Results 1 to 32 of 32
  1. #1
    ride, eat, live
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    238

    200mm rotor size on 5spot?

    can a 200mm rear rotor be run on a 5 spot? anyone doing it? is it "not recommended" to run a rotor that size due to long term stress/fatigue issues on the chainstay? (i had a ventana el salt that sherwood recommended have an extra gusset welded on the chainstay to stiffen it and reduce the chance of a stress failure from the forces of the larger rotor)

    thanks guys
    i'm the man from nantucket

  2. #2
    Amphibious Technologies
    Reputation: SCUBAPRO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,472
    Why do you need a 200mm rotor in the rear? 180 not enough?
    "The best you've ridden is the best you know" - Paul Thede, Race Tech

  3. #3
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,457
    Don't quote me, but I think SSinga may be running V2's with the solid 203 rotors on his Spot.

    It does seem like overkill, but also you're likely to not use the brake to its full potential anyhow. I have rarely used my V2 front (from scuba) and M4 rear to their thermal or power potential.

  4. #4
    ride, eat, live
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    238

    more

    yeah, 180 not enough. heat up and fade faster than 200's, i need all i can get. so does it fit?
    i'm the man from nantucket

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: steve47co1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    982

    It will coincide with the chainstay

    I ran a 203 on my Spot and the distance between the outer edge of the rotor and the inside of the stay was mere millimeters - any warp in the rotor would cause a strike.

    Even with out a warped rotor, I did get some dings in the stay just from junk being kicked up and getting trapped in between.

    I would run a 203 in the front and a 180 in the rear - I do that now with my RFX and I have plenty of stopping power.
    The reason dogs have so many friends is that they wag their tail instead of their tongues.

  6. #6
    ride, eat, live
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    238

    heat and fade on long runs?

    so you guys with 180 in the rear aren't experiencing major heat and fade on sustained downhill runs? i'm surprised. maybe my brake skills need refining (i use the front a lot but maybe need to use more front). riding the front range in colorado it's very typical to have 20 minute sustained, steep, fast downhill runs with tech sections thrown in. it's basically 20 minutes of brake management to avoid hurtling off the side of a trail to an untimely death. i ran 180's and would have to stop 2-3 times as the brakes faded. they get so hot if you sprinkle water on them it sizzles and turns to steam. happens less with 200's.
    i'm the man from nantucket

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: steve47co1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    982

    Caution;  Merge;  Workers Ahead! Braking skills?

    I live in Steamboat and we have seriously long downhills here. I am wondering if you are riding your brakes?

    I run a 185 Hayes in the rear with Goodridge lines and pads and a 200 Hayes in the front of my RFX and I do not get any fade or overheating. Are the spiders (connecting arms) turning bronze on your rotors? If so, you are probably riding your brakes and you are tempering the rotors. Are you also replacing brake pads frequently?

    Only use the brakes when you need them, not all the time.
    The reason dogs have so many friends is that they wag their tail instead of their tongues.

  8. #8
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,457
    Nah, on the trips I've taken that have actually had elevations, my brakes were fine. I used to drag my rear, but never experienced fade. Even with dragging, it's good to release and clamp to allow some intermittent cooling.

    PS- while it may seem cool to do so, dripping water onto a hot rotor will only serve to warp it.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,060
    With my hub and wheel combo I cant even get a 203mm to fit on my '06 RFX. I was running it for awhile but it BARELY fit and even the slightest wobble would cause it to grind the chainstay as steve47co1 stated. Perhaps a different hub would make a difference and I could fit a 203 on there? For now I have a 160mm on the back and notice little to no difference in braking ability or fade while riding on the Shore. I have a 185mm waiting in the wings to put on which is probably what I will end up leaving on there...

    Buzz

  10. #10
    Amphibious Technologies
    Reputation: SCUBAPRO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,472
    Quote Originally Posted by cbehnke
    so you guys with 180 in the rear aren't experiencing major heat and fade on sustained downhill runs? i'm surprised.
    I'm actually running 160mm and no brake fade problems here. I only tap on the bakes only when I really need them though. So I'm either breaking hard or not at all.

    What kind of brakes are your running and when was the last time you bled them?
    "The best you've ridden is the best you know" - Paul Thede, Race Tech

  11. #11
    ride, eat, live
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    238

    okay

    i'll start experimenting with braking style on 180mm rotors to see if i can brake more efficiently. seems like it's rare to experience what i am,...i'll troubleshoot and see how it goes. thanks for the info
    i'm the man from nantucket

  12. #12
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,457
    Give us some info on you and your setup. It'll help get you steered in the right direction.

