1.6 vs 1.8 brakes
Front:
http://www.rev2red.com/images/cars/front.jpg Rear: http://www.rev2red.com/images/cars/rear.jpg About 1" larger in diameter F&R, so around 1/4" all the way around. Front pads have signifigantly larger braking surface, although I dont have them yet to compare, so stay tuned. http://www.rev2red.com/images/cars/padsize.jpg |
i did the 1.8 swap a while back, i like them better, will eventually change the prop valve too when i get around to it
|
Prop valve is different?
I have to get my rotors turned, then my 1.8 upgrade can be finished. |
i forget which one it is, there's a few different variations, but certain one is the most desirable, direct swap too, adds in a little bit more rear bias for more even braking
|
Originally Posted by Mach929
(Post 61075)
i forget which one it is, there's a few different variations, but certain one is the most desirable, direct swap too, adds in a little bit more rear bias for more even braking
I typically have run a race pad in front and a street pad in the rear... but I'm used to FF cars... can't wait to figure the miata out. |
hey splitime, who is that dude in your avatar, he kinda looks like the guy off of the powerblocks, Trucks show.
|
|
1 Attachment(s)
See attached for diff prop valves from diff years.
|
I did several years ago on old 92. It was great. One of the best mod's I ever did to the car.
I have comparison shots somewhere |
front rotors shot
can you tell the 1.6 from the 1.8 http://www.imagestation.com/picture/...4/fd09d5f9.jpg |
Originally Posted by brgracer
(Post 61097)
See attached for diff prop valves from diff years.
|
then teach us how to read shock dynos....
|
the straight line represents the front brake and where it branches off represents what the rear brake do at that pressure level. Under that pressure level the rears act the same as the fronts, but when pressure gets high enough pressure to rears are bled off
|
i never had brake balance problems. I did have a new master clynder though??
|
Originally Posted by mxv
(Post 61081)
hey splitime, who is that dude in your avatar, he kinda looks like the guy off of the powerblocks, Trucks show.
I typically get comparisons to Jason Lee in person or when I have my goatee. Prop Valve question... those abs vs non-abs valves... all the same fittings/format? On the hondas, the abs cars use a differently designed valve, ie: its not plug/play. Are they for us? |
1 Attachment(s)
I replaced mines about 2 months ago and its day and nite difference. I also got front steel braded lines, did flush and replaced it with DOT4 synthetic. I have colbolt blues front and EBC green rears. Great combo and stops much better. I have confidance in my brakes now! :)
|
Originally Posted by brgracer
(Post 61097)
See attached for diff prop valves from diff years.
Can someone walk me through, let's say, the '94? They both go up together until they hit about 420? Then they diverge? The rear is limited to the straight line pressure from then on up; while the front goes to about 840 while the rear is reaching 600? When the front reaches 840, is all higher pressure cut off? Front and rear? I'm confused.:confused: |
Originally Posted by olderguy
(Post 62187)
OK, I'm old and dense and still can't figure out the chart.
Can someone walk me through, let's say, the '94? They both go up together until they hit about 420? Then they diverge? The rear is limited to the straight line pressure from then on up; while the front goes to about 840 while the rear is reaching 600? When the front reaches 840, is all higher pressure cut off? Front and rear? I'm confused.:confused: For example, lets say you are applying 1200 (I forget the units of the graph) of total brake pressure then: a 90-93 the prop valve sends around 700 to the front and 500 to the rear brakes a in 94-97 car the prop valve would send around 650 to the front and 550 to the rear a 94-97 abs car the prop valve would still have almost a 50/50 bias |
Originally Posted by brgracer
(Post 62257)
Basically, at low pedal pressures, the hydraulic pressure is evenly distributed between the front and rear brakes, but at higher pressures they skew toward the front brakes at a fixed percentage after a specific knee point. As you can see from the graph, in the earlier 90-93 they start biasing toward the front much earlier than later years.
For example, lets say you are applying 1200 (I forget the units of the graph) of total brake pressure then: a 90-93 the prop valve sends around 700 to the front and 500 to the rear brakes a in 94-97 car the prop valve would send around 650 to the front and 550 to the rear a 94-97 abs car the prop valve would still have almost a 50/50 bias |
Originally Posted by olderguy
(Post 62263)
So if someone wasn't going to go to an adjustable proportioning valve when they do the 1.8 upgrade, they should at least use the 1.8 valve?
In fact, as already mentioned some people even just upgrade the stock 1.6 brakes by changing out the prop valve to get less of an aggressive front bias under heavy braking. YMMV. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:00 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands