# Missing spoon brake mysteries



## squeedals (Oct 3, 2013)

Why are so many TOC and earlier bikes missing the front spoon brake assembly? And not an easy part to find. The hole bracket on the front stem is there, but the brake is not. And I'm talking about complete bikes and original. No new rear hubs with brakes either, so where did the assembly go.........and why just the brake system? You DO need brakes at some point in your ride.  

Don


----------



## bike (Oct 3, 2013)

*It was unmanly*



squeedals said:


> Why are so many TOC and earlier bikes missing the front spoon brake assembly? And not an easy part to find. The hole bracket on the front stem is there, but the brake is not. And I'm talking about complete bikes and original. No new rear hubs with brakes either, so where did the assembly go.........and why just the brake system? You DO need brakes at some point in your ride.
> 
> Don




to have brakes on your wheel.

 Columbia even advertised it could be removed with no trace! That was pre coaster era but you can imagine the concept continued on.


----------



## squeedals (Oct 3, 2013)

I'll buy that anwer on a mens bike........but so far I've seen a number missing on womens models. Look out below! :eek:


----------



## jkent (Oct 3, 2013)

It could be that the reason the brakes are missing off the girls bikes, was because it was robbed off a girls bike at some point to put back on a boys bike? Like common practice still today. A lot of girls bikes go to the trash to be parted out for boys bikes.
Just a thought.
JKent


----------



## squeedals (Oct 3, 2013)

jkent said:


> It could be that the reason the brakes are missing off the girls bikes, was because it was robbed off a girls bike at some point to put back on a boys bike? Like common practice still today. A lot of girls bikes go to the trash to be parted out for boys bikes.
> Just a thought.
> JKent




Well that's not "manly" one bit! Hey hun........let's go for a bike ride......say down Dead Mans Hill??


----------



## Obi-Wan Schwinnobi (Oct 3, 2013)

squeedals said:


> Well that's not "manly" one bit! Hey hun........let's go for a bike ride......say down Dead Mans Hill??




Its like today, seeing the fixie dorks. Some of them have no brakes and use the weight of their body to slow down by back pedaling. I personally think its nuts to have no brakes zipping around cars n such haha.


----------



## squeedals (Oct 3, 2013)

fatbar said:


> Its like today, seeing the fixie dorks. Some of them have no brakes and use the weight of their body to slow down by back pedaling. I personally think its nuts to have no brakes zipping around cars n such haha.




Can these old bikes be slowed down by "back peddling"? I don't know. Still doesn't really explain why so many assemblies are MIA. Could it be.........it was an OPTION on some models way back then?


----------



## pedal4416 (Oct 3, 2013)

Bricycle already owned all of these bikes at one point and removed the brakes. Now he's selling them back to you in the sell/trade section!!


----------



## bricycle (Oct 3, 2013)

pedal4416 said:


> Bricycle already owned all of these bikes at one point and removed the brakes. Now he's selling them back to you in the sell/trade section!!




LOL......!!!!!! I do have one spoon kit available. You just need the spoon? See my ad...


----------



## thehugheseum (Oct 3, 2013)

brakes were for sissies and the same goes for clutches on early motorcycles.............i think we forget how rural most of america was before autos and population took off...........its possible women ditched the brakes as part of equality..............the bicycle coming of age was a huge event for women

    yes you can back pedal or just get used to judging things around you for how fast or hard you ride, in the late 1800s i cant imagine the roads were very good so braking probably wasnt what we think of in todays world

   fixi bikes are actually easier to control than the clustered up overcomplicated counterparts


----------



## Gary Mc (Oct 3, 2013)

Pre-1900 most all bikes were fixie's with NO brakes. Some did have spoon brakes, some others had coaster brakes or facsimiles of a brake, but most had nothing. The first coaster brake attempt was in 1897 with the New Departure Controller actually designed to slow the bike down but didn't have a lot of stopping power. The first true coaster brake was a New Departure/Corbin collaboration in 1898.  From 1900 into the teens, many bikes were still sold as fixies thus creating a huge aftermarket for coaster brake sales beginning in 1899 to put brakes on your fixie.  Aftermarket coaster brakes continued as big business into the teens & twenties.  

