Tektro is one of those component companies that seemed like an underdog to me. I dug when they got spec’d on bikes because their products are generally decent without being ostentatious. I like fancy bikes and high-end stuff, even the nostalgia/revival/craze over randonneur bikes, but in the end, it’s the ride that matters, and if someone is having fun on a $600 TIG-welded bike, then more power to them! Anyway, Tektro stuff can be afforded by “The Every-cyclist” which is where my heart is. I have dug their stuff — until now, that is….
Rant Within A Rant!
I $*#%@! HATE brake force limiters. You know, those squishy/springy little things in linear-brake noodles on low-end bikes that are put in to prevent novices from applying too much front brake and flipping? They are annoying because they are, um, effective —they steal brake power, often resulting in the lever bottoming out on the bar before the wheel locks up. Of course I’m not looking for wheel lock-up, but maximum deceleration, which happens just before lock-up. If you can lock your wheel, you can learn to stop just shy of doing so and get the most out of your brakes. A force limiter interferes with that and is just another way our litigious society tries to bubble-wrap people to save them from their own incompetence. I’m not blaming novices — nobody is teaching them squat! Like my anti-helmet-law-rant says, I’d rather that people were given a decent bike education to make them more proficient cyclists who make better decisions. OK, now back to our regularly scheduled rant...
What WERE They Thinking?!
I dunno why they did it — it’s really beyond me. Maybe they were afraid people would — gasp! — replace the stupid force-limiter-noodle with a regular one. Anyway, the fine folks at Tektro moved the force-limiter from atop the noodle to between the brake arms in their SU-11 model (maybe others, I dunno). When a brake lever is actuated, the brake arms approach each other. The problem with the SU-11 is that the force limiter, not only occupies some space between the arms, but as it extends through it’s motion it closes the gap even more. Under certain circumstances, the force-limiter can allow the hanger (the part the noodle sits in) to bottom out on the far brake arm, which makes providing additional brake power impossible. It’s an amazing feeling — not something I had ever experienced before. It felt like a block of wood or something was between the brake lever and the handlebar. I was stunned that Tektro would make such a bad design. It was uncharacteristic of them in my experience.
On the SU-11s, there was only about 2.3cm between the end of the hanger and the far brake arm. Compare the picture above with this one of a more standard linear pull brake. Check out the gaps between the hanger and the far brake arm. OK, so the pictures kinda suck, but hopefully you get the idea...
Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right
I originally saw this problem on a new bike, with new brake pads, and the situation could only get worse. As the pads wear, the brake arms have to move further in order for the pads to reach the rim, making it more likely the hanger will bottom out on the far brake arm. Tektro (I’m guessing) had “thicker” brake pads with extra material made to try and keep the SU-11 arms farther apart and help prevent the hanger from bottoming out on the far brake arm. Just one problem though: those brake pads are not standard, and when they wear out, the bike owner is probably just going to have them replaced with a more common linear pull brake pad. That means that the danger of the SU-11 brake design may only be revealed at that point on an unsuspecting cyclist. Talk about a weak fix!
They’re BA-ACK!
I thought I’d seen the last of this lousy design of brake at the end of 2005, but unfortunately, it’s back on some 2007 bikes. I’m so pissed about this that I decided to blog about it (duh!), and ask others to contact the Consumer Product Safety Commission to ask for an investigation (see below). Apparently, that is the first step consumers take to get a product recalled. Manufacturers may initiate a recall, but Tektro hasn’t done so (I contacted them in 2005 about this issue). Granted, they basically had no U.S. presence then, but apparently have a “warranty guy” in this country now. I hope they get their act together.
Shizzlestorm?
It’s with a little trepidation that I rant about this whole issue, I guess because I fear some retribution or judgment or even legal action. I decided though that my responsibility is to the cycling public, who might hurt themselves on bikes with this brake. Therefore, like the last time I saw these on bikes I carried, I am replacing them, regardless of whether I will be compensated by the manufacturer or bike company that spec’d them. I’m sorry if posting this blog entry makes either of them uncomfortable, but tough crap — this is people’s safety we’re talking about. It’s my reputation and livelihood too, and I’ve tried to “do the communication thing” with the appropriate companies. Now I’m trying for some more leverage, and you can help. Together, maybe we can get something to happen.
Won’t You Join Me for Some Tough Love?
Not that kind — wrong blog! I’m hoping folks will contact the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and ask for an investigation into this brake design. Maybe Tektro will do the right thing and recall this brake, compensating those affected by it. A recall isn’t the worst thing in the world. Shit happens, and people make mistakes (though this is a pretty amateur one, I gotta say). The thing the matters is how they respond to them once they are made aware of a problem. IMO, Kryptonite did a great job with their U-lock recall a couple years ago (kudos to them).
Anyway, as far as I can tell, this link will take you to the right place to report the Tektro SU-11 linear pull brake:
Let the bondage, uh, TOUGH LOVE begin!
