"BLACK BETTY" 2019 S-works Tarmac project

Who are you (no off-topic talk please)

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 7952
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

This is a great build, well done. But it also highlights a couple real issues with dropped seatstays and rim brakes. Firstly, in order for the rear brake cable to get to the brake from its exit point out of the top tube, it has to make this godawful cut downwards, usually cutting across the opening between the top tube and the seat tube. It’s just rather unsightly in my opinion.
But aside from the unsightliness, more importantly, the bends to the actual brake cable on its way to the caliper can compromise function and smoothness. Now, I’m not a fan of EE brakes, but look at the bodge that has to be made here with that “adaptor” bushing. It angles the brake caliper up and outwards trying to get it both away from the seattube and also to provide a more naturally smooth routing of the brake cable. But as soon as you change the angle of the brake caliper from the angle of the seatstays, it screams “something’s not right here” from an aesthetic standpoint and the word bodge comes to mind. A workaround for something that shouldn’t be in the first place. Furthermore, that new angle of the brake caliper effectively reduces the clearance for the tire at the rear of the caliper. I’ll bet it reduced the clearance by almost 50% from what it was prior to having to install the adaptor. This bike likely has enough clearance for 28mm tires although with the altered angle of the brake caliper, I’m not so sure that’s the case, or it might be tighter then one would like.
Not a commentary on the build, which is fantastic, but a commentary on the compatibility of rim brakes and dropped stays. And as was just mentioned... details matter.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

by Weenie


User avatar
ProfessorChaos
in the industry
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:10 am

by ProfessorChaos

Calnago wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:25 pm
This is a great build, well done. But it also highlights a couple real issues with dropped seatstays and rim brakes. Firstly, in order for the rear brake cable to get to the brake from its exit point out of the top tube, it has to make this godawful cut downwards, usually cutting across the opening between the top tube and the seat tube. It’s just rather unsightly in my opinion.
But aside from the unsightliness, more importantly, the bends to the actual brake cable on its way to the caliper can compromise function and smoothness. Now, I’m not a fan of EE brakes, but look at the bodge that has to be made here with that “adaptor” bushing. It angles the brake caliper up and outwards trying to get it both away from the seattube and also to provide a more naturally smooth routing of the brake cable. But as soon as you change the angle of the brake caliper from the angle of the seatstays, it screams “something’s not right here” from an aesthetic standpoint and the word bodge comes to mind. A workaround for something that shouldn’t be in the first place. Furthermore, that new angle of the brake caliper effectively reduces the clearance for the tire at the rear of the caliper. I’ll bet it reduced the clearance by almost 50% from what it was prior to having to install the adaptor. This bike likely has enough clearance for 28mm tires although with the altered angle of the brake caliper, I’m not so sure that’s the case, or it might be tighter then one would like.
Not a commentary on the build, which is fantastic, but a commentary on the compatibility of rim brakes and dropped stays. And as was just mentioned... details matter.
Interesting way to put things. I think the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks for dropping the seatstays. The increase in vertical compliance, and areo advantage makes it the shape of the future.

I do share your thoughts about the adaptor for the 54cm and smaller frames with ee brakes. It just seems like an afterthought, and it does put the cable in slightly more a bind. It is why I liked Jake’s solution for fitting the ee brakes on his frame. I have the Dura Ace brakes on my Tarmac, because it was an off the shelf build, and I’ve yet to change them yet.

The bit about compromising the tire clearance is interesting. I know this bike was originally designed for 28s. The adaptor does appear to be an afterthought. I wonder if it comprises the clearence. I’ve heard of people using 30s before, but tire clearance can vary due to manufacture’s tolerances, and rim width. I do know the design with direct mount brakes over loads of room for tires, and offer a ton of stopping power with great modulation. I love the brakes on my Tarmac.

Bianchi10
Posts: 815
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 10:53 pm

