Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

1000115hr3.jpg

1000116am5.jpg

first time i've seen something like this.

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/4075/1000183hf6.jpg

found on this car.

i'm thinking its a drifter? and one pair of the rear calipers is hooked up to a hydralic handbrake or something.

sharing is caring =P

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/147550-interesting-brake-setup/
Share on other sites

Yeah i can see the practicality for a drifter with a hydr hand brake...

I dont see it as a twin setup for normal braking, as why woudl you not just upgrade to 4 pot brakes and a larger disc.

This would be easier. Also how would you balance the brakes for not only performance but for heat if they were used in the same application...

My money is that its a handbrake drift setup as the drum hand brake on 33's is not flash for snap braking...

I cant speak for porche but i know ferrari use the twin setuip quite a bit...

The reason for this is you can achieve a greater surface area on the rear disc for general braking application because you dont need the drum setup for the hand brake...

It makes perfect sense... As for porche I have not really any idea, but the few i have seen like the GT3's that race up here at QLD raceway they all seem to have 6-8 pot front cal's and 4-6 pot rears...

So i can say i have seen a dual setup on a race spec porche, but as i said I dont really know porche's. My old man called them expensive VW's when i was a kid and taught me the ways of Ford and Holden... :(

Bathurst taught me skyline was king of the mountain...

I remember seeing something like this on a BTCC car a few years back. The calipers were opposite each other though.

Don't see this setup much anymore so I guess single caliper setup was much more effective.

When you see it on the McLaren F1 and other exotics you will find that they are typically a 4 pot for brakign and a single piston/twin piston for handbrake.

Some race cars do it for enduro racing as the increase in pad area means that have been able to save time in the pits by elminating the need for a pad change

the secondary brake on a ferrari etc is definitely for handbrake - you'll notice that there is no offset part in the rotor for the drum handbrake.

it may have also been done because of the two piece nature of a ceramic rotor, and the desire the use an aluminium hat to reduce weight (rather than a cast iron drum like the harrop solutions - which by what i can see is cast iron)

99-KC17R19A18_sticker.jpg

You also increase your unsprung weight.

?? No it wouldnt. The calipers dont require the power of the engine to spin them, they are stationary as the disc moves, so it wouldnt affect the unsprung weight at all. And as stated above, by making the drum brakes at the rear redundant, you can use a lighter material such as aluminium for the hat, so if anything you are reducing the unsprung weight.

EDIT: Oops my bad, im getting unsprung weight mixed up with the rotational mass components, ie, wheels, drive shafts, brake discs etc. But what are the cons of increasing the unsprung mass?? Doesnt it just come down to a trade off between bump absorbtion and vibration?? As above in my previous, wouldnt it actually still be beneficial to reduce the ROTATIONAL MASS in the system by using lighter materials for the brake disc composition (by no longer needing heavy hats for drum brakes)? This would negate any weight added by an extra caliper system, as well as minusing the weight of the existing drum brake setup. Of course, this only applies to a rear twin caliper setup.

Edited by SLVR32GTR

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • It is a kunfine Android screen . Does anyone know the wirering diagram of the fuga ??
    • just an update to this, poor man pays twice  Tried sanding down the pulleys but it didnt do the trick. Chucked another second hand alternator in the na car which I got for free off my mate and its fixed the squelling. Must have been unlucky with the bearings.    As for my turbo car, I managed to pick up a cwc rb alternator conversion bracket + LS alternator for 250 off marketplace, looked to be in really good nick. Installed it , started the car and its not charging the battery.... ( Im not good with auto elec stuff so im not sure if this was all I needed to do but I verified such by using a multimeter on the battery when the engine was running and I was only getting 12.2v )   I had to modify the earth strap for the new LS alternator , factory earth strap was a 10mm bolt which did not fit the bolt on the LS alternator which was double the size so I cut it off , went to repco bought some ring terminals that fit, crimped it onto the old earth strap and bolted it up to the alternator , started the car and same issue. Ran like shit and was reading 12.2 at the battery.  For a "plug and play" advertised kit thats not very plug and play but alas.  My question is , am I missing something ? Ive been reading that some people recommend upgrading the stock 80 amp alternator fuse to a 140 amp but I dont see how that would stop the alternator charging especially at idle not under load.  Regardless ive pulled it out and am going to get it bench tested by an auto elec tomorrow but it would be handy to know if ive missed something silly or have done something wrong.   
    • My wild guess is that you have popped off an intake pipe....check all of the hoses between the turbo and the throttle for splits or loose clamps.
    • Awesome, thanks for sharing!
    • To provide more specific help, more information is needed. What Android screen? What is its wiring diagram? Does the car's wiring have power at any required BAT and ACC wires, and is the loom's earth good?
×
×
  • Create New...