Broken Brooks B17: The Continuation

My Brooks is still broken, but there have been a few noteworthy developments. After posting about my plight on German radreise-forum.de and on this blog, I have received some useful feedback. A commenter here pointed out that Brooks has an "official" repair person in Philadelphia and that I should contact the US Brooks distributor, Highway Two, to get the repair shop's contact info. Unfortunately, they didn't reply to my email. I then contacted Brooks directly and within a couple of minutes they replied:

There is a man called Simon Firth who runs Hanford Cycles in Philadelphia who was trained here at the factory in Smethwick so he should be more than capable of repairing it for you. His email addresses are: hanfordcycles@gmail.com or brooksrepair1@gmail.com.

The second email address is no longer in use but after sending a message to Hanford Cycles I quickly got a response from Simon Firth. Repairing my B17 would cost 36 dollars for parts, 35 for labor and about 10 for shipping, totaling at 81 dollars. Plus the cost for me to ship the broken saddle to Philly and the ever-looming Canadian custom fees and taxes. Now I by no means think that these charges too high (an online friend from Germany told me that he was quoted a total of 60 Euros for a repair directly at Brooks); however, I had bought the B17 for 90-something dollars shipped. So I don't think I'll have the saddle professionally fixed.

At the same time, I really don't want to throw out a piece that has served me so well and is in principle repairable. As a result I will attempt a repair myself. As mentioned before, Brooks sells all the necessary spare parts (i.e. the frame plus rivets) and their shipping charges to Canada are reasonable. Another online friend directed me at this very detailed how-to and the process seems to be doable. Some more advice and pictures can be found here. It's all in German but the pictures should be helpful. I'll order the spare parts soon and will report on the repair.

In the meantime, I have replaced the Brooks with the Velo Orange Model 1 and after the first 120km ride I'm pretty happy with it. But more on that in another post.

Cheap or expensive -- Which bottom bracket to choose?

If you've read my previous post on the toll of winter, you know that my bottom bracket is grindy. I haven't kept exact records of how many kilometers I have ridden with it, but I'm pretty sure that it's only about two years old and definitely has less than 10 000 km on it. That's pretty disappointing for a cartridge bottom bracket. I've looked at different options for a replacement and it was hard to decide between them:

• get another cheap Shimano cartridge BB and hope that this time it will last longer?
• get the really nice SKF bottom bracket that has a 100 000 km/10 year warranty?
• move away from square taper BBs and try a external bottom bracket system?

The last option I did not really consider. My cranks are still in good shape, as are all three chainrings. In addition, people's experiences with external bottom bracket systems appear to be mixed. In theory they seem like a great idea (easier to install, larger bearings) but in practice it hasn't quite worked out like that. Therefore, it came down to deciding between cheap and expensive. Interestingly, in the world of square taper bottom brackets there isn't really any middle ground: square taper system have become less and less common and SKF is, as far as I know, the only high-level option.

I was really tempted by the SKF bottom brackets, currently only distributed by Compass Bicycles. A 100 000 km warranty (given my annual mileage it would probably be the 10 years that come first) is pretty impressive, and as exchanging bottom brackets is one of the more time consuming maintenance items it can make a lot of sense -- install and forget! The price for those carefree 100 megameters is fairly steep, though: 129 USD plus shipping (and probably taxes and customs for us Canadians). Compare that with the cheap Shimano option: at the LBS, a UN-55 bottom bracket costs 30 dollars, meaning I can buy four to five Shimano BBs for the price of one SKF (if you live in the US you can get them for less than $17 shipped on Amazon. Simplistic rational choice economics would probably tell us to go for SKF: if my new Shimano BBs are going fail like the last one, at only 10 000 km, five of them will only last for 50 000 km -- versus the at least 100 000 km of the SKF. But what if the SKF breaks down before that and I'll have to pay for the shipping back to the US? And are kilometers the right metric if I'm riding less then 10 000 km per year anyway? What if my bike gets stolen (not that unlikely in Montreal)? What if the new Shimano bottom bracket will last much longer than the previous one, as they do for a lot of people? On the other had, isn't buying cheap but crappy things horribly unsustainable and making me a bad person?

