951 5/33 Brake Bias/Brake Pad ?
#1
951 5/33 Brake Bias/Brake Pad ?
For DEs I was running a slightly higher friction pad in the rear than on the front of my 951S. I installed the 5/33 brake bias valve and it is clearly too much rear braking with those same pads. Should I be able to use the same pads in the rear as on the front with the 5/33 bias, or should I go to a lower friction pad in the rear?
Last edited by CO951; 05-26-2007 at 02:04 AM.
#4
I run the 5/33 and the same pads front and rear with no problem, but I have an '87, which uses the same size pad for front and rear.
The '89 has more front brake so I would try to get feedback from someone with an '88S or '89.
The '89 has more front brake so I would try to get feedback from someone with an '88S or '89.
#5
couple of things come to mind
how much are you trail braking, exactly where are they locking up? are they locking up braking straight or if you're still braking at the start of the turn?
Is the car still on stock ride height, stock springs? how much weight transfer is being taken off the rear under hard braking...
how much are you trail braking, exactly where are they locking up? are they locking up braking straight or if you're still braking at the start of the turn?
Is the car still on stock ride height, stock springs? how much weight transfer is being taken off the rear under hard braking...
#6
The car is stock ride height and springs. I do tend to trail brake a little, but it was impossible with the 5/33 valve and higher friction pads in back. Even braking totally straight the rears were locking up when I was braking at the limit with that set up.
#7
After talking to a couple of guys who race their 944 S2's & turbo's I decided to keep the stock brake bias valve when I upgraded to the turbo S front brake rotors and calipers on my S2 track car.
The thinking was this is what Porsche used when they built the turbo S's so they should know best.
I have not been dissapointed////
The thinking was this is what Porsche used when they built the turbo S's so they should know best.
I have not been dissapointed////
Trending Topics
#8
The thinking was this is what Porsche used when they built the turbo S's so they should know best.
#9
ABS car here, so I can't say about pads F/R with the proportioning valve. That said, the rake of the car relative to ride height will have an effect. CG + Track + Wheelbase are pretty fixed on the car until you raise/lower one end or the other a bit...
#11
By my book, more rake (i.e. rear higher relative to nose) levers the nose down and lightens the rear. Opposite (lower rear end - read no rake or negative rake) reduces the levering of the nose downward and reduces the lightening of the rear end under heavy braking.
I hope this makes sense. Not a suspension engineer by any means, but can definately feel the difference in pitch when changes are made relative to front/rear right heights and the way they rotate the car (pitch and roll) around the CG.
I hope this makes sense. Not a suspension engineer by any means, but can definately feel the difference in pitch when changes are made relative to front/rear right heights and the way they rotate the car (pitch and roll) around the CG.
#13
Turbo S/89's have the most front brake bias and benefit the most from a 5/33 brake bias valve. You can definitely run the same pads front and rear on an 89 with a 5/33. Without the bias valve you will be underusing the rear brakes.
I would definitely NOT run the 5/33 on an '86 951, however.
I would definitely NOT run the 5/33 on an '86 951, however.
#14
I have an 86 with 89S front brakes stock rear, no abs, and the 5/33 valve. With stock pads in front and EBS pads in the rear I don't have trouble with the rears during trail braking, but usually do get some inside front wheel lock up.