# Why no rear brakes?



## RMurphy195 (17 Feb 2016)

Why do so many trikes have no rear brakes? To my mind, having just the front wheel with brakes (even on relatively expensive trikes such as the Pashley offerings) is plain silly!


----------



## Jobro (17 Feb 2016)

RMurphy195 said:


> Why do so many trikes have no rear brakes? To my mind, having just the front wheel with brakes (even on relatively expensive trikes such as the Pashley offerings) is plain silly!


It's cos even the best tyres won't grip on air.................on a recumbent trike braking hard lifts the rear wheel off the ground!


----------



## numbnuts (17 Feb 2016)

My el-cheapo trike which some people call “agricultural” and a “trike shaped object” has disc brakes all round.


----------



## Tigerbiten (17 Feb 2016)

On a trike there's normally not enough weight on the rear wheel to give you any decent braking effort before the wheel starts to slide.

Both my front brakes are worked off a single level, so if they fail I'm left with only the back.
If that happens then my braking distance is at least twice as far and can be upto ten times longer if the surface is very smooth.

It's also why you can spin the back wheel going up a hill if it's wet.


----------



## Profpointy (17 Feb 2016)

Jobro said:


> It's cos even the best tyres won't grip on air.................on a recumbent trike braking hard lifts the rear wheel off the ground!



that's not really the point of the 2nd brake though. On a normal bicyle maximum stoppage (techncial term?) is when the back wheel just lifts and all braking is on the front. Reason for back brake is in case front brake pads ping off when descending a steep hill just after you've gone out on a ride with only front brakes working - not that I'd ever be so silly, not me ! More everyday, allows controlled slowing on a poor surface - maybe not so i.portant on a trike


----------



## Smokin Joe (17 Feb 2016)

I never used the rear brake on either a cycle or motorcycle unless I was on loose or slippery conditions and wanted to "steady the ship", as it were. Rear brakes on bikes have little or no stopping power and I don't miss not having one on the trike.

I did wonder about the UK legal requirements on trikes however, mine is made in Taiwan and imported from Australia.


----------



## ufkacbln (17 Feb 2016)

Just to be difficult....

My Kettwiesel has twin rear brakes, but no front brake


----------



## BlackPanther (17 Feb 2016)

My Trice brakes a lot better than a df with front and rear brakes, and even stops safely if I lock a wheel. The rear does have a disc brake, but locks too easily to be of any use other than as a handbrake or drag brake.


----------



## starhawk (18 Feb 2016)

Even on a DF the rear brake isn't of much use, on the tadpole you have two front brakes which isn't double as efficient as one, it's much better than that, I can actually stop on a dime with my trusty front drumbrakes. So the bottom line is: having a rear brake only on a tadpole is plain silly. Now I actually have a discbrake on the rear but that is a parking brake, not for use while riding.


----------



## sidevalve (18 Feb 2016)

Most of the posts seem to miss the point though - a poor brake, even on the rear is 100% better than no brake at all


Tigerbiten said:


> my braking distance is at least twice as far and can be upto ten times longer if the surface is very smooth.


Better twice as long than none at all


Smokin Joe said:


> unless I was on loose or slippery conditions and wanted to "steady the ship",


Sort of proves the point really


----------



## arallsopp (18 Feb 2016)

sidevalve said:


> Most of the posts seem to miss the point though - a poor brake, even on the rear is 100% better than no brake at all



I think the idea is to have two independent braking systems. Consider a two wheeler, independent levers run to the front and rear wheels:

If the front brake fails in isolation, you still have the back brake. Its not as effective as the pair, but it works.
If the back brake fails in isolation, you still have the front brake. Its not as effective as the pair, but it works.
If both fail at the same time, you are the victim of rare and unfortunate happenstance.
Consider most tadpole trikes. Independent levers run to the front left and front right wheels

If the front right brake fails in isolation, you still have the front left brake. Its not as effective as the pair, but it works.
If the front left brake fails in isolation, you still have the front right brake. Its not as effective as the pair, but it works.
If both front brakes fail at the same time, you are the victim of rare and unfortunate happenstance.
There are trikes (some adapted, some native) that have both brake runs from the same lever. There's an increased potential to end up in unfortunate happenstance, but that risk is normally outweighed by the freedoms it offers the rider.