Those are all legitimate questions and to some of them there are no easy answers. In the end, I bought another Shimano BB UN-55: The LBS had them in stock, a 30 dollar hole hurts much less in my wallet than a 150 dollar hole, and I'll just have to hope that this time I'm more lucky.

Which trade-offs do you make in the realm of bottom brackets? Have you moved beyond square taper and Octalink? Or are you a retrogrouch with good old cup-and-cone bearings?

Almost like a Brooks? First Impression of the Velo Orange Leather Saddles Model 1 and Model 3

After my recent Brooks mishap I decided to try something new. Velo Orange, one of the brands that sells leather saddles made by Taiwanese company Gyes, had a sale on two of their models, their "Model 3" being a copy of the Brooks B17 touring saddle, and "Model 1" a copy of the Brook Team Professional, which is somewhere in between a touring and a road racing saddle. It would be hard not to compare the VO offerings with their Brooks counterparts, and since I have a good deal of experience with Brooks products, that's what I'll do.

Velo Orange Model 1 (left) and Model 3 (right)

First, let's talk about cost. Shipping to Canada was 17 Dollars and unfortunately I also got hit with sales tax and processing fees (it's pretty unpredictable when you have to pay sales tax and when you don't). So the overall cost for both saddles was 60 + 65 + 17 + 25 USD, coming out to 83.50 per saddle. On Amazon.com, a real B17 currently sells for 107 USD and a Team Pro starts at 135 USD, both including shipping to the US. With some research it might be possible to get them for slightly less (e.g. buying from a European webshop), but the Velo Orange saddles are definitely still going to be cheaper, even at their regular price of 85 and 90 dollars.

"Aged" leather of the Model 3. Not the binding in the middle of the saddle

On first view, the saddles look pretty similar to their Brooks inspiration, but there are a number of differences. For the Model 3, the most obvious one is the leather itself: whereas the regular Brooks features smooth leather, the VO saddle's surface resembles more that of the Brooks "Aged" models. The "aged" leather is supposed to break in more quickly--but consequently will also stretch and wear more rapidly. VO doesn't say anything in particular about the Model 3's leather and the leather still feels pretty stiff and hard. The Model 1, on the other hand, has a smooth surface that looks a little more dull than a real Brooks. But I'm suspecting that might change after the application of Proofide and some polishing/riding.

Model 1. A little dull.

From below, both saddles look quite different from a Brooks: instead of leather you see some kind of textile layered over the leather's surface. I guess this is for protecting the saddles from road spray, something that I don't have to care about because of my fenders. Another obvious difference between the Model 3 and a B17 is that the former is bound with two holes in the middle of the saddle. This prevents the sides of the saddle from flaring and it will also make the saddle a bit harder (depending on how tightly you bind it). Compared to a standard B17, Model 3's rivets are bigger. I'm not sure what they're made out of but it's not the copper of the more expensive Brooks saddles. Finally, in contrast to the Team Pro, Model 1 has bag loops, a feature that is pretty important to me and that made me buy a Swallow instead of the Team Pro for my road bike. 

Here you can see the textile underlayer

Underside of the Model 1

One less obvious difference are the saddle rails. I've complained about the sub-standard strength of Brooks rails (somewhere in the 6.6 to 6.7mm range) and fortunately the VO saddles feature wider rails. My calipers are out of battery at the moment, but it looks like the rails are at least 7mm wide. This will hopefully prevent the rails from breaking--but might also make the ride slightly harsher. Another frequent criticism of Brooks saddles is their limited fore-aft adjustability. Because Brooks saddles were developed in the age of slacker seat tube angles and haven't changed since then, some people have problems getting the saddle as far back as they would like to. I haven't measured the rails yet, but VO says theirs offer 10mm more space. (If you want even more range you should have a look at Selle AnAtomica saddles).

