This brake looks pretty aero, though I know nothing about it. Anyone know why Zipp stopped making them?
http://cgi.ebay.com/..._trksid=p3286.c0.m14

They stopped making them when they stopped making the frames. The brake was proprietary to the frames.

---

.
.
Paul

I tried one out, back in the day

http://i36.tinypic.com/swsmq0.jpg

Found them, thanks!

---

-------
Joe

I don't know that an exposed cable is the only, or even the most, aero solution.

I've fabricated a "cable stiffener" made from aluminum tubing with an airfoil cross section for my front brake cable housing. The tubing is made for radio controlled airplane models. At low yaw anyway, I bet it has a lower CdA than an exposed cable. YMMV.

---

---

"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."

if a carbon fairing similar to the zipp 3001 brakes could be fabricated for the ee brakes surely this would clean up the frontal area and make them even more aero and you would get the best of both worlds aero, lightweight with stopping power.

m@tty

Agree with paul they stopped making htem. in a few other notes on the infamous zipp 2001 brakes:
a) they used a proprietary mount so you cant swap them back and forth
b) they have 3 settings for you to choose between:

• Setting 1: Regardless of what you do with levers, brake pads never touch rim
• Setting 2: Brake pads rub on rim at ANY imperfections, and when applied tension rim so aggressively that you are literally in danger of crushing rim, while you go over the handlebars
• Setting 3: Brake pads cannot be released from rim, impossible to make wheel turn.
• You can choose between any of the 3 settings above, and swap between them with only 2 hours of work per brake per setting change
• You will also note that in none of these settings do the brakes function as "brakes" in the traditional senses of the word

But i will agree they looked REALLY cool, and they are aero!

My solution has been to basically leave my rear brake on my zipp2001 (which i bought from paul! and it ROCKS!) in setting 1, and only use my front, non-zipp brake for actual slowing down, while my rear brake serves to get me past tech inspections as a "brake".

Clyde

---

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-Cartels: Serotta, Zipp 2001, Guru, eh?
-"It was kinda long and then i got really tired"

I'm going to say this with the utmost respect I can muster...

You're doing something very, very wrong. Zipp brakes work fine. They can be swapped front to back. You can add a barrel adjuster with a decent set of drill bits and an M4 tap.

I have 3 of them, they all work perfectly, stop well, etc. I have run them on the back and front of a Zipp 2001, Softride Rocket TT, Cervelo P3, etc. No issues whatsoever.

Chris

I think the barrell adjuster is very much what i need- exactly how did you add one?

---

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-Cartels: Serotta, Zipp 2001, Guru, eh?
-"It was kinda long and then i got really tired"

Just drill out the hole where the cable stop is and then tap it with an M4. I used a standard adjuster from a rear derailleur. Most shops would probably just give you one to use.

Chris

I'm not sure if this would apply to brakes, but I think the best compromise would be to add an in-line cable adjuster that is typically used for shifters.

ex. http://www.probikekit.com/display.php?code=A0297

"IF" (and that's a big if) it can fit in a brake cable set-up, it would be a much simpler solution.

Clyde_s_dale,
I think that you are on to something. I did do a TT brake without the barrel adjuster and it was really low profile. Tri riders complained that the lack of a barrel adjuster made it difficult to change out their training wheels with the racing wheels, so the barrel adjuster was included on the new brake (see first posting on this thread). I would probably change a few things on that perch design as pictured, but perhaps it would be a good idea to go back to the no-adjuster setup and include those in-cable adjusters?

Matt, as you know, brake cables and housings undergo much higher tensile and compressive forces (respectively) than derailleur cables do. Are those inline adjusters designed for brakes?

---

---

"100% of the people who confuse correlation and causation end up dying."

Matt I would much rather have the cable adjuster on the brake like on your prototype brake at the top of this thread.
I think with many of todays aerobars with internal cables exiting on the underside of the bars and the short amount of exposed cable left to fit an inline adjuster on the front brake it would be hard to hide it from the wind and would probably end up less aero and there isnt much reason not to have an adjuster on the rear brake!

anyway how is the brake progressing I am really inspired that you are working on an aero brake set as every second counts!

m@tty

I've used an Indy Brake in a P4 but I don't use an inline adjuster for this reason:

---

Ale Martinez
www.amtriathlon.com

I dont understand the reason.

---

Want: 58cm Cervelo Soloist. PM me if you have one to sell

Vintage Cervelo: A Resource

Jeremy,
That is good info. Your comment, combined with the possibility that the adjuster could get crushed during braking make me reconsider. There is quite a bit of compressive force on the brake housings. Even if the adjuster does not fail, it could make the brakes pretty mushy. I might try running that setup myself to see how well it goes with an Indy.

This is the kind of thing that always causes much grief - you spend a whole bunch of time machining the brakes to have something like this end up not working the way you expect.
The barrel adjuster really does make the housing stick out. It is not just the top of the adjuster too. You have to make room for the threads underneath so that the brake arm does not pull upward and interfere, - hmm.

Thanks,
Matt

Have to admit, that looks pretty tidy. That is one of the center pulls that I have not actually had the pleasure to try out.

There is what appears to be a barrel adjuster, so it looks like it was designed for a housing. This could cause:
1) A force on the brake that pulls it off center, or
2) Squishy brakes because the stem might deflect.

Cross bikes sometimes have that setup and it seems to work really well with cantilevers. Any problems with centering or stopping power?

The barrel udjuster is for the internal adjustment to tighten the cable tension, the brake is not made for cable housing

No issues with it being off center in 2 yrs use

Stem is steel, no deflection

Stopping power is sufficient for a TT bike, it works, I can stop

If you designed this brake today, I would buy it for sure

Otherwise, I'd set up a Tektro/Oval like Tom

To make a brake that is faster, the caliper should to be small, and it needs to be a centerpull design sans cable housing

(I have the wind tunnel results from the Hooker vs. Dura Ace test, across a 30deg yaw sweep, from my 1/2 hr session at LSWT in 2007)

Else, I'd just stick an EE brake on the front and be done with it

Another option:

---

___________________________________
Paul | Medisch Info | Medisch Zoeken

I have an older pair of Ultegra brakes that I am thinking about doing this too. Guys in the machine shop can make it look a lot better than a HACK job in the field.

The only reason that I am not doing it at this time is because I do not have a back up pair of brakes and I am not sure about braking performance.

If you do it, let us know how it worked for you! I am very curious.

---

___________________________________
Paul | Medisch Info | Medisch Zoeken

This cable adjuster, that looks just like every other one, includes fittings for both brake and derailleur cables:

http://www.nashbar.com/...amp;mr:referralID=NA

"The Nashbar In-line cable Adjuster Set allows you to install a cable adjuster anywhere you have cable housing! Perfect for when you are running Cantilevers with STI levers, or bikes without head tube adjusters. Set includes 2 adjusters and fittings for brake or derailleur."

---

Suffer Well.