Canti brake question - bosses 65mm apart

726moo

Devout Dirtbag
Hi. Ive been given a late 80s/early 90s steel cyclocross frame. It has canti bosses on the front that are 65mm ctc apart. The selection of cantis in my parts box dont fit so should I be looking for a specific type that work on 65mm spacing? If so any clues on make/model etc.... Thanks
 
726moo":v3cccn4z said:
Hi. Ive been given a late 80s/early 90s steel cyclocross frame. It has canti bosses on the front that are 65mm ctc apart. The selection of cantis in my parts box dont fit so should I be looking for a specific type that work on 65mm spacing? If so any clues on make/model etc.... Thanks

65mm doesn't sound like an awful lot of clearance for a CX fork - it's not an Edison is it? Apparently they built a few 'cross frames in the mid/late 80s which used an 'ordinary' road fork crown rather than a wide touring/CX one, as a result the clearance at the top of the fork was quite limited and prone to clogging with autumn leaves. I know this 'cause I used to own one!
Proper old-school wide-profile cantis from Modolo, Mafac or Weinmann should do the job; I had Modolos on that particular frame.

David
 
David. Thanks for the reply. I am also questioning the original purpose of the frame! I took it on understanding that its a Paul Milnes 531 steel cx frame. It has all top tube routed cables and a top pull front mech, routed down the seat tube. So on face value looks like a cx frame. Last night I fitted the rear wheel with 35mm tyres and there wasnt enough clearance, I reckon a 28/32mm tyre would be the maximum. Maybe it isnt a cx frame after all. TBH what I thought would be a cheap build for a winter commuter is proving a bit of hassle. As the front mech is top pull it seems impossible to find a double top pull mech that will work with stis. Maybe a 1x8 might be the way forward. Charlie
 
726moo":xh2k4t96 said:
David. Thanks for the reply. I am also questioning the original purpose of the frame! I took it on understanding that its a Paul Milnes 531 steel cx frame. It has all top tube routed cables and a top pull front mech, routed down the seat tube. So on face value looks like a cx frame. Last night I fitted the rear wheel with 35mm tyres and there wasnt enough clearance, I reckon a 28/32mm tyre would be the maximum. Maybe it isnt a cx frame after all. TBH what I thought would be a cheap build for a winter commuter is proving a bit of hassle. As the front mech is top pull it seems impossible to find a double top pull mech that will work with stis. Maybe a 1x8 might be the way forward. Charlie

If it has top tube gear cable runs it sounds as though it should be a proper 'cross frame. To get a double front mech to work you need a small pulley on the seat tube in between the BB shell and the mech to make a bottom-pull derailleur work with top-pull cable routing (e.g. the old ALAN 'cross frames had these fitted at the factory). DMR make a widget called a Mechverter which clamps on to the seat tube and does just that job:

http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/images/produ ... G10815.jpg

For a frame of that age, you'll probably struggle to get anything fatter than a 30mm or 32mm tyre to fit; cyclo-cross tubs of old from makers like Clement and Barum were usually 28mm tops. If you're building a commuter, a good quality 25mm or 28mm touring tyre is worth going for.

David
 
Back
Top