Model 1 next to a Brooks Swallow

Another less obvious difference is weight: On my kitchen scale, the Model 1 came in at 541g (claimed weight 520g) and the Model 5 was 646g (vs 665g claimed). This makes a tie between Model 1 and a Team Pro (claimed weight 520g), but quite a difference between Model 3 and the claimed 520g of a B17.

I think this is all I can say for now, but updates will follow once the saddles are in use.

Winter's toll. And a winter bike?

Winter is far from over here in Montreal. But because of a snapped gear cable I decided to do a spring tune-up on Wolfgang, my all-purpose, all-year bike. A lot of people have "winter beaters," but to me that never made too much sense: I really like my bike and don't see the point of riding an inferior quality bike at a time that places the highest demands on bike and rider. Especially, I wouldn't want to give up on my hub generator and LED lighting at the darkest time of the year. So far, this has worked well for me and the wear and tear of components didn't seem to be particularly bad. But somehow this winter seems to have been worse than previous, if not in weather but in damage to parts. My rear rim was destroyed a couple of weeks ago, after less than 10 000 km.

Busted rim

And during my tune-up today I discovered a whole bunch of other issues:

• my bottom bracket feels noticeably grindy
• the front brakes, Avid Single Digit 7, didn't turn that well around the brake bosses
• the Tiagra front derailleur is sticky and doesn't want to go to the smallest chainring any more
• all the cables and housing are in miserable condition and have to be replaced
• a lot of the bolts, despite being made of stainless steel, show a lot of surface corrosion
• one of the Shimano M424 pedals feels crunchy in the bearings

I'm not quite sure why this winter has been worse than others. I might have ridden more (last year I didn't ride between mid-January and the end of March because of a broken wrist), Montreal winters might be somewhat harder than those in Ithaca, and in some cases it is probably just accumulative damage.

This can't be good for your bike, can it?

It seems tempting to add a dedicated winter bike to the stable, and if I had the resources (and permission from the accomplice) I would probably get a bike with the following features:

• dynohub and lower quality LED lighting (e.g. the B&M Lyt): As stated above, I wouldn't want to give up on my dynohub-powered lighting system. However, for riding in the city I don't need a B&M Cyo or Philips SafeRide light. It's more about being seen than about seeing.
• frame with upright position: A frame that allows me to ride in a more upright position would help in snowy and icy conditions.
• SPD-compatible pedals: I also wouldn't want to give up on SPD pedals and I'm happy with my Lake winter cycling boots.
• plastic saddle: Whereas for long rides a leather saddle is an absolute requirement, for commuting a plastic saddle will do and also take care of the issue of having to cover your saddle---this season I managed to lose 3(!) saddle covers.
• drop bars: A lot of people prefer straight, Albatross, or North road bars for a winter bike; this makes sense from a balance and control perspective; however, my wrists are not built for any kind of non-drop bar, even on reasonably short rides.
• good and wide studded tires: Wheel size is not particularly important for me but good studded tires are a must. And some wideness helps with floating over snow.
• disc brakes (at least in the front): Rim brakes with drop bar levers can be pretty problematic in wet conditions, and most of the time winter means wet roads. Therefore I want disc brakes, probably mechanical ones like the Avid BB7 because of the drop bars. In addition, rim wear is not an issue with disc brakes.



Not a good studded tire

• 2-speed Sturmey Archer Duomatic kickback hub with low gearing: I'm not a single-speed or fixed gear person because my knees don't like me mashing up hills (and hills I like!); at the same time, derailleur systems don't particularly like road salt and constant wetness. A 2-speed Sturmey Archer kickback hub thus would be perfect: no cables, allows to use a 1/8" chain, and has more than one gear. I've never ridden a Duomatic hub so maybe it's not as good as I think.

I don't really see me building up this bike any time soon. But one may dream while wainting for spring...

Broken Brooks B17

Update March 15: I've written up some repair-related information in this post.

Last weekend, I did my first long (i.e. over 100km) ride of the year. The weather was alright at 3°C and some sun with clouds and I had a very nice ride out to the L'Île Perrot. Not so nice was the fact that about 85 km into the ride my Brooks B17 Imperial saddle broke: I heard a quick cracking sound and immediately knew that it had to the failure that I had been afraid of for a long time: one of the rails broke, right behind the clamp.

