set up, do you really want to lose that set up when new pads are needed. If pads are precisely set up, then any wear can be taken up by the cable adjuster on the brake handle and then wound back in when new pads are fitted to start the process again. Yeah some say it is easy to set up cantis, maybe it is, but there is braking and precise braking, I always go for the optimum, the best I can get which requires loads of tweaks before it is how I want it, therefore replacement braking surfaces are the best idea, don't disturb the set up.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Thanks for your thoughts on it - it does seem odd. Is it to do with more or less leverage? Hhmmm...

It's to do with getting the wheel out of the forks, the long lip end on the front facing back (like I use) means the brakes to not come so far apart, making it harder to get the wheel in/out and often you have to pull the tyre past them.
More so with suspension forks.

 

[michael franks]

FluffyChicken wrote:

It's to do with getting the wheel out of the forks, the long lip end on the front facing back (like I use) means the brakes to not come so far apart, making it harder to get the wheel in/out and often you have to pull the tyre past them.
More so with suspension forks.

Thanks for the reply - if I used another set of rears on the front, ie: short end towards the front, would it affect the efficiency of the brakes?