  13. #13
    ride, eat, live
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    238

    not cool

    PS- while it may seem cool to do so, dripping water onto a hot rotor will only serve to warp it.[/QUOTE]

    i'm aware of the warping issue of rapid cooling, the sizzle/steam happened on a water spit....not purposefully pouring water to cool them down. surprised me though to see a mouthful of water sizzle and steam off in 2 seconds.
    i'm the man from nantucket

  14. #14
    not so super...
    Reputation: SSINGA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,464
    the 203mm rotor fits just fine. I have the same amount of clearance on the Spot as my old Pack did. If your rotor warps enough to hit the stay you wheel isn't going to turn because the rotor won't go through the caliper either.

    At 200+lbs I prefer the bigger rotors too. They give a better feeling at the lever and make them much easier to modulate IMO.
    Nothing to see here.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,610

    question

    brand and model brakes, rotors and pads?

    If a 180 don't do it you have other problems. a 180 x 200 is a brutally stront combo of swept area.

    Maybe it is just style, but I try to ride and drive with the brakes off, untill the last second uses less 'fuel' , as no doubt I have payed for the vertical and want my full ration back in speeeeeed.


    DT

  16. #16
    not so super...
    Reputation: SSINGA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,464
    OK then??

    As DT so kindly pointed out, I'm a hack with no skills. I'll still take my HUGE 203mm Moto rotors for the added feeling of control they give me.

    All you skilled riders get the 160mm rotors.
    Nothing to see here.

  17. #17
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,457
    Nah singa. I think I know what he means, as per some past discussions about design. The design of a bike and parts selection is determined largely by the terrain the design is tested and tweaked on. That's probably why similar designs have such radically different feels sometimes.

    Perhaps out by us, our combo requires or makes comfortable the bigger brakes. I know I don't need a V2 and M4 combo, but it helps on the tightest turns on the tight singletrack I run, where I need to do a fast stop, trackstand, then turn in. The brakes are totally controllable, so why not have more power than I need available for those times I actually do need it (and the thermal capacity). Unfortunately, not all the trails here are wide open range to blast big speed runs.

    Singa, how are the V2's treating you now? Did you get the metallic pads yet?

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,610

    Ss

    Sorry SS, I was not thinking about your bike or you at all. I was thinking how a 180-203 rear-front combo on a 5 Spot was not enough. I have ridden thousands of vert descending on 160x2 on my Spot and with metallic pads they get too hot, but with EBC organic they are fine.


    brand make and model. And NO I do not recomend bigger than 180 on a Spot or new RFX. No one should need it, I can't vouch for 'want' but with a good set of discs there is no need in normal riding. I did not make room for it, even though it may just fit, it was not intended for 200 on the rear.

    DT

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: steve47co1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    982

    Amen

    Can I get an Amen, brother?
    The reason dogs have so many friends is that they wag their tail instead of their tongues.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,974
    I'm 200ish with gear and ride here in the front Range and higher. I have learned to scrub off speed with harder brake squeezes rather than keep them on. I do use the front as long as it isn't in a techy section. I use the front a lot actually but scrub speed of and then let it roll.

    I have 180s or 185s F&R on my Spot. Metal front and organic rear pads but the front now squeals like a poor little stuck piglet

  21. #21
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,457
    Quote Originally Posted by steve47co1
    I would run a 203 in the front and a 180 in the rear - I do that now with my RFX and I have plenty of stopping power.
    That's what I got on my bike, in addition to using an m4 in the rear. Plenty of power, and great control. I couldn't see needing more than this and now I'm using more front braking, the way it should be, rather than dragging the rear all the way down.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,974
    I think some of the Titus guys you rode with also said you were a hack with no skills

    Just kidding but with good brake pads, I can't see needing more than 185 out back unless you weigh 300 lbs and have some long/fast downhills and even then....

  23. #23
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,128

    Skilless hack reporting in...

    I run 8" rotors front and rear on my '06 RFX, (with spot seatstays, RFX chainstays):




    I found the 6" Rear rotor more than enough for aggro trail riding & freeriding(if you can call my pu$$y stuff that), on my trails but there's no speed runs. Everything is tap tap tap STOP!

    I went to an 8" rear rotor purely out of fear of not having enough for my first trip to the lift park. I found that b/c I'm still learning how to ride park stye DH/FR I'm on my brakes MUCH more than usual but in comparison my friends are way faster b/c well they're not going as slowly!

    I can tell you even with 8" F&R my arms still cramp up to uselessness before the day is done at the lifts.

    I expect that as I get better I'll brake less and later, and won't really need a big rotor on the back. I tend to rely more on my front by nature but when in over my head I aim for more even braking to balance the bike. I almost never drag the back end.

