BritBike Forum logo
BritBike Sponsor BritBike Sponsor BritBike Sponsor
BritBike Sponsor

BritBike Sponsor

BritBike Sponsor
BritBike Sponsor BritBike Sponsor BritBike Sponsor
JWood Auction JRC Engineering dealers JWood Auction
Home | Sponsors, Newsletter | Regalia | Calendar | Bike Project | BritBike Museum | Spiders Cartoons, "OLD" BritBike Forum | DVD- Manuals & Parts books | BritBike Stickers & Decals
Upgrade to: Premium Membership | Premium Life Membership | Vendor Membership | Site Sponsor Membership
Photo posting tutorial

Member Spotlight
coopers
coopers
australia
Posts: 57
Joined: January 2005
Show All Member Profiles 
Shout Box
Search eBay for motorcycle parts in following countries
Australia, Canada, France, Holland, Italy, United Kingdom, USA
Random Gallery photo
Who's Online Now
195 registered members (1xfatboy), 1,789 guests, and 604 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Simon.Holyfield, Bushcreature, Doug Valley, tim_v7, BosBSA
10032 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
Lannis 144
kommando 103
Stuart 66
Popular Topics(Views)
476,598 mail-order LSR
Forum Statistics
Forums33
Topics65,721
Posts635,201
Members10,032
Most Online3,995
Feb 13th, 2017
Like BritBike.com on Facebook

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes #518738
12/14/13 7:29 pm
12/14/13 7:29 pm
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 221
Lives in Devon, covered in oil
D
DickDastardly Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
DickDastardly  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
D
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 221
Lives in Devon, covered in oil
I wonder if someone can put this right for me?

Looking at the parts manual the leading rear brake shoe (item 32) is facing to the rear of the bike but looking in the service manual the leading shoe is facing to the front!



Which is the right way the parts manual or sevice manual or does it make a difference if the brake lever (item 24) is facing up or down?

Also, in this picture take from R.B.'s book it shows a spacer between the brake plate and swing arm,



none shown in parts manual of the 1971 BSA (or Triumph) any thoughts? I have assembled mine as per the parts maunual and the wheel is dead central in swing arm without this 'additional' pictured spacer, but once I'm not sure about something I start to doubt everything!


Regards

Last edited by DickDastardly; 12/14/13 7:46 pm.



Support Your #1 BritBike Forum!
Membership Type! Free
Member
Premium
Member
Premium Life
Member
Vendor
Member
Site
Sponsor
Recognition No Premium Member Premium Life member (5 years) Vendor Member Site Sponsor Membership
Post commercial threads No No No Yes Yes
Custom title No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Upload avatar & photos No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Link avatar & photos Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Private Message Storage: 10 100 100 100 100
Length of signatures 255 600 600 600 600
Removes this very advert island between post 1&2 No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Price Free $12.90/year $105.00 No End
$55.00/5 years
$210.00/year
($17.50/month)
Email
Click on button >>
  Premium Member Premium Life member Vendor Member Site Sponsor Membership
Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #518806
12/15/13 7:00 am
12/15/13 7:00 am
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 127
northern B.C.Canada
furymalc Offline
BritBike Forum member
furymalc  Offline
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 127
northern B.C.Canada
They reused the illustration from the Fury parts book, so thats why the shoes are the wrong way round.
Late bikes used a longer lever and was fitted upwards to clear the wheel spindle.It should fit only one way to be at the correct angle.

Cheers
Malc

Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #518934
12/16/13 2:28 am
12/16/13 2:28 am
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
W
Whisper Offline
BritBike Forum member
Whisper  Offline
BritBike Forum member
W
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
Hi Dick

The wheel is NOT supposed to sit dead centre in the swingarm!
It should be offset by 50mm to the right, i.e. away from the chain.

The wheel is supposed to sit dead centre between the down-tubes, measured at the rim.

I have forwarded a drawing for you by E-mail as I battle to post pictures.

Never seen the spacer as per your picture.

Regards Jack

Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #518935
12/16/13 2:37 am
12/16/13 2:37 am
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
W
Whisper Offline
BritBike Forum member
Whisper  Offline
BritBike Forum member
W
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
Hi Dick

Sorry, your E-mail address greenbacking@smn.com is not recognised.

Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #518945
12/16/13 4:23 am
12/16/13 4:23 am
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
W
Whisper Offline
BritBike Forum member
Whisper  Offline
BritBike Forum member
W
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
Hi Dick

It should of course read 5 mm offset, NOT 50.

Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: Whisper] #519129
12/17/13 2:30 pm
12/17/13 2:30 pm
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 221
Lives in Devon, covered in oil
D
DickDastardly Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
DickDastardly  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
D
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 221
Lives in Devon, covered in oil
Originally Posted By: Whisper
Hi Dick

It should of course read 5 mm offset, NOT 50.



Nice one, have measured the difference as you've got me worried, the gap is 5.18mm more on the chain side.

As Gavin's post has now been deleted, could someone confirm that I've got the shoes ass-about-face?
The leading shoe marked with an 'L' should be toward the front of the bike and the shoe marked with the 'T' should be to the rear? (Opposite to what is shown in the parts book, as printed in my first post).

I also have in my box of goodies the short down facing lever and the longer up facing lever which should I use?

Regards

ps email is greenbacking@msn.com

Last edited by DickDastardly; 12/17/13 2:31 pm.



Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #519137
12/17/13 2:56 pm
12/17/13 2:56 pm
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3,775
ohio
shel Online content
BritBike Forum member
shel  Online Content
BritBike Forum member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3,775
ohio
I'm not sure if this applies to A65s or not but when I started on my T150 I didn't have any wheels, or much of anything else for that matter so when started piecing together the rear hub and axles, spacers and what not I looked at a lot of photos in the TOL gallery.
It seems the 71 models used the short offset lever turned downward and 72 on up used the longer straight lever turned upward.
71 R3's also used the shorter offset lever turned downward.


When given the choice between two evils I picked the one I haven't tried before
Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #519138
12/17/13 3:00 pm
12/17/13 3:00 pm
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 127
northern B.C.Canada
furymalc Offline
BritBike Forum member
furymalc  Offline
BritBike Forum member
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 127
northern B.C.Canada
The shoes should be opposite to that shown in the first picture,
that drawing is for the Fury which has its rear wheel the other way round.
The longer lever was for 72 model, so your choice.

Cheers
Malc

Last edited by furymalc; 12/17/13 3:00 pm.
Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #519152
12/17/13 4:02 pm
12/17/13 4:02 pm
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,875
Gnashville
DavidP Online content

BritBike Forum member
DavidP  Online Content

BritBike Forum member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,875
Gnashville
You will notice that in the parts book the brake plate and shoes are shown on the opposite side of the drum for clarity. The parts book is meant to aid in ordering parts, it is not a map for how things go together.
From the '71 workshop manual, "The shoes are interchangeable, and are fitted with loose abutment pads to prevent wear on the pivot block." I've never seen a pair which were marked, L and T.
I guess if you have clearance you would wish to use the longer lever for increased leverage. My '71 has the shorter lever pointed down and no spacer between the plate and swing arm.
Works about as well as any comical rear brake I've ever had. laughing


Stepping on others doesn't make you stand tall.

71 A65L "Zelda"
92 BMW K100rs "Gustav"
Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #519167
12/17/13 5:09 pm
12/17/13 5:09 pm
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3,775
ohio
shel Online content
BritBike Forum member
shel  Online Content
BritBike Forum member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3,775
ohio
I have a pair conicle rear shoes that are marked L & T, they could be originals. I don't remember the replacements being marked though.


When given the choice between two evils I picked the one I haven't tried before
Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #519241
12/18/13 2:11 am
12/18/13 2:11 am
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
W
Whisper Offline
BritBike Forum member
Whisper  Offline
BritBike Forum member
W
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
Dick

My brake-shoes are also marked L & T.

It is almost impossible to install the shoes wrong way around as long as you can read the lettering when the shoes are installed.

The steel pieces go onto the pivot, so there is no way to install them upside down.

My short lever works very well on my '71 Thunderbolt.

A couple of remarks regarding the "picture of R.B's book" whoever R.B. is.

