you'll need to show your math on this one and where you're getting your figures.

 

I'm going to email some companies on this very topic.

What would you naysayers be satisfied with?
Brembo?
PM?
Hawg Halters?

All 3?

 

Thanks for all the info. I'm going with single 13" disc and a pm caliper. I'm gonna check them out at bike week, and see exactly what I'll need.

 

I did the math in my post. It was a hypotheticl formula and I stated from the get go that they weren't scientific quotes quoted from scientists, but they are references from people I respected on the boards. Now, you can take any information you get from anyone on any message forum with a grain of salt.

I never claimed to be an expert, nor did I sleep in a Holiday Inn. Maybe Piggy can get some real scientific expert analysis on the subject. He seems to know his stuff and who to call, so I'm eager to hear what he can find out. But, I'm already convinced, if done right that I can improve my braking with a single rotor setup.

 

I could go into braking force required for a given weight at a given speed at a given distance but that would require three to four pages and would be very boring. Bottom line, singal 13 inch brake, exellent, dual stock brake better, dual 13 inch set up, best.

 

You mention the Hayabusa-a skilled rider won't have the rear wheel on the ground in a panic stop , leaving a total of two rotors. Eliminate one and you have 50% left. If you don't change the master cylinder you have less than that. Brake area and pad/rotor material determine your stopping ability. Truly , the 80% figure is suspect to me.

 

Let me get this straight; you're saying if you replace the single rotor with better parts you're going to gain 20% more over stock dual Brmebo's which equals out to 120% stopping power with a single? I can't see that man.

 

First, keep in mind my original post, I don't rember the exact numbers, I just used these numbers to relay what I remember.



Please remember that I'm also not claiming to be an expert or have all the facts. If I haven't made that clear, I apologize and let me state it again here. But I have paid attention to this old debate for a few years and am willing to share what little bits of information I can recall that has led me to believe that a proper single rotor setup is as good, if not, better than Harley's touring dual setup. If someone has facts to prove me wrong, by all means, post and help settle this debate.

And I'm familiar with the rear braking of the sportbikes and its irrelevance when needing to come to a quick stop from speed. I've spent many years and many miles on sportbikes from all the big 4 manufacturers. I was just using the Hayabusa as an example of someone who relies on the performance of the front brake even more than we do, that went to a single rotor.

I know that conventional wisdom will tell you that if you have two of something and you take 1 away, you now have 50% less of what you had before. But you are already creating friction with one rotor, so the 2nd rotor cannot duplicate the innitial performance of the first, it can only "compliment" it so to speak. Make sense? I wish I would have saved the links to that stuff back then.

Also, everyone that I have heard from that has switched to a quality single setup (i.e. master cylinder, lines, caliper, and rotor) has stated that they have improved braking. Of course they could be lying for whatever reason, but I've never seen a post or talked to someone in the flesh that said they missed the performance of their old dual setup.

Now, after BadPiggy emailed PM and HHI and I saw the response from HHI about brake fade and the single rotor having to work harder - rather than duals sharing the workload - that's another thing to consider.

This is just one of those things where you have to think outside the box. I'm very interested in the facts. I mean, the reason is out there so I want to know the reasons so I can counter them, or realize that I shouldn't attempt to. It was a fact that the world was flat, up until we knew it wasn't.

The numbers aren't exact, they were just meant to show that it's not 50-50 like conventional wisdom would suggest. I agree that it doesn't seem right at first glance. I'm really trying to keep this going because I hope that some R&D guy from a brake company will stumble in here and state some facts in laymen's terms so we/I could no exactly why Harley deemed it ok for the Heritage to run a single.

 

Cost effectiveness and considerably less weight. A dedicated , high-performance single rotor set-up may indeed better the stopping power of the stock set-up. It's going to cost a lot of money to improve on the Brembos-in fact , it's going to cost a lot of money to equal the Brembos. You want *****-to-the-wall braking from a Harley? Get a XR1200. The Nissins on that puppy will squirt your eyeballs out when used aggressively.
Finally , a 13" cast iron rotor will work very well-the first several times-two stainless rotors will bleed off heat much more efficiently , and likely retain efficiency over more braking events. I knew a racer who could boil the brake fluid on a Buell in two laps.

 

Your answer to the heritage question is Harley designed the Soft tail line with one rotor and the Touring line with two. They probably also had to draw a line somewhere with the weight issue, Say below 700lbs single caliper, over 700 dual caliper. If all there bikes were the same you would not have much to choose from. As for specific brake questions i will try and answer then for you. EG, 6 piston caliper verses 1, 1/2 inch verses 5/8 bore master cylinder. What ever you would like to know.