    BTW metal shimano pads are much more powerful than the organic and hardly ever squeal.
    Last edited by Bikezilla; 11-16-2007 at 01:09 PM.
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  24. #24
    not so super...
    Reputation: SSINGA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,464
    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes
    Sorry SS, I was not thinking about your bike or you at all. I was thinking how a 180-203 rear-front combo on a 5 Spot was not enough. I have ridden thousands of vert descending on 160x2 on my Spot and with metallic pads they get too hot, but with EBC organic they are fine.


    brand make and model. And NO I do not recomend bigger than 180 on a Spot or new RFX. No one should need it, I can't vouch for 'want' but with a good set of discs there is no need in normal riding. I did not make room for it, even though it may just fit, it was not intended for 200 on the rear.

    DT
    Great!! now neither my fork nor my brakes math the intended use of 5.5 Spot. Can everyone say "no warranty for you!"

    I used to have a 185 F/R set-up. Then I tried a 203 front. OMG - what a huge difference in control. So I went 203 rear. For me (YMMV) I feel that it offers much more precise control over your braking, plus with the Hope Moto brakes your rotor choice is limited to 203mm. I might not need the power the 203 can give but it seems to me that I can put that power to better use.
    Nothing to see here.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,974
    DT- please note SSINGA's IP address. Then when you get an email saying:

    "Dear DT, I was just riding along on my Spot when all these crazy cracks appeared oy of nowhere. I was all skeered and need a new frame under warranty please...... SSINGA (or other)"

    Well, then you know to post up here on this thread and pull an move like you know

    Sorry SSINGA- just kidding and could not resist.....

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    123
    DT, just a quicky, was the Pack ever designed for a 200mm rotor on the rear, or am i suffering with a tight squeeze too. im running a 05 pack, with Crossmax SX wheels, with Hope Moto V2 normal rotor. I have about .5mm of clearance with this setup.
    I had issues with a 185 hope mini (original mini) so i beefed it up to stop it heating up so much. (bad techneque probably) Not a problem with heat now, but i think i could get away with a 180mm, Not sure, you read so much on these things, an its bloody expensive to keep shelling out on stuff, so i went overkill to solve my problems.

    :-)

    edit: Crap, sorry for the thread jack!!!!
    My Name is backwards, Who did that!!!

  27. #27
    ride, eat, live
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    238

    DT chimes in....niiiiiiiice!

    allright already dave, GET OFF ME!!! actually, thanks for the chime DT, always appreciate the builder giving his opinion, it means a ton. i'll go with the 180's and F.I.T.F.O. on the trail (FITFO = figure it the *uck out). i do tend to use my brakes more often and lightly versus no brakes and getting up to higher speed and then hard application of brakes to reduce speed where needed. man, i rode and raced BMX for 20+ yrs and fiddled with trials for a few years...you'd think i'd know how to ride by now huh!
    i'm the man from nantucket

  28. #28
    ride, eat, live
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    238

    decaf option

    Quote Originally Posted by turnerbikes
    brand and model brakes, rotors and pads?

    If a 180 don't do it you have other problems. a 180 x 200 is a brutally stront combo of swept area.

    Maybe it is just style, but I try to ride and drive with the brakes off, untill the last second uses less 'fuel' , as no doubt I have payed for the vertical and want my full ration back in speeeeeed.


    DT

    I got other problems??? relax, tough guy. i'm running Hope M4 calipers with hope rotors and hope pads (forget what material they are). but i'll go to 180 in the back
    i'm the man from nantucket

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    234
    The oct. 2006 issue of Decline mountain bike magazine has a special article on Super D racing, basically endurance downhill. They point out that both XC and DH racers do these type races, with some racers going with XC bike setups to maximize climbing, while others have a more DH setup to gain time oh the downhills. One photo from the spread has John Kirkaldie side by side w/ an XC style racer, pointing out the differences in race garb and bikes; John is the more DH type guy, with full face helmet, shin pads and a 5 Spot bike with 8 inch rotors in the front, and 6 in back. I'd say just do six in back, and eliminate the compatibility problems with 8. I've found in critical situations of stopping, by cranking on the front and feathering the back, you stop quick and avoid going over the bars. Also, I've used 6 inch rotors on an all mountain rig, riding a DH course, and had no over - heating, squeaking - type problems - and I weigh over 200lbs with gear. I'd say go ahead, over - gun on braking, but keep a smaller one in back. Pro mountain biker John Kirkaldie set up his 5 spot that way for super D racing.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Prof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,165

    Here you go

    203 FRONT



    185 REAR



    No fade ever, not once.
    Stay off the brakes

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    174
    203 front, 160 rear. Pick your spots and brake hard with the front. May the force be with you!

  32. #32
    Shot Down in Flames...
    Reputation: D-Rock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,218
    You people with brake problems need some Formula Oros. 180 F/R is some brutal braking power that is easily modulated.

    D.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.