Rod brakes

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Chris S

Legendary Member
Location
Birmingham
Are rod brakes more efficient than caliper ones? Caliper brakes only apply direct force to one side of the rim but rod brakes are effectively 'centre pull' and apply it to both.

I'd like to know as I've seen one or two rod-braked bikes on ebay and I'd like to know how practical they are. I realize they're heavier than bikes with Bowden cables.
 

tyred

Legendary Member
Location
Ireland
They're not as bad as people make them out if adjusted correctly. In fact, they're just as good as typical sidepul caliper found on 70s road bikes on chrome rims. And that's the problem - chrome rims, work fine in the dry, not so good in the wet.

It is essential to ensure they are set up so that both pads hit the rim at the same time (this is not guaranteed, bend things to suit) and that both pads contact the rim fully, not have half of it out past the rim. A good true rim with no flat spots is essential, more so than with caliper brakes, clean off any rust or it will tear the pads in shreds. A drop of engine oil on all the pivots and the sliders on the forks on a regular basis to keep everything working smoothly with minimal effort. Also be aware that there are two different types of pads - Raleigh and Phillips and they are not interchangeable. It can be time consuming setting up rod brakes but once done, you will probably never need to touch them for another 30 years.

If you are tall enough to straddle a 28" wheeled frame, they really do provide a unique riding experience. I wouldn't like to ride one in busy city traffic on a regular basis as they aren't very maneuverable but if you have easy access to quiet country roads, a 28" wheeled roadster is a joy. It might take a bit of effort to spin such a heavy wheel up to speed but once you do, the big wheels just glide along with minimal effort and laugh at poor road surfaces (remember the design of these pre-dates tarmac roads). IMO, a 28" wheeled roadster needs a Sturmey to make it pleasant to ride.

26" wheels are probably more common. Much the same applies but there is such a thing as a "light" or "sports" roadster with lighter weight tubing (check the diameter of the seatpost. 1" was standard, anything thicker suggests lighter tubing) and more sporting geometry. Most of these had cable brakes but there were a few like Elswick, Humber and Royal Enfield who produced sports roadsters with rod brakes. These bikes are a lot faster and easier to ride than most realise and single speed with a 60 - 70" gear would be fine for anything other than very steep terrain.

Also be aware that the quality standards within the British bike industry started to fall from the late 1950s onwards. Older bikes will often have better chrome and paintwork. Beware of Raleighs (and other Raleigh Nottingham built bikes like later Rudges, Humbers, BSAs etc) showing a lot of BB or headset wear as they are non standard threading.
 
OP
OP
Chris S

Chris S

Legendary Member
Location
Birmingham
In fact, they're just as good as typical sidepul caliper found on 70s road bikes on chrome rims. And that's the problem - chrome rims, work fine in the dry, not so good in the wet.

Would that mean that rims where the chrome has worn off provide better wet-weather stopping? (I'm not too bothered about aesthetics)
 

tyred

Legendary Member
Location
Ireland
Would that mean that rims where the chrome has worn off provide better wet-weather stopping? (I'm not too bothered about aesthetics)

Yes, but sand off any big rusty scabs which will chew up the brake pads in double quick time.
 

sidevalve

Über Member
Yes, but sand off any big rusty scabs which will chew up the brake pads in double quick time.
And that means every time you use the bike [if it's not in daily use of course]. Rust forms very fast on naked steel.
 

lunchbreak

New Member
I'd expect rod brakes to be less effective than side pull. With side pull calipers there are 2 sets of levers, those on the bars plus the arms of the caliper, and together they multiply the force applied against the rim. However, looking at pics of rod brake levers, they look like much longer and have more leverage so maybe they're about the same?
 

lpretro1

Guest
If rod brakes had been any good they'd still be putting them on bikes!!! :0 And oh, the weight of them...
 

snailracer

Über Member
If rod brakes had been any good they'd still be putting them on bikes!!! :0 And oh, the weight of them...
They still do, in places where brake cable is a technological extravagance.
 

tyred

Legendary Member
Location
Ireland
If rod brakes had been any good they'd still be putting them on bikes!!! :0 And oh, the weight of them...

Cable breaks are lighter and are easier to install and set up. They've also been around almost as long as rod brakes.

Rod brakes have a place. They can be a pain in the arse to set up but once done, they will work reliably for many years, need no replacement parts apart from the brake blocks, are not affected by dust, grit or water getting into cables so are still used in countries where roads are not generally tarmac surfaced. This included Western Europe prior to WW2. After the war as road surfaces improved, there was less need for a heavy duty bike like a 28" wheeled traditional roadster so lighter bikes became more popular.
 

Davidc

Guru
Location
Somerset UK
I had them on my first bike, a 20" wheeled Humber "Small" bike. They worked well, but the rims were bare steel - the chrome had probably gone at least 10 years before I had the bike.

Also had them on a 1950s delivery bike I had for use round town and shopping in the '70s. As Dell and others have said they were basically set and forget. As the pads wore there was an adjuster on one of the rods for each brake, but that was all. Again, they were more than adequate.

The rod brakes were comparable to the side pull caliper brakes on the Peugeot bike I had then, but wouldn't compare well with current dual pivot caliper brakes.
 
Top Bottom