Message text written by "R. Ashford Little II"
>Hmm, Revington seems to imply that beefing up the rear brakes could lead
>to premature rear axle failure. Comments?
>
>R. Ashford Little II
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Martin Jay [mailto:martin@revingtontr.com]
>
>>I'm fairly sure there's nothing commercially available,we looked @it a
>>while ago & it wasn't viable.
>>The main constraint was the weakness of the standard rear hub units,
>>there seem to be an ever increasing number of failures.
>>Also, unless your circuit racing, we dont generally need more braking on
>>the back.
Did he say that the rear wheel bearing hubs are breaking or the cast
aluminum trailing arms are breaking. Since the brakes work directly on the
rear hubs and the brake rotor (or drums) it would seem on the surface that
the axles themselves are not involved. But after a little thought it
occurs that drum brakes work more or less equally on either side of the
axle resulting in very little offset force on the bearings.
Disc brakes, on the other hand, have all the brake pads on one side of the
axle. When braking, the pads grab the rotor and apply a tangential force.
To prevent the axle from rotating about the pads the axle bearings mush
apply an approximately equal force in the opposite direction. This force
could well excede the force resulting from the weight of the vehicle
resting on the bearing and with the double taper bearing setup used this
will put tension on the hub shaft - which are known to break. (I have a
broken on in my garage if you would like to see on)
Or is it because those who opt for this conversion are more likely to
hot-foot it around town (or track) than those with OE brakes?
But I agree with his last statement. Since the front brakes do 75 % of the
stopping, rear disc brakes are like gilding a lilly.
Dave
/// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|