EE Brakes – Cutting edge innovation or rehash of past failures?

[Tobias]

Reading the Meivici review pictures of the EE Brakes caught my eye, so I read their review with much interest.

http://pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=7013

The first thing that jumped out at me was the similarity in operational concept with the old Campy Delta brakes. Shimano had something similar too but less refined IMO than Campy’s.

These EE Brakes are reportedly a reinvention of wheel stoppers but isn’t the concept very similar to those of some old brakes, maybe just packaged differently to save weight? My question is how can they get around the intrinsic problems that were the demise of the old brakes?

For starters, the mechanical advantage of the brakes varies considerably with setup – hence why it’s necessary to get them adjusted just right (similar to some cantis). A quick look at the brakes shows the operation is not linear at all. And since the mechanical advantage can change significantly depending on initial setup, it would seem necessary to continue to make adjustments as the pads wear. I’m guessing that by the time the brake pads wear the equivalent of the thickness of an adjustment washer they will require washers to be repositioned to restore the mechanical advantage (or lack thereof as there would be too much).

Then there is the linkage that adds forces on the arms in the same direction as the brake pads, making forces on the pivots that much higher. That and the fact that there are five large-diameter pivots instead of the typical couple make it likely that the brakes have much higher friction than typical calipers. It’s no wonder a stronger return spring is a good thing ……… without one friction would make modulation even tougher.

Other than light weight, what can possibly make these brakes better than traditional calipers? Or is it one of those things you have to try to find out that they actually work better than they should in theory? I may be wrong regarding what appears to be inbuilt non-linear operation, greater friction, setup complexity compared to normal calipers, or the need to readjust as the pads wear, but to what degree should I trust a review that doesn’t address most of these issues?

The quick release is indeed clever; but isn’t it much like a V-brake cable being removed except that it’s in compression rather than tension? OK, innovative nevertheless. :cool:

Other than weight and the quick release, what’s actually innovative?

[goonster]

I wouldn't be surprised if there is some patent from circa 1893 that covers the mechanical function, but they are CNC machined out of gold-colored alloy so that is new . . .

[54ny77]

Irrespective of their technical wonder, I can only ask: how keen are you to clean the convoluted things when they're filthy?

[duke]

Here is a link to the VeloNews brake test report from earlier this year. It compares EE brakes to about a dozen other models.

http://www.eecycleworks.com/VNJune%20BrakeTest.pdf

duke

[Nil Else]

Irrespective of their technical wonder, I can only ask: how keen are you to clean the convoluted things when they're filthy?

Convoluted and monstrous... looks as though those ought to be able to stop a semi...

[RPS]

They caught my eye as well because the packaging (i.e. – cable routing and quick release) may lend themselves for the rear brake to be mounted under the bottom bracket (like on some time-trial bikes). The overall narrow design with the cable coming in from the top should make it workable for mounting under the BBKT, and the quick release would be on the non-drive side (away from the chainrings).

In general I don’t like non-linear actuation, which is one of the reasons I replaced canti brakes with mini-Vs on my Cannondale tandem. That’s not to say it’s a feature that can’t be made useful under the right circumstances.

Irrespective of their technical wonder, I can only ask: how keen are you to clean the convoluted things when they're filthy?
I’m with you on the cleaning requirement expectations. I don’t spend enough time cleaning my bikes as it is, so these brakes would be going in the wrong direction – beyond any other deficiencies they may or may not have. Weight savings alone would not be enough for me to spend time cleaning them – not to mention the higher cost. I’d stick with Dura-Ace which stop as good or better and cost less -- and easier to clean.

[Ken Robb]

I haven't tried all the new brakes but I wondered how any caliper brake could work better than Shimano 7800. It seems, per this test,there aren't any better overall. It would be interesting to see if the 7900 pads made the 7800 brakes even better.

[palincss]

The first thing that jumped out at me was the similarity in operational concept with the old Campy Delta brakes. Shimano had something similar too but less refined IMO than Campy’s.