Brooks B17 Imperial: Still in good shape

This problem is widely known, as is the fact that Brooks claims that it's not their fault (and Grant Petersen agrees). Saddles with the tension too low, mounted too far back, or malicious clamping mechanisms supposedly cause the issue, but that seems to be only part of the story. For one, Brooks saddle rails are slightly thinner than standard rails, according to an article in the German bike magazine Fahrradzukunft, resulting in a significant reduction of strength. Due to their hammock principle --  you sit on a piece of leather that is only connected to the frame at the nose and the rear -- presumably a Brooks creates higher stresses on the frame. And it's easy to see how higher stresses plus weaker rails can in some cases lead to breakage. Of course, it is impossible to tell how frequently Brooks rails break. The company itself probably has a good estimate of it, but is not making any figures public. However, on the internet you come across a fairly large number of incident reports. (It's important to keep in mind that Brooks saddles are pretty popular and therefore the number of incidents has to be put into the context of the large number of Brookses produced.)

Just a little asymmetrical...

My saddle had been ridden for approximately 10 000 km and my weight is somewhere around 85 kg. I think it's unacceptable for a saddle to fail after only such a short period of use -- at my current annual mileage I'd have to buy a new saddle for well over 100 dollars every two years! Some people might say, "well, then why don't you just get a nice saddle from a different manufacturer?" Unfortunately, it's not that easy: first, I do need a leather saddle. Despite being vegan and having some weight-weenie tendencies, I can't really give up on leather in this case: I have a slight scoliosis, resulting in me sitting on the bike crookedly. My leather saddles can adapt to that while plastic saddles can't. Second, while Brooks is not the only manufacturer of leather saddles the number of alternatives is limited and they all have their drawbacks, too:

• Selle An-Atomica: reportedly, the saddles are very comfortable, but the leather stretches very fast. In addition, they carry a hefty price tag of over 200 dollars shipped.
• Gilles Berthoud offers a range of nice leather saddles and apparently they can be easily repaired at home. Presumably due to their hefty price tag, they are not very common and it's therefore difficult to find reviews. 
• Velo Orange sells a range of Brooks knock-offs. They're certainly cheap, but who knows long they will last.

So I'm not really sure what to do. I feel very reluctant to spend money on yet another Brooks, especially since breaking rails are not the only problem one can have with a Brooks (my father-in-law, for example, has a B17 that absolutely does not break in).  For now, I have fixed the saddle by using the advice from the Fahrradzukunft article mentioned above: move the saddle forward, so that the broken part is covered by the clamp, and then tighten the clamp bolt to 25 Nm. We'll see how long that is going to last and how long I'll be willing to put up with the less than ideal saddle position.

Repairing the saddle is another option. Since prior to the defect I was very happy with the B17 Imperial and the leather is probably good for at least another 10 000 km, it would be nice to repair the saddle. While Brooks offers all the necessary spare parts, unsprung saddles like the B17 require you to re-rivet the saddle onto the frame. This is pretty tricky and Brooks recommends to have it done by a professional. Which, of course, is pretty expensive. I haven't talked to any of the local Brooks "dealers of excellence" in Montreal yet, but what I've found online is not that promising: at this place, the cost would be over 100 dollars, and I imagine other places will charge a similar amount.

After the temporary repair

So I'm not sure what to do yet, but I'll keep you updated. If you have experience with Brooks saddles breaking or being repaired, please comment.

Planning for spring: Quebec to Montreal

Last year was a bad bike camping year for us. We only managed to do one overnight trip, and even that one had to be cut short due to health issues. Well, there's always the next year, and the cold of winter is a great time for daydreaming and actual planning of tours to come. Very high on the list of tours to do is a one-week ride from Quebec City to Montreal via Sherbrooke on the Route Verte 1. Using OpenCycleMap and the official guide I have mapped out a 445km route. The idea is to start in Quebec City and then ride back home to Montreal. This has the advantage of allowing us to ride as fast or slow as possible, without the pressure of having to catch a train. It will probably take about a week at about 65km per day.

