Orientation of brakes

Sheldon posted about this a while back, with an anecdote that I though
exemplified why one should _not_ switch the brakes. In theory, yes, it makes
sense to have your strongest hand on the most powerful brake.

But his example was that he took a bike out for a test ride that did not have
its brakes switched. Because he was used to right-hand/front-brake, he was
nearly unable to stop in an emergency.

Even if it's less than ideal, it seems to me it's probably best to have one's
brakes set up the same as everyone else's to avoid this type of situation,
lest one's initial reaction when braking in an emergency be the incorrect one.

Only if you ride a lot of other people's bikes. Who does that? Set it up
like you want it, and be sure to set up all your bikes the same way. But your
emergencey reaction does not depend on your having the same arrangement as
everyone else. It depends on consistency in your equipment.


David L. Johnson
Department of Mathematics
Lehigh University

Rick Onanian writes:

In the old days, of downtube shifters, right-handed riders would
have some advantage with the front brake on the left, since the
right hand usually did the shifting of both levers, and it is good
to have the important brake available even when shifting. Now that
is not an issue, either.

It's still easier to shift the more common rear derailleur with the
more skilled right hand while leaving the more important front brake
available to the clumsy but still-strong-enough left hand.

I see no conflict there. I seldom if ever shift while braking anyway.
In fact the act of shifting is so quick that it fits in equally well
before or after braking and is something I do with the left hand,
front and rear. Therefore, my front brake is on the same hand it was
on on my motorcycle that gave me the impetus to switch to pedals.
Besides, I am not encumbered by shift/brake levers. Shifting is on
the downtube where it doesn't conflict with anything unless you are
afraid to ride one handed, something of which I heard often before the
days of STI shifting.

That, in my estimation was the cause of these expensive and fragile
brake/shift levers. Lance didn't fare so well after he fell on his
left brake lever and had to ride an uncomfortably low gear to the top
of the climb when he realized the chainwheel would no longer shift
reliably after his spill. It was what caused him to freewheel forward
and end with both feet on the road after he got back on his bicycle.

So, for me, it's better with the left-hand front brake. I've never
wished I had more strength or dexterity for my braking.

The difference is that I still motorcycle downhill and I stand the
bike on its front wheel on many curves in the mountains with my right
hand: http://tinyurl.com/jq0s

Jobst Brandt

Palo Alto CA

wrote in message ...

brake/shift levers. Lance didn't fare so well after he fell on his
left brake lever and had to ride an uncomfortably low gear to the top
of the climb when he realized the chainwheel would no longer shift
reliably after his spill. It was what caused him to freewheel forward
and end with both feet on the road after he got back on his bicycle.
on this count you are incorrect. lance cracked the right chainstay on
his bike, which effected his shifting. supposedly the damage was done
by the rider behind him hitting him.

wrote in message news:QCYZa.10889

sorry, here's the link. took me a minute to find it.
http://www.velonews.com/tour2003/tec...es/4647.0.html

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:51:28 GMT,
wrote:


That, in my estimation was the cause of these expensive and fragile
brake/shift levers. Lance didn't fare so well after he fell on his
left brake lever and had to ride an uncomfortably low gear to the top
of the climb when he realized the chainwheel would no longer shift
reliably after his spill. It was what caused him to freewheel forward
and end with both feet on the road after he got back on his bicycle.

Lance Armstrong's climbing bikes use regular (non-STI) left brake
levers and a single downtube shifter for the front mech. It can be
seen in the stage photos below:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tour.php?id=photos/2003/tour03/stage15/JD/stage_15(7)
http://www.cyclingnews.com/tour.php?...T/003lance_luz
http://www.cyclingnews.com/tour.php?...ia/ARMSTRONG49

Had the left lever been an STI model, the crash might have caused more
problems.


John Henderson, New York City, USA
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Let's roll!" -- Todd Beamer, 9/11/01
"After five and weekends" -- 711th SOS
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:51:28 GMT, wrote:
It's still easier to shift the more common rear derailleur with the
more skilled right hand while leaving the more important front brake
available to the clumsy but still-strong-enough left hand.

I see no conflict there. I seldom if ever shift while braking anyway.

You've never been halfway through a shift when you suddenly
need to brake?

That, in my estimation was the cause of these expensive and fragile
brake/shift levers. Lance didn't fare so well after he fell on his

Another, maybe more important reason why left-front-brake
is good: With these expensive and fragile brake/shift levers,
there is often an inconvenient conflict when you want to
brake and shift in rapid succession.

hand: http://tinyurl.com/jq0s

Beautiful photo. I hope I can get some pictures like that
during my upcoming Poconos vacation.

Jobst Brandt

Palo Alto CA
--
Rick Onanian

Chris Mayhew writes:

sorry, here's the link. took me a minute to find it.
http://www.velonews.com/tour2003/tec...es/4647.0.html

That is worse than I thought. Now we have bicycles that don't
withstand a mild fall, one that merely tipped over onto the road
without striking an obstacle, and the frame broke. I've seen a lot of
pile-ups in criteriums and track races and no frame failures although
I'm sure some got bent while some wheels visibly crumpled. In this
fall not even a wheel was damaged, and the frame failed!

This should not improve the demand for TREK non-steel frames... but it
will. That's the way the tifosi react.

Jobst Brandt

Palo Alto CA

wrote in message
...
Chris Mayhew writes:

sorry, here's the link. took me a minute to find it.
http://www.velonews.com/tour2003/tec...es/4647.0.html

That is worse than I thought. Now we have bicycles that don't
withstand a mild fall, one that merely tipped over onto the road
without striking an obstacle, and the frame broke. I've seen a lot of
pile-ups in criteriums and track races and no frame failures although
I'm sure some got bent while some wheels visibly crumpled. In this
fall not even a wheel was damaged, and the frame failed!

This should not improve the demand for TREK non-steel frames... but it
will. That's the way the tifosi react.

Yup, and the fact that its a full *145g* lighter than the 2003 version means
Trek is going to get the BIG bucks! I bet this new 2004 Trek 5900 Superlight
(gotta luv that name) with Shimano Dura Ace 10 is going to retail in the
$5000+ range! So, what are you waiting for? Get rid of that old steel bike
(you still riding steel?) and get in line NOW!

Jobst Brandt wrote:

You make it sound like motor racing. Shifting is not a rapid fire and
often performed act in bicycling although with more and more gears,
many riders believe they are operating a Ducati of the like as I see
then shift their away from a traffic light as it turns green.

Maybe some people shift several times to avoid pushing hard
at a low cadence. Some of us don't have bulletproof knees.

In any case, you write as if there were something wrong with
enjoying the act of shifting.

Tom Ace

Tom Ace writes:

You make it sound like motor racing. Shifting is not a rapid fire
and often performed act in bicycling although with more and more
gears, many riders believe they are operating a Ducati of the like
as I see then shift their away from a traffic light as it turns
green.

Maybe some people shift several times to avoid pushing hard at a low
cadence. Some of us don't have bulletproof knees.

In any case, you write as if there were something wrong with
enjoying the act of shifting.

I think this has morphed into how to shift. The claim was that riders
shift so often that braking and shifting conflict. This is like the
claim that hand signals interfere with braking. This may be true for
speeds above 40mph but hand signals are easily and properly given
before braking for a left turn (I assume from the left lane and in
front of cars).

Jobst Brandt

Palo Alto CA