----------



## numbnuts (18 Feb 2016)

.....and with a rear brake you can do handbrake turns


----------



## ufkacbln (18 Feb 2016)

Smokin Joe said:


> I never used the rear brake on either a cycle or motorcycle unless I was on loose or slippery conditions and wanted to "steady the ship", as it were. Rear brakes on bikes have little or no stopping power and I don't miss not having one on the trike.
> 
> I did wonder about the UK legal requirements on trikes however, mine is made in Taiwan and imported from Australia.




All you need to know (and more) from the CTC's Construction and Use advice 


> It should be noted that this legislation applies only in Britain, meaning England, Wales and Scotland. Other parts of UK have their own subtly different versions of the Road Traffic Acts and are for this purpose: abroad. (See Bells below.)
> 
> *Brakes*
> In the case of a pure pedal cycle (no electrical assistance) these regulations are so simple, that the only parts that matter are the brakes.
> ...


----------



## starhawk (19 Feb 2016)

sidevalve said:


> Most of the posts seem to miss the point though - a poor brake, even on the rear is 100% better than no brake at all
> 
> Better twice as long than none at all
> 
> Sort of proves the point really



What kind of point are you trying to prove? The most unlikely situation that if all other braking systems breaks down a rear one is good to have? The regulations says that two independent brakes are enough because the situation that both of them failing is a most unlikely occurrence. And having the two independent brakes on the front wheels is undeniable the best solution.

If you on the other hand have a Delta, well you can't put two brakes on the same wheel so omitting the second brake just because regulations says you can is not plain silly it is lunacy!


----------



## Tigerbiten (19 Feb 2016)

sidevalve said:


> Most of the posts seem to miss the point though - a poor brake, even on the rear is 100% better than no brake at all
> 
> Better twice as long than none at all
> 
> Sort of proves the point really


It's a question of trust.
I trust my front brake will stop me quickly under most conditions.
I don't trust my back brake will.
It's a bit like when wheel rims where chrome plated, a bit 50-50 if you could stop in the wet ......


----------



## voyager (19 Feb 2016)

electric assist regs state front and rear brakes ( all wheels braked) it will be nice if we could grow an extra hand to use the rear brake.
seriously, l have a doubler on the front brakes and the rear brake on the left as usual , it is nice to know there I a second if not poor brake available to stop , weight transfer on braking still lifts the rear wheel of a 100lb e-trike .
it would be nice if the idiot that wrote the rules knew what he/she was talking about . They might work on a bike but never on a trike .
Take the pedal reflectors situation nobody can see the pedal reflectors' on a recumbent


----------



## raleighnut (20 Feb 2016)

voyager said:


> electric assist regs state front and rear brakes ( all wheels braked) it will be nice if we could grow an extra hand to use the rear brake.
> seriously, l have a doubler on the front brakes and the rear brake on the left as usual , it is nice to know there I a second if not poor brake available to stop , weight transfer on braking still lifts the rear wheel of a 100lb e-trike .
> it would be nice if the idiot that wrote the rules knew what he/she was talking about . They might work on a bike but never on a trike .
> Take the pedal reflectors situation nobody can see the pedal reflectors' on a recumbent


So technically my e-assist trike (upwrong) isn't legal as the front wheel drives and brakes, 1 of the rear wheels drives and brakes (silly 'band' brake on the axle) but the other rear wheel does bugger all except hold up that side of the trike.


