by Karl V » Sat Nov 30, 2019 8:42 pm
I probably wouldn't notice any difference if I swapped the brakes around Pete, 'cos I'd put the brake bias mainly to the front to make sure all wheels lock up at the same time. And anyway, if rear brakes are not important, why have them fitted at all? They must do something?
And another way to say 'move brake bias to the rear' is 'reduce the effectiveness of the fronts'...
If the Alcons have a braking factor of say 10 (benchmark) and Sports are say 6, then I have a braking factor of 16/20 across the car. The brake bias is quite a way to the rear to balance the braking, so actually the rears are working much harder than the fronts and are smaller discs and pads with floating 2 pot calipers. Whereas the more substantial fronts are somewhat retarded to compensate for the skinny cousins at the back. Isn't the strength of the chain that of the weakest link?
I'm really not expecting shorter stopping distances with Alcons all round 'cos as soon as the tyres let go, that's it. My guess is that by having the same types of brakes all round - be it AP, Alcon, 'Sports' etc. - the need to change bias is really only to compensate for uneven weight distribution and NOT compensating for less efficient braking components as well as the weight distribution, as I have it at the moment. I still expect a slightly rear bias even with the same brake set up all round 'cos of the weight distribution; so maybe the rears will always work harder because of that?
Which probably all translates to: not having to stamp so hard on the middle pedal to stop and having better braking feel 'cos both axles are much more evenly matched in their stopping abilities.
It's this kind of man maths that allowed me to convince the missus that a Nomad was a suitable midlife crisis in the first place, but I am grateful to hear from others who have experience with both set ups - I'm just working on theory. Oh. And the missus really can't give a flying fudge any more...
Ta.
I probably wouldn't notice any difference if I swapped the brakes around Pete, 'cos I'd put the brake bias mainly to the front to make sure all wheels lock up at the same time. And anyway, if rear brakes are not important, why have them fitted at all? They must do something?
And another way to say 'move brake bias to the rear' is 'reduce the effectiveness of the fronts'...
If the Alcons have a braking factor of say 10 (benchmark) and Sports are say 6, then I have a braking factor of 16/20 across the car. The brake bias is quite a way to the rear to balance the braking, so actually the rears are working much harder than the fronts and are smaller discs and pads with floating 2 pot calipers. Whereas the more substantial fronts are somewhat retarded to compensate for the skinny cousins at the back. Isn't the strength of the chain that of the weakest link?
I'm really not expecting shorter stopping distances with Alcons all round 'cos as soon as the tyres let go, that's it. My guess is that by having the same types of brakes all round - be it AP, Alcon, 'Sports' etc. - the need to change bias is really only to compensate for uneven weight distribution and NOT compensating for less efficient braking components as well as the weight distribution, as I have it at the moment. I still expect a slightly rear bias even with the same brake set up all round 'cos of the weight distribution; so maybe the rears will always work harder because of that?
Which probably all translates to: not having to stamp so hard on the middle pedal to stop and having better braking feel 'cos both axles are much more evenly matched in their stopping abilities.
It's this kind of man maths that allowed me to convince the missus that a Nomad was a suitable midlife crisis in the first place, but I am grateful to hear from others who have experience with both set ups - I'm just working on theory. Oh. And the missus really can't give a flying fudge any more...
Ta.