The ground or trailing brake was another class, a long, curved fork being attached, and being so worked by a cord as to bring a notched or roughened end into biting contact with the ground; this was not wholesome for the road surface, but it served fairly well for retarding, and if pressure enough were applied the back wheel (which bore only a small load) could even be lifted off the ground, the brake taking its place as carrier. The cord was made very thick and strong; yet as there was a chance of its snapping, other forms of brake were devised to meet that chance. In one, the cord was slackened instead of tightened, allowing the short arms to drop down in front of the back wheel, which forthwith ran up off the ground and directly upon a small flat shoe borne by these arms, so that the wheel stopped turning and rode on a “drag” instead. Another pattern made the brake arm long enough to go quite over the wheel; this was worked by drawing upward with the cord until the back extremity bore on the ground; if the cord broke, a spring pulled the arm in the other direction, and the forward end, carrying a shoe upon which the wheel ran up, dropped down before the wheel.
The front wheel brake was the common one, however. Sometimes it was in roller form, as sometimes now, and this was sometimes worked by a rack and pinion, the handlebar being rotated for the purpose. More generally the brake was a simple L-shaped lever with a spoon at its end, worked by a hand lever on the bar, as today. As old riders remember, the brake on the high wheel was very sensitive and hazardous, as an excess of pressure would lock the wheel in its bearings and send everything over headlong.
HAY & WILLITS BACK PEDALLING BRAKE.
HAY & WILLITS BACK PEDALLING BRAKE.
BRAKE OR NO BRAKE.
The modern type removes that danger and yet the modern wheel, the drop frame excepted, is brakeless to this day, all discussion about brakes in the press and before city governing boards, enforced by not a small number of cases of disastrous run-away mishaps, having failed to bring about the adoption of a brake as a regular part of construction. There are some mechanical reasons for this, and some reasons in custom and fashion. The head being longer than in the old days, it is impracticable to use the L spoon, and the direct “plunger” pattern is necessary. This requires a long connection down from the bar, and it has been difficult to keep the brake parts in smooth working order, especially as adjustability for height of the bar must be included. Later, makers have begun to put the downward connection within the head and work the brake directly under the fork crown; but even then the lever upon the bar is a clumsy fixture and constantly interferes with changing position of the bar. With the front wheel brake at its best, and however necessary some brake may be deemed to be, it is still an expensive and troublesome fixture.
The effect on the tire is also to be considered. The old solid tire could submit to anything, but the stress and wear on the pneumatic are so great that it really ought not to be subjected to brake friction. If it is urged that the back wheel is the proper and effective place for brake application it may justly be said that the back tire, having to carry most of the load and bear all the driving traction, ought to be kept free from further demands from a brake. On behalf of the front tire it should be said that when a brake spoon has cut into the rubber on the tire tread not only is there liability to leakage of air but moisture may reach the fabric and disintegration by rotting may set in. As women are the chief possessors of the front plunger brake, and, moreover, are most likely to use it, because generally more timid and also less practised and confident in back pedalling, it is fair to warn them against unnecessary use of the brake (which really ought to be reserved for emergencies), especially when on wet surfaces, since rubber cuts and tears more readily when wet.