What is NOT to love about Paul Racer M brakes?

[reggiebaseball]

I am wondering what isn't awesome about these brakes.

This season I am gong to try some larger tires, 25, 27 and potentially 32.

I THINK that I can fit 25s on my bikes with ouzo pro carbon forks, maybe 27s but not sure.

On my steel fork bike, I am sure I can fit 25 and 27, but I am not sure with campy skeletons if I can fit 32s.

In both situations I start hitting the caliper before the frame or fork.

I am just wondering, why not throw a pair of Paul Racer M brakes on the steel fork bike and run whatever tires I want... I would get the ones with the center mount bolt.

That would open the world to 32 CX type tires.

Just wondering if I a missing something - like they cannot stop big guys on big hills, or the creak, or they slip out of adjustment super easy, or somehow they are not compatible with road riding or frames- anything like that.

thanks

[christian]

They require a cable hanger. Don't know if that's a downer, but it's different.

[witcombusa]

What is NOT to love about Paul Racer M brakes?


They are CNC machined not forged

[christian]

They are CNC machined not forged
Really? I assumed they machined a forged piece, not that they were machined from billet. If that's true, then yes, that's something to not love.

[Cat3roadracer]

I have them on my rando. They are grabby, but nothing like a Dura Ace caliper, for example. Nice looking, well made, tons of clearance. Not right for every situation, but cool on certain bikes.

[EricEstlund]

The brakes are longer reach then your Campy's- 47/57mm vs. 40/50mm. The brake has more length for a bigger tire, but the frame (rear bridge height) and fork (crown height) might not.

All of that said, if the frame will work with them, they are great brakes.

[reggiebaseball]

I think they look nice
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22538785@N05/8708190342/in/photostream/

[PaMtbRider]

They are a little pricey but work great. I typically run a 35c cyclocross tire and have no clearance problems at all.

[jpw]

dedicated boss positions on stays (unless one chooses the center mount version).

n.b. Paul's website has been revamped.

[donevwil]

I agree with christian, laying out a functional and aesthetically pleasing cable hanger solution can be a challenge on a road bike, especially if you don't have a good amount of headset to bar rise. The brakes themselves are great. Yes they are machined from billet not forged, but that's not an issue for a well designed part, only for poorly designed, weight first, form over function parts.

[reggiebaseball]

because of where the holes are inthe fork crown, what I find is that the brakes are what hit the tires first, not the fork crowns, etc.
What I find is that the skeleton caliper brake goes 1cm down below the pivot screw point.

So from looking at the Paul brakes, which have no bridge below the brake center screw mount, I think I would gain back about 1CM, which is pretty critical down there to tire options,
but I am trying to figure it out for the steel fork bike.

[jbrainin]

What's not to love? They are very heavy.

that's all.

[Mark McM]

What's not to love?

As mentioned, they require a cable hanger. If you have a lightweight (flexible) steerer, they may be prone to chattering (see issues on cantilever brake chatter).

They only have a 1:1 leverage ratio, which is roughly the same as single pivot sidepull brakes, and less than dual pivot brakes or mini-V brakes, so more hand force will be required for the same braking force.

Like any other brake with wide-set pivots, they are less tolerant of changes in rim width - if set up for wide rims, then installing a wheel with a narrow rim may allow the pads to sweep up into the tire.

The Paul Racer M brake are basically a traditional centerpull brake. Centerpull brakes fell out of usage due to too many disadvantages and no particular advantages.

[Lionel]

but I am not sure with campy skeletons if I can fit 32s.


Certainly it won't fit.

Racer M work very well (I have the center mount) if the frame can take them.

[rugbysecondrow]

Price. They are expensive. The centerpull are not as good as the ones which have side braze-ons, and that is an expensive after thought. They are also bulky/chunky looking, IMO.

I am wondering what isn't awesome about these brakes.

This season I am gong to try some larger tires, 25, 27 and potentially 32.

I THINK that I can fit 25s on my bikes with ouzo pro carbon forks, maybe 27s but not sure.

On my steel fork bike, I am sure I can fit 25 and 27, but I am not sure with campy skeletons if I can fit 32s.

In both situations I start hitting the caliper before the frame or fork.

I am just wondering, why not throw a pair of Paul Racer M brakes on the steel fork bike and run whatever tires I want... I would get the ones with the center mount bolt.

That would open the world to 32 CX type tires.

