Another project - Miyata 310

[nfmisso]

Just picked up a Miyata 310 frame & fork this morning

It is 1982/1983/1984 vintage based on the frame (double butted Cr-Mo) and the forks (hi-ten steel). The 1981 had plain guage Cr-Mo tubing; while the 1985 and 1986 models had manganese-steel forks. (note Reynolds 531 is a manganese-steel).

http://s211.photobucket.com/albums/bb8/dianemisso/Miyata/

I am not sure how this project will playout. The big depending factor is scoring some brifters.

[ghost]

What is a Brifter Nigel?

[nfmisso]

(09-17-2011, 07:00 PM)ghost Wrote:  What is a Brifter Nigel?

shifter and brake lever in one unit.
from: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gloss_bo-z.html
"Brifter: A combination brake/shift lever, such as a Campagnolo Ergo or Shimano S.T.I. unit. This term was coined by Bruce Frech. "

[attachment=2784]

[ghost]

(09-17-2011, 06:53 PM)nfmisso Wrote:  Just picked up a Miyata 310 frame & fork this morning

It is 1982/1983/1984 vintage based on the frame (double butted Cr-Mo) and the forks (hi-ten steel). The 1981 had plain guage Cr-Mo tubing; while the 1985 and 1986 models had manganese-steel forks. (note Reynolds 531 is a manganese-steel).

http://s211.photobucket.com/albums/bb8/dianemisso/Miyata/

I am not sure how this project will playout. The big depending factor is scoring some brifters.

Nigel, does your frame have braze-ons for down shifters?

[nfmisso]

(09-18-2011, 06:03 PM)ghost Wrote:  Nigel, does your frame have braze-ons for down shifters?

No, but it had downtube shifters originally. Doesn't look like it had anything brazed on there.

[Tim M]

I looked at velobase but they only show a 1986 310 and it appears to have down tube shifters mounted (via a hole and a braze or glue??) on the top of the down tube. Perhaps earlier models such as yours had clamp on down tube shifters...is there any evidence of that on the tube? (one can still purchase clamp on down tube shifters)

In any case, why go with costly and fussy brifters rather than bar end shifters? And, brifters or bar end you're still going to have the cable routing and support problem if you take the shifters up from the down tube.

[nfmisso]

Hi Tim;

There is a little triangle brazed on the bottom for locating downtube shifters. There is a guy on ebay selling cable stops that fit in place of the down tube shifters.

I tried bar-ends; our tandem had them; and did not like them. I want to try brifters. My friend with them really like them (his bike doesn't fit me).

[Tim M]

Nigel,

Thanks for keeping an old bike in play and out of the dumpster! It can be done! My only experience in your scenario is with the Problem Solvers product and the Jagwire inline adjusters. It worked (with bar end shifters), but took some minor hacking.

Problem Solvers
dual cable Backstop 1-1/8" (28.6)

http://bikeusa.com/product/problem-solvers-dual-cable-backstop-1-1-8-28.6-sku-br5454-qc55.htm


New! Origin8 Clamp-on Double Stop for Standard 1 1/8" (28.6mm) Downtubes.


http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/cable-hardware-shift.html#hardware

also:

http://harriscyclery.net/product/jagwire-in-line-cable-adjuster-1062.htm

[nfmisso]

Hi Tim;

I decided to try these:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cable-Stop-Clamp-Downtube-Adjusters-4-Shimano-STI-/120748880005?pt=Cycling_Parts_Accessories&hash=item1c1d31b085

They have a nice appearance, and have the adjustment features.

I used the Origin 8 parts on a 7 to 21 speed conversion. If adjusters are not needed, they are very nice, and I would use them again.

My bikes range from early '80s to '94

[nfmisso]

A little up date. THe previous owner trashed the forks when he tried to remove something - from the evidence, he tried to undo the upper race directly, without removing the handle bar stem, nuts, etc; by grabbing on to it, and the end of forks (or maybe his wheel). The forks have some buckling, and the tanged washer with teeth on one side that engages the upper race to prevent rotation had its tange 10° out of the slot for the tange.

This morning we hoped on the tandem, and took the orginal fork and a fork that I have had lying around for a couple years over to Wheel Away to have the mechanic there pull the crown race, and shorten the new for by 10mm. The new fork is silver, and looks good with the dark red frame. It has a hole for mounting a dual pivot front brake and mounts for V-brakes (positioned for ISO 559, not ISO 630); and more fender clearance than the original forks. The brake reach on the new forks in 55mm vs 50mm on the orginals. Luckily, the crown race to axle dimension and angluar position is within a couple of millimeters (looks identical by eyeball, my Engineering eyeballs are good for ±2mm over the less than 400mm distance here). The V-brake bosses will be used to mount a Sunlite http://www.amazon.com/Sunlite-Gold-Tec-Front-Rack/dp/B002MKHR6G/ rack in front to hold my commuting stuff.

This afternoon the bottom bracket was overhauled - the grease that was in it looks like the original - and the new fork installed. I went for loose bearings in both the bottom bracket and headset for added strength and stiffness.

There probably will not be any further progress until Christmas break, as work is ramping up, and I will have at least one more trip to China this year.

[nfmisso]

Updates

First fitting the front rack. The support channels worked out better than expected. Cut down kitty litter buckets will be attached, which will fix the supports in place - not that they needed anything additional.
[attachment=3211]

[attachment=3212]

[attachment=3213]
not very much rear brake clearance - more later

[attachment=3214]
front brake clearance looks okay - more later

[attachment=3215]

[attachment=3216]

[attachment=3217]
front fender terminates at the front brake, and does not go between the tire and the brake - not enough clearance - the front rack will provide protection, and I may attache the scrap of the fender under the rack.