Yes, the Shimano disk brake in the 1970s had the same operating mechanism as Campag Delta.

[dave thompson]

Shimano AX 'aero' brakes from the '80s.

[mpetry]

the EE's are similar, with a cam that acts on the cable and the opposing arm.

http://www.classiclightweights.co.uk/components/eb-kr-rb2.jpg

Mark Petry
Bainbridge Island, WA

[Tobias]

Here is a link to the VeloNews brake test report from earlier this year. It compares EE brakes to about a dozen other models.

http://www.eecycleworks.com/VNJune%20BrakeTest.pdf

duke
Thanks, that’s a good comparative review, and shows by their admission just how subjective cycling equipment reviews are. And that touches on part of my question – when do we know what to believe? How much credibility do these reviewers have, and how much should they have?

Do we ever see something tested from a major manufacturer where the reviewer says something like “this is really stupid, doesn’t work, don’t ever buy it”? It must happen so infrequently I don’t recall a single instance. Maybe major manufacturers don’t ever produce crap. :rolleyes:

This comparative test is a good example. They used multiple brake levers so we can probably assume they used different bikes, right? And it is suggested in the write up that not every caliper was tested with all levers except in the panic stops, which adds a variable that could easily sway results.

And then there is the number of riders doing the testing. Was it one or multiple riders? It would have been nice to note that; maybe do five stops with each of two riders. And then show the results to see if some brakes work comparatively better than others depending on rider.

The DA 7900 was the strongest stopper “hands down”, but due to inconsistency it did not finish first. Sometimes it could pull 1 G of deceleration and other times it couldn’t come close (based on average). What gives?

And then there is the pad material. “Another conclusion from our test impressions: Brake pads matter – in a huge way”. Who would have thought? :rolleyes:

Since a panic stop is limited by going over the bars, does it mean that most of these brakes could not generate enough front wheel braking to lift the rear wheel off the ground? And is so, why not? Could the rider not squeeze the brake lever harder? :confused:

[jblande]

Tobias,

I agree. I have never read a negative review of a bike product. As near as I can tell, these publications are slaves to their advertisements and sponsors. Normal controls for comparative analysis are never used and the real parameters for their 'rating' are never given. Most of the time, seems like a hoax to me.

Joel

[dannyg1]

Tobias,

I agree. I have never read a negative review of a bike product. As near as I can tell, these publications are slaves to their advertisements and sponsors. Normal controls for comparative analysis are never used and the real parameters for their 'rating' are never given. Most of the time, seems like a hoax to me.

Joel

Actually, and rare though it is, it was Velonews Editor Ben Delaney and the Mavic R-Sys (http://velonews.com/article/93054/a-shattering-experience---a-post-recall-r-sys-wheel-failure) that prove the 'Never say never' adage a worthwhile warning here.

Flipside is to count the post review Mavic advertising in Velonews (My bet is that you won't find any).

Best advice I ever read was a direct answer to a photography forum rant about this very issue from the Ex-Editor of Shutterbug magazine (notorious for never saying anything remarkably negative) and read simply: "Read between the lines".

There will forever be a Faustian bargain played out in the editing of magazines where reviews are published and there's not much that can be done to fix it; poor reviews lead to advertising boycotts. Advertising boycotts grow because people with like interests are sometimes even forced to join in. Large advertising boycotts lead to magazine death quickly.

Customer driven business models are end product, too expensive, to compete with industry driven models and so, are relegated to 'pursuits of passion' (which, even when done with the best of intentions, are done by the very people most likely married to a biased preconception of certain manufacturers and product lines. These people are probably the least likely group to consistently produce 'perfect' reviews). Remember 'Power corrupts'.

Getting manufacturer's to participate in 'shootout' style tests is nigh impossible without prior assurance that, should their product not win (or come out near the top), an attempt, by the magazine, will be made to allow for 'out of the fire' wiggle room.