Just wondering if I a missing something - like they cannot stop big guys on big hills, or the creak, or they slip out of adjustment super easy, or somehow they are not compatible with road riding or frames- anything like that.

thanks

[palincss]

The Paul Racer M brake are basically a traditional centerpull brake. Centerpull brakes fell out of usage due to too many disadvantages and no particular advantages.

Centerpull brakes fell out of fashion because everyone swooned over Campagnolo sidepulls, even thought they had the reputation of being such poor stoppers they were called "speed modulators."

Just off the top of my head I can give you at least two advantages of the centerpull design: clearance for wider tires, and more room for fenders.

[bicycletricycle]

pauls are cool, they look a little chunky in comparison to the forged center pulls of old.

[Mark McM]

Centerpull brakes fell out of fashion because everyone swooned over Campagnolo sidepulls, even thought they had the reputation of being such poor stoppers they were called "speed modulators."

Just off the top of my head I can give you at least two advantages of the centerpull design: clearance for wider tires, and more room for fenders.

It was the Delta brakes that were called "speed modulators", the sidepull brakes were very good (and an improvement over centerpull brakes).

If Paul wanted to increase tire/fender clearance and maintain the braking performance of sidepulls, they should have started with a design more like the Shimano Dura-Ace 9000 calipers, and simply re-spaced the pivots.

http://dev2.infocaster.net/media/2875/Products-base-brakes.jpg

If they had done this, they would have been very similar to the Altenberger Synchron brakes, which are the original dual pivot side-pull brakes (shown here with fat tires and fenders):

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7191/6773898930_a127ab222d_z.jpg http://lh6.ggpht.com/-OgbwfHNwAsI/TT4ws-5kC0I/AAAAAAAABHk/fRLzFvfPdbQ/_TB20979.JPG

[jbay]

What's not to love?

[...]

Like any other brake with wide-set pivots, they are less tolerant of changes in rim width - if set up for wide rims, then installing a wheel with a narrow rim may allow the pads to sweep up into the tire.In related fashion, if you suffer a lot of brake pad wear during a wet, dirty, mountainous ride, the pads can sweep up into the tyre too. I've seen it happen and it ain't pretty.

-- John

[palincss]

It was the Delta brakes that were called "speed modulators", the sidepull brakes were very good (and an improvement over centerpull brakes).


Mark, I tried a friend's bike once that had the 1970s vintage Campagnolo sidepulls. Lever effort was (to me) shockingly high and braking performance was almost nonexistent. I said something to him when I brought the bike back, and a bunch of riders hanging around started lecturing me about "speed modulators," and racer adrenalin and if they had sensitive and powerful brakes they'd all crash because of it, etc. etc.. I don't think I've ever actually seen Deltas on the road.

[jbay]

If they had done this, they would have been very similar to the Altenberger Synchron brakes, which are the original dual pivot side-pull brakes (shown here with fat tires and fenders):

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7191/6773898930_a127ab222d_z.jpg http://lh6.ggpht.com/-OgbwfHNwAsI/TT4ws-5kC0I/AAAAAAAABHk/fRLzFvfPdbQ/_TB20979.JPGA blast from the past! I had the Altenbergers on my first "racing" bike, from the age of six or seven. I won't try to review them, however. :rolleyes:

-- John

[donevwil]

Centerpull brakes fell out of fashion because everyone swooned over Campagnolo sidepulls, even thought they had the reputation of being such poor stoppers they were called "speed modulators.".

I've tried many old top-of-the-line old sidepulls, they are speed modulators at best (I'm 240lbs). I just put some early 70's centermount Mafac Racer centerpulls with Mathauser pads on my Mondia commuter, more powerful than all but the best dual pivots and I have clearance for monster tires. Have not tried the new Dura Aces, but the Paul Racer M and Mini-Motos are the most powerful rim brakes I've ever used. Yes, modulation is touchier than the best dual-pivots, rim width tolerance is poor (can't swap 19s for 23s or visa versa), if you're not lucky figuring out the perfect cable hanger solution it'll likely cost you a few hangers, stems & headsets and if you don't inspect and maintain your bike you may run your pads into the tires, but in terms of what brakes NEED to do, they are awesome.

[Ken Robb]

I have a bike with 1981 Nuovo Record Standard reach brakes. With stock pads they are "speed modulators". This may be due to the original design and material or their relatively short length.

With "modern" pads of salmon rubber they provide plenty of stopping but require a lot more hand power than modern dual pivots. Braking from the hoods with one's two smallest fingers as we do with new brakes would be difficult for a person with small or weak hands.

