Rear brake sticking?

[Acebars]

Hi everyone I'm new here.

I didn't intend to get involved in bicycle repair but I was sold a bit of a lemon told everything was working but the rear brake is sticking, so I'm trying to sort it, I have 0 experience of bicycle mechanics although I am mechanically minded. I know it must be an annoyingly easy question but would appreciate any help:

The brake is the type below:



So what is happening is when I press the brake it just sticks and the brake lever becomes loose and floppy, the front brake is working nicely and returns once released. Another thing I've noticed is the little metal part shown below above the cable below is tightly fitted on the working front brake but comes loose on the rear brake. Any help appreciated. Thanks!

[Joe_W]

Inspect cable and housing, check for kinks or frayed cables.

[Acebars]

(04-06-2013, 05:27 PM)Joe_W Wrote:  Inspect cable and housing, check for kinks or frayed cables.

Checked. No kinks or fraying, will double check.

[Acebars]

Double checked no kinks or frays.

[DaveM]

Most likely either the cable is not sliding through the housing smoothly or the rear caliper is binding in its pivots. Try detaching the cable from the rear caliper, then slide the cable through the housing by hand and also squeeze the caliper by hand. You should be able to find which one is binding.

If its the caliper, you might try loosening the bolts that hold the pivots and getting some grease/oil into the joints. Of course, be careful to avoid lubricant on the brake shoes or where it might drip on them.

Binding cable may just need some oil also. The end of the cable may give you trouble if you try to pull it all the way out of the housing. But if you prop the bike so you can drip oil onto the cable right where it goes inside the housing and then give gravity a little time to work the oil down inside, it may free up.

[nfmisso]

(04-06-2013, 07:33 PM)Acebars Wrote:  Double checked no kinks or frays.

In my book, the 1st picture you posted is a frayed cable.....

[Acebars]

Thank you DaveM! It was indeed the caliper simply loosening the pivot bolts and oiling them did the job, all working fine now. Really appreciate it!

Now I have another problem not sure whether to post another thread or write it here, the bike was delivered to me with wheels removed.

When I try to mount the rear wheel two things are happening the rear forks for the wheel appear to be too narrow to fit the wheel so I have to part them slightly stressing the frame to fit the rear wheel on, this is the first problem.

The next problem is getting the rear wheel to slide up and seat in the right position on the frame/forks. It appears the axle for the wheel is quite thick and it doesn't naturally or doesn't want to slide up and axle seat

The frame is an old Reynolds 531. So question is, is it normal to have to stress the frame to mount such a wheel? Perhaps thats what I need to get the wheel up into that position? Here's a photo below for an idea of how far I've got:

[nfmisso]

Rear forks being a little tight is normal. "Little" is 1 to 3 mm. 531 (or any steel frame) can handle that with no problem, and probably a bit more.

You need to make sure the RD hanger is perfectly aligned with the frame. The hanger is that bit with '4532' stamped on it that can be clearly seen in the picture above. It does not need to be so tight that it cannot move, a little bit of play in it will allow an easier wheel install.

[Acebars]

I did adjust the hanger but it made no difference.

Finally managed to get the rear wheel back on after much trying, but only by using a rubber mallet on each side of the axle as gently as possible. I removed one of the spacers on one side of the axle (which actually made the rear wheel aligned centrally rather than too one side that I noticed when I mounted it with the spacer)

Odd thing is when I got the rear wheel in position without the spacer it appears there was a 1mm gap between the axle and the forks (making the forks too wide without the spacer). Tightening the axle bolts amended this and I suppose compressed the width of the rear forks by 1mm.

I doubt my method is correct and I hope I didn't bugger anything up, really not sure why it was such a bugger to get on.

[1FJEF]

I'm no expert but I ride bikes with solid axles, and your bike looks like it would have come with QRs.

[nfmisso]

(04-08-2013, 11:03 AM)Acebars Wrote:  I did adjust the hanger but it made no difference.

Finally managed to get the rear wheel back on after much trying, but only by using a rubber mallet on each side of the axle as gently as possible. I removed one of the spacers on one side of the axle (which actually made the rear wheel aligned centrally rather than too one side that I noticed when I mounted it with the spacer)

Odd thing is when I got the rear wheel in position without the spacer it appears there was a 1mm gap between the axle and the forks (making the forks too wide without the spacer). Tightening the axle bolts amended this and I suppose compressed the width of the rear forks by 1mm.

I doubt my method is correct and I hope I didn't bugger anything up, really not sure why it was such a bugger to get on.

Sounds like it will be fine.

As Jeff notes in his post - are you sure that you have the original rear wheel?

[Acebars]

(04-08-2013, 03:47 PM)nfmisso Wrote:  Sounds like it will be fine.

As Jeff notes in his post - are you sure that you have the original rear wheel?

Quite right I don't and was suspecting that was the problem. What are QRs?