[attachment=3218]

[attachment=3219]

[attachment=3220]

[attachment=3221]

[attachment=3222]

The rear brake actually rubs on tire (32-630) - bracket required to move it up.

Fitted up the rear fender - not shown - will work okay without rubbing.

Turns out I needed another part (sold seperately) to attach the brake cables to the 2200 series shifters.

The wheels were on my Schwinn World Tourist until a spoke failed on the rear - after my putting over 5K miles on the wheels I purchased used. I decided that a complete rebuild of the rear wheel was in order - used Ø2mm Wheelsmith spokes; left side is black because I got a fantastic deal on them, but the supplier did not have any in the correct length for the right side. The color difference made the wheel building easier - black right, silver left.

The front tire is an Avenir (Kenda) 28-630, the rear is a Bell 32-630.

[nfmisso]

And today I found that I cannot fit a front derailleur without having the rear fender rub on the 32-630 tire.

Choices: 1 x 7 - cheapest alternative, ordered a 46T chain ring; as I believe that is the best compromise for my riding. 52T (with 25T big rear cog) is too big for the small hills that I encounter on my commute and 39T with 13T small cog is too short.

The other choices was to switch to ISO 622 (700c) wheels and tires; too much money for this project.

[xerxes]

The bike almost certainly had 700c wheels originally and that's why you're having trouble with brake and frame clearances.

Also, it looks more like and audax frame than a full tourer. Audax frames are designed to take mudguards for winter training and maybe a lightly loaded rack, whereas on a full tourer I'd expect to see front rack bosses, extra bottle cage bosses etc. Full tourers generally have longer chain stays and more relaxed frame angles as well, which makes them slower steering and more stable when fully loaded, whereas a racers and audax frames are more compact and have faster steering, which may be a bit twitchy, especially with heavily loaded racks.

[nfmisso]

Hi Xerxes;

Given it's fork (hi ten steel) and frame (double butted Cr-Mo) material, my bike is a 82, 83 or 84 model year; which all came with 27" wheels. The 310 was not equipped with 700c wheels until the 86 model year.

The 310 was in the "Semi Pro Series" - more racer than anything else.

[xerxes]

Looks like you're right about the wheel sizes: http://www.miyatacatalogs.com/2007/12/miyata-catalog-1982.html

I'm surprised by that, here in the UK I seem to recall that 27" wheels were pretty much phased out by the early 80's.

It still looks a bit tight for mudguards, you might catch your toes on them when you turn the wheel. This is a problem on some very tight race frames anyway, even without mudguards, not too much of a problem on a time trials bike, but not ideal for a tourer/commuter.

[nfmisso]

I am used to catching my toes on the front mudguard of our tandem - the 310 has about the same toe clearance. My World Tourist has a fraction more clearance, only my SR has real toe clearance to the front fender.

I figured out a way to keep the front derailleur and the rear mudguard - move the end of the fender to just above the derailleur clamp. I ordered a two piece aluminum clamp today that I will drill and tap to provide the front mounting point for the fender.

For the rear brake, I can mount it to a plate with it's bolt 12mm above the stock position, and everything will work fine.

Looks like I'll be able to put it all together after we get back from vacation.

Both the 310 and SR projects are learning experiments for me to better understand what kind of bike I want to ride most of the time. I am leaning towards this one:
http://www.amazon.com/Nashbar-Steel-Touring-Bike-58CM/dp/B005JDGMAA/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&coliid=I3EXZ3VVMB9LU0&colid=UTY71LGEXJUA

[xerxes]

I'm not sure I'd trust a plate to mount the brake on, it will probably be too flexible. At best it will make the brakes squeel, at worst it may fail and the caliper tangle up on the frame, or in the spokes.

Perhaps a block, with a section removed so that it fits either side of the brake mount and bolt can go all the way through and another hole in the top through with the caliper is bolted. Alternatively, two plates bolted either side of the existing mount, braced with a block with a hole in it, through which the brake is bolted.

Something like this:

[nfmisso]

Hi Xerxes;

Thanks for the suggestions.

When I said plate; is it a 5mm thick piece of aluminum 6061 T6 that is well secured to the brake cross piece and the seat stays.

I am Mechanical Design Engineer; and assure you that the brake mounting will be more rigid than stock.

Of the two concept you show above; the lower one would work better because the middle block can be made slightly thinner than the brake cross piece so that everything will be clamped tight. The upper concept will result in rattling because it has to clear the cross piece to be installed, and beefy section makes it impractical to squeeze it tight.

[xerxes]

(05-24-2012, 10:22 AM)nfmisso Wrote:  When I said plate; is it a 5mm thick piece of aluminum 6061 T6 that is well secured to the brake cross piece and the seat stays.

Ah, OK, I had visions of a thin plate bolted to the existing brake mount and the brake bolted through another hole 12mm higher - and the caliper flapping about feebly each time you used it.

As an engineer, I'm sure you're aware that when the brake is applied, the caliper bolt will apply quite a bit of twisting force to the cross member to which it is attached, hence my idea of something that would clamp either side of it.

[nfmisso]

I concur, the stock brake mounting put a great deal of torsion load into the cross member.

the way I have the plate configured will actually result in a lot less load on the cross member; the plate will transfer a compressive load into the seat stays and the cross member - no twisting loads will be seen by the cross member with the plate.