Now to get to what I suspect is the reason for why you see spoon brakes missing today, I have read Wheelmen of the era considered brakes for sissies thus not manly and that thought prevails to some extent with them today.  I suspect this is the reason so many spoon brakes are missing on mens bikes, true Wheelmen of the era bought a new bike, didn't want to be seen as a sissy & actually removed them, of course this is only supposition based on my readings of the Wheelmen thought about braking mechanisms around the turn of the century.

bike & thehugheseum have the correct answers.  Roads were not good and your pedals were used as much for control as handlebars on sub-standard bumpy, rutted out dirt roads for both men & women.  Brakes were actually slow to catch on TOC.  Many Wheelmen actually thought braking mechanisms would cause accidents, just imagine using a spoon brake caked in mud which is why they didn't stay on long.


----------



## squeedals (Oct 3, 2013)

Gary Mc said:


> Pre-1900 most all bikes were fixie's with NO brakes. Some did have spoon brakes, some others had coaster brakes or facsimiles of a brake, but most had nothing. The first coaster brake attempt was in 1897 with the New Departure Controller actually designed to slow the bike down but didn't have a lot of stopping power. The first true coaster brake was a New Departure/Corbin collaboration in 1898.  From 1900 into the teens, many bikes were still sold as fixies thus creating a huge aftermarket for coaster brake sales beginning in 1899 to put brakes on your fixie.  Aftermarket coaster brakes continued as big business into the teens & twenties.
> 
> Now to get to what I suspect is the reason for why you see spoon brakes missing today, I have read Wheelmen of the era considered brakes for sissies thus not manly and that thought prevails to some extent with them today.  I suspect this is the reason so many spoon brakes are missing on mens bikes, true Wheelmen of the era bought a new bike, didn't want to be seen as a sissy & actually removed them, of course this is only supposition based on my readings of the Wheelmen thought about braking mechanisms around the turn of the century.
> 
> bike & thehugheseum have the correct answers.  Roads were not good and your pedals were used as much for control as handlebars on sub-standard bumpy, rutted out dirt roads for both men & women.  Brakes were actually slow to catch on TOC.  Many Wheelmen actually thought braking mechanisms would cause accidents, just imagine using a spoon brake caked in mud which is why they didn't stay on long.




This makes sense. Great explanation BTW. This would also explain why on some bikes missing the hand brake component mounted on the handlebars shows no "ghost" where a mount would have been if it were present for many years. The early removal would explain that part.


----------



## squeedals (Oct 3, 2013)

So........the question now moves to : Is it worth trying to replace the brake for a complete pre TOC bike and does the missing brake diminish the value?  We all know what hens teeth these babies are and original units are pricey so if we can skip that part of a resto, that would be nice.


----------



## squeedals (Oct 3, 2013)

bricycle said:


> LOL......!!!!!! I do have one spoon kit available. You just need the spoon? See my ad...




Here are the pics:


----------



## filmonger (Oct 3, 2013)

*RE: 1898 Brakes*

Awww - but try not to forget that there were a few brake choices back in 1898....


----------



## Gary Mc (Oct 3, 2013)

squeedals said:


> So........the question now moves to : Is it worth trying to replace the brake for a complete pre TOC bike and does the missing brake diminish the value?  We all know what hens teeth these babies are and original units are pricey so if we can skip that part of a resto, that would be nice.




This will depend on different people's perspective on the issue.  Some will say (probably most CABE members) it needs to be 100% correct per the catalog or it diminishes the value which is prevailing thought and likely correct on value just due to collectors perspective as this has been prevailing thought for a long time. Takes a long time to change prevailing thought.  People get really anal about items being catalog correct to get the best value out of bikes.   I have a different take as I believe in restoring to what the original owner had on it if you know, that's it's history to me, not what's in a catalog necessarily as long as the item is era correct.  So if it was removed I'm not necessarily a fan of correcting it except for safety issues which might mean adding the brake back.  A dilemma for you, yes.  