Anyone require better brake pads to go with that otherwise excellent brake?

Tobias,
You'd do well to ask the excellent questions you've posted of the Editor's at Velonews. The answers would surely be interesting.

[RPS]

And then there is the pad material. “Another conclusion from our test impressions: Brake pads matter – in a huge way”. Who would have thought? :rolleyes:

Since a panic stop is limited by going over the bars, does it mean that most of these brakes could not generate enough front wheel braking to lift the rear wheel off the ground? And is so, why not? Could the rider not squeeze the brake lever harder? :confused:
In a panic stop on a traditional bike the front brake stops the wheel and the front tire stops the bike (tandems and recumbents can be a little different).

Since the test rider demonstrated the capacity to decelerate at more than 10 meters/second/second with the Shimano DA 7900, then it follows that with some of the tested brakes he was not even close to the point of going over the bars. We have to assume the only thing that kept him from decelerating quicker was the lack of brake “power”.

And in that regard, there is a strong correlation between the “Power Feel” rating and the rate of deceleration – no surprise there. But brake power comes down mostly to mechanical advantage and coefficient of friction between the pads and rim. However, regardless of less of either, it doesn’t prevent the rider from pulling harder on the lever to compensate for lower mechanical advantage or coefficient of friction. In the real world a rider may limit how hard he pulls based on fear of breaking a cable or something else and then not having much brake at all, but in a controlled test the question of limited rider input is indeed interesting.

[RPS]

Shimano AX 'aero' brakes from the '80s.
I can't tell for sure, but think that instead of a linkage they used a wedge to spread the arms at the top. If so, that makes return friction even worse, which I'd expect to make for poor modulation.

[RPS]

Personally I’d like to see someone test and compare road-specific linear-pull brakes (mini-mini-Vs) on a road bike against normal calipers. I know I’ve said it before, but in “theory” it has the potential to be simpler, lighter, more aero, more direct-acting, and with a single pivot per arm a minimum of friction.

[Charles M]

:) I wrote that review...

My suggestion would be to try the brakes. They are nothing like the old stuff we're speculating about. Having the old ones in your hand and on a bike and then using the new ones would end a lot of speculation...

They are also not a design that makes for braking performance that is anything but very good through the range of brake pad life. If turning the tension adjuster bolt on a brake is a flaw, I think most all brake sets fail your review...


Set up is also not a big deal. When set right, a simple visual check is all you need. The margin for error here is nothing like what's speculated.


EE are probably the nicest performing aftermarket brakes available (followed by some pretty hard to find Gravitas carbon stoppers from ZeroG). Looks / value etc are up to you...


Nobody has to agree, but I've not met anyone with actuall product use / knowledge of the EE that differ in opinion.






As it relates to me being a slave. If you read my signature line, it might help you to gain a little better feel for me... One thing to add would be that I have also never been assigned an product to review. I pick.

(side note: Like a lot of gear, I bought the brakes in the review and paid an up charge for color change...)

I try and write what I find accurately and I'm always open to someone finding me false... I've made mistakes before and will again.

But I would be an idiot to argue over why someone thinks I write what I do...



When I don't know something, I ask. I think it makes for a better forum than speculation and insult.

[jlwdm]

I really enjoy Charles' reviews. Are they subjective? Sure. But he gets to ride so much great gear I value his opinions. Lots of great reviews because he picks great stuff to review.

I just wish I had known he was in Scottsdale all the years I was there until last December. I would have liked to go ride with him and see all the fantastic bikes. Could not have ridden any of his bikes though - he never reviews 63 cm bikes - discrimination.

Jeff

[jblande]

Peztech,

my apologies if you took my generalization about reviews as a personal insult. If you wrote the brake comparison, then I feel quite foolish. The remark was in no way directed at you personally.

