Author Topic: Brake cable length  (Read 181 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

chaz

  • Silver Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
    • View Profile
Re: Brake cable length
« Reply #15 on: 12 October, 2019, 18:19:24 »
if it rattles, its more likely to wear due to vibration , a nice sliding or tighter fit but not an interference (hammer in) fit as too tight can damage the cable

JulianS

  • Empire Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 1531
  • A10
    • View Profile
Re: Brake cable length
« Reply #16 on: 12 October, 2019, 18:31:06 »
Reality is the photo below. The bent steel ones vary.

Photo shows shackles cropped from cables over the years.

The only one which is a close fit is the one top right which came from an old A10 cable.

Ready made cable quality can be questionable, look at the prices - you can buy an imported front brake cable from ebay sellers for less than 7 including postage.

Phil C

  • Golden Flash
  • *****
  • Posts: 603
    • View Profile
Re: Brake cable length
« Reply #17 on: 12 October, 2019, 19:59:16 »
The one on my old (existing) cable is like the one top right of your photo's, Julian, and fits on the arm okay. Chaz confirms what I thought, ie a decent fit is needed, rather than a rattling one.

Anyway, to recap: my bike is 1965, but the brake cable which is listed, and sold, for that year (part no. 41-8535) appears to be wrong for my bike (too long, ie 39 ins outer cable, and clevis fork a very loose rattling fit on my actuating arm, like about 2mm wider than the arm thickness.)

The old (existing) cable appears to fit the bike fine. It is, I think, about the same length as the cable listed for 1960-64 bikes (part no. 41 - 8505) (32 ins outer cable.)

I wonder if the shorter (41-8505) cables have a smaller clevis gap than the longer (41-8535) ones. I'll phone a dealer on Monday morning and check.

I'm thinking maybe my 1965 bike takes the  cable designed for the previous year's bike (41-8505, the 32ins type.) That would seem a bit weird. Why would it be?            Phil.