ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > The perfect line and other riding myths
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-04-2015, 05:26 PM   #1
c1skout OP
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Western PA
Oddometer: 223
A question on brake pad life

Does anyone know if twin front disc brake pads last longer than single disc. For example: some bikes were offered with both set-ups. If I had a xs650 Yamaha with single disc and got 10,000 miles of commuting before needing to replace pads, would changing to factory twin disc have me needing to replace 2 sets of pads at the same 10,000 miles, or would they last to 15 or 20,000 miles.

Just something I had wondered about.
c1skout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2015, 05:44 PM   #2
aldend123
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Location: Bristol County MA
Oddometer: 314
This is probably difficult to say. It depends on the disc size, drilled or not, pad surface size, pad material, usage, and weight. I think you'll find anecdotal reports like 'my single disc bike pads lasted forever, but my dual disc bike ate them'. But because of the variables, not sure how meaningful those would be. You'd want a large sample of data.

Do you go through pads quick enough to care? I'm cheap, but buying and installing another disc, and now replacing pads in sets, I'm not seeing the savings.
__________________
2002 Aprilia Futura | 1986 Kawasaki GPz900R
aldend123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2015, 06:47 PM   #3
c1skout OP
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Western PA
Oddometer: 223
No, I don't go through a lot of brakes. This was just something I thought of and couldn't decide on an answer.
c1skout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2015, 09:07 PM   #4
RxZ
Legal Drug Dealer
 
RxZ's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2010
Location: Tyler, TX
Oddometer: 1,884
From a pure physics standpoint, the dual setup would last longer. Even so; they may last twice as long, but then you are replacing two sets, so its a wash financially
__________________
2002 Yamaha FZ1
RxZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2015, 11:06 PM   #5
Kommando
Beastly Adventurer
 
Kommando's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Spacecoaster FL
Oddometer: 7,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by RxZ View Post
From a pure physics standpoint, the dual setup would last longer. Even so; they may last twice as long, but then you are replacing two sets, so its a wash financially
Yeah, plus adding weight/complexity. It would probably stop you faster easier though. If you can already lock/stoppy it though, you probably don't need more braking power...unless you're in the habit of overheating your brakes.
Kommando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2015, 11:49 PM   #6
Pecha72
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: May 2008
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Oddometer: 4,061
Riding style also matters so much here. Basically how fast do you ride, and how much and how often do you use the brake(s). Two riders on identical bike&brake setup, are unlikely to get the same mileage from their brake pads. Means you cannot really compare the pad wear itself between riders.
__________________
Countries ridden • FIN • SWE • NOR • DK • EE • LV • LT • POL • SK • HU • RO • BG • GR • IT • AT • DE • CZ • CH • SMR • LIE • NL • BE • FR • AND • ES • GBR • LUX • SI • HR • BIH • SRB • MK • TR • IR • PAK • IND • TH • KH • LA • MY • ID • AUS • CR • USA • ZA • LS • SWZ • MZ • NA • BW • ZM • ZW
Pecha72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2015, 04:48 AM   #7
baka1969
Veteran Bubblehead
 
baka1969's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Location: NE Philly
Oddometer: 99
Technically you'd need the pads to last 3x longer on a dual disc setup to see significant cost savings. Not including the price of adding the 2nd brake. That said, even with the additional unsprung weight of the extra caliper, dual brakes should perform better than a single setup.
baka1969 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2015, 08:07 AM   #8
wild
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2014
Location: Krakow, Poland
Oddometer: 235
I have single disc on my bike and i really don't see how much better braking could be. But...

regarding performance:

http://www.superstreetbike.com/how-t...ce-mythbusters

Quote:
Myth: Busted
Using both fully-functioning front rotors, we were able to stop from 65 MPH in 57 feet. With only one front caliper active, it took 18 feet further to stop from the same freeway speed. That equates to stopping 32 percent faster with both rotors on a stock wheeled bike. Reaction time on the street can mean the difference between life and wreck and it must be even quicker when riding with handicapped brakes. Keep this in mind when dropping a rotor for a better view of your prized aftermarket wheel. On the drag strip, removing a rotor to save weight may be less dangerous being a closed circuit with a required shutdown area but it’s still worth noting. Just remember that what goes fast must slow down, and when it comes to the street, no matter what bike you’re riding, less is not always the best when it comes time to quickly grab the brakes and avoid an obstacle.
wild is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2015, 08:43 AM   #9
freetors
Studly Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Location: Collinsville, OK
Oddometer: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by wild View Post
I have single disc on my bike and i really don't see how much better braking could be. But...

regarding performance:

http://www.superstreetbike.com/how-t...ce-mythbusters
What a credible source It's almost physically impossible for them to stop a bike in under 60 feet. Even the best cars (which usually stop in shorter distances than sportbikes) can't brake from 60 in less than 90 feet.
freetors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2015, 09:30 AM   #10
wild
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2014
Location: Krakow, Poland
Oddometer: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by freetors View Post
Even the best cars (which usually stop in shorter distances than sportbikes) can't brake from 60 in less than 90 feet.
wrong, if you know how you'll stop always faster on a sport bike.

wild is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2015, 10:25 AM   #11
freetors
Studly Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Location: Collinsville, OK
Oddometer: 923
Quote:
Originally Posted by wild View Post
wrong, if you know how you'll stop always faster on a sport bike.

I think you're wrong. Motorcycle Consumer News lists their best braking bike ever tested as the '06 Triumph Speed Triple 1050 at 104.8 ft. Most of the other bikes hover between 110-130ft. http://www.mcnews.com/mcn/articles/2...rfInd_0214.pdf

Motortrend's two best braking cars tied at 93ft. http://www.motortrend.com/features/m...than_100_feet/
freetors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2015, 10:49 AM   #12
UrsaMobili
Canoodian Expat
 
UrsaMobili's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Location: Back on the left coast, on island with no ferry
Oddometer: 72
The table above is correct. Keep in mind it is in meters and kilometers per hour. There is a little conversion needed, for the metric (SI) system chellenged.
For example:
60 mi/h is roughly 96 km/h
1 meter is respectvely ~ 3.3 feet
Use the appropriate numbers from the table and do the math. You'll see that the stopping distance for motorcycle from 60 mi/h is about 130+ feet. Kinda average number.
The 57 feet quoted originaly could be misconverted meeters.
UrsaMobili is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2015, 01:46 PM   #13
Vertical C
Beastly Adventurer
 
Vertical C's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney Australia
Oddometer: 2,728
I think most riders would have a tendency to drag their brakes when they were covering their brakes in heavy traffic situations, where they are not actually braking and may actually be accelerating.but are using the pads.

I think this might be one difference.

Also obviously single is going to get hotter, so during repeated heavy braking this might have a effect on the rate of consumption.

Maybe a wash....
Vertical C is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2015, 04:11 PM   #14
Wraith Rider
Beastly Adventurer
 
Wraith Rider's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Location: Germany
Oddometer: 1,456
Bikes' stopping distances from 100kph are around 40m, with many at around 42m and some very good ones (BMW K series) at~38m.
Cars easily achieve less than 40m, the VW Golf ~36m if I remember correctly.

In general cars stop shorter.
Most probably that is the case because of better stress sharing between the tyres and better stability/less flipping tendency.
__________________
"Why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else."
"Because we shouldn't have to."
Wraith Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2015, 04:22 PM   #15
wild
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2014
Location: Krakow, Poland
Oddometer: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraith Rider View Post
In general cars stop shorter.
wrong.




only light expensive sports cars stop faster then sport bike.

wild screwed with this post 03-05-2015 at 04:29 PM
wild is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 06:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2015