Brake suggestions for '92 bike?

I don't know why your discussion of your excellent 1992 bike has been moved from the forum designed for the discussion of members' 1992 bikes, but there it is. Authority is often blind, but free men fight on regardless.

My assessment would be that you have a superb frame there, and it's great that you are still using it to the full. The only things that strike me as slightly jarring to the eye are the modern cranks and rear derailleur, which don't suit the frame at all. I appreciate that they give you gears that 1992 kit doesn't have, but mid-90s XT with a 11-32 or 12-32 cassette would give you almost the same range and look much better.

The other thing I notice is that there is very little bottom bracket drop, which suggests that the fork is too long for the frame, unsurprising in a 1992 frame not designed for suspension. If you like the handling, there's no problem, but if you would prefer it more lively then there's what causes it. A shorter stem, preferably with some rise, would solve the problem.

I wouldn't have thought the brakes were a problem at all.

Anthony":oqn5fotu said:

I don't know why your discussion of your excellent 1992 bike has been moved from the forum designed for the discussion of members' 1992 bikes, but there it is. Authority is often blind, but free men fight on regardless.

Click to expand...

Yo Chuck D, Fight The Power!

It was moved because readers bike it for discussing, er, readers bikes which clearly implies a complete build. Not readers brakes.


As others have said don't sweat the vs unless you intend to return it to complete period correct. Some of the other more modern bits are more jarring than the vs.

Yo Chuck D, Fight The Power!

Click to expand...

LOL .

This site has a lot to answer for - I now have a hankering for a 5 arm crankset and square-taper BB, especially as I'm thinking of buying a modern XC full-susser...

Thanks alot guys :evil: .

( ).

Probably being a bit thick here but did someone say vee brake levers would give feeble canti brake performance :shock:

I thought Vee brake levers pulled more cable than canti levers and thus should increase power, possibly to dangerous levels, to canti brakes :?

I'm also sure this debate has happened before.

If you wish to stick to your 9 speed combined brake/gear pods then stick to Vee's. No point taking a retrograde step with your stopping power just for aesthetic value

velomaniac":21c5fqu3 said:

Probably being a bit thick here but did someone say vee brake levers would give feeble canti brake performance :shock:

I thought Vee brake levers pulled more cable than canti levers and thus should increase power, possibly to dangerous levels, to canti brakes :?

Click to expand...

Force x Distance = Constant

so the more cable the lever pulls, the less force it applies.

The longer arm of the V-brake compensates for the lower cable tension provided by the V-brake lever. A V-brake lever used with a canti brake gives more travel but less force at the pad.

An excellent explanation sir, thankyou .

there is very little bottom bracket drop, which suggests that the fork is too long for the frame, unsurprising in a 1992 frame not designed for suspension

Click to expand...

I wouldn't sweat it. The fork is contemporaneous with the frame - pretty much nothing was "suspension corrected" when the RC35 came out, everyone put them on frames not designed for bouncy forks. It only had <50mm of travel anyway, and won't do much harm

what about some period Magura stoppers? Pretty cheap these days and offer pretty decent halting prowess.