You are reading a single comment by @Archie's_Grobags and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@Archie's_Grobags
And just how would it work?
With the holes on the inside of the stays like they should be and the canti spring tip in say, the top hole, the cantis would be pointing at approx 7 o'clock on the left one and 5 o'clock on the right one...you would then rotate them up to their proper position which would tension the spring.
On that setup if you were to rotate the cantis so the spring was in the holes on the outside you'd have the top of the left canti pointing towards 5 o'clock through the wheel, and the top of the right canti pointing at 7 o'clock through the wheel....if you then tried to rotate them back up to the correct position you'd find them stopping at approx 9 o'clock on the left and 3 o'clock on the right with both pads pointing upwards instead of towards the rim as canti springs aren't designed to be able to twist very far.
Look at this picture....that's with the spring mounted through a hole on the inside edge of the fork....now imagine rotating the brakes right the way around to the outside where he has the holes and think about where the pads would be pointing.
Also, the wider apart you space the canti studs, the worse the braking force gets, which is why snake stays were created...and as those studs are mounted on the outside edge of the stays instead of the usual inside it means less braking force...so again...if it's not a mistake, why would they be mounted back to front?