Page 1 of 4
anyone used the rear disk kit from ultimate engineering?
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 14:13
by slim_adi
http://www.ultimate-engineering.co.uk/index.html ?
if so, what dya think - will be going through some of the mechanicals on mine this autumn winter, and a full replacement of the braking system is possibly on the cards anyway, so i thought about going that extra mile..
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 14:39
by R0B
tbh.unless you have a large non standard engine.i cant see the point in spending all that dosh myself.if your standard brakes are in good nick.they should be able to do the job.imo
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 18:32
by CovKid
Plus, as has been proved many times, the more improvements you make to braking, the more risks people take. Lot of money to spend unless you have a whopping great engine in there.
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 19:09
by toomanytoys
As said.. rear discs are over the top unless a lot bigger engine, better off upgrading the fronts before the rears... as per VW south africa did even with 2.6 5cyl engines with 140 bhp in a hot climate where they knew it would be overloaded....
stock drums work very well when fresh and quality parts used...
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 19:35
by andysimpson
toomanytoys wrote:
stock drums work very well when fresh and quality parts used...
Discs work much better though.
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 21:01
by Red Westie
Why do people assume that discs work better? I teach motor vehicle for a living and I can tell you the brakes need to be bias ballanced.
Most vehicles work on something like a 70/30 split that is to say when braking the fronts do 70% of the work where as the backs only 30.
Commercial vehicles and Estate cars often have brake compensators fitted so the more weight that is carried a greater percentage effort is given by the back brakes...but still nothing like as much as the fronts.
The natural forward motion of a braking vehicle exerts more weight to the fronts so improving the back brakes will simply mean that anything more than moderate braking will result in the backs continually locking up.
We used to have this problem on VW LT's when taking them for a plating check (Commercial MOT) the brake roller tester was really designed for lorries and as the LT only just fell into 'plating' weight when they were tested they would barely move the gauge and so fail their rear brake test.
So what we would do was to wind the rear brake compensators to the max before taking them which made them absolutely lethal!!! locking the rear wheels at every junction and stop sign. Once past we would then take the compensator back to it's original position.
Like I say, improving the effort on the backs is not a good idea on it's own...improve the fronts first as they are the ones doing the lion share of the work. Having said this, a well maintained and adjusted set of original T25 brakes are pretty good, brake pedal feel can also be improved by fitting some braided hoses like simon sells.
Martin
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 21:09
by andysimpson
Red Westie wrote:Why do people assume that discs work better? I teach motor vehicle for a living and let me tell you the brakes need to be ballanced.
OK drum brakes work intially better but once hot take forever to cool down, discs brakes get rid of heat much quicker, don't fill up with dust, much better in very wet conditons and less maintance.
I fix motor vehicles for a living and let me tell you discs are far superiour.
I also agree they need to be balanced, i have 11"discs on the rear of my synro with 2 pads per wheel, i have 13"discs with 4 pads per wheel on the front.
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 21:41
by lhd
Why do people assume that discs work better? I teach motor vehicle for a living and I can tell you the brakes need to be bias ballanced.
Most vehicles work on something like a 70/30 split that is to say when braking the fronts do 70% of the work where as the backs only 30.
Commercial vehicles and Estate cars often have brake compensators fitted so the more weight that is carried a greater percentage effort is given by the back brakes...but still nothing like as much as the fronts.
The natural forward motion of a braking vehicle exerts more weight to the fronts so improving the back brakes will simply mean that anything more than moderate braking will result in the backs continually locking up.
We used to have this problem on VW LT's when taking them for a plating check (Commercial MOT) the brake roller tester was really designed for lorries and as the LT only just fell into 'plating' weight when they were tested they would barely move the gauge and so fail their rear brake test.
So what we would do was to wind the rear brake compensators to the max before taking them which made them absolutely lethal!!! locking the rear wheels at every junction and stop sign. Once past we would then take the compensator back to it's original position.
Like I say, improving the effort on the backs is not a good idea on it's own...improve the fronts first as they are the ones doing the lion share of the work. Having said this, a well maintained and adjusted set of original T25 brakes are pretty good, brake pedal feel can also be improved by fitting some braided hoses like simon sells.
Martin
That to me makes a lot of sense.....
Really the majority of the work is done by the front and the main reason for the rear is to stop it overtaking the front......
I would agree disc's are better but not if you havn't already upgraded the fronts for something brutal.
I think if you kept standard fronts and added rear disc's you would encounter problems.
But hey, I have been know to be wrong once in my life.........
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 22:02
by CovKid
And just to throw something else into the mix, I rarely use my brakes at all.
I was taught to work up and down the gearbox from the word go which suits me as I'm always in the right gear at any given moment. If you're constantly braking hard then bad habits may already be instilled and simply uprating the brakes will accentuate the problem as well as the risks to other road users if not pedestrians. I see enough on the road who drive like that.
When I have had to brake, usually through some other motorist not paying attention, it pulls up sharp enough. They're well maintained and I always drive with decent gaps between me and the guy in front. Granted you can't always anticipate the sudden emergency but in an emergency situation the entire weight is on the front (more or less), and even with a well set up vehicle, hard braking on that level can give rise to unpredictable results.
I used to be hard on clutches and hard on disc pads but have completely changed the way I drive now. Its too expensive to drive any other way with petrol the price it is.
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 22:18
by The Reverend Pimp Daddy
CovKid wrote:And just to throw something else into the mix, I rarely use my brakes at all.
