Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    359

    Felt FR1 direct mount brake problem

    Hi all,

    I'm hoping this is the best forum for this question. I have a new Felt FR1 frame, which has direct mount rear brakes. The problem I've run into is that I am running November AForce Al-33 rims that have an outside width of 26mm. My shop says that the 105 direct mount brake will open just 19 mm before bumping up against the chainstay.

    Clearly seems like this shouldn't happen, but it is. My LBS suggested I need the calipers to open at least 30mm. I've called the shop I bought the frame from and they are checking with Shimano, but it's the weekend, so won't know until Monday at earliest. Anyone run into this sort of problem and come up with a solution?

    Thanks,
    Bradley

  2. #2
    'brifter' is a lame word.
    Reputation: cxwrench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,381
    I've built a bunch of those bikes w/ both the TRP made brake last year and the Cane Creek/eecycling direct mount brake this year. They are all used w/ Zipp wheels, mainly the 303...plenty of clearance. I've noticed nothing that would make me thing Shimano brakes wouldn't work but I haven't tried them. If no one here has experience w/ the 105 I can yank one off a floor bike and see how it works on the F1...I'm building another one this coming week.
    I work for some bike racers
    I've got some bikes, some guns,
    and a bunch of skateboards

  3. #3
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    359
    Thanks CX. I heard back from Felt, kinda surprising for a Saturday afternoon, and they suggested the cane creek as well, but were going to check and get back to me come Monday. I'll look at the TRP as well as I'm not familiar with them. I didn't go in to see what trouble my shop was having, but my guess is the brake pad holders, whatever those are called, stick up between the chainstays, even though every diagram I could find shows them fitting beneath the stays. Of course, what diagram would show them not working? Thanks again.
    Bradley

  4. #4
    'brifter' is a lame word.
    Reputation: cxwrench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,381
    Quote Originally Posted by bleckb View Post
    Thanks CX. I heard back from Felt, kinda surprising for a Saturday afternoon, and they suggested the cane creek as well, but were going to check and get back to me come Monday. I'll look at the TRP as well as I'm not familiar with them. I didn't go in to see what trouble my shop was having, but my guess is the brake pad holders, whatever those are called, stick up between the chainstays, even though every diagram I could find shows them fitting beneath the stays. Of course, what diagram would show them not working? Thanks again.
    Cool...I'd recommend the CC instead of the TRP. The TRP felt mushy all last year even after Jim Felt had some braces made for the team bikes. The Cane Creek is a really nice brake.
    I work for some bike racers
    I've got some bikes, some guns,
    and a bunch of skateboards

  5. #5
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    359
    Thanks for the suggestion. I have a feeling, though kinda expensive, the Cane Creek will also be more readily available.
    Bradley

  6. #6
    'brifter' is a lame word.
    Reputation: cxwrench's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    13,381
    Quote Originally Posted by bleckb View Post
    Thanks for the suggestion. I have a feeling, though kinda expensive, the Cane Creek will also be more readily available.
    Most likely, that TRP is probably OEM only, or near enough.
    I work for some bike racers
    I've got some bikes, some guns,
    and a bunch of skateboards

  7. #7
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,712
    There's a whole thread here about unpopular opinions about cycling.


    http://forums.roadbikereview.com/gen...ns-364877.html

    Direct mount might get added to that as I'm completely missing the reason these exist. "Very slight" aero advantage ?, very slight braking advantage where none is needed ?. Headaches with wider rims and tires, plus headaches installing ?.

  8. #8
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    359
    The direct mount brakes are not important to me, except that they work when I need them to work. I've been loving Felt frames for more than a few years for how they ride, and when I had the chance to level up from a 2014 F2 to this year's FR1, I couldn't think of any other frame I'd rather ride. So, the direct mount is a bit of a pain in getting it set up, but not a deal breaker. Whatever aero advantage they may provide is certainly offset by my paunch.
    Bradley

  9. #9
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by bleckb View Post
    The direct mount brakes are not important to me, except that they work when I need them to work. I've been loving Felt frames for more than a few years for how they ride, and when I had the chance to level up from a 2014 F2 to this year's FR1, I couldn't think of any other frame I'd rather ride. So, the direct mount is a bit of a pain in getting it set up, but not a deal breaker. Whatever aero advantage they may provide is certainly offset by my paunch.
    There's 2 things I'd never get on a carbon road frame - 1) Press fit b-bracket and 2) Direct mount brakes.