My problem is with the lack of any standards of statistical assessment and with the failure to provide transparency about the procedures used to test. Perhaps that is not of interest to the industry. Given the plethora of extremely expensive, seemingly equivalent high-end products, I have been surprised by the homogeneity of many of the reviews I have encountered. I am curious how fine-grained the description of these products can be without a greater amount of experimental rigor. Perhaps that is the scientific positivist in me speaking.

[salvatore]

Thanks Charles. I thoroughly enjoy and look forward to all your reviews, and your help has been instrumental in allowing me to at least narrow down what choices I might look at. Since I don't have the ability to test every single piece of gear, it is a real help to have your reviews as a resource. Ultimately my opinion is the only one that matters, but it helps to sort through a lot of the BS out there. Grazie mille!

[Charles M]

I actually wrote the review of EE at Pez, not the brake comparo at Velonews. (Not that I think that's grounds for changing anyone's opinion)

That said, I think the brake comparo was good and having tried everything on there I wouldnt disagree with the scores by more than a point or so on any of them... (the only thing I though interesting was the use of the brakes on a 7900 Group where the cable pull was designed for the DA brakes in particular, but it didnt change the results much)


And I don't take any offense to getting generalized as "on the take", mostly because I'm not...

People just dont know what they think they know but to be very honest, I understand why lots of people think what they do. That's why I dont get freaked out, but I also dont hesitate to give a little more info at least about my situation...


That said, guys like matt at Velonews, James at Cyclingnews, Zap at where ever he is today (not an insult, he's just got a LOT of ground to cover and the tech noggin to go with it) these guys are all stand up folks and I've not read anything that I would just flat call dishonest or misleading (I might have a different feel here or there). I have never heard them say one thing and write another and frankly I dont think they would risk their reputation to do it.

This is a DAMN small industry and the second any of us tossed anything out that was plainly false, it would come round pretty quickly...




Anyway, the functional detail (in depth) of the parts is no place near close between the EE and the others listed BUT the comparo isn't completely bunk!

The attitude it was presented in is subject to your own personal taste...

[dannyg1]

:) I wrote that review...



I have a question or two: Bryan Buck of BC2A design/Ti2 Racing makes an interesting aftermarket brake that he's been selling for a couple of years now and that was for two years or so, the worlds lightest dual pivot caliper.
Brian claims that Tektro outright stole his design (http://ti2racing.com/TheTruth.html) with the introduction and marketing of their, included in your test, brake.

Why did you not include the Ti2 Racing brake in your review?

In looking over the questions Tobias asked, his main point of inquiry is clearly focussed on what's innovative about the EEbrake. This is obviously an innovative product that does what a centerpull caliper does well, at at least half the weight (In my view, it's one of the few true advances in brake design of the last twenty five years or more. Producing a multi pivot design of the weight this EEbrake has is an amazing achievement by itself. That it works very well doubles that).
I really don't see what he's saying as so much "speculation", I see it more as a shrugged 'BFD'. It seems to me easier to answer these questions directly than take them as personal criticism, as you seem to have done. No one asked you when you bought your EEbrakes or whether you paid 'accommodation' rate for them. Those questions are closer to the personal line (Still fair though, IMO).

In fairness, I should point out that I'm a veteran of a high-end audio review magazine and am very familiar with how difficult it is to present your findings in keeping with the demands of the three bosse's (The Editor, The manufacturer and the consumer). It was an interesting review nonetheless, good job.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Do we ever see something tested from a major manufacturer where the reviewer says something like “this is really stupid, doesn’t work, don’t ever buy it”?

. . . in Mountain Bike Action that came pretty damn close.

One other thing that most readers don't know is that some magazines also sell editorial content space. The advertiser pays to have a certain story of their chosen subject run, but it's not run as an "advertisement." It's run as editorial content. Make no mistake--90% the content you see in mags like BICYCLING is there to sell stuff.

Charles' reviews, Mountain Bike Action, and those in Cycling+ out of England are the most objective I have seen. But even the ones in Cycling+ seem to have suffered from ratings inflation the past year.

