Disc brake adaptor ...
 

Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop

[Closed] Disc brake adaptor wierdness (This one is interesting!)

20 Posts
7 Users
0 Reactions
94 Views
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

I flogged the Juicys that came with my Pitch and bought some bits and bobs to upgrade the Magura Louises I had lying around.
Basically I want to put the existing 180mm front rotor on the rear and upgrade the front to a 210mm, so I bought a disc and 2 appropriate adaptors. It's all proper Magura kit, came in proper sealed bags and everything
Easy peasy?
Nope.

The rear fits fine - The front however.....
I'd noticed the adaptor looked a little small in the packet, and when I come to fit it, this is what I end up with -

[img] [/img]

The caliper won't go anywhere near close enough to the disc mounts with this adaptor. Not noway, not nohow. Yes the adaptor IS ON THE RIGHT WAY ROUND (It won't fit any other way) and in the pic the caliper is pushed right up onto the disc, so it would have to move out a tad to let the disc turn.

So I get investigating. Brake adaptors, if you use the same size front and rear, will fit a 20mm larger front disc. The adaptors I have for the standard discs (180mm/160mm) are identical, but when I match this supposed 210mm front up to the new 180mm rear, it's actually slightly smaller!

[img] [/img]

That _can't_ be right.

Now I can only think of 2 possible explanations
1) This adaptor is wrong - Wrongly made or wrongly labelled
But it looks identical to the one in the pic on CRC where I bought it
http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=21527

2) There is some issue with the forks - i.e. This mount isn't compatible with this particular combination of Magura components for some reason. But I can't imagine why that would be. There is no problem fitting the standard disc/adaptor, and the forks are Pikes, my last pair of Pikes had an identical disc mount.

This is leaving me a bit baffled, I'm going to post it on the Magura forum as well.

Any ideas???????????


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 6:50 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

It does look like they have lable/bagged it up worng. See what Magura have to say.


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 7:21 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Your problem is that the adapter is for the old, low pressure, Julie brake and not the Louise that you have in the picture. The old version of the Julie was made as a P.M. +20mm affair so that it fitted a 180 rotor without adapters on a P.M. fork. There is no way to fit a 210 mm rotor to your bike with any of the newer brakes with Post Mount calipers. 203mm rotors are the max nowadays.


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:09 am
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Coolfurcats - Right. OK. I've been doing some digging, and I was coming to the conclusion that it was Julie mount only, too. Thanks for the confirmation.
It doesn't say this on the CRC website, so I guess I'll have to send them back, and that it's their fault for not giving the proper information


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:12 am
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

In fact, the disc says Louise on the listing

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=7631

Looks like I bought the last one, too!


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:16 am
 juan
Posts: 5
Free Member
 

Well there is on lesson to that.
Buy hope breaks my dear 😉


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:18 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

yup from a by eye measurement of the picture your about the 20mm out, reckon its actually a 190 frt or 170 rear... odd sizes...

you do know that the same caliper fitted to the front of a bike need a 20mm bigger disc than the same caliper fitted to the back?

ie an I/S caliper designed as direct fit to a fork for a 180mm disc will also fit direct to the frame at the rear but require a 160mm disc..

Now most calipers are post I think there is no difference in caliper front to rear, making it cheaper to produce, but you have to get that 2omm difference sorted out with the adaptor..... I guess one day there will actually be a standard that means standard.

edit..

The old version of the Julie was made as a P.M. +20mm affair so that it fitted a 180 rotor without adapters on a P.M. fork.
God, so some companies are still messing about with it!!!

I thought if you had a post fork and a post caliper it popped straight on with no adaptor for 160mm, and a little i/s to post adaptor to take it to 160mm for the rear... at least thats what Shimano ones do (afaik)...


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:18 am
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Well there is on lesson to that.
Buy hope breaks my dear

I used to have Hope brakes. I sold them when they boiled and dumped me in a ditch. In WALES....
And then boiled again. In BRISTOL.

It seems the problem is nothing to do with Magura, but with CRC mis-labelling the items.
🙂


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:21 am
 DezB
Posts: 54367
Free Member
 

And why, pray tell, didn't you go for a 203mm disc?


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:26 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

cheapskate dezb... now look whats happened! 🙂


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:27 am
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

And why, pray tell, didn't you go for a 203mm disc?

Because it was £2 cheaper to go for the 210, so given the info I had (i.e. That it would fit Louises!) why the hell not?!?!

🙂


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:46 am
Posts: 25872
Full Member
 

shim it up with some washers ?


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:52 am
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Nahh, send it back and swap for a 203. I don't do bodge jobs. 🙂


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 8:55 am
 juan
Posts: 5
Free Member
 

I used to have Hope brakes. I sold them when they boiled and dumped me in a ditch. In WALES....
And then boiled again. In BRISTOL.

Well one other answer my dear 😉
Brake less... (ok a not so obvious one would have be to cut the intake of cakes 😉 but then I know how much you like cakes 😉 )
Out off topi there is a multistradr 1100s for seel round the corner. Come on you know you want it 🙂


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 9:00 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

PP, you sure 210 -203 = 7mm thats only 3.5mm movement at the caliper, it doesnt look like it will work with that adaptor still..

If its any consolation I bought a deore granny ring the other day to fit to XT HT11 cranks and saved about £1.50 getting one for an older chainset, it took me 20 mins with the dremel cutting tabs off so it went around the HT11 BB...


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 9:03 am
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Brake less

Please tell me how to slow or stop from 35-40 mph for a tight corner ot T-junction without braking.... I was probably 20lbs or so lighter than I am now at the time too.....

Can't afford a motorbike of any sort at the minute. Not for a year or two either. 🙁


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 9:06 am
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

PP, you sure 210 -203 = 7mm thats only 3.5mm movement at the caliper, it theyt doesnt look like it will work with that adaptor still..

Tinsy, you've not read the thread properly judging by that comment, or looked at the pictures.

To recap -

It's the correct adaptor for the disc

CRC say it will fit my brakes, but they are wrong. It's only for Julies.

🙂


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 9:09 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Nahh, send it back and swap for a 203. I don't do bodge jobs

I assumed from that you was sending back the 210mm rotor for a 203mm rotor and attempting to use the adaptor in the picture?


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 9:20 am
 DezB
Posts: 54367
Free Member
 

All Avids use spacers between the mount and the adapter. S'not really a [i]bodge[/i]. v-brake pad spacers are the norm.


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 9:23 am
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Ahh, I see. No, I'd have to send the rotor and adaptor back. 🙂


 
Posted : 08/10/2009 9:23 am
Posts: 19914
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Quick update - Just recieved 203mm replacement disc and adaptor from CRC, with a £2.99 refund (Postage I guess) which I never asked for or expected being as the new parts are £2 more than the old ones.

(P.S. - With the job I do, there's no way I could have sorted this so well at an LBS, so I'm very happy!)


 
Posted : 16/10/2009 2:37 pm