    What reading I did on direct mount, especially with the rear mounted on the bottom of the chainstays, is it's a crappy location for a brake, where the braking action is trying to pull the brake off the frame, vs. pushing it into the seatstays. This was a concept on mt. bikes 30 years ago, soon abandoned and that was with predominantly aluminum frames. I'm not sure I'd trust carbon in this application, unless a dozen manufacturers jump on the band wagon and have been doing it a decade.

    And I'm no luddite, I bit the bullet and run Di2, so like technology where it makes sense. DM sure doesn't to me.

  10. #10
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve B. View Post
    There's 2 things I'd never get on a carbon road frame - 1) Press fit b-bracket and 2) Direct mount brakes.

    What reading I did on direct mount, especially with the rear mounted on the bottom of the chainstays, is it's a crappy location for a brake, where the braking action is trying to pull the brake off the frame, vs. pushing it into the seatstays. This was a concept on mt. bikes 30 years ago, soon abandoned and that was with predominantly aluminum frames. I'm not sure I'd trust carbon in this application, unless a dozen manufacturers jump on the band wagon and have been doing it a decade.

    And I'm no luddite, I bit the bullet and run Di2, so like technology where it makes sense. DM sure doesn't to me.
    How many front brakes, which do most of the stopping, have you heard being pulled off of front forks? All front rim brakes are trying to pull the brake off the frame.

    I agree, bottom bracket mounted rear brakes is a terrible place to mount a brake. It's not an easy area to make adjustments, and accumulates a lot of road grime which can interfere with braking. I believe these two reasons were the main reason why bottom bracket brakes on mtn bikes were abandoned 30 years ago.

  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by RHankey View Post
    How many front brakes, which do most of the stopping, have you heard being pulled off of front forks? All front rim brakes are trying to pull the brake off the frame.

    .
    Look at the typical size of chainstays and compare to the fork blades. Big difference in structure.

    But I'm no expert at this and expect that manufactures can tailor carbon to do what they need to support the load, just wondering why bother with little or nothing yo be gained.

    Note that this is my uninformed opinion only. I can see why DMs are installed on sculpted aero frames, where the blending of components into the frame can yield results.

  12. #12
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve B. View Post
    Look at the typical size of chainstays and compare to the fork blades. Big difference in structure.

    But I'm no expert at this and expect that manufactures can tailor carbon to do what they need to support the load, just wondering why bother with little or nothing yo be gained.

    Note that this is my uninformed opinion only. I can see why DMs are installed on sculpted aero frames, where the blending of components into the frame can yield results.
    Size of structure or material is irrelevant, as frame makers need to ensure there is sufficient material/bracing for the brake in the location and orientation they choose. It is likely a lot easier to achieve sufficient material/bracing right next to the bottom bracket than on the seat stays. Regardless, just how many times have you heard of brakes being ripped out of road bike frames, regardless of mounting location or orientation?

    I asked you about front brakes specifically, as front brakes deal with significantly greater pulling forces than a bottom bracket mounted rear brake will ever face, and for the last 20 years most road bikes have almost exclusively used CF forks, a material for which you question its suitability for brakes oriented such that they are being pulled out of their mounting brackets.

    I repeat, I agree BB mounted brakes is not a great idea, but for different reasons than you give. For TT bikes, it might be deemed an acceptable compromise for some, but not one I would have ever chosen in my racing days.

  13. #13
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    359
    And me, I just want the brakes to fit so I can ride my new frame!
    Bradley

  14. #14
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by RHankey View Post

    I asked you about front brakes specifically,
    As just continuing an interesting discussion;

    I wonder if fronts would have gone on the rear of the fork if they could re-design the frame to allow clearance. Likely more aero as well.

    Rear chainstay design is a huge compromise with competing requirements of A) Not re-inventing to a new b-bracket and crank design to accommodate a beefier chainstay and B) Still allow the trend to wider tires.

    Obviously Felt feels that it has a solution, even though the track record is for manufacturers to abandon chainstay mounted brakes. Carbon induces a new and interesting factor, though as the OP has discovered, there are obviously some ongoing limitations.

    But agree that it's a solution without a problem.

Similar Threads

  1. Felt FR1 and AR1 Frame Prices - OUCH!
    By Lachapr in forum Felt
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-12-2018, 08:40 PM
  2. AR1 or FR1 Frameset?
    By Lachapr in forum Felt
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-23-2017, 01:38 PM
  3. Shimano cranks in FR1 frame
    By GT8 in forum Felt
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-30-2017, 02:48 PM
  4. Direct mount brakes - brake lever compatibility
    By 491025 in forum Components, Wrenching
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-20-2014, 06:15 AM
  5. Difference between direct mount and hangar mount?
    By shades9323 in forum Components, Wrenching
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-30-2008, 07:17 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

roadbikereview.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.