BBD

[Charles M]

BBD, Zap has more Tech knowledge in his little finger than I do head to toe...



I have a question or two: Bryan Buck of BC2A design/Ti2 Racing makes an interesting aftermarket brake that he's been selling for a couple of years now and that was for two years or so, the worlds lightest dual pivot caliper.
Brian claims that Tektro outright stole his design (http://ti2racing.com/TheTruth.html) with the introduction and marketing of their, included in your test, brake.

Why did you not include the Ti2 Racing brake in your review?

In looking over the questions Tobias asked, his main point of inquiry is clearly focussed on what's innovative about the EEbrake. This is obviously an innovative product that does what a centerpull caliper does well, at at least half the weight (In my view, it's one of the few true advances in brake design of the last twenty five years or more. Producing a multi pivot design of the weight this EEbrake has is an amazing achievement by itself. That it works very well doubles that).
I really don't see what he's saying as so much "speculation", I see it more as a shrugged 'BFD'. It seems to me easier to answer these questions directly than take them as personal criticism, as you seem to have done. No one asked you when you bought your EEbrakes or whether you paid 'accommodation' rate for them. Those questions are closer to the personal line (Still fair though, IMO).

In fairness, I should point out that I'm a veteran of a high-end audio review magazine and am very familiar with how difficult it is to present your findings in keeping with the demands of the three bosse's (The Editor, The manufacturer and the consumer). It was an interesting review nonetheless, good job.

I can't say I understand what you go through in your High end Audio publication. I've never had to check anything through the Editor / Owner at Pez. I have open posting at Pez as a condition to providing content without taking payment...



And.... one more time....

I am not the guy at Velonews that did the multi brake test.





That said...

I have reveiwed also the TRP 960. And I know Bryan personally as well as the contacts at TRP.

TRP 960 REVIEW (http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=6303)


And I refused to post anything on that brake set until I called Bryan myself as well as TRP to see what the design details really were.

TRP presented info including several design differences, not the least of which were tweaked geometry of the brake as well as a completely different upper arm, I-beam sections etc. And Bryan's didn't have a QR while the TRP have a fairly innovative little flipper... But I think Bryan's design was absolutely an influence and TRP didn't deny it.


At the end, I again called Bryan and was very open about what I found and I asked if he were going to chase this legally. when he said he was not, I ran the review.

I didnt have to call Bryan at all, but there was NO WAY I would run the review without digging. I didnt have to hold off posting and working through the details... And I sure as heck didnt have an incentive to piss off TRP by openly questioning their design foundation at Weight weenies (where I also told that group that I wouldnt touch the brakes before getting more info). What I did have to do was post an honest review of the product.


If there's something false in the TRP review at Pez, let me know! But I cant tell you why Velonews didnt use Bryan's brakes.



As for what you felt Tobias meant and or what my emotional state is while posting, that's a debate for a higher being than I...

[RPS]

They are also not a design that makes for braking performance that is anything but very good through the range of brake pad life. If turning the tension adjuster bolt on a brake is a flaw, I think most all brake sets fail your review...
I'm certain that is not what is being questioned. The part of your review that mentioned having to use washers to adjust the pads closer or farther from the rim is the underlying issue (I think) unless I miss read your review.

[Charles M]

I'm less certain,

Mostly because the OP didnt mention "washers".



That said, the article pretty plainly says the washers are to help clearance issues that are happening due to the trend of wider rims.

the washers inside and out can be used to change clearance for skinny and more importantly lately wider rims is exactly what is in the review.

There are brakes that siffer from clearance with some of the new wider rims... I think a brake that allows for that is a good thing rather than bad.


The Pez review (because we're now talking about 3 reviews in this thread) says nothing at all about the washers being needed because the brakes will lack or change power application if you don't hit a set up sweet spot. That may be your interpretation of his assumtion, but it's also not an issue with the brakes...

