When I interviewed SRAM's Chris Mandell about the DB8 recently, he said the difference in brake power between a lever with Swinglink and a lever without...
When I interviewed SRAM's Chris Mandell about the DB8 recently, he said the difference in brake power between a lever with Swinglink and a lever without was slightly less than the difference between bumping up one rotor size (+20mm). So it adds power, but not worlds of power.
Which brings me to another question: what size brake rotors and what pads are you running? I ran 220 HS2 rotors and SRAM metallic pads on the DB8's (no swinglink) and had power for days for all the riding around here, and that's as a decently heavy guy with the heaviest wheels in the world (dual 29" DH tires with Cushcore on alloy rims). I actually liked riding the DB8's more than Mavens for the trails around me, but that would likely be different if I were banging out laps at Whistler or Morzine.
I've had a lot of issues with the HS2 rotors too, they warp almost as bad as the centerlines do. Seem to not take the heat...
I've had a lot of issues with the HS2 rotors too, they warp almost as bad as the centerlines do. Seem to not take the heat very well even compared to other simple non floating steel rotors. Sram rotors also are the most consistently warped out of the box in my experience, and Sram brakes have the highest percentage of warranty issues that I deal with in the shop, usually the levers.
As far as the color thing goes, I checked the temperatures steel changes color at, and it's a very small difference in temp between brownish and purple blue.
I really am not surprised
I even had to warranty one as it was completely warped out of the box, like seriously bent
looking back at rotors i've had, Theres alot more 'bad ones' than good ones, like whats honestly so hard to make a flat rotor? I know hope and Magura prefer their vented/floating as the track moves to be inline to reduce vibration.
looking back at rotors i've had, Theres alot more 'bad ones' than good ones, like whats honestly so hard to make a flat rotor? I know...
looking back at rotors i've had, Theres alot more 'bad ones' than good ones, like whats honestly so hard to make a flat rotor? I know hope and Magura prefer their vented/floating as the track moves to be inline to reduce vibration.
If steel has been cold formed/worked, or heated without subsequent uniform cooling, it can end up with uneven residual stresses that get released when it's later annealed by heating, resulting in deformation. Could be a factor.
looking back at rotors i've had, Theres alot more 'bad ones' than good ones, like whats honestly so hard to make a flat rotor? I know...
looking back at rotors i've had, Theres alot more 'bad ones' than good ones, like whats honestly so hard to make a flat rotor? I know hope and Magura prefer their vented/floating as the track moves to be inline to reduce vibration.
If steel has been cold formed/worked, or heated without subsequent uniform cooling, it can end up with uneven residual stresses that get released when it's later...
If steel has been cold formed/worked, or heated without subsequent uniform cooling, it can end up with uneven residual stresses that get released when it's later annealed by heating, resulting in deformation. Could be a factor.
Absolutely could be a factor. I've been wondering how most companies make their rotors. I would assume laser cutting would be the best, efficient and fast, but the heat might be an issue.
Who do you think has the best venting pattern on their rotors?
looking back at rotors i've had, Theres alot more 'bad ones' than good ones, like whats honestly so hard to make a flat rotor? I know...
looking back at rotors i've had, Theres alot more 'bad ones' than good ones, like whats honestly so hard to make a flat rotor? I know hope and Magura prefer their vented/floating as the track moves to be inline to reduce vibration.
If steel has been cold formed/worked, or heated without subsequent uniform cooling, it can end up with uneven residual stresses that get released when it's later...
If steel has been cold formed/worked, or heated without subsequent uniform cooling, it can end up with uneven residual stresses that get released when it's later annealed by heating, resulting in deformation. Could be a factor.
Absolutely could be a factor. I've been wondering how most companies make their rotors. I would assume laser cutting would be the best, efficient and fast...
Absolutely could be a factor. I've been wondering how most companies make their rotors. I would assume laser cutting would be the best, efficient and fast, but the heat might be an issue.
Who do you think has the best venting pattern on their rotors?
Id like to assume they all do it like Hope... Laser cut and then heat treated, im assuming the stamped rotors are not treated.
