Correct Braking Proceedure

I have to admit that after many years I really do not know how to use my
brakes correctly on my bike. One tends to do these things by instinct.

Should one use the front brake first followed by the rear brake or the
reverse? Should they be applied simultaneously? Maybe it depends on what
gradient one is on? It might be down to which brake performs better?

This has probably been discussed before, but I would like to know.

This has probably been discussed before, but I would like to know.

It has, extensively.

Have a look at http://sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html

For all that you probably need.

Following on from Saxman's message. . .
I have to admit that after many years I really do not know how to use my
brakes correctly on my bike. One tends to do these things by instinct.
An ounce of practice is worth a ton of theory so experiment.

--
PETER FOX Not the same since the poster business went to the wall

2 Tees Close, Witham, Essex.
Gravity beer in Essex http://www.eminent.demon.co.uk

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 18:14:02 +0100, Saxman
wrote:

I have to admit that after many years I really do not know how to use my
brakes correctly on my bike. One tends to do these things by instinct.

Should one use the front brake first followed by the rear brake or the
reverse? Should they be applied simultaneously? Maybe it depends on what
gradient one is on? It might be down to which brake performs better?

This has probably been discussed before, but I would like to know.

Sheldon Brown suggests that front brake alone is correct in nearly all
braking situations.

I disagree with Sheldon Brown, but it is worth reading what he says.

http://sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html

Sheldon argues that maximum braking force is at the point when the
rear wheel is about to lift from the ground, and the rear wheel has no
traction, therefore applying the rear brake has no effect, thus for
maximum braking the front brake is all that is required in most
situations.

Here's what I say...

Braking with both brakes is more effective because the braking force
is by slowing both wheels by pushing the pads onto the rims, and
neither brake need be fully applied to slow the bike as fast as
applying the front brake alone. Applying the rear brake too hard can
cause the rear wheel to lock, possibly causing the bike to slew.
Applying the front brake too hard can cause the front wheel to lock,
possibly causing the rear end to lift, or front wheel to skid.

To prevent a rear wheel skid, don't apply the rear brake too hard.

To lessen the chance of a rear end lift, shift your weight back.

A front wheel skid is rare on tarmac.

To brake quickly on tarmac, shift your weight back by locking your
arms, apply both brakes, with more pressure on the front brake. On
steep decents, pump your brakes to lessen the chance of the rims over
heating which can cause a blow out.

Bertie Wiggins wrote:

Here's what I say...

Braking with both brakes is more effective because the braking force
is by slowing both wheels by pushing the pads onto the rims, and
neither brake need be fully applied to slow the bike as fast as
applying the front brake alone.

But that will not slow the bike as fast as the front brake alone purely
because the geometry means that the maximum deceleration you can achieve
will have transferred all the weight to the front wheel only.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Tony Raven wrote:
Bertie Wiggins wrote:


Here's what I say...

Braking with both brakes is more effective because the braking force
is by slowing both wheels by pushing the pads onto the rims, and
neither brake need be fully applied to slow the bike as fast as
applying the front brake alone.


But that will not slow the bike as fast as the front brake alone purely
because the geometry means that the maximum deceleration you can achieve
will have transferred all the weight to the front wheel only.


That ignores the possibility that the limit of braking may be the tyres
skidding rather than lifting a wheel or the brakes themselves.

In my personal instance of riding a recumbent bike a lot of the time
it's virtually impossible to lift the back wheel under braking and the
disc brakes are capable of locking either wheel at will. On an upright
with it's attendant high CoG Sheldon is right a lot more of the time but
this is still not the case on icy, wet, leafy or greasy roads.

In the dry I use the front brake alone, SB is quite correcect in this
situation.

In the wet I use both brakes, biased toward the front and gradually
increase braking force until the back starts to lock up, this gives me a
good indicator of how much grip I've got at the front without
encountering the much less controllable front wheel skid.

Alex

Tony Raven wrote:

Bertie Wiggins wrote:

Here's what I say...

Braking with both brakes is more effective because the braking force
is by slowing both wheels by pushing the pads onto the rims, and
neither brake need be fully applied to slow the bike as fast as
applying the front brake alone.

But that will not slow the bike as fast as the front brake alone purely
because the geometry means that the maximum deceleration you can achieve
will have transferred all the weight to the front wheel only.

I know I'm going to regret this but...This assumes the gometry of the
bike is sufficient to allow the rear wheel to lift. If this is not the
case the front will lock and the back can be used to decrease the
stopping distance.

So, the question is, is it impossible to lift the rear wheel before
losing traction for some bikes?

What about wet road surface?

For my tuppence worth, for me, it's front brake only. The rear is only
used to impress 16yo girlies at bus stops.

Without doubt the front is capable of retarding the bike quickest. If
the wheel feels like it will lock and the rear hasn't lifted then there
will be some braking potential from the rear but not a great deal due to
the weight transfer. I think we all agree on this.

Personally I only use the rear. I do this because it is good practice
for judging braking distances and feeling grip and I always know that
if I make a mistake I will have a really powerful front brake to get me
out of trouble.


--
MichaelB

"MichaelB" wrote in message
...

Without doubt the front is capable of retarding the bike quickest. If
the wheel feels like it will lock and the rear hasn't lifted then there
will be some braking potential from the rear but not a great deal due to
the weight transfer. I think we all agree on this.

Personally I only use the rear. I do this because it is good practice
for judging braking distances and feeling grip and I always know that
if I make a mistake I will have a really powerful front brake to get me
out of trouble.

You probably ought to keep in practice using the front, otherwise when you
apply it for the emergency it could all go horribly wrong.

(Not at all convinced by your 'judging braking distances' argument - in what
way will just using the rear brake tell you your braking distance?)

cheers,
clive

Bertie Wiggins wrote:
Sheldon Brown suggests that front brake alone is correct in nearly all
braking situations.

I disagree with Sheldon Brown, but it is worth reading what he says.

I hardly ever use my rear brake. In fact, I went out on a longish club
ride a couple of weeks ago and didn't even notice that I had forgotten
to refit the rear brake blocks (after a spot of tinkering) until one of
my riding companions pointed it out to me...

All I can say is thank god my front brakes didn't fail on a descent.
That would not have been a very nice way to discover the lack of rear brake.

To prevent a rear wheel skid, don't apply the rear brake too hard.

Or just brake /before/ you start turning and let off the brakes during
the turn.

A front wheel skid is rare on tarmac.

....unless it's wet, when it becomes all too easy to make the front wheel
skid.

d.