[jbay]

if you don't inspect and maintain your bike you may run your pads into the tires, but in terms of what brakes NEED to do, they are awesome.But I'm talking about what can happen in one long ride in bad conditions - the type of conditions in which you need your brakes most and require them to be dependable. That, for me, is a huge concern.

-- John

[donevwil]

But I'm talking about what can happen in one long ride in bad conditions - the type of conditions in which you need your brakes most and require them to be dependable. That, for me, is a huge concern.

-- John

Fair enough, not my riding environment so off my radar. Because of my size, the high speed descents here and numerous whack-job drivers, my priorities are very biased toward max power and clearance for real 32s. Not many viable options.

[witcombusa]

Mark, I tried a friend's bike once that had the 1970s vintage Campagnolo sidepulls. Lever effort was (to me) shockingly high and braking performance was almost nonexistent. I said something to him when I brought the bike back, and a bunch of riders hanging around started lecturing me about "speed modulators," and racer adrenalin and if they had sensitive and powerful brakes they'd all crash because of it, etc. etc.. I don't think I've ever actually seen Deltas on the road.

My Delta's see the road......

[Mark McM]

Mark, I tried a friend's bike once that had the 1970s vintage Campagnolo sidepulls. Lever effort was (to me) shockingly high and braking performance was almost nonexistent. I said something to him when I brought the bike back, and a bunch of riders hanging around started lecturing me about "speed modulators," and racer adrenalin and if they had sensitive and powerful brakes they'd all crash because of it, etc. etc.. I don't think I've ever actually seen Deltas on the road.

I think this may not be a true apples-to-apples comparison. More than just the calipers have changed over the years. Brakes in the '70s often had poor brake pads. These brakes also originally used unlined cable housings, which had more friction (decreased the cable force at the caliper). Vintage levers also didn't have return springs, which necessitated stronger caliper springs.

And, very importantly, single pivot calipers typically have a leverage ratio of 1:1, whereas modern dual pivot calipers have a leverage ratio of about 1.6:1, or about 60% higher. This higher leverage ratio provides more brake force for a given lever force. This is important factor, since the Paul Racer brakes being discussed have a leverage ratio of about 1:1, or about the same as single pivot calipers. With the same hand levers and cables, they should give similar performance to single pivot calipers.

[Mark McM]

I've tried many old top-of-the-line old sidepulls, they are speed modulators at best (I'm 240lbs). I just put some early 70's centermount Mafac Racer centerpulls with Mathauser pads on my Mondia commuter, more powerful than all but the best dual pivots and I have clearance for monster tires. Have not tried the new Dura Aces, but the Paul Racer M and Mini-Motos are the most powerful rim brakes I've ever used.

I'm not surprised that you find the Paul Mini-Motos very powerful, because the linear pull design gives them a leverage ratio of 2:1 or more - more than dual pivot sidepull brakes (and, as you say, at the cost of rim clearance). But I am quite surprised that you find them equivalent to Mafac Racer and Paul Racer M centerpull calipers, since these calipers have a leverage ratio of only about 1:1 - less than dual pivot brakes, and much less than the linear pull Mini-Moto brakes. Assuming the same brake pads are used, these centerpull brakes should be in the same class for stopping force for lever force at all.

[Mark McM]

I have a bike with 1981 Nuovo Record Standard reach brakes. With stock pads they are "speed modulators". This may be due to the original design and material or their relatively short length.

With "modern" pads of salmon rubber they provide plenty of stopping but require a lot more hand power than modern dual pivots. Braking from the hoods with one's two smallest fingers as we do with new brakes would be difficult for a person with small or weak hands.

I think this gets the heart of the matter. Modern dual pivot brakes have a higher leverage ratio than older single pivot brakes, which means that the same stopping force can be acheived with lower hand force, but at the expense of reduced pad/rim clearance (and greater weight). However, with enough hand force, there is no reason that single pivot calipers can't acheive the maximum possible braking. I was testing this out just the other night with my Cane Creek BRS200SL calipers, which are lightweight single pivot calipers. They may require a firmer hand squeeze to get the same stopping force, but I could still brake hard enough with the front brake to lift the rear wheel off the ground (which is pretty much the limit of bicycle braking).

[VoyTirando]

So, i'm looking at building up a frameset that was designed with medium reach brakes in mind, ideally Paul Racer Ms. In my ideal world, it would have canti studs and I'd mount the TRP EuroX's I have in my parts bin. But it doesn't....

So, is there a less expensive but universally admired alternative to these damned things out there? I can't find them used anywhere, and retail price is nuts. Are they worth the scratch?

[ColonelJLloyd]

What is NOT to love about Paul Racer M brakes?


