![]() |
Big Rear Brakes
|
Introduction
Why have big brakes on your MG? If you had a properly set up brake system, you
could probably pull an F to a halt with discs the size of 50 pence pieces in
practically the same distance as the same car with discs the size of dinner
plates. Big brakes are heavy too – increasing unsprung weight. The way I look at
this, unsprung weight describes that mass of metal at the end of the axle – the
wheel, the tyre, the hub. The heavier this is, the harder the springs and
dampers have to work to keep them under control after bouncing over bumps. Lower
the unsprung weight, the easier it is to make a car handle and ride well. Big
brakes are also expensive – not least because you’re looking at much more
material being incorporated in them.
Big brakes can be a hazard.
Why on earth would anyone want big brakes? Putting aside marketing (go on, admit
it, you love the look of huge brakes behind those shiny alloys of yours!), big
brakes do have a purpose. It’s all about heat. While those 50pence-sized brakes
could probably lead to wheel locking just as effectively as a big brake, they’d
get so hot that they’d probably boil your brake fluid and probably ignite the
friction material on the brake pads. Brakes convert kinetic energy into heat –
and if you’re travelling fast, there may well be vast amounts of energy to
disperse! Big brakes have an advantage: their much larger surface area means
that they can shift much more heat in a much shorter period – which is ideal of
a high performance sports car that is being used heavily on the track or on the
road. But ultimately, they won’t stop your car any faster than an otherwise
identical, smaller disc-equipped car. That said, the greater braking leverage
that is to be gained from applying a retardation force at the edge of a larger
disc means that for any given brake-pedal movement, you will get more stopping
force applied. Unsurprising then that we all feel that big brakes mean more
stopping power – but this is a subjective impression, and not the reality.
The funny thing is, the ultimate limiting factor of the rate of deceleration you get from brakes is not the braking system at all. It’s the tyres! No matter how heavy or light the car, the braking force is limited purely by how much grip your tyres can generate; the vehicle’s mass is simply not part of the equation.
|
So why are we writing an article about big brakes in FTF? Well, MG started it. They started fitting 304mm AP Racing 4-pot calliper brakes to MGFs and then TFs. You have to agree that they do look sublime.
The odd thing was that they did absolutely nothing about the rear discs. MG didn’t even bother altering the settings of the brake bias valve.
Why should this matter? If the MGF and TF were a front
engine car, then actually it probably wouldn’t matter at all. In a 1G stop (the
same rate of change of velocity you’d feel if you’d jumped off a cliff edge), a
front-engine car would load up its front wheels due to weight transfer
effectively leading to 80 or indeed 90% of the work being performed by the front
wheels. An MGF is rather different. It’s weight distribution is rather more rear
biased (55% of the MG’s weight is over the rear wheels! [more]),
meaning that under the same circumstances, the rear brakes are still playing an
important role in slowing the progress of the car even during a 1G stop.
Estimates suggest that the split is something more like 60:40 front/rear under
these conditions. You can read more about this
here.
Which is where my problem with the big front brake kits comes in. When ever I
have driven cars fitted with the 304mm front disc, I have found that that is
just too easy to lock the front wheels – it’s as though the rears simply aren’t
pulling their weight in the stopping department. Given the mismatch in braking
torques between a 304mm and a 240mm disc, this perhaps is not surprising.
Frankly, a standard set up using race-bred pads all-round is far, far better
from this balance perspective.
Balancing out bigger front brakes
One solution for the big brake imbalance is to fit more aggressive rear pads – say Mintex 1177 to Mintex 1144 at the front. But as anyone who is familiar with the 1177 pad will testify, they eat discs, and cover everything with tenacious pad dust… not ideal for a road car.
|
The only other solution is to fit a larger rear disc. And given that 240mm discs look lost behind 16” wheels, there is an undeniable aesthetic justification for going down this route too.
It is probably no coincidence that this yawning chasm of a gap in the market has, until very recently, been left unfilled. Get your rear brakes wrong, and you run the very real risk of dangerous over-braking of the rear wheels and consquent rear lock up. Get rear-end lock up on entry to a corner, or even mid corner, and you’ll be saying a big hello to the scenery (and everything that Bill Oddy holds dear) as the rear of your MG goes hedge trimming. Dangerous. Brake design is probably best left to the professionals.
One of the ironies of the collapse of MG Rover is the release of engineering talent from the company into realms that hitherto it would never have travelled; into the hands of the enthusiast market. The chassis development team who worked with Rob Oldaker are a case in point. These guys have now set up their own company (Vehicle Handling Solutions) and are producing kits for MGF and TF owners. Find your TF too bouncy? They’ll do you replacement Bilstein dampers in the specification that they wanted them in the first place but weren’t allowed due to budget constraints. Want a better braking system for your MG, then you’d better ask…Which is what the MGF Register has done. And these guys have come up trumps. And as you can see from the picture to the left, the larger rear discs are worth fitting for the looks alone!
On the left is the standard-sized 240mm rear disc. On the right, the new 266mm rear discs. They don’t look quite so puny any more do they?
So you are interested in fitting these discs, how do you go about it?
|
|
|
Instructions: How to fit the VHS rear brake kit
1. |
|
2. |
![]() ![]() With the road wheels removed, we can now gain access to the brakes themselves. |
3. |
![]() |
4. |
![]() |
5. |
![]()
|
6. |
![]() Wayne made light work of these. I was
happy to take photographs… ;o) |
7. |
![]() |
![]() ![]() This becomes important on this big brake conversion, as the central spigot is essential for locating the disc properly to the wheel hub as we’ll see… |
|
8. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
9. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
10. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
11. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
12. |
![]() |
![]() |
|
13. |
![]() |
![]() ![]()
|
|
![]()
|
|
14. |
![]() |
15. |
![]() |
![]() Here Wayne finishes off the job – calliper now back in place. Perhaps we should have given the calliper a lick of paint before refitting? You could certainly do this when working on your own car. |
|
16. |
![]() |
![]() |
Big
rear brakes fitted – worth doing?
The answer to this is definitely yes. Some would argue that
they’re worth fitting for the aesthetic value alone – those discs no longer look
lost behind 16” alloys in the way that the original 240mm items did. But that
wasn’t the reason for fitting them. The real proof of the pudding is on the road
and track – and I have to say that the brake balance with these discs is simply
brilliant. You can really heave on the middle peddle without fear of inducing
premature lock up of the front wheels – the rears also mean that the total
retardation is ultimately great than if you were braking using the front wheels
alone. And I am hopeful of additional benefits too – compared to my old brake
set up, I am hopeful that these discs will run a good deal cooler, which ought
to be good news in terms of brake disc and brake pad longevity, not to mention
the life span of the rear bearings themselves.
If you find yourself close to needing new rear discs and pads on your MGF/TF, I
would certainly recommend fitting these rear brakes. In the words of Tony the
Tiger: “They’re Grrrrrreat!”