Brake linings shortening ?

[rex.webb]

Please
Can any one remember the post on
IMPROVING BRAKING by SHORTENING ONE BRAKE LINING ?
I have two brake shoes , one has had it,s lining shortened.
NOW should that be the
LEADING SHOE or TRAILING ??
Thanks in anticipation of a reply.
RIDE with CARE and LIVE LONG
to ENJOY YOUR MOTORCYCLING and SCOOTERING

[SPRIDDLER]

It must be the trailing end of the trailing shoe.
See the link below for my explanatory post and photos from 2013:

http://www.jampot.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 66#p115566

I recently re-wrote and expanded the above post as an article for the Jampot mag which may appear in due course.

[Rob Harknett]

I have to wonder why manufacturers were not aware of this? If they were, why did they not do it? Could it be because, tapering the linings had almost the same effect, but gave the advantage of longer life to the linings once bedded in.

[MalcW]

I always thought that tapering the ends was to prevent brake squeal. I suspect that the real reason they don't do it is because as things stand they only have to make 1 brake shoe which works in either leading or trailing positions. To do it differently would require 2 different shoes, i.e. more effort. Plus there is the risk that someone will install them the wrong way round of course.

[SPRIDDLER]

I have to wonder why manufacturers were not aware of this? If they were, why did they not do it? Could it be because, tapering the linings had almost the same effect, but gave the advantage of longer life to the linings once bedded in.

I guess that when all the components were new and concentric it wasn't thought necessary/economic to fettle brakes individually. Traffic was slower and less dense. Plus the old asbestos linings were more 'grippy' and in those days riders were happy/safer (accustomed to?) stopping in 29 feet from 30mph.
Manufacturers developed the twin leading shoe brake because for the same rider's hand force on the handlebar lever and the same brake lining area each shoe was a leading shoe and therefore each shoe benefited from the 'servo' effect. It was more expensive to produce though

[SPRIDDLER]

I always thought that tapering the ends was to prevent brake squeal. I suspect that the real reason they don't do it is because as things stand they only have to make 1 brake shoe which works in either leading or trailing positions. To do it differently would require 2 different shoes, i.e. more effort. Plus there is the risk that someone will install them the wrong way round of course.

Yes, tapering the ends slightly is supposed to prevent brake squeal as it reduces the build-up or 'bow wave' of brake dust being pushed ahead of the end of the lining. I've not had brake squeal and I suspect less dust is generated with today's hard composite linings than by the softer woven asbestos ones.

Ferodo linings NOS (640x480).jpg

[Harry44]

Many years ago I bought a Triumph Saint (police version of the bonny) it had the conical hub twin leading shoe front brakes and single leading shoe rear. Riding it home the brakes were awful. The front took a huge effort to get any brake force from it and the rear was like putting a stick through the spokes, best left alone.
The route home took me over the hills and included a cross roads at the top of a steep hill. I stopped at the cross roads using just the front brake. As soon as we stopped...…………...it rolled away backwards. Now twin leading brakes are never much good going backwards but I didn't expect that!

Fortunately there was no traffic behind me as I was unable to attempt using the rear brake as my legs were paddling furiously backwards in an attempt to keep the bike shiny side up. The result was inevitable, but little damage was done.

Once I had the bike home I started with the basics, and yup the brake cable was seized solid, disconnected at both ends I couldn't move it by hand.

I wanted the bike to be complete and talking to an ex-copper friend he revealed he had a pair of police panniers in his loft. Without asking the obvious question I bought them and fitted them. Dead easy as a bracket ran from the (unused) pillion peg mounting then turned through 90 degrees to the top suspension mounting. riding up the road with me nice panniers on it really looked the part no police markings no blue lights but you could still see what it used to be.

Then I hit a pothole and bang !!! On came the rear brake, hard, we came to a screeching halt. It was now obvious what the problem was, the little lever on the rear brake was the wrong way up and had snagged the pannier bracket. I walked home, got some spanners, took the pannier back off to release the brake, turned the lever through 180 degrees and voila a nice usable back brake. Funny old world innit?

Cheers Harry

[rex.webb]

THANK,S Spriddler as you say
It must be the trailing end of the trailing shoe.
See the link below for my explanatory post and photos from 2013:

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=12693&p=115566#p115566

I recently re-wrote and expanded the above post as an article for the Jampot mag which may appear in due course.

[Pharisee]

Many years ago I bought a Triumph Saint (police version of the bonny) it had the conical hub twin leading shoe front brakes and single leading shoe rear. Riding it home the brakes were awful.......

I currently have a '71 Bonneville with the frorementiond twin leading shoe front brake. I sorted it out by scrapping the fabricated operating arms and machining a pair from solid stainless steel... I also made them 1/2" longer between centres. The brake cable with the brake light switch incorporated was discarded as it was too 'spongy' and an heavier after market cable fitted. Some time was spent with a fine cut flat file and a stick of chalk removing the high spots and ensuring contact over the whole of the shoes surface. That improved the braking a lot. Twin discs it isn't but it is well up to the bikes modest performance.

NYM_1181.jpg

[Mick D]

Hi John

Why did you go for compressing the levers rather than the rigid link?

Regards Mick