Apparently “Co x” without the space, is an offensive word. CT logic.
And then you have drift cars… :D
Two 6-piston callipers and a brake rotor with a very small contact patch for it’s size. F*ck logic.
explain this..
Like all 405 Mi16s, some guy with a 205 stole the engine and brakes.
Rocket powered, brakes not needed.
Weight reduction bro
Weight reduction bro.
didn’t a mercedes model come with dual brake calipers in the front?
you should have looked at the difference between rear wheel drive and front wheel drive too. Front wheel drive cars tend to have the steering rack behind the engine on the firewall. So the easiest way to get the steering rack connected is at the rear so then there is no place at the rear for a brake caliper and they end up putting that in the front. Now with a rearwheel drive car they tend to put the rack under the engine mostly on the front of the crossmember. So then its easier to get the steering on the front and the brake on the back side.
Steering rack on the firewall? Lolwut. It’s almost always mounted on the subframe
I have been thinking about something, it may be very stupid, but when you increase the size of your brakes, will you ever get to a point where you can no longer get any better braking force? I mean, won’t the brakes just lock up easier? As long as the brakes has enough braking force to lock the wheels, then surely it can’t be beneficial to have more braking force, after that point, isn’t it a question of how much grip the tires has? I can’t explain this properly in english, but can anyone explain? :(
I know exactly what you are saying, but it actually is more difficult for brakes to slow a wheel down then to simply lock them. And in performance applications you generally do not want to lock your wheels, but riding that threshold of almost locking generates a lot of heat and you need dissipation to handle that heat. It is good practice to upgrade your brakes when you upgrade your hp.
Yes, absolutely. In fact, almost every modern production car get produced has enough brake force to overcome the available grip, so increasing the size of the brakes doesn’t actually increase brake force, all it does is change the ratio of pedal input to brake force.
It’s not to say big brakes are pointless though, they are primarily about improving heat dissipation so you can keep hammering them corner after corner.
you got it right.Actually there’s an episode on the motortrend channel,about the brakes of the El Camino,you can watch this verry effect that you described :)
He doesn’t talk about cars that have brakes on the axles.
What do you mean?
“It’s a van; and it’s green” 3:24 xD
I’m personally wondering why some hypercars have two calipers on the rear disk and some only one ? Always figured it was for handbrake purposes ?
like this? yeah the little one is the emergency brake
Comments
This guys YouTube Channel is awesome!
No you’re awesome!
Brian Co x .. Is that you?
Apparently “Co x” without the space, is an offensive word.
CT logic.
And then you have drift cars… :D
Two 6-piston callipers and a brake rotor with a very small contact patch for it’s size. F*ck logic.
explain this..
Like all 405 Mi16s, some guy with a 205 stole the engine and brakes.
Rocket powered, brakes not needed.
Weight reduction bro
Weight reduction bro.
didn’t a mercedes model come with dual brake calipers in the front?
you should have looked at the difference between rear wheel drive and front wheel drive too. Front wheel drive cars tend to have the steering rack behind the engine on the firewall. So the easiest way to get the steering rack connected is at the rear so then there is no place at the rear for a brake caliper and they end up putting that in the front. Now with a rearwheel drive car they tend to put the rack under the engine mostly on the front of the crossmember. So then its easier to get the steering on the front and the brake on the back side.
Steering rack on the firewall? Lolwut. It’s almost always mounted on the subframe
I have been thinking about something, it may be very stupid, but when you increase the size of your brakes, will you ever get to a point where you can no longer get any better braking force? I mean, won’t the brakes just lock up easier? As long as the brakes has enough braking force to lock the wheels, then surely it can’t be beneficial to have more braking force, after that point, isn’t it a question of how much grip the tires has? I can’t explain this properly in english, but can anyone explain? :(
I know exactly what you are saying, but it actually is more difficult for brakes to slow a wheel down then to simply lock them. And in performance applications you generally do not want to lock your wheels, but riding that threshold of almost locking generates a lot of heat and you need dissipation to handle that heat. It is good practice to upgrade your brakes when you upgrade your hp.
Yes, absolutely. In fact, almost every modern production car get produced has enough brake force to overcome the available grip, so increasing the size of the brakes doesn’t actually increase brake force, all it does is change the ratio of pedal input to brake force.
It’s not to say big brakes are pointless though, they are primarily about improving heat dissipation so you can keep hammering them corner after corner.
you got it right.Actually there’s an episode on the motortrend channel,about the brakes of the El Camino,you can watch this verry effect that you described :)
He doesn’t talk about cars that have brakes on the axles.
What do you mean?
“It’s a van; and it’s green”
3:24 xD
I’m personally wondering why some hypercars have two calipers on the rear disk and some only one ? Always figured it was for handbrake purposes ?
like this? yeah the little one is the emergency brake