We'll be taking the train to Quebec City, which is slightly complicated: the only regular train with checked luggage service (and therefore with bicycle transportation) is the Ocean, going from Montreal to Halifax. Unfortunately, it doesn't stop in Quebec proper, but on the other side of the St. Lawrence, in Charny. In addition to that, it gets into town rather late. The alternative to that is to take the "Bike Train," special VIA Rail trains that don't require you to box up your bike. The downside is that these trains only run on the weekend (and maybe only in the summer? Not sure.). So we'll have to see what works best. We'll probably do the fully-loaded camping kind of trip, and judging from a POI file of campgrounds in Quebec that shouldn't be a problem. Since I'm vegan, we'll probably do most of our cooking ourselves and I hope there will be sufficient shopping infrastructure for me not having to eat pasta and tomato sauce each night...

Have you been on this ride or portions of it before? It would be great to get feedback on the route, camping choices, and what the infrastructure is like.

Testing a Penny Stove in the Cold

I am a big fan of DIY alcohol stoves, especially the penny stove variety. I like DIYing in general, and in this case it's also about the fact that a homemade penny stove is actually better than many if not most of the commercial offerings in terms of weight and heat output.

Heineken Penny Stove and stand

In a recent thread on the German Radreise-Forum about equipment choices for an overland trip from Germany to China, the question of the ideal stove came up. Alcohol stoves were discounted by some, based on the availability of fuel in many countries along the way and due to their questionable performance at high altitudes and low temperatures. I was somewhat surprised by the latter objections, as on the penny stove website there are a number of testimonial about the cold weather performance of the stove, including a quotation by Reinhold Messner who supposedly made tea with a jet-based alcohol stove on one of his expeditions to the Himalayas. However, the information there was not very specific -- how much longer does it take to boil water at cold temperatures and how much more fuel does it take -- and my curiosity was sparked. I decided to test it myself.

Air temperature of -9°C

Stove, pot, windscreen

This winter has been pretty mild in Montreal and so it took some time until it was cold enough for a meaningful test. Last Sunday morning had been predicted to be about -10°C and so I put my stove, fuel, and thermometer out on the porch right after waking up and ran the test after about an hour. So this is the experimental setup:

Altitude: 10m
Amount of water: 1l
Air temperature: -9°C
Water temperature at start: 5°C
Pot: 2.2l REI coated aluminium pot with slightly to big stainless steel lid (I couldn't find the original plastic lid)
Stove: Heineken-based penny stove with wind screen
Wind: almost no wind
Fuel temperature: same as air temperature

Burner at full power

I started the timer right before lighting the stove. The lighting itself was unproblematic: I just dropped a burning match into the stove. The total time until reaching a full boil was about 14 minutes and 30 seconds. I didn't measure the fuel consumption, as my kitchen scale recently broke, but the stove still had quite a bit of fuel in it.

5°C water right from the tap

Now what's the bottom line? Is the penny stove an appropriate choice for winter camping or riding through the Himalayas? I don't think you can definitely answer that question based on my test. Unfortunately, I don't own any other types of stoves and therefore couldn't do replications of the test on other equipment. But there are some hints: first of all, the stove does work in the cold. Even if it may not be the fastest, it will still boil your water in a not totally unreasonable amount of time. Second, we can compare the stove's cold weather performance with some of the published data at higher temperatures: in this test, a penny stove boiled 32 oz (0.95 l) of water in 7:50 at 20° degree air temp with 18°C degree water temp and 670m elevation. It would be interesting to calculate the estimated burn time adjusted for the different starting temperatures of the water, but I haven't done that yet.

Full boil

Assuming that it will get colder again here at some point, I'll try to repeat the test at something closer to -20°C and I might also do a test indoors to get a good baseline to compare my results to. If any readers can contribute data on the cold weather performance of alcohol or other stoves, please feel free to comment.