Which Size Disc Rotor 160 or 180mm
- Thread starter Kona-853
- Start date
JamesM
Senior Retro Guru
Nah, go 180/180 it wont really cost any more and it will be better modulated and more fade resistant, its not all about power. Not sure about most people but I tend to use the rear brake more than the front. In my opinion all that stuff about 80% of the braking being done by the front wheel is based on car facts. Under heavy braking on a bike you move most of your weight over the rear wheel so I reckon its much more even front to rear. On loose stuff if you really hammer the front brake (especially when turning) you will lock up the front wheel and wash out, again meaning we all probably use the rear brake alot more than we think. 180/180 
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.
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.
Andy B":2tud3ax4 said:
i believe they are the same, just that i use the back more
i see your point though and your probably right that the front will slow you quicker, more force input?
i just think same size rotors are more aesthetically pleasing
I have 160/160 and they stop me fine *. have 1 bikes with 180/160 but reckon that is an overkill and am thinking of changing fromnt to 160.
* I don't have access to any long steep hills and my riding style is to not go mentally fast then slam the brakes but to feather them as I pootle down the hill.
Bear in mid that the larger the rotor the more force is being applied to the fork and frame; some lighweight forks e.g. early SIDs don't like big disc ( > 160 mm ).
* I don't have access to any long steep hills and my riding style is to not go mentally fast then slam the brakes but to feather them as I pootle down the hill.
Bear in mid that the larger the rotor the more force is being applied to the fork and frame; some lighweight forks e.g. early SIDs don't like big disc ( > 160 mm ).
Thx all
Thats a good point 02gf74 my frame is 2007 rocky mountain blizzard and the forks are rock shox recon race 2008 ish.
Anyone know if i have any limiting factors to think about on above items I dont wanna stress the frame or forks to much. :shock:
Thx again all
Thats a good point 02gf74 my frame is 2007 rocky mountain blizzard and the forks are rock shox recon race 2008 ish.
Anyone know if i have any limiting factors to think about on above items I dont wanna stress the frame or forks to much. :shock:
Thx again all