If steel has been cold formed/worked, or heated without subsequent uniform cooling, it can end up with uneven residual stresses that get released when it's later...
If steel has been cold formed/worked, or heated without subsequent uniform cooling, it can end up with uneven residual stresses that get released when it's later annealed by heating, resulting in deformation. Could be a factor.
Absolutely could be a factor. I've been wondering how most companies make their rotors. I would assume laser cutting would be the best, efficient and fast...
Absolutely could be a factor. I've been wondering how most companies make their rotors. I would assume laser cutting would be the best, efficient and fast, but the heat might be an issue.
Who do you think has the best venting pattern on their rotors?
Are the Code Rs on my Spartan worth tinkering with to improve? Say, adding Code RSC levers?Or should I get MT7s, Cura 4s, Dominions, Lewis, Hope...
Are the Code Rs on my Spartan worth tinkering with to improve? Say, adding Code RSC levers?
Or should I get MT7s, Cura 4s, Dominions, Lewis, Hope, DHRs? (Bonus points to not having to run new brake lines and Matchmaker compatible). There are just so many choices now I'm not sure which way to go, but I have read the Code Rs are bottom tier.
I took it out last night for a post-winter shakedown and though they are noticeably stronger than the Guide RSCs on my other bike, they have never felt adequate for what I use the bike for; I like riding steep jank and tough natural features.
Yeah that's the impetus behind just getting a set of used Code RSC masters. I'd just change the top half. Easy.What I'm wondering is if the...
Yeah that's the impetus behind just getting a set of used Code RSC masters. I'd just change the top half. Easy.
What I'm wondering is if the the performance difference between R and RSC is significant, or marginal. I don't know anyone with Code RSCs so I cannot test them.
Its quite a big difference, my bike came with code r that I hated, eventually picked up a set of rsc levers and they were absolutely night and day. Much more power and better feel with the bearing etc. I swapped one lever over first and gave it a poke down the driveway and was very surprised at how much better it was. I've kept them on now and went straight to RSCs on my next bike. They are still not a nice as something like dominions but I don't think they are any worse than a 4 pot shimano. I dont buy that the power difference is the same as a 20mm rotor swap, I did that first (200 to 220) and while it was better it was nothing like the swap to the rsc lever. You would want to get the lever fairly cheap, I paid under half retail but if dominions were not pretty pricey here I'd still run them instead.
Has anyone modified their non-Hayes calipers to tap a grub screw into the mounts, as in Hayes's "crosshair" caliper alignment feature, and lived to talk about it?
I'm curious, although I don't have a drill press or mill or any way to align it properly, so I'm not about to try it myself.
Has anyone modified their non-Hayes calipers to tap a grub screw into the mounts, as in Hayes's "crosshair" caliper alignment feature, and lived to talk about...
Has anyone modified their non-Hayes calipers to tap a grub screw into the mounts, as in Hayes's "crosshair" caliper alignment feature, and lived to talk about it?
I'm curious, although I don't have a drill press or mill or any way to align it properly, so I'm not about to try it myself.
Closest I've gotten is filing down Shimano and Magura Calipers so hope rotor rivets clear them. I bet you could, probably would recommend using a drill press and vise to make sure it's lined up well, but honestly, those screws haven't done much for me, they tend to move around under vibration
Its quite a big difference, my bike came with code r that I hated, eventually picked up a set of rsc levers and they were absolutely...
Its quite a big difference, my bike came with code r that I hated, eventually picked up a set of rsc levers and they were absolutely night and day. Much more power and better feel with the bearing etc. I swapped one lever over first and gave it a poke down the driveway and was very surprised at how much better it was. I've kept them on now and went straight to RSCs on my next bike. They are still not a nice as something like dominions but I don't think they are any worse than a 4 pot shimano. I dont buy that the power difference is the same as a 20mm rotor swap, I did that first (200 to 220) and while it was better it was nothing like the swap to the rsc lever. You would want to get the lever fairly cheap, I paid under half retail but if dominions were not pretty pricey here I'd still run them instead.