----------



## voyager (20 Feb 2016)

*technically yes *

the ctc regs state all e-assist should have brakes on all wheels ( hence the velo will have front wheel discs and a transmission brake operating on both rear wheels ) 

*Brakes*
In the case of a pure pedal cycle (no electrical assistance) these regulations are so simple, that the only parts that matter are the brakes.

The basic requirement is for two efficient braking systems, by which the front wheel (or wheels) can be braked independently of the rear wheel (or wheels). This means that if there are two wheels at the front and/or the rear, the relevant system must act on the pair. It also means that the combined operation of front and rear brakes from one lever is not allowed - except as an _extra_ braking system: additional to the two _independent_ front and rear braking systems required by this law.

Each braking system is required to be in efficient working order, but apart from saying that a brake that bears directly upon a pneumatic tyre in _not_ efficient, these regulations do not define how the brakes work or how they are operated. So back-pedal brakes are just as legal as the usual hand-levers. (You could even brake with your teeth if you could invent a way to do it _efficiently_!)

A lot of words are nevertheless devoted to wheels that cannot rotate independently of the pedals (i.e. no freewheel), the upshot of which is very simply that a fixed wheel drive counts as a braking system – on that wheel or wheels.





Don't blame me, blame the twit* that wrote the regulations

emma

* polite version


----------



## voyager (20 Feb 2016)

*even these regs are NOT UP TO DATE and are displayed on the ctc website *
These regulations, which were enacted in 1983 (Statutory Instrument No. 1168), defined a new type of vehicle under the Road Traffic Acts. Other legislation says who is permitted to ride an EAPC (anyone over the age of 14), where they may ride it (not defined, but presumed to be anywhere you can ride a normal pedal cycle) and how they ride it (just like a pedal cycle). See the pages on Construction & Use and Lighting regulations for more about that. The Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles Regulations simply set out the minimum criteria such a vehicle must satisfy – or else it will be regarded as some sort of electric motorbike (taxed, insured, used only by a licensed, helmeted rider etc.). These criteria are as follows:


The vehicle must not weigh more than 40 kg if a solo bicycle, or 60 kg in the case of a tandem or tricycle.
The vehicle must be fitted with pedals, by which it can be propelled.
The vehicle must not be fitted with any sort of motor other than an electric motor.
The continuous rated output of the motor must not exceed 200 watts if fitted to a solo bicycle, or 250 watts in the case of a tandem or tricycle.
The motor must not propel the vehicle when it is travelling faster than 15 mph.
Not included in the above list, but required by Construction & Use regulations (so they ought to be listed since you can't legally use the thing otherwise!) are the following additional criteria:


The vehicle must be fitted with a plate (where you can easily read it) showing the manufacturer's name, the nominal battery voltage and motor power output.
The power switch or control must default to off, requiring a constant intervention from the rider in order to maintain power assistance. (No power without pedalling, as required in some other countries, also satisfies this requirement.)
Note that these definitions do not include cycles with more than three wheels. So you cannot electrically assist a quadricycle without it becoming some kind of motor vehicle.

Vehicle weight, for the purpose of these regulations, is the weight of the cycle without a rider and no load other than 'the loose tools and equipment with which it is normally equipped'. Nominal battery voltage and continuous rated output are defined with reference to BS1727: 1971. Apparently this lets the peak output be a little higher than the number of watts specified above.

*European legislation*
Many other countries also allow a modicum of electrical assistance on pedal cycles, under similar but slightly different regulations of their own. Mostly they allow a bit more power (250W rather than 200W), with a fractionally higher motor cut-off speed of 25 kmph (15.5 mph) and up to four wheels. On the other hand, most countries additionally require that the motor must not propel the vehicle when the rider is not pedalling. This no power without pedalling type of EAPC is called a 'pedelec', as opposed to an 'E-bike' that will also go when the rider freewheels. I think that British experience proves that a speed limited motor is enough to keep an E-bike behaving like a pedal cycle, but other countries are insistent that the rider also pedals.

