Andy B wrote:
A little test for those who believe that a rear brake has a greater stopping power than a front brake
Ride along at a set pace, at a given point pull one brake hard until you stop
Repeat the process using just the other brake
I'll bet a whole cake, yup I'm risking cake on this, that you will stop quicker just using the front brake compared to just using the rear brake braking from the same speed & from the same point
The reason for shifting your weight back under heavy braking is to stop you going over the bars.
180 up front 160 out back.
Try that downhill, round a corner, on loose, wet, mud, grass etc.
My point was that the rear brake is often seen as the poor relation to the front brake and as such gets over looked. On a mountain bike depending on the situation either brake can be required to provide the majority of the braking force. On downhills the rear brake is generally used more than the front to control speed without compromising steering and to improve stability. In these situations a bigger disc will give better modulation/control and will fade/wear less. Off road I always wear out rear pads quicker than fronts. So, why not have the same spec brake on the back as up front? The cost weight implications are minimal.