Re: [CR] Short Reach Front, Long Reach Rear?

(Example: Humor:John Pergolizzi)

Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 19:58:04 -0800 (PST)
From: "Fred Rednor" <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <BAD1BC39C61143BD879ABCE709194726@mark2e3b6d0b55>
Subject: Re: [CR] Short Reach Front, Long Reach Rear?


Mark,

I have seen circa 1960s bikes build in this manner. These would be Italian bikes (in fact my own '69 Atala is an example) and Schwinn Paramounts from the USA, as well. Of course, in these cases, the short reach front brake would still be on the long side by modern standards - e.g something like 57mm to 61mm.

I'm not certain anyone knows why, although I've read many theories. Yours is as reasonable as any of the others - perhaps more so.

Best regards Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia (USA)
> Would this date from the times when
> the back wheel had to have a greater range of movement fore
> and aft?  To cope with flip/flop hubs and riders who
> would wring the last drop of use out of a chain by moving it
> further back in the long dropouts of the day. Dropouts got
> shorter for sure with the Campagnolo short dropout (When?)
> and even vertical dropouts with no capability for chain
> adjustment at all. The slots in the earlier calipers were
> longer too so that the shoes had a greater range of up and
> down adjustment because as the wheel goes back in the
> dropout the rim rises relative to the brake shoes 
> despite the dropout slots going up and back too. Am I right
> or am I havering?  (Havering = talking a load of
> hooey)
> Mark Stevens   
> Evanton   Scotland