bblair

As I am collecting my parts to restore my 1968 Paramount, I find the huge assortment of measurements confusing.

First, what is the proper brake reach designation? I see both short and long listed, as well as recessed vs conventional. So many variations.

Bars and stem seem pretty straight forward.

Later, we can discuss bottom bracket sizes and double vs triple, sealed vs old-style....it goes on forever.

bikemig 

Do you have brakes that came on the bike? If you do, you could start by measuring that.

This tells you how to measure reach:

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/calipers.html

Old bikes have a lot of clearance. I'm getting 65 mm up front and 75 mm in the rear with 27 inch wheels on my '68 Paramount. The brakes on mine which are original to the bike are old school Weinmann 999s with a heck of a lot of reach.

bblair

Just a frame, and that's off for paint now.

I did see the Sheldon Brown article, so I guess I'll have to wait a couple of weeks until I can measure directly. I did not realize that there are so many variations. Going to use 700C wheels.

FBOATSB

Just look up the 68 spec sheet and see what options were offered. I'm guessing the 999's were standard

T-Mar

Required brake reach will vary depending on your chosen wheel set and position of the wheel in the dropouts. Just install your chosen wheelset and measure the distances from the centre of the brake mounting hole to the centre of the rim sidewall. Be aware that brake reach in the front and rear are sometimes different, so make sure you measure both. Once you can the measurements, you can determine which brakes will work.

dddd

On my '66 Paramount Deluxe, the reach in back is long, so even with 27" wheels, a drop-down center bolt and the longer-style Record caliper, the reach is slightly inadequate for the pads to reach the rim.

Salamandrine 

Measure to find out. I'd suspect that they will be standard reach, 47-57, as it was still standard at the time. Since this size hasn't been standard since about the late 70s, it can be confusingly called long reach sometimes nowadays, which is incorrect.

To my eyes the Weinmanns in post #2 appear to be mid reach 610.

BTW what is up with this measuring reach diagonally? When did it start? I don't think that's a great method and it's not how I was taught. I measure vertically from the post hole to the center of the braking surface on the rim.

https://velo-orange.blogspot.com/201...ake-reach.html
https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear...-reach-brakes/

bblair

Yea, I guess I am getting impatient. Best to wait until I have wheels on frame and simply measure.

ThermionicScott 

You don't have *any* 700C wheels on hand to try?

davester

If you are going with Campy or similar sidepulls rather than the more commonly specced Weinmann centerpulls, you may need to get a drop bolt for the rear brake because the clearance can be very high on some of those early Paramounts.

T-Mar

You measure perpendicular to the mounting bolt axis because that is how manufacturers measure and report their brake reach dimensions.

bblair

Sure I do. But the frame is out getting painted. When it comes home, I'll put on some wheels and measure. Just trying to get things going.

ThermionicScott 

Ah, gotcha!

Unca_Sam

Come to the Third Hand bike co op and dig around in our center pull collection. I recently finished sorting them, and there's a handful of Weinmann 750 and clones, as well as lots of 610s and clones. You can test-fit these to your heart's content during the open shop hours, and if you find a set you like, buy them for cheap. At the very least you'll know what reach to look for when looking for your replacements.

SurferRosa

I wasn't satisfied with the Weinmanns on my '60 Paramount, so I went with inexpensive Tektros -- R559 on the rear and R539 in front. It's a 700c conversion, and I had to use the rotary tool on the front caliper to slide the pads down a little more to reach.


.

gugie 

Question: why do so many vintage bikes have significantly different reach requirements for front and back brakes? I've had several frames go through the Atelier over the past few years that have this "feature".

SurferRosa 's Paramount is a classic example of this. He had to use a different brake between front and rear to make it work.

The heavy lifting for RiddleOfSteel's Schwinn Paramount was brazing a new steerer in the fork, but I also lowered (replaced) the rear brake bridge so he could use the same reach brake front and rear. I used MAFAC 2000 brakes on my recently built up Motobecane Le Champion. The front brake has the pads choked up at the top of the adjustment, the rear is all the way down. Velobase says that's a 15mm difference!

I see no logical reason for this.

SurferRosa

To clarify a lil bit, the super long R559 would work on the front, but the shorter model looks way better. And you can buy them as singles...

I really like the idea of moving the brake bridge lower. Nice job. I also like the idea of using a drop bolt.

Salamandrine 

Maybe someone should reiterate the basics.

Short reach: 39-49mm
Medium reach: 47-57mm
Long reach: 57+ mm

Short reach could vary. Some early aero brakes were more like 36 - 42 or something like that.

Medium reach was also called standard reach or normal reach. It's specs would also vary. For example the Weinmann 610 which unsurprisingly goes up to 61. Often incorrectly called long reach nowadays.