by Bianchi10

Calnago wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:25 pm
This is a great build, well done. But it also highlights a couple real issues with dropped seatstays and rim brakes. Firstly, in order for the rear brake cable to get to the brake from its exit point out of the top tube, it has to make this godawful cut downwards, usually cutting across the opening between the top tube and the seat tube. It’s just rather unsightly in my opinion.
But aside from the unsightliness, more importantly, the bends to the actual brake cable on its way to the caliper can compromise function and smoothness. Now, I’m not a fan of EE brakes, but look at the bodge that has to be made here with that “adaptor” bushing. It angles the brake caliper up and outwards trying to get it both away from the seattube and also to provide a more naturally smooth routing of the brake cable. But as soon as you change the angle of the brake caliper from the angle of the seatstays, it screams “something’s not right here” from an aesthetic standpoint and the word bodge comes to mind. A workaround for something that shouldn’t be in the first place. Furthermore, that new angle of the brake caliper effectively reduces the clearance for the tire at the rear of the caliper. I’ll bet it reduced the clearance by almost 50% from what it was prior to having to install the adaptor. This bike likely has enough clearance for 28mm tires although with the altered angle of the brake caliper, I’m not so sure that’s the case, or it might be tighter then one would like.
Not a commentary on the build, which is fantastic, but a commentary on the compatibility of rim brakes and dropped stays. And as was just mentioned... details matter.
I totally agree. I wish there would have been more thought taken into consideration about the rear. I love the lok of the EE brakes and they are performing well. The adapter could have been a little cleaner, but it does the trick and I dont really notice it to be honest.

thorerik
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:46 pm

by thorerik

Great looking bike with an eye for detail!

rexyi1990
Posts: 226
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:05 pm

by rexyi1990

Bianchi10 wrote:
Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:58 pm
And here she is...

Image
DAMN COOL!!!

Imaking20
Posts: 1832
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:19 am

by Imaking20

Calnago wrote:
Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:25 pm
This is a great build, well done. But it also highlights a couple real issues with dropped seatstays and rim brakes. Firstly, in order for the rear brake cable to get to the brake from its exit point out of the top tube, it has to make this godawful cut downwards, usually cutting across the opening between the top tube and the seat tube. It’s just rather unsightly in my opinion.
But aside from the unsightliness, more importantly, the bends to the actual brake cable on its way to the caliper can compromise function and smoothness. Now, I’m not a fan of EE brakes, but look at the bodge that has to be made here with that “adaptor” bushing. It angles the brake caliper up and outwards trying to get it both away from the seattube and also to provide a more naturally smooth routing of the brake cable. But as soon as you change the angle of the brake caliper from the angle of the seatstays, it screams “something’s not right here” from an aesthetic standpoint and the word bodge comes to mind. A workaround for something that shouldn’t be in the first place. Furthermore, that new angle of the brake caliper effectively reduces the clearance for the tire at the rear of the caliper. I’ll bet it reduced the clearance by almost 50% from what it was prior to having to install the adaptor. This bike likely has enough clearance for 28mm tires although with the altered angle of the brake caliper, I’m not so sure that’s the case, or it might be tighter then one would like.
Not a commentary on the build, which is fantastic, but a commentary on the compatibility of rim brakes and dropped stays. And as was just mentioned... details matter.
Maybe making too broad of a categorization, eh?

Image

Image
Current:
Wilier Wonka | The Dentist | The Bucket List

Retired:
Specialissima | Evo | T2 | Blue | Project C6.0 | Felt AR FRD | Colnago C59 NERO | 2014 S-Works Tarmac | S-Works Venge | Wilier Cento Uno SL | Tarmac SL2

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 7952
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Not really. There will be different degrees of unpleasantness depending on frame size and just how “dropped” the seatstays are, but I’ve never seen one that I thought looked great. Yours is at least perfectly functional. But how about a side view of that setup please. I’d like to see the cable run from the top tube to the brake. I’ll bet it has to take a pretty acute turn or two to get there, if not a straight line shot which is the ugliest of all.
[edit]: Nevermind, you’ve already posted your build so I could see it there. It’s a nice build and a very pretty bike but you know what a stickler I am for both functionally and aesthetically perfect cable routing, so it’s little wonder that these designs make me cringe... so, here’s the view as it was in your build thread. That angle that the brake housing has to take out of the caliper hurts...
Image
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

Imaking20
Posts: 1832
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:19 am

by Imaking20

Yeah, I've since taken a couple links out of the housing. If I was running standard housing, I may run it shorter, but this still gives me enough clearance to not get any rattle from the links against the frame.
Image

As they say, beauty is in the eye of the beerholder. To my eye, this looks a little downsy:
Image

But no doubt it's tidy.