They are CNC machined not forged

I've seen others make this comment about the Pauls and the VO sidepull. This just kinda strikes me as cork-sniffing. What percentage of Paul's break because of this? I'm guessing just about zero. Is your gripe with potential flex? Never been a problem for me.

[choke]

So, i'm looking at building up a frameset that was designed with medium reach brakes in mind, ideally Paul Racer Ms. In my ideal world, it would have canti studs and I'd mount the TRP EuroX's I have in my parts bin. But it doesn't....

So, is there a less expensive but universally admired alternative to these damned things out there? I can't find them used anywhere, and retail price is nuts. Are they worth the scratch?IMO they are easily worth it....they have great stopping power and modulation plus loads of clearance.

This tire measures 32mm.....

http://hampco.ciocctoo.com/brakes.jpg

[zennmotion]

So, i'm looking at building up a frameset that was designed with medium reach brakes in mind, ideally Paul Racer Ms. In my ideal world, it would have canti studs and I'd mount the TRP EuroX's I have in my parts bin. But it doesn't....

So, is there a less expensive but universally admired alternative to these damned things out there? I can't find them used anywhere, and retail price is nuts. Are they worth the scratch?

Worth the scratch is a subjective question. Other alternatives include the VO centerpull brakes, Compass cycles, and Diacompe is still making centerpulls, both less expensive than Pauls. And of course you can troll Ebay for some older used centerpulls from Mafac and Weinmann, with new modern brake shoes they would work very well. And of course there are mid-reach caliper brakes- Shimano BR650, VO, Tektro that all work nicely with clearance for 32-35mm tires if your frame allows the shoes to be set at the bottom of the slot. I think some of the discussion regarding braking power missed the point that centerpull brakes offer somewhat better modulation and power than single-pivot calipers. I would say, based on my experience with Paul Racers, that they really offer similar performance to dual-pivot calipers that were developed to provide an even, linear response to braking effort as compared with single pivots. Centerpulls allow for more tire clearance than mid-reach calipers, if the brake is the limitation (as opposed to fork crown or chain stay clearance that is the limiter). Whether Pauls are "worth it" depends- you can get brakes with equal performance less expensively with mid-reach calipers or one of the less expensive centerpulls as a cost-benefit decision. If you don't see yourself using larger tires than 33mms or so then mid-reach calipers would be just fine. Pauls are very pretty (IMO) and you're paying some extra for a small boutique brand. I have a set of Paul Racers (47-59mm reach) that I ordered by mistake, thought I was getting the shorter Racer M's (47mm limit), but it was a happy error as it turns out that they work fine with the shoes set at the top of the slots, and it allows me the option to convert to 650b (with fatter tires) simply by moving the shoes to the bottom of the slots. So happy coincidence or brilliant forethought by Tom K/Spectrum, I don't care- there's a set of 650b wheels in my future, just when I thought I had exhausted all reasonable justifications for another N+1... more wheels don't count! The Pauls feel really smooth and even, great power equal to (maybe better than?) calipers and look pretty especially in polished.

[PaMtbRider]

It's been about 3 years since I commented on this thread. Since then I've bought a Kirk JKS-X with Paul Racer M brakes and still love them.

[VoyTirando]

@the last three posters, this is great food for thought. the picture alone is such a hard sell. They do look amazing. I haven't seen a long reach caliper that looks nearly as elegant; they somehow look imbalanced, whereas the Pauls look great. And let's be honest, how our bikes look is important to most of us (witness fancy lugs, paint, matching colors, lining up tire labels with the valve....).

Re: performance, it's hard to find a modern brake that doesn't perform. Even the fiddly cantis on my Bridgestone (yes, TRPs, which are nice), when set up with Kool Stop salmons, are killer - witness me locking them up twice on my commute to work yesterday in NYC traffic, totally reliable even when wet. Even older technology seems pretty great: the single pivot 105 calipers on my wife's bike, same nice brake shoes, are totally reliable. So...

Is it worth the premium price for looks alone?

(an aside, is that I have this paint-is-crap but bones-are-righteous Ciocc designer '84 i've pondered setting up 650B, and the comment above makes me think I could swap the Pauls around between projects and finally try that theory out).

Food. For. Thought.

[zennmotion]

@the last three posters, this is great food for thought. the picture alone is such a hard sell. They do look amazing. I haven't seen a long reach caliper that looks nearly as elegant; they somehow look imbalanced, whereas the Pauls look great. And let's be honest, how our bikes look is important to most of us (witness fancy lugs, paint, matching colors, lining up tire labels with the valve....).