My perspective:  We lose history so often to me when we correct what original owners did which is why you raised the issue, why are these missing so often.  Everyone thinks it has to have a spoon brake because it was in the catalog, really?  Then why did original owners choose to remove them so often?  To me it's just as valid to leave it off for the reason it was originally removed and is representative of what happened in the era.  I just refurbished a 1930 bike with a rear reflector that came out roughly 6 years after the bike.  Why you might ask?  My answer is that's what the original owner had on it.  It is it's history of the particular bike just as much as what's in the catalog.  It will also have a 1934 speedo on it if I can ever find all the parts, 4 years after the bike was manufactured.  Again, why?  The original owner added it so to me it brings the particular bike back to it's own historical context.  There was a roughly 1930 Hawthorne motorbike on the CABE last year that had a lobdell horizontal spring saddle on it.  It was obviously not correct as the saddle came out about 8 years after the bike BUT the original or an early owner obviously made the change.  CABE members were pretty overwhelming stated the saddle needed to be back to correct per the catalog.  Was it correct, no.  Was it part of the bike's history, to me yes, and it looked really cool.  In the end the owner I believe sold the saddle and recouped what he paid for the bike.  Had it been mine, I would have left the saddle as an early upgrade to preserve it's history but was not my call to make and obviously not prevailing thought on the CABE.

Sorry I rambled so much but that's my perspective, I like historical perspective & context as much or more than catalog correct, right or wrong, good or bad.....


----------



## Gary Mc (Oct 3, 2013)

filmonger said:


> Awww - but try not to forget that there were a few brake choices back in 1898....
> 
> View attachment 116420




An era appropriate early coaster brake would be appropriate as well even if it's 5 years later than 1898 to me......

PS, the Coaster Brake you posted is the New Departure Controller, one's on ebay right now for $4K Buy It Now LOL.  I only know of 2.


----------



## filmonger (Oct 3, 2013)

*RE: The Wheel 1896*

Here is what the Wheel had to say about riding brakeless in Aug 1896... I think this kind of answers the question about attitudes of the day. - Oh yea.... and I agree with Gary. Preservation of history is just as important as Originality when all is done in a sympathetic manner. Your bikes paint is just fantastic - very nice machine.


----------



## squeedals (Oct 3, 2013)

Gary Mc said:


> This will depend on different people's perspective on the issue.  Some will say (probably most CABE members) it needs to be 100% correct per the catalog or it diminishes the value which is prevailing thought and likely correct on value just due to collectors perspective as this has been prevailing thought for a long time. Takes a long time to change prevailing thought.  People get really anal about items being catalog correct to get the best value out of bikes.   I have a different take as I believe in restoring to what the original owner had on it if you know, that's it's history to me, not what's in a catalog necessarily as long as the item is era correct.  So if it was removed I'm not necessarily a fan of correcting it except for safety issues which might mean adding the brake back.  A dilemma for you, yes.
> 
> My perspective:  We lose history so often to me when we correct what original owners did which is why you raised the issue, why are these missing so often.  Everyone thinks it has to have a spoon brake because it was in the catalog, really?  Then why did original owners choose to remove them so often?  To me it's just as valid to leave it off for the reason it was originally removed and is representative of what happened in the era.  I just refurbished a 1930 bike with a rear reflector that came out roughly 6 years after the bike.  Why you might ask?  My answer is that's what the original owner had on it.  It is it's history of the particular bike just as much as what's in the catalog.  It will also have a 1934 speedo on it if I can ever find all the parts, 4 years after the bike was manufactured.  Again, why?  The original owner added it so to me it brings the particular bike back to it's own historical context.  There was a roughly 1930 Hawthorne motorbike on the CABE last year that had a lobdell horizontal spring saddle on it.  It was obviously not correct as the saddle came out about 8 years after the bike BUT the original or an early owner obviously made the change.  CABE members were pretty overwhelming stated the saddle needed to be back to correct per the catalog.  Was it correct, no.  Was it part of the bike's history, to me yes, and it looked really cool.  In the end the owner I believe sold the saddle and recouped what he paid for the bike.  Had it been mine, I would have left the saddle as an early upgrade to preserve it's history but was not my call to make and obviously not prevailing thought on the CABE.
> 
> Sorry I rambled so much but that's my perspective, I like historical perspective & context as much or more than catalog correct, right or wrong, good or bad.....




Never thought of that take, the history of the original owner intent and after 100 years or so, what mods have been done. How many owners has a bike had.......that kind of thing. We are just caretakers I guess, unless we destroy the bike. Some day after I'm long gone, someone will have my collection or individual part of and might be wondering, who has owned this bike. As time progresses, we could be talking about many, many owners of a particular bicycle. Crazy......


----------



## thehugheseum (Oct 3, 2013)

gary mc is absolutely right in my book................i have always thought building a bike from a catalog picture was silly.............if your really into history then your into the stories a piece tells,thats probably why alot of collectors appreciate a original even if beat up.........the story it tells is its own and unique/interesting


----------