I was taught to work up and down the gearbox from the word go which suits me as I'm always in the right gear at any given moment. If you're constantly braking hard then bad habits may already be instilled and simply uprating the brakes will accentuate the problem as well as the risks to other road users if not pedestrians. I see enough on the road who drive like that.
When I have had to brake, usually through some other motorist not paying attention, it pulls up sharp enough. They're well maintained and I always drive with decent gaps between me and the guy in front. Granted you can't always anticipate the sudden emergency but in an emergency situation the entire weight is on the front (more or less), and even with a well set up vehicle, hard braking on that level can give rise to unpredictable results.
I used to be hard on clutches and hard on disc pads but have completely changed the way I drive now. Its too expensive to drive any other way with petrol the price it is.
Well said that man
Posted: 23 Sep 2008, 22:20
by andysimpson
lhd wrote:Why do people assume that discs work better? I teach motor vehicle for a living and I can tell you the brakes need to be bias ballanced.
Most vehicles work on something like a 70/30 split that is to say when braking the fronts do 70% of the work where as the backs only 30.
Commercial vehicles and Estate cars often have brake compensators fitted so the more weight that is carried a greater percentage effort is given by the back brakes...but still nothing like as much as the fronts.
The natural forward motion of a braking vehicle exerts more weight to the fronts so improving the back brakes will simply mean that anything more than moderate braking will result in the backs continually locking up.
We used to have this problem on VW LT's when taking them for a plating check (Commercial MOT) the brake roller tester was really designed for lorries and as the LT only just fell into 'plating' weight when they were tested they would barely move the gauge and so fail their rear brake test.
So what we would do was to wind the rear brake compensators to the max before taking them which made them absolutely lethal!!! locking the rear wheels at every junction and stop sign. Once past we would then take the compensator back to it's original position.
Like I say, improving the effort on the backs is not a good idea on it's own...improve the fronts first as they are the ones doing the lion share of the work. Having said this, a well maintained and adjusted set of original T25 brakes are pretty good, brake pedal feel can also be improved by fitting some braided hoses like simon sells.
Martin
That to me makes a lot of sense.....
Really the majority of the work is done by the front and the main reason for the rear is to stop it overtaking the front......
I would agree disc's are better but not if you havn't already upgraded the fronts for something brutal.
I think if you kept standard fronts and added rear disc's you would encounter problems.
But hey, I have been know to be wrong once in my life.........
Depends on dimension of discs, also differet vehicles, t25's are a*** heavy you will need BIG discs to lock them out before the fronts.
Posted: 24 Sep 2008, 09:56
by Red Westie
I think the point I was trying to make is the rear drum setup on T25's is more than adequate to give the correct ballance with standard front disks/calipers.
Drum brakes also have self sevo action (the leading shoe pulling itself into the drum) brake discs/pads don't do this.
Again...talking about rear disc setups; because rear brakes don't work very hard we often find Disc's rust up or glaze with lack of use, a problem that would effect vans not being driven daily and where brakes are not applied frequently and relatively hard.
So...discs are better but not for all and can be problematic (talking about rears particularly) if not driven regularly and worked.
Martin
Posted: 24 Sep 2008, 12:04
by slim_adi
thanks for the comments guys - its always good to have a balanced discussion and make a decision from that
i'm running a 2.1 multivan as my daily doing the commute twice a day and the occaisional longer slog to a show / the coast
to be honnest, it will all boil down to how much cash i have at the time, but from the advice above, i'll probably stick to standard drums on the rear.....although i tend to drive in a "spirited manner"
i'm not excessively heavy on the mechanicals, and - unless those 6 numbers come up - i'll be sticking with the stock engine
Adi
Posted: 24 Sep 2008, 12:30
by CovKid
The Beetle was a different matter, since it doesn't take quite so much in terms of increasing engine size to present braking problems but these vehicles are elephants in comparison really.
That said (and I Used to build custom bug engines), its amazing how many fly-by-night kids could scrape up the cash for a beast of an engine then look blankly when I mentioned stopping power. Brakes should at least match up to the power you're using otherwise, expensive engine or not, it isn't long before the vehicle becomes a write-off, or worse you kill yourself or someone else.
On the positive side, you would notice the difference with discs all round, but probably only in those white knuckle moments when ultimately it will be the tyres that you'll be relying on just as much anyway.
As an aside, one big reason I moved from years driving bugs to the T25, is that it ensured I slowed down a bit and I was put off by the amount of T2 owners seeming welding their buses up for ever more. I like the 'weight' of the T25 and the way it handles although I've also come across moments (as have we all) when I was expecting just a little too much of it.
Ultimately, a point made by my good friend Frank Groter at Frank's Bus Parts in Walton, whatever we do, numbers of vehicles diminsh, the rust sets in and many of us will move on to later or other vehicles. Enjoy what you've got, while you've got it.
Posted: 24 Sep 2008, 15:39
by Mr Bean
andysimpson wrote:lhd wrote:
That to me makes a lot of sense.....
Really the majority of the work is done by the front and the main reason for the rear is to stop it overtaking the front......
I would agree disc's are better but not if you havn't already upgraded the fronts for something brutal.
I think if you kept standard fronts and added rear disc's you would encounter problems.
But hey, I have been know to be wrong once in my life.........
Depends on dimension of discs, also differet vehicles, t25's are a*** heavy you will need BIG discs to lock them out before the fronts.
Yes true and disks could help achieve this. Providing the disks are proportionately rated and do not conflict with the designers intent. I believe the true advantage would be in the long downhill retardation scenario where drums can get into thermal runaway. I would suggest however that if you want to drive like a rally driver you swap the T25 for a Ford Mexico complete with clip board and leater driving gloves.