Long reach was sort of a catchall for anything bigger. Weinmann 750 was a ubiquitous and typical example.


WRT why long reach in the back? The only explanation I've ever heard was that the lower mechanical advantage of the rear brake made the brakes feel more balanced between front and rear. Maybe. I wonder if the actual explanation is more boneheaded, like to get more mud clearance, or maybe it was to make room for a bigger tire in back for traction. People used to think that way.

That is how I've always done it, and it was also my understanding that that's how manufacturers did it. Thanks for verifying I'm not nuts or gaslit.

bikemig 

Yeah those long reach Weinmanns aren't the greatest brakes. I'm thinking of going with the new Dia Compe 750s on my '68 Paramount. I kind of dig center pulls on an old bike.

repechage

‘68 paramount could be a road racing version or a touring version.
the touring version was designed for 27” wheels, even fenders as a option.
the rear bridge was located to accept those with a nice fender “line”.
also rear brakes often had longer reach to reduce the mechanical advantage and curtail “ lock up “ during hard braking.

the road racing paramounts in 1968 were just being adjusted for use of the then brand new Campagnolo brakes. These were what was later known as Normal reach. Short reach, “ piccolo “ showed up late 1974 ( really 1975-76)
this was a transition period. There were ‘68-‘69 road racing paramounts that needed a drop bolt for the rear.
a ‘68 paramount designed for Campagnolo brakes will have no brake cable stops or have them in the side to compliment the ordered calipers. Weinmann 500’s are mechanical mirrors of Campagnolo.

RiddleOfSteel

GREAT question, and one I have asked myself as well. One would think it could be low-end bikes that would have it for whatever reason, but Paramounts had mismatching all the time. The fact that '60s Paramounts have such ridiculous reach measurements keeps me from ever wanting them--I am a fan of stopping reasonably.

On the other end there is early Trek (like my former '81 716) that employed a standard reach caliper on the front (700C wheels as standard), but could run a short reach caliper on the rear if so desired. This was on a number of sport touring-type Treks and it honestly keeps them, in my eyes, from being the properly versatile bikes that they could be with larger tires and room for fenders.

I suppose I can understand why brake reach can vary within a few millimeters, but a full 10mm or more, even on nice bikes, is baffling and illogical.

merziac

Maybe the almighty, all knowing Schwinn and Trek were just as confused as we are all along.

I have an upcoming project where this exact thing was paramount but its not a Paramount.

T-Mar

I've always consider it to be an anti-lock feature of sorts. Longer caliper arms aren't as rigid and don't have as much mechanical advantage, so they're harder to lock up. Also, most bicycles are set up with right hand rear braking, which is typically the dominant and stronger hand, causing even more of a tendency to lock up the rear brake, which increases stopping distance. Up to and including the early 1970s bicycle boom, most people were not familiar with hand operated brakes and would apply equal or what they thought was equal force to both brakes, resulting in locking of the rear wheel. They didn't realize that they had to apply less force to the rear wheel to prevent lock-up due to the the inertial weight shift to the front wheel and the subsequent unloading of the rear wheel. Consequently. many manufacturers (especially on their entry level models), offered longer reach calipers on the rear to counteract the tendency for rear wheel lock-up.

Once bicycles with hand operated rear brakes became the norm and people had experience with them, manufacturers shifted towards equal reach brakes on the front and the rear. However, the concept of weaker brakes on the rear was not totally abandoned, even at the high end. Campagnolo offered "differential" dual pivot brakes with equal reach but with a less rigid (and lighter) rear caliper. Later, they mixed stronger dual pivot front brakes with weaker single pivot rear brakes, to achieve the same effect.

bikemig 

The reach is clearly longer on the rear of my '68 Paramount than the front as per post 2 above. I don't really understand all the hate for the long reach on early Paramounts. A well set up center pull (or the dual pivots SurferRosa used in past 15) allow you to brake safely.

I've been gravitating lately towards buying older road bikes from the 70s and 60s. They typically have eyelets which is cool in a retro sort of way especially if you ever want to run fenders. More importantly older road bikes can generally take a 32c tire or even one a bit larger. Tires width is the single biggest variable in terms of what you can do with a bike. A 32c tire lets me ride most gravel roads and I can run it at lower pressure so it's more comfortable over long distance. YMMV but I'm good with the reach on my 68 Paramount or any of my road bikes from the 60s and 70s.

nlerner

FWIW, I’ve run Weinmann/DiaCompe 750 cp brakes on lots of 650b conversions, and stopping power is just fine with decent pads and aero brake levers. The combo of long arms, hardened old pads, and more limited mechanical advantage of non-aero levers guarantees poor performance.