[Tobias]

:) I wrote that review...

My suggestion would be to try the brakes. They are nothing like the old stuff we're speculating about. Having the old ones in your hand and on a bike and then using the new ones would end a lot of speculation...

They are also not a design that makes for braking performance that is anything but very good through the range of brake pad life. If turning the tension adjuster bolt on a brake is a flaw, I think most all brake sets fail your review...


Set up is also not a big deal. When set right, a simple visual check is all you need. The margin for error here is nothing like what's speculated.


First of all, I want to assure you this thread was not motivated in any way by personal factors against you. My interest is strictly in the technical aspects of equipment, which made me question how “subjective” these kinds of reviews are, and to what degree the reviewer is affected by other factors (in your case I suspect your fascination with light-weight equipment may be a factor).

Two technical points in your review struck me as very peculiar. The first was the absence of reference to what appears to be significant non-linear application of braking force. Obviously this could be because it doesn’t exist or it doesn’t affect braking as much as I expect, or it exists and you didn’t notice it.

Normally most experts tout linear application as a good thing, so it would follow that non-linear would not be a good thing (hasn’t worked out very well in the past with other brakes). Interestingly the EE Brake web page makes reference to the brakes’ vise-like grip; and I find that very appropriate. If you look at the upper linkage of the EE brake you’ll see the similarity to Vise-Grip Pliers; which is what I was referring to.

With the EE Brakes as the upper linkage approaches a straight line, the amount of mechanical advantage increases very quickly (if not for friction would go up to infinity). That’s exactly how Vise-Grip pliers get the incredible high clamping power compared to normal pliers.

Assuming they start out adjusted for optimum performance, as the pads wear the upper linkage will start to get flatter (approaching a straight line) which will change its performance. Adjusting the cable will do nothing other than to move the pads closer to the rim, but it doesn’t restore the mechanical advantage of the caliper itself. That you don’t see this is surprising. That’s why the pads have to be adjusted in or out relative to the rim width – it’s the only way to adjust the mechanical advantage. Adjusting the cable won’t do it.

If I’m seeing this all wrong please let me know how it actually works. You may or may have not worn a set of pads down yet, or maybe don’t wear them down much at all before you replace them, but in theory it’s an issue that should require ongoing adjustment (which I’m not about to do regardless of how light these things are).


The second technical point is your reference to straight versus curved brake parts. If loaded in compression or tension, straight parts are generally much stiffer than curved ones, but if loaded in bending, it becomes much less important – and likely insignificant. In a typical single or dual pivot caliper, all arms are curved and also loaded in bending. With the EE brake, all but one of the struts is loaded in bending, so whether they are straight or curved should make little difference relative to the stiffness of the material and cross section. Hyping that they are made of straight parts seems like something you either didn’t understand or something you were fed by the manufacturer. Technically I don’t see it as a relevant factor. If the calipers are stiff it’s likely because the parts are short which makes them flex less, but straight versus curved is a red herring.

[Charles M]

Re the first several paragraphs... Short answer.

The brakes don't suffer performance loss as it applies to brake function in the degree you are assuming it does and it's not heavily effected by brake wear.

Yes I have worn down the pads. The simple adjuster bolt (found on virtually all road brakes) works the same on the EE when this happens...




Re the last paragraph... these brakes have parts that work in compression as well as "in bending" and I did write in the review that the main arms were made shorter to be more stiff. The shape (beyond being straight) also helps the stiffness of all the brake components.


The brakes are designed to combine pivot placement and component (individual parts that make up the brake) stiffness to give max leverage.

Straight parts are very good in compression and in this design they also make for putting minimal material between pivot points (shortest distance between two pivots is a pretty simple idea) to reduce weight.

You mention the relationship between short and stiff and that's true for these brakes. They use more pivots and shorter, STRAIGHTER parts to better effect than brakes using fewer pivots and longer, curved and more flexible parts.