new tektro cx brakes
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 46
  1. #1
    CDB
    CDB is offline
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    381

    new tektro cx brakes

    https://www.tektro.com/02products/10992ag.php



    Looks like some nice features that maybe the spooky/frogglegg brakes might not offer....?
    For example, toe in using standard cartridge-style pads, w/o having to bend the brake posts manually w/ pliers. Also, adjustable spring tension on each side. Weight not to shabby either! 121 grams / wheel

    I have not used these yet, nor do I know how much they cost. But if they are priced comparably lower, similar to their Oryx brakes, I would imagine that there is quite a good value here.

  2. #2
    Samurai on Two Wheels
    Reputation: Lord Taipan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    452
    Hmmm interesting. All I really know of Tektro is I hate their disc brakes, but I'd love to see what people think of these.

  3. #3
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    383
    I have no problem with my oryx brakes. They are strong enough to stop me. I would be interested to give these new brakes a try. Besides, I am going to save a few ounces with them.
    Last edited by Crank-a-Roo; 07-25-2007 at 08:59 PM.

  4. #4
    Frites en Mayo Velo Club
    Reputation: cx_fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    226
    QBP part numbers are:
    Silver - BR7460
    Black- BR7462

    (my bad....they can be used for front or rear)

    Retail is around 40 dollars a wheel. Weight is about 120 grams a wheel. They come in silver only

    They wont be in stock until mid August though.
    Last edited by cx_fan; 07-27-2007 at 06:57 AM.

  5. #5
    vegan cyclocross disco
    Reputation: iamandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    428
    QBP has a black model listed also. 8/13 in stock date.

    As long as the braking power is there, these seem like the way to go.

  6. #6
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    475

    Comming stock on new Norco CX bikes

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    https://www.tektro.com/02products/10992ag.php



    Looks like some nice features that maybe the spooky/frogglegg brakes might not offer....?
    For example, toe in using standard cartridge-style pads, w/o having to bend the brake posts manually w/ pliers. Also, adjustable spring tension on each side. Weight not to shabby either! 121 grams / wheel

    I have not used these yet, nor do I know how much they cost. But if they are priced comparably lower, similar to their Oryx brakes, I would imagine that there is quite a good value here.
    Norco bikes had a tent with some mt bikes and two cross bikes at MT bike race a couple of weeks ago in Bellingham WA- just south of Canada. Those new brakes were comming stock on both of there cross bikes- one 105 group and one with tiara mix group. I didn't get a chance to ride the bikes but they have a very nice lever feel with the sti levers. They also look like a very nice paul copy-even nice looking coil springs, similar looking to pauls. I havn't had really good luck with their v-brakes, or levers, but these look more promising, wheather they stay adjusted well, and keep even spring tention over time like pauls remains to be seen, but at a much lower price point it might be worth it to try if new brakes were needed, and if they came stock on a bike they appear to be as good or better then many of the other OE brakes out there.

  7. #7
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    434
    I had some brakes a while ago with the V-brake style of pad, very similar design as well. To be honest, they pretty much sucked.

    Looked cool and were easy to adjust, but they didn't have enough power to take advantage of that type of pad. I found I really had to pull hard on the levers to get them to do much of anything. V-brake pads seem to be much harder than cani pads, so take that into consideration. I even tried the softer red Ritchey pads, which helped, but in the end, they were much worse than I had hoped, so off they came.

  8. #8
    CDB
    CDB is offline
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    381
    Quote Originally Posted by one_speed
    I had some brakes a while ago with the V-brake style of pad, very similar design as well. To be honest, they pretty much sucked.

    Looked cool and were easy to adjust, but they didn't have enough power to take advantage of that type of pad. I found I really had to pull hard on the levers to get them to do much of anything. V-brake pads seem to be much harder than cani pads, so take that into consideration. I even tried the softer red Ritchey pads, which helped, but in the end, they were much worse than I had hoped, so off they came.
    The removable cartridge style pad isn't exclusive to v-brakes. They are the same pad compound, depending on the brand and work in both canti's as well as linear pull (v) brakes. The difference is that w/ the removeable style, you can slide in a new insert and be good to go for less setup work. The hardness varies between manufacturers, and also depending on if they are intended for regular or ceramic rims (ceramic pads are much harder and will kill a standard rim very fast).

  9. #9
    Cyclocross is Seasonal?
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    711
    Anyone remember the Radius cantis that looked like they would work great but didn't?

    These Tektros remind me an awful lot of the Radius brakes.

    Shudder (literally)

    If they work well, it'd be awesome, but we'll have to wait until someone has ridden them.