In 2004 a European Directive harmonised 'type approval' procedures for motorcycles whilst making an exemption for electrically assisted pedal cycles. Type approval comprises technical safety tests that a motor vehicle has to pass before it can be put on the market. Like the Pedal Bicycles (Safety) Regulations, these tests are of concern to the manufacturer and retailer and not something the customer or user ordinarily has to bother about.

The EAPC exemption is based on the majority European definition of an EAPC, i.e. a pedelec. So all E-bikes now have to go through motor vehicle type approval before they can be sold in UK, including those that can be used just like pedal cycles once the customer gets them out of the shop. So there's not only a bigger market for pedelecs, they are also easier to put on the market, here as well as abroad. No power without pedalling is no problem for most people (except the very infirm), but some of these machines are slightly over-powered, up to a speed fractionally higher than UK law permits to be used – without all the paraphernalia of a motorbike. Fortunately, the police do not take any notice of this minor technical infringement and it seem likely that UK regulations will eventually be brought into line.


----------



## voyager (20 Feb 2016)

*The current regs ARE ( july 2015 )

THEY have abandoned the weight limit on bikes , trikes etc to allow quads *

*the limit of motorization on only 2 or 3 wheels--- now quads are allowed 
and have taken away the legal throttle on july 15 onwards e-bikes 
so technically you cannot have a pedelec /throttle e-quad ,*

so

*WTF are they trying to do *

in the words of Kat von Dee DILLIGAF 

regards emma


----------



## thegravestoneman (21 Feb 2016)

Try rear braking on a trike you will be amazed at the pointlessness of them, drag brakes or parking brakes only.


----------



## voyager (22 Feb 2016)

I always wanted a barrow but they were always out of my reach ( price wise ) then 3 years ago when I started looking for one they were either 
silly prices or so far up north they were not economical to pursue , hence I ended up with a tadpole , that one was not the best choice and I decided that I could do better myself and built my own .
If a barrow came up at the right price maybe I would grab it .


----------



## Riding in Circles (23 Feb 2016)

On a tadpole all a rear brake does is turn you around very quickly.


----------



## thegravestoneman (25 Feb 2016)

Just bought a complete Bob Jackson to replace my elderly Higgins and have change out of £300. Surely that's not too dear?


----------



## voyager (25 Feb 2016)

nice price , most of the ones near here were over double that ,

still we have too many bents now to get one 

regards emma


----------



## thegravestoneman (26 Feb 2016)

voyager said:


> nice price , most of the ones near here were over double that ,
> 
> still we have too many bents now to get one
> 
> regards emma


price was about right, only later Longstaff's and Trykits should go for some more. Life is nicer up in the air rather than down with the fumes


----------



## Icemanhgv (28 Apr 2019)

I'll be doing my first spotives soon and I have to have brakes in all three wheels


----------



## voyager (28 Apr 2019)

if god wanted up to have 3 brakes he would have given us 3 hands .

On a serious note so what is the problem, fit a double lever for the fronts and a single lever for the rear 
This is required by the eapc regs on e trikes.

conditions and use say only a rear brake is needed if the saddle height is under 2ft but l wouldn't ride a trike with one brake.


----------



## Nigelnightmare (29 Apr 2019)

So they want only "non modified" bikes BUT are insisting that you modify yours by adding an extra brake.

Good luck on the sportive.
Quite a lot of the upright riders will be surprised when you whizz past them on the downhill bits.


----------



## byegad (29 Apr 2019)

Riding in Circles said:


> On a tadpole all a rear brake does is turn you around very quickly.


Exactly! I fitted a disc to the rear wheel on my QNT There was absolutely no way it was of any use except as a parking brake. The one time I used it, as a test, the trike tried to swap ends, fast.


----------



## Nigelnightmare (29 Apr 2019)

They do even better in snow or icy conditions.
Look here 
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fKmuBaAaL4&list=PL55jf5F7hH-H14l78slX5bKoJLJCyCgpE&index=9&t=0s


----------

