Yeah, I would try putting new brake cable housing (if the current housing is old or unknown) on the front brake at least, and see if this improves things.
The current brakes on the bike have barrel-adjuster cable tensioner, so no need for in-line unless you go with a centerpull brake + cable hanger that doesn’t have a barrel adjuster. But rim brake pads, even salmon, don’t wear out across single rides the way that sometimes happen with disc. I’ve never had to adjust cable tension for pad wear in under 100 miles except in rainy season after a lot of braking (e.g., on a commute bike where I’m stopping way more regularly).
You’re not super-invested in the retro for its own sake, just need a compliant bike. I rode multiple Eroica rides with non-aero levers (Tektro knockoff of 9-speed Campy shape) but that was Eroica California, which is policed less heavily than the original in Italy.
In technical terms of mechanical advantage, I’m pretty sure older non-aero brake levers actually pull less cable than 2000-and-since levers, which would actually increase your braking power. So the main downside of those levers are the fact that they weren’t only kinda designed as a hand position.
Your bike clearly has external nutted brakes, and if you wanted medium-reach dual pivot brakes with recessed nuts you’d need to drill out the frame/fork. Or just the fork (front brake is like 85% of your braking power; it’s easy enough to lock up the rear wheel with wimpy brakes).
Dual pivots are set up to have more stopping power (although single pivots could have been designed with the same mechanical advantage; they just didn’t because back then broken spokes were more common so setting the pads further from the rim was reasonable). As others have mentioned, you’d need medium-reach dual pivot brakes (47-57mm reach from brake bolt to rim). The Tektro R559 that @yoanna_yo mentions is long-reach (55-73mm). Short-reach brakes (the norm for road bikes pre-disc) are 39-49mm reach.
If you want period-correct dual-pivot stopping power you can use a centerpull brake, which have excellent stopping power (less flex in the system). But then you’d need a cable hanger above the headset.
Here are the Dia-Compe brakes (from a 1981 Nishiki, albeit with new pads / cable housing / rims) that truly scared me on some descents. I’m 210 lb but have huge hands and never worry for braking power unless there’s a lot of flex in the system, and these brakes must have just “folded” - had way too much flex.
The funny thing is, my counterexample to these is a Gran Compe brakeset (1978, I think, a bit older than yours) that looks similarly skinny but wasn’t a problem (again, for my big hands). These absolutely didn’t fold and I’ve ridden them on real-descending courses. This is why I think it might be worth trying another single-pivot brake (just plug and play the front brake, no need to change anything else as long as pads & housing are good) to see if that provides sufficiently comfortable braking.
I’m not an engineer or framebuilder, but I would never ever consider drilling out a brake bridge or fork crown to switch from external nutted brakes to recessed nut!
Last I checked, which is a few years ago, there were some dual pivot calipers available with external nuts. But I haven’t checked now.
Would you say the issue is that you can’t pull the brake levers hard enough to achieve the stopping power which is available, or that the lever bottoms out on the bar before you have achieved enough stopping power?
If it’s bottoming out first, look at upgrading the housing, and fitting a stiffer brake caliper. If you can’t pull it hard enough, consider a lever with less throw - a lot of the older brake levers pulled more cable than newer ones, so you might get more power from a more modern lever shape which you can pull more easily.
Proper bike. Dia Compe/Cane Creek and Tektro have new versions of those brake levers but they may not perform any better. If updating be sure to get a model with the correct cable pull for a calliper brake, but jeez … I reckon go with what you’ve got. Mortally jealous of you upcoming exploits, have a brilliant time.
Ooh, did Shimano make medium-reach version of the 7400 brakes? I’m only aware of the short reach ones.
I ran the single pivot 1050 brakes on my main road bike for years, and they’re great. One of those cases where Shimano tried out new/improved stuff in the 105 group and they’re truly better than the 600 and Dura Ace of the same era (maybe pre-7400).
I thought all of the pre-aero brake levers of that time period (not necessarily including some faux-vintage replicas designed to work with newer brakes) pulled less cable compared to more recent rim brake stuff.
Sounds like the Tektro dual pivots that she bought had a nutted option.
Btw - I disagree about the risk of drilling out steel frame to accept recessed nuts. People have been doing this for decades, and I’ve also had a frame builder do it for me, who didn’t comment on it being risky or contingent on details about the frame.
You’re simply expanding the diameter of an existing hole on one side. The risk is using too large of a drill bit.
There can be some weird things with spacers for a rear brake bridge, but the main thing there is just to drill out the curved-to-flat washer that goes between the round brake bridge and the nut.
I’d worry about the brake bridge failing under braking load, weakened by a hole bigger than originally planned. But again, I’m not an engineer or framebuilder! And nice steel bikes can stand up to a lot of stuff.
You may be right about brake bridge drilling being nonzero risk. Forks are the place where I’m not worried at all. The potential saving thing for the rear is that peak braking force is so much lower, because it’s so much easier to lock up the rear wheel since it’s being the center of mass. I should ask about this at my favorite crusties (albeit super knowledgeable) forum.
From memory the salmon pads are great in all weather (and don’t leave black gunk everywhere as they wear in the rain) but they are harder so you might get better braking performance from a softer compound.