  10. #10
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: turbomatic73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    687

    Tektro also makes these...

    Saw these Tektro brakes on velo-orange the other day...MAFAC knock-offs to a t. Anyone tried them? they look cool!




    http://velo-orange.com/temacabr.html
    Attached Images Attached Images

  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegancx
    Anyone remember the Radius cantis that looked like they would work great but didn't?
    Those are the ones I was speaking of, couldn't remember the name. We'll see who takes the leap and reports back.

  12. #12
    duh...
    Reputation: FatTireFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    9,658
    total frogleg ripoffs...

    yeah, I remember those radius things and was remineded of them... upon closer inspection they looked really cheap. are those skinny arms gonna flex?

  13. #13
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Albino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    223
    I almost picked these up at a swap meet very cheap. They are way too heavy and didn't seem very smooth. The arms are double wide and sturdy no flexing.

    I'm going with the new Tektro canti's when they come out.

  14. #14
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: jeremyb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    813
    I like em, think they look retro cool. remind me of these a little:

    PlusOneLap.com: Online Cyclocross Magazine

  15. #15
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    56
    Got the new Tektros today and just finished installing them. These replaced the Oryx brakes on the front of my Felt. I was kind of worried when the label said 161g/wheel but that weight includes all the hardware. The spring is separate from the arms so they'll be easy to replace if you need to. I rode them for a few minutes on the road and they seem to stop ok.

    One question. Do I have the straddle cable set up right? I'm not sure if I've got it too high.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  16. #16
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    434
    You generally want the cable higher with this type of brake. Looks good to me. If they're still not doing quite what you'd like, you can try a pad with a softer compound.

  17. #17
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    362
    Quote Originally Posted by cx_fan
    QBP part numbers are:
    Silver - BR7460
    Black- BR7462

    (my bad....they can be used for front or rear)

    Retail is around 40 dollars a wheel. Weight is about 120 grams a wheel. They come in silver only

    They wont be in stock until mid August though.

    Wow, AEBike has them for $23.
    That's cheap!

  18. #18
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by dyg2001
    Wow, AEBike has them for $23.
    That's cheap!
    That explains a lot. I was expecting $40 from my LBS when I picked them up, but I ended up paying less than what AEBike would be with shipping to my house.

  19. #19
    CDB
    CDB is offline
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    381
    Quote Originally Posted by bchuang
    Got the new Tektros today and just finished installing them. These replaced the Oryx brakes on the front of my Felt. I was kind of worried when the label said 161g/wheel but that weight includes all the hardware. The spring is separate from the arms so they'll be easy to replace if you need to. I rode them for a few minutes on the road and they seem to stop ok.

    One question. Do I have the straddle cable set up right? I'm not sure if I've got it too high.
    I don't know much about setup of those types of brakes. But I did take your photo and superimpose the Oryx brakes over the top of the CR720's to compare...



    I lined up the brake bosses and pads and they seem to be pretty much the same scale. Then I superimposed another trialign yoke further down to a position where I personally like to set my brakes up. This lower angle seems to give me more braking power w/ less hand force.

    I drew three different colored lines.

    1. The magenta pink one represents where I'd personally set up the brakes for the Oryx ones. That height is also very similar to the stock yoke that comes w/ the Avid Shorty brakes. I added a pic of that below.

    2. The turquoise blue line represents where the straddle cable would go if you used that low yoke position w/ the CR720's. Interestingly, you can see that where that blue line intersects w/ the Oryx brake arms. My guess is that your new brakes would give you poor leverage w/ that low position because it effectively makes the Oryx arms very short. I think the higher yoke is better.

    3. In order to get the same leverage out of the CR720's w/ the low yoke position, the arms would need to be as wide as the yellow line illustrates! Since that wouldn't be good either, I think the high yoke position as shown in your original picture is best. A secondary item of interest is that the path that the cable takes between the CR720 arm and the yoke contact point intersects at the same point as where the Oryx arms are. That tells me that the leverage is quite similar between the two brakes. But maybe I am missing something here that someone else might notice. ? Anyone else have comments about yoke height w/ this style brake?

    Those new brakes really do seem like a good design. I'd like to try them out. Do you notice that you have more rim clearance w/ the 720's vs. the Oryx?

    CDB

    My Avids:

  20. #20
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    518
    i'm particularly interested in a comparison of these new tektros to either the oryx or the paul's. my b bike has oryx which seem quite good, especially for the money. the downside is mud clearance with the oryx. my a bike has neo-retros that are starting to corrode and could use new springs. instead of new springs, i was thinking of going with these new tektros. any feedback in 'cross application yet?

