The Tester Approves thread (see first post)

but couldn't find a lever recommendation

Any common road lever, according to prejudice. Obvs. Shimano has a compatibility chart which says you have to use the matching Sora/Tiagra/105 STIs, but the build in my house which has them is on Campag Ergos. As Brommers says, TRP RRL is a popular choice for people who have either good or bad reasons to reject the SRAM S500/S900 brake levers.

Cool, TRP are half the price so that's my prejudice. Do you have any other mini v recommendations as the Shimano ones seem hard to find these days?

Tektro

The TRP CX9/8.4 mini-v brakes are very nice, but rather spenny. I've never used them, but I suspect the Tektro 926AL brakes are 95% as good for 25% of the price.

Or the Tektro RX-6 if you need more clearance.

any other mini v recommendations

TRP are fine but needlessly expensive next to the Shimano ones. Tektro 926 is functional but a substantial drop in quality of design and execution.

German shops are usually a good bet for Shimano non-series and touring parts, Bike24 have black 353s in stock https://www.bike24.com/p2168610.html
It's worth getting the XT shoes https://www.bike24.com/p223508.html while you're at it as the moulded-t0-the-bolt pads are the main thing which makes the Sora worse than the Tiagra/105 level brakes.

926AL brakes are 95% as good for 25% of the price

Probably not that good, but 926 at £15 for two brakes from PlanetX makes them 10% of the price of CX9s, so just being half as good makes them better value🙂

Thanks all, this is perfect

They're probably fiddlier to set up. But I suspect that in a blind test, 95% of people would be unable to tell the difference from one to the other. They're basically just a metal stick with a pivot on one end and a clamp/cable stop on the other end. Anyone with enough grip strength to cause either to bend significantly either needs to take up Olympic weightlifting or reconsider their solitary lifestyle.

Anyone with enough grip strength to cause either to bend significantly either needs to take up Olympic weightlifting or reconsider their solitary lifestyle

The forces involved are bigger than you think, thanks to the mechanical advantage of the levers. The strength test in the safety standard implies a reaction at the pad/rim interface of about 4kN

I have a pretty good idea of the forces involved. After all, they wouldn't work in slowing you down otherwise. However, it's a fairly short lever, and even the 926AL is a fairly chunky piece of aludiddlium. I'm sure there is a difference, but whether it would actually be discernable to mere mortals, I'd need convincing by some fairly solid FEA work or real life experience, neither of which I have.

whether it would actually be discernable to mere mortals, I'd need convincing by some fairly solid FEA work or real life experience

Maybe you're too rich ever to have used cheap brakes, but you can certainly feel the difference. From the look of things the "real life experience" is going to be of the class (and possibly order) of Weinmann 500 vs. Shimano BR-6800. If the back tyre is off the ground before the front brake lever hits the bars, the brakes are adequate, but your fleet is full of things which are nice rather than simply adequate.

Well, ignoring the ad honimem attacks and playing the ball rather than the man, then yes, some of my bikes have some pretty sketchy brakes, including Weimann centre-pulls, and there's definitely a difference compared to them and more modern brakes. As I said, I've never used 926AL brakes - that pleasure is yet to come. However, as I hold them in my hands, they seem like pretty chunky numbers which look sturdy enough. Maybe I'm wrong, and they are an order of magntidue worse than TRP CX brakes. I doubt it, but I'll rely on personal experience on that front.

they look like pretty chunky numbers

Apparently they're a little too chunky for some forks, see https://www.flickr.com/photos/ah_blake/8353292956/in/photostream/ et seq.🙂

Anyway, since this is the #tester_approved thread, the 926AL gets the seal of approval for easily exceeding the threshold dividing crap from proper bicycle components, but for my money the Shimano ones are worth paying double for.

That bike24 description says 'not for ST levers'; I thought the point of mini-Vs was that they were suitable for road levers? Or is this an SLR/NSSLR cable pull thing?

That bike24 description says 'not for ST levers'

They're obliged to conform to a strict interpretation of the Shimano compatibility chart. In practice, they're fine if properly adjusted. I think the shorter total lever throw of STIs (because the gear lever hits the bars) means that if you set up the initial pad clearance at the maximum permitted, you might run out of lever travel before generating enough stopping power to pass the deceleration test.

Tester, do you know anything about m7000/mtb cranks needing a spacer to fit on road frames? I bought them then read a review mentioning it but can't see anything

BSA Road and mtb bottoms bracket shells are different widths.

Nah, most are 68mm but some MTBs are 73, might also have extra for ISCG mounts. Just install the cranks with an MTB BB and the correct spacers for a 68mm shell, which is 5mm DS and 2.5mm NDS.

Lovely stuff, nice paperweight on the way from Germany then. Cheers all

Tester, do you know anything about m7000

I could find out, but so could you. Look at the EV and SI PDFs on shimano.com

ad honimem

You know where you can stick your honey memes? :)

You'll need one 2.5mm spacer on the NDS between the BB shell and the BB cup, and two 2.5mm spacers on the DS, with a 68mm wide road-spec BB shell. One of the 2.5mm spacers on the DS might come as a 1.8mm and 0.7mm pair of spacers.

is FH-RS505 tester approved?

(cup and cone in generaal vs sealed)

Centrelock isn’t