Ultimately, my point is that there's nothing wrong with dropped chainstays and rim brakes - some manufacturers just do it better than others. Sure, a "standard" component brake may have a nicer looking cable angle/entry - but I'd rather not have that arm hanging out from the side of the bike. Also direct mount EE brakes have more stopping power than any other rim brake I've used - by a lot. Not quite the modulation of dual pivot Campy, but more power. And better power and modulation than 9100. Plus, this is weight weenies and a 153g brake set is pretty rad :)
Current:
Wilier Wonka | The Dentist | The Bucket List

Retired:
Specialissima | Evo | T2 | Blue | Project C6.0 | Felt AR FRD | Colnago C59 NERO | 2014 S-Works Tarmac | S-Works Venge | Wilier Cento Uno SL | Tarmac SL2

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 7952
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Hmmm... holy crap! where'd you get that pic... it's gorgeous! :) But not sure what you mean by it being a bit "downsy". Every frame will dictate how exactly the routing ends up, but in general the principle is the same... I strive for as smooth and graceful a line as possible from exit port to brake caliper, following the lines of the bike and for sure finishing up with a straight smooth shot into the brake caliper itself. I've seen the very tips of brake housing almost broken off over time by having to make an abrupt bend into the caliper. So, the smoother the line, the silkier the action...
Sitll not sure what "downsy" means... I guess you're right, beauty is in the eye of the beholder....
Image

And a bit different frameset profile, but the principle remains the same...
Image

And with EE brakes on either of these frames, I could still have achieved those nice smooth routings. With dropped stays, not so much. Re your comments on the EE's... they are light for sure, but a friend just replaced his new direct mount EE's with 9100's and basically says the opposite of you. Aside from being light, the 9100's outperform in every aspect. And yes, I told him he should try the 9100's after working on his EE's. But I get it, some folks think the EE's are gorgeous. To each his own.

Sorry for the slight diversion but this issue was really a significant part of the OP's thread, so kinda relevant I suppose.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

CrankAddictsRich
Posts: 1574
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:39 pm
Contact:

by CrankAddictsRich

To the OP... stunning build! Fantastic. My only question is, why the Mimic saddle? Isn't that a female saddle... unless you are female and I missed that somewhere in this thread.

On the topic of DM EE brakes... the spacer looks like an afterthought, becuse it is.. I'm sure this bike wasn't designed with EE brakes in mind, but rather standard high end DM brakes like DA, SRAM or Campy with a side pull. That being said, I've seen a few of these bikes in person and the EE adapter didn't bother me at all. I run stamdard mount EE brakes on my SL5 Tarmac and my Venge before that. I've also used DA9000 brakes and the EE's are definitely a step up. I've heard that DM brakes are better than standard mount so I can't directly compare to the DM EE brakes, but I'm sure they do the job and as this is weight weenies... they ARE light.

dudemanppl
Posts: 891
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 5:09 am

by dudemanppl

Imaking20 wrote:
Fri Dec 21, 2018 1:38 am
Image

Image
damn isaac your routing looks like trash, calnago looks 100% perfect

User avatar
themidge
Posts: 1083
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 4:19 pm
Location: yer ma

by themidge

CrankAddictsRich wrote:
Sun Dec 23, 2018 3:35 am
I'm sure this bike wasn't designed with EE brakes in mind, but rather standard high end DM brakes like DA, SRAM or Campy with a side pull.
Doesn't the 'Ultralite' full build of the SL6 come with EE brakes? Do they use an adaptor for that build too?

Nefarious86
Moderator
Posts: 2986
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 4:57 am
Contact:

by Nefarious86

Was there actually anything making contact on the frame when not using the brake adapter?
Using Tapatalk

CrankAddictsRich
Posts: 1574
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:39 pm
Contact:

by CrankAddictsRich

themidge wrote:
Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:40 pm
CrankAddictsRich wrote:
Sun Dec 23, 2018 3:35 am
I'm sure this bike wasn't designed with EE brakes in mind, but rather standard high end DM brakes like DA, SRAM or Campy with a side pull.
Doesn't the 'Ultralite' full build of the SL6 come with EE brakes? Do they use an adaptor for that build too?
Yes... the Ultralite uses the adapters too.

My guess... when the frame was designed and developed, it was set up using side pull DM brakes. Late in the develoopment game, they decided that they could do an Ultralight model with no paint and took it a step further by spec'ing it with some additional weight weenie goodies.

Bianchi10
Posts: 815
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 10:53 pm

by Bianchi10

Yeah, It did hit the frame when I compressed the brakes without the adapter, so I was glad to resolve it with this adapter. It doesn't bother me to much.


I've got my cable routing pretty spot on with this one. I had it a hair too short on my prior evo and wanted to make sure this had a proper amount of front end cabling. I'm head over heals in love with this bike. I dont miss that evo AT ALL
Image

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post