The spindle is installed wrong way around. The boss should be on the chain-side, and the Nyloc nut on the right-hand side.

There are no cover-plates for the wheel-adjusters on the swing-arm ends.

Not that these are major issues!

Best Regards

Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #519251
12/18/13 5:09 am
12/18/13 5:09 am
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
W
Whisper Offline
BritBike Forum member
Whisper  Offline
BritBike Forum member
W
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
DavidP

The 71 manual is wrong.

It mentions (in the front wheel section)that the brake shoes are interchangeable. It also mentions steel abutments between the shoes and the pivot.
The front wheel doesn't have a pivot and/or steel abutments and the shoes ARE interchangeable.

However the rear wheel shoes are NOT interchangeable.
It doesn't say so (in the rear wheel section) of the book either.
The steel abutment plates are at the bottom of the shoes and only fit the bottom. The abutment-plates canot be fitted to the top. Therefore it is not possible to interchange the shoes.
This is probably the treason that the shoes are marked L & T.

Regards from a sunny Cape Town.

Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #519270
12/18/13 10:22 am
12/18/13 10:22 am
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
W
Whisper Offline
BritBike Forum member
Whisper  Offline
BritBike Forum member
W
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
Gents

Upon further investigation the rear wheel shoes ARE interchangeable.
From moving the left shoe to the right.
This however results in the leading edge becoming the trailing edge.
So they are not really interchangeable without upsetting the works.

Dick, therefore in the photo I sent you the shoes are clearly the wrong way around.
This is however the way they were when I bought the bike.
And I put them back the same way. By the way the brake worked fine, but maybe it works better now!

I have now swapped the shoes around, which results in the leading edge being similar to the picture in the 71 works manual, seeing that this is the consensus on this thread.
Luckily the wheel is still out of the bike, took 10 minutes to change.

Now the lettering is not visible when the shoes are installed, however the L is on the right, towards the front of the bike.

Thanks for starting this thread, without which I would have installed the shoes wrong way around.

Best Regards

Jack

Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DickDastardly] #519373
12/19/13 6:24 am
12/19/13 6:24 am
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
W
Whisper Offline
BritBike Forum member
Whisper  Offline
BritBike Forum member
W
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 220
Cape Town, South Africa
Gents

Yes I am waffling on a bit!
However for peace of mind:

There is a very nice explanation on the workings of the leading edge drumbrake on www.engineeringinspiration.co.uk/drumbrake which confirms that the Leading Shoe marked L should be installed towards the front of the bike.

Looking at the drawing in the parts book, the drawing is correct, except that the leading and trailing shoes are transposed, also as far as the part-numbers are concerned.

The guy who did this should be fired!

Best Regards from a sweltering Cape Town

Jack

Re: A65 1971 Rear Conical Hub brake shoes [Re: DavidP] #520261
12/26/13 11:26 am
12/26/13 11:26 am
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 221
Lives in Devon, covered in oil
D
DickDastardly Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
DickDastardly  Offline OP
BritBike Forum member
D
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 221
Lives in Devon, covered in oil
Originally Posted By: DavidP
You will notice that in the parts book the brake plate and shoes are shown on the opposite side of the drum for clarity. The parts book is meant to aid in ordering parts, it is not a map for how things go together.
From the '71 workshop manual, "The shoes are interchangeable, and are fitted with loose abutment pads to prevent wear on the pivot block."

I've never seen a pair which were marked, L and T.

I guess if you have clearance you would wish to use the longer lever for increased leverage. My '71 has the shorter lever pointed down and no spacer between the plate and swing arm.
Works about as well as any comical rear brake I've ever had. laughing



Swapped aroung the shoes all good now smile






There you go smile





Moderated by  Allan Gill, Jon W. Whitley 


Home | Sponsors | Newsletter | Regalia | Calendar | Bike Project | BritBike Museum | Spiders Cartoons | "OLD" BritBike Forum | DVD- Manuals & Parts books | BritBike Stickers & Decals
Upgrade to: Premium Membership | Premium Life Membership | Vendor Membership | Site Sponsor Membership
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1