[Acebars]

Right I spoke too soon. Tried to take the bike out for a ride and the rear wheel axle kept shifting and hitting the rear fork making it unrideable.

The trouble is when I tighten the rear axle bolts too much it seems to affect and tighten the bearings so the rear wheel doesn't turn over easily.

Is there something I'm doing wrong?

[nfmisso]

QR = Quick Release

This wheel is equipped with QR aka Q/R:
http://www.amazon.com/Avenir-Weinmann-Cassette-Compatible-26-Inch/dp/B003RLDSTE/


The one in your pictures is BO aka B-O or B/O = Bolt On

[nfmisso]

(04-09-2013, 11:02 AM)Acebars Wrote:  Right I spoke too soon. Tried to take the bike out for a ride and the rear wheel axle kept shifting and hitting the rear fork making it unrideable.

The trouble is when I tighten the rear axle bolts too much it seems to affect and tighten the bearings so the rear wheel doesn't turn over easily.

Is there something I'm doing wrong?

Sounds like you need to rebuild your rear hub - Alex has instructions: http://bikeride.com/overhaul-wheel-bearings/

[1FJEF]

(04-09-2013, 11:02 AM)Acebars Wrote:  The trouble is when I tighten the rear axle bolts too much it seems to affect and tighten the bearings so the rear wheel doesn't turn over easily.

Did you service the bearings? Normally, with my bolted wheels, tightening does NOT change bearing cone tension, which is something I like about them. If an outer bearing cone lock nut is missing or loose you will see rotation in axle parts between the drop outs when you tighten, I've also noticed this with badly bent axles.
With the wheel off the bike is there play or slop in the rear axle? Does it feel like a dollar store pepper grinder when you spin the axle with your finger tips?
Oops! Nigel beat me to it with the previous post!
Hey, can you post a picture of the other side of the axle?
Can you accurately measure the distance between the rear drop outs in mm?

[DaveM]

When you took off the "spacer" from the rear axle, was it a threaded nut or just a hollow unthreaded tube that slid over the axle? If it was the outer nut, the axle needs that in place to hold the adjustment on the bearings. Without it there, when you tighten down the nut that holds it to the frame, it tightens up the bearings too (which is why the wheel won't spin.)

You can remove the actual spacers that are unthreaded though you can mess up the spacing of the wheel by doing this. And once you unscrew the nuts or spacers, you have to redo the adjustment of tightness against the bearings before you put the wheel back on the frame. That would be covered in the video that another commenter linked to above.

None of this is a huge deal and you should be able to put everything back right, but you are digging yourself in a little deeper.

I'd get the axle put back together and the bearings re-adjusted first.

It would be good to measure the spacing between the "dropouts" on your frame (the flat parts the nuts tighten against. Measure the inside dimension) and measure the length of the axle across the outermost locknuts (not the threaded part that sticks out past them). That would help us figure out if your frame is bent, if the wheel is really the wrong size for your frame, or if there is some other problem.

There are ways to deal with the axle not sliding into the dropouts, but they may involve filing on either the frame or the axle and I'm hesitant to advise either until we know if there's a bigger problem.

Ah, the learning process....

[Acebars]

Just wanted to say everyone I really appreciate the help, I'm not at home until next week but will update as soon as I get my hands on the bike again.

[Acebars]

Hi again everyone,
I'm still not home so not really able to have a look at the bike.

I've been thinking however I'd really prefer not having a rear wheel that is extremely difficult to remove and one which is not very good for the frame when I'm trying to bash it in place. So it may be better that I just throw it away and get a proper quick release one, which I understand originally where campagnolos?

A couple of questions before I do so, the frame I've bought is a 22 1/2 inch (57cm) and I'm 5'10"-5'10.5" tall with a 32" inseam and it seemed a little big for me to be honest when I was trying it out like I was really leaning over with no bend in my elbows to reach the handle bars.

The online calculator has told me 55cm or 22" (which is actually closer to 56cm) so perhaps my frame is to big and I should just consider really selling it on rather than investing in it?

[Joe_W]

Frame sizing from such calculators is... well... nowadays meaningless, not that it made sense anyways. There used to be a time when top tubes were horizontal. Alas, today they are no longer, they slope downward. So the frame size when measuring the centre-centre bottom bracket to top tube distance is now meaningless. Instead the frame should be measured "centre to air" (I cannot remember where I got that phrase from... it is by somebody else), measuring centre of the bb to the "virtual" intersection of a theoretical horizontal top tube with the seat tube.

What I personally find more importatn than the height of the frame is the length. If you have a long torso you need a longer frame than somebody with the same height and a short torso. However using the inseam-times-a-random-number frame size calculation will give the latter person the bigger frame, which is... stupid.
But yeah, it sounds as if your frame is too big for you, although 2 cm in frame size probably would not make such a big difference (assuming the frames have the same geometry, so the ratios of the tubes are similar as are the angles on the frame).