  21. #21
    CDB
    CDB is offline
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    381
    Ok, this is a challenge to all other elite level racers... I dare you to get more geeky than me!

    Using CAD to study the movements, I graphically compared the "low yoke w/ Oryx" brake against the "high yoke w/ CR720" determined that while pulling a constant length of cable above the yoke, each brake moved a different amount.

    The Oryx pad rotated 7 degrees around the boss, and the CR720 rotated 9 degrees. That's 28.5% more movement. This means that for the same amount of cable pull, you get more brake movement w/ the wide brake. Or, another way to look at it is you have to pull less cable to move the CR720 brake the same amount as the Oryx. I also calculated that graphically and with the CR720's, it requires only 79.2% of the cable pull needed to move the Oryx brakes the same amount.


  22. #22
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    356
    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    Ok, this is a challenge to all other elite level racers... I dare you to get more geeky than me!
    Wow, impressively geeky. One thing I wonder though: with the way the pictures are superimposed, it doesn't look like there's any space for the post washers on the superimposed Oryx brake. If you add them, it would widen the brakes a little bit. Would that make a noticeable difference in cable pull ratios?

    If only they made road brake levers to pull more cable, we'd be able to use V's and not worry about all this stuff...

  23. #23
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    434
    Oh boy, wait until some get ahold of this. I've read too many posts of guys dissing the Vs for cross due to clearance. Personally, I don't have an issue with it. They'd be wider than your fork or seat stays. Generally, anyway.

  24. #24
    CDB
    CDB is offline
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    381
    Quote Originally Posted by winstonc
    Wow, impressively geeky. One thing I wonder though: with the way the pictures are superimposed, it doesn't look like there's any space for the post washers on the superimposed Oryx brake. If you add them, it would widen the brakes a little bit. Would that make a noticeable difference in cable pull ratios?

    If only they made road brake levers to pull more cable, we'd be able to use V's and not worry about all this stuff...
    I utilized this photo (taken from above) for the overlayed image stuff. They have the same distance from pad to brake arm and the washer scenario seems identical... so, no, I don't think that is a factor. And no, if the washer setup was different, it would not change the cable pull ratio. The brake would still need to travel the same distance along the radius, center of rotation being the boss. It might be a minute difference (if any) but may as well consider it a non-factor. The main point illustrated was that the different brakes require different ratio's of cable pull, thus give a different "brake power" feel at the brake lever.


  25. #25
    CDB
    CDB is offline
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    381
    Quote Originally Posted by one_speed
    Oh boy, wait until some get ahold of this. I've read too many posts of guys dissing the Vs for cross due to clearance. Personally, I don't have an issue with it. They'd be wider than your fork or seat stays. Generally, anyway.
    I think it's a small handful of reasons that contribute to the hesitation. Weight, bulk, adapters, aesthetics, clearance for mud, etc... But I agree, maybe not a big deal. Adam Craig doesn't have any problem racing w/ V brakes and Clincher tires too! I've ridden Avid canti's for the past 6 years in a lot of sticky mud and distance to the rim has never been a huge issue. I think braking power has more of an impact - the more grip at the rim relative to the leverage of your hand gripping force is the more important variable to consider. I was feeling the tektro "v" brakes that come stock on this fall's S-Works cx bikes and they felt pretty darn good. No adapter either.

    This whole issue of the "clearance to the pad from the rim while not braking" needs to be discussed. (I just put on my serious face here... be prepared ) Is it really that big of a deal? Whether my brake pad sits 2mm or 4mm or 6mm from the rim when I'm not grabbing the brakes, does that really matter while in the mud? That drag? When you're not braking, some of the muck gets picked up from the bottom of the wheel at the ground and it gunks up everything as it flings all over the place. Your eyes, downtube, drivetrain, etc. It's dirty and messy. Some of that ends up mucking up around the pad and sticking to the rim braking surface. How thick of a layer at the rim depends on how far away your pad sits to scrape the extra off. The bigger the gap, the thicker the layer of mud. The extra stuff that sticks to your pads will have to rub off first before you get good braking control. That factor is present w/ all brake systems. With a wider gap to the pad, that just means a thicker layer of goo can accumulate before needing to get scraped off by the pad when clamping down. The closer the pad sits to the rim while racing in muddy conditions means that you have that much more pad to wear down before the brake lever hits the bar and you are w/o any stopping power. Generally, I would say 2-4 mm is plenty of space.

    C'mon. I know you're out there. Get out your pocket protectors and tape up the nose bridge on your glasses. NERD ALERT! NERD ALERT! This is a super-sweet topic to discuss!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

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

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.