Re: performance, it's hard to find a modern brake that doesn't perform. Even the fiddly cantis on my Bridgestone (yes, TRPs, which are nice), when set up with Kool Stop salmons, are killer - witness me locking them up twice on my commute to work yesterday in NYC traffic, totally reliable even when wet. Even older technology seems pretty great: the single pivot 105 calipers on my wife's bike, same nice brake shoes, are totally reliable. So...

Is it worth the premium price for looks alone?

(an aside, is that I have this paint-is-crap but bones-are-righteous Ciocc designer '84 i've pondered setting up 650B, and the comment above makes me think I could swap the Pauls around between projects and finally try that theory out).

Food. For. Thought.

The Ciocc may be limited by chainstay and fork crown width for 650b, I'd be interested to know how large a tire you could fit. If you get the Pauls, you'll need cable hangers front and rear because they're not included with the brakes. The front hangers are easy to find and inexpensive, they're still common for CX bikes, and you can get them in silver or black- some don't have barrel adjusters so check, or use in-line cable adjusters- they are usually 1cm stack height (replacing a stem spacer), so they won't work if your stem is slammed, you'll need a cheap looking thin stamped steel model instead. The rear hangers are a little harder to find, the only one I found to work for me after lots of searching was an overpriced little doodad from Nitto. All the others looked cheap and ugly or were too long (Surly makes a nice looking one as well but it's made for cantis that are hung lower on the seat stays, the Surly hanger is too long for centerpulls, at least on my bike). Get this Nitto model for centerpulls http://www.benscycle.com/p-440-nitto-as-1-rear-housing-stop.aspx It's stupid expensive for what it is, but it's pretty, had a barrel adjuster and if you're already dropping too much $$$ for the Paul brakes you might as well go all in on the hardware- details matter in tarting out a bike.

[adamhell]

(an aside, is that I have this paint-is-crap but bones-are-righteous Ciocc designer '84 i've pondered setting up 650B, and the comment above makes me think I could swap the Pauls around between projects and finally try that theory out).


if you are going to do a 650b conversion then you would need the paul racer (not M's) long reach brakes, i believe.

i just stuck the paul racer (not M's) on my black mtn cycles road, because the copy for it said it's meant for long reach brakes, but the brake pads are slid all the way up in the slot and still not making perfect contact with the rim. a set of racer Ms might be in my future.

[Nags&Ducs]

I'm about to order a set of Paul Racers but the 3 places I've looked (universal, niagra, and BTD) are all out of the rear brakes. Anyone know why that is? Do folks buy only rear Pauls and use something else for the front? I find it perplexing that the rears are not in stock.

[MaraudingWalrus]

Timely zombie thread revival...

my three speed fixed gear commuter thing needs a different front brake solution. Crappy caliper brake isn't cutting it, and doesn't really offer enough clearance for the monstrous michelin protek tires..

[charliedid]

I'm about to order a set of Paul Racers but the 3 places I've looked (universal, niagra, and BTD) are all out of the rear brakes. Anyone know why that is? Do folks buy only rear Pauls and use something else for the front? I find it perplexing that the rears are not in stock.

Try a shop that has an account or buy em direct.

Pretty sure they are in stock

[basilic]

it turns out that they work fine with the shoes set at the top of the slots, and it allows me the option to convert to 650b (with fatter tires) simply by moving the shoes to the bottom of the slots.

This is interesting but I don't get it. The difference in radius between 700 and 650b should be 19mm, (622-584)/2. Yet the Paul website rates the reach as 57-67mm, so 10 mm span. Have you tried it?

[VoyTirando]

Wow, there's a lot to look out for in setting these guys up. I know the Surly hanger, and may even have one somewhere. The Nitto does look more elegant and you make a strong case for tricking this bike out.

Re: spacing on the Ciocc, I measured where the tires would hit front and back. In the back, there's just about 40mm, and in the front there's tons of space, at least 40mm if not 50, so should be fine. But important caution re: Racers vs. Mediums, and I'd better do some measuring; I'd really like to use the brakes for more than one frameset, as I'm constantly getting curious about trying out some new combination with the parts i've got lying around.... I still haven't bought a set of brakes yet, still hoping a pair will turn up used.

[El Chaba]

All things considered, to accommodate a wider tire/fender setup centerpulls are definitely the best solution...and whenever centerpulls are called for-after all these years-I still think that Mafacs are the best solution. Choose whatever model provides the proper reach and replace the old pads with Koolstop salmons. This setup works remarkably well with ergopower levers.