Evening lads The braking on my MK2 1991 8v doesn't inspire me with confidence so i'd like to upgrade to something. Anybody got any recommendations? Cheers Ad
g60 (ibiza 20vt brakes ) 2nd hand should be from 60-100 quid . you will need 16v hubs and m/cylinder and servo to do it right . im doing it at the mo , well when i get off my ass
Save some cash mate and service you existing setup - std 8v's don't go fast enough to warrant bigger brakes, neither do **most** modded ones for that matter You may want to check your wheel alignment/balancing ...I have noticed some judderiness when braking at the top end of the speed range, but its nothing a decent service won't sort Edited by: unintelligent
I personally think thats a load of crap, its always good to upgrade your brakes, even on a standard 8v. It is possible to get brakes to fade in standard cars if they're pushed hard enough. The 280mm g60 disc setup should be a cost effective way of upgrading I would think. Overkill on brakes never hurt anyone, underkill or running standard factory stuff can do.
fair enough, but I recon you could get 280mm calipers for hardly any money from a breakers. I was offered 288mm calipers and carriers from an anni for like 40 each. But if you want an upgade, 280mm is the way to go on mk2s from the opinions on here.
Definately recommend G60 (280mm) disks with some decent pads (Pagid Fast road etc) I've lost count the amount of times having better brakes have prevented accidents by being able to stop in time (because of other idiots on the road ) You just have to be careful in winter when it's black ice
I'd say having decent pads/discs/fluid/braided hoses is more important than discs size. I used to have a 239mm setup that used to take all the abuse I could throw at it from the std. 8v engine. If you do go bigger, no need to go for 280's, 256's would be fine and they're gonna be a fair bit cheaper than 280's. I bought a full 256 setup with nearly new discs and pads for 40 all in inc. the uprights. Joe
How the hell do you boys drive! I spent the whole of Saturday hammering a set of little 239mm brakes round Castle Combe, no fade, not even any smell! I have a set of 280mm fronts to go on, if I hadn't paid money for them I wouldn't bother! Unless you are running slicks I'd suggest you look at getting the original system working properly.
but the question begs to be asked - if the 239's are so good, why did you go for 280's??? Its always good to have more braking power in reserve, no matter how you drive. What about this - if you're on the motorway doing 80 (reasonable speed, everyone does it on here) you glance down to turn up the temp on the heater or change track on a CD, look up and the traffic in front has stopped and you have to slam on the brakes, would you rather have 239's or 256's or 280's. You choose. I may be going for 312s on my 8v in the future.
I bought the 280's because they were a bargin. I've had them for ages and never had time to put them on. I have never had fade issues on the road with the 239's but thought I might on track. Having done a few track days with the 239's they have done nothing but impress me. I would agree that it's always good to have something in reserve. I think the point I'm trying to make is that people sometimes spend money uprating a perfectly good system because it's not set up properly. I know it's only money but it could be spent elsewhere
i just had a drive in my sis's mk1 cabrio, they are 239's. they're good enough for how she drives the car, and yes with good discs and pads, new seals and fluid etc can see them being fine, however i'd never go back after being use to my 280's!
Hmm, I don't agree with what you're saying here, bigger brakes will have no impact on stopping distances, they just provide slightly more fade resistance and a larger braking torque. All you have to do in this situation with the smaller brakes is to push the pedal slightly harder to compensate. In fact some would argue that the smaller brakes here are an advantage as you have less chance of locking a wheel and therefore threshold braking is made easier. Now if you did this 10 times in a row, then the bigger brakes would show an improvement. Joe Edited by: Joe_G
thats fair enough - Limiting factors we are discussing here are power of brakes and braking traction of tyres. So if your bakes are capable of locking the wheels at 80mph that means that there is no advantage of going for larger brakes, in that one application of 80-0, but over 10 applications of 80-0 you may be subjected to fade etc... with the smaller brakes, which will make the brakes the limiting factor and not the braking traction of the tyres. This is what you're saying. I agree with this. But I'd be happier with my tyres grip being the limiting factor over as many applications as possible, and having no doubt that at 80mph I can generate maximum braking effect permissable by my tyres, even if the brakes have been worked lightly/moderately coming up to that 80-0. So my example wasnt ideal to show the advantage of going for the largest brakes, but you guys get what I'm saying.
As S1mma says the limiting factor is the grip from your tyres, if you can lock the wheels fairly easily then there's no advantage to bigger brakes. Having said that at Combe with 239's on and green stuff etc etc. I was having a problem with not actually being able to lock the wheels, coming into quarry I was standing up on them and couldn't quite get them to lock, pedal was rock hard tho. Obviously this sort of abuse isn't going to happen on the road tho. Joe
There must be some advantage, as heavy/high performance vehicles need bigger discs to stop them. Bigger discs must retard the speed of the vehicle better and quicker, as otherwise all those big heavy or fast cars would have little brake discs