In reality, go to first page of this thread, Code R and RSC difference is virtually none in terms of power output with the same lever force, rotor, pads of course.
and a 20mm gain in rotor size it's actually more power gained then R to RSC, they might feel better but it's not much for the price.
I've never used them myself but from what I've heard from other people the crosshair alignment on the Hayes sounds great on paper, but not quite so useful in practise.
Its quite a big difference, my bike came with code r that I hated, eventually picked up a set of rsc levers and they were absolutely...
Its quite a big difference, my bike came with code r that I hated, eventually picked up a set of rsc levers and they were absolutely night and day. Much more power and better feel with the bearing etc. I swapped one lever over first and gave it a poke down the driveway and was very surprised at how much better it was. I've kept them on now and went straight to RSCs on my next bike. They are still not a nice as something like dominions but I don't think they are any worse than a 4 pot shimano. I dont buy that the power difference is the same as a 20mm rotor swap, I did that first (200 to 220) and while it was better it was nothing like the swap to the rsc lever. You would want to get the lever fairly cheap, I paid under half retail but if dominions were not pretty pricey here I'd still run them instead.
In reality, go to first page of this thread, Code R and RSC difference is virtually none in terms of power output with the same lever...
In reality, go to first page of this thread, Code R and RSC difference is virtually none in terms of power output with the same lever force, rotor, pads of course.
and a 20mm gain in rotor size it's actually more power gained then R to RSC, they might feel better but it's not much for the price.
I don't believe that test in the slightest, I went back to back and there is absolutely a huge difference in feel and grunt for the same input force. I didn't touch the pads/rotors anything else. There was a fresh bleed, check, swap lever, test again and it was night and day.
I see you've questioned some of the results yourself?
I've never used them myself but from what I've heard from other people the crosshair alignment on the Hayes sounds great on paper, but not quite...
I've never used them myself but from what I've heard from other people the crosshair alignment on the Hayes sounds great on paper, but not quite so useful in practise.
It's possible to use them wrong. If you follow the procedure that makes the most of them they're great, quite an improvement over the standard process. If you don't, and take the same kind of approach you would with a brake that doesn't have them then they kinda just get in the way.
- Back out crosshair screws - Push on caliper to move it inboard so outer pad is fully in contact with rotor - Tighten down caliper bolts until you just can't move the caliper by hand (not until play is gone, i mean until you are unable to adjust it by hand at all) - Tighten each crosshair screw until it hits the caliper bolt and starts to move the caliper outboard - Edge the caliper out slowly, alternating the screws. You get the feel for it. Once you do, it's easy to do in three adjustments: one crosshair screw, then the other, then back to the first for the final adjustment - Nip up rear caliper bolt then front caliper bolt.
If you try to use them with the bolts loose, they suck. Any movement at all in the caliper they suck. Don't try to loosen one bolt and then adjust it back the other way by loosening the crosshair screw while pushing on it with your thumb then retightening once it's in the right spot, it sucks. If you adjust while there's no tension on the bolt, everything hasn't squished down nicely yet so when you do tighten it down it moves the caliper slightly. If you do go too far outboard with your adjustment then back the screw out, push the caliper back, tighten the caliper back down, and then start again. But it's so easy to not overshoot the adjustment that you'll never do it once you're used to it.
My hot take is SRAM brakes that aren't the RSC (now SLV/Silver) model aren't worth using for aggressive riding. The Swing link and Contact adjuster are...
My hot take is SRAM brakes that aren't the RSC (now SLV/Silver) model aren't worth using for aggressive riding. The Swing link and Contact adjuster are really key to making them work well. I've owned Code RSCs, rented bikes with Code Rs, and now own 3 pairs of Maven Ults.
Better brake pads than the stock SRAM ones will help also. I found the SRAM sintered pads for Codes to be pretty meh. Just about any aftermarket pad will be better (Galfer, MTX, etc.). The SRAM pads for Mavens got a lot better. And thicker rotors like HS2s.
I'd second a lot of this.
If had Code R's on anything short of a full-blown enduro bike, I'd trying to find a deal on two RSC levers with the old-school hose angle that works better with mechanical shifting (what I run) and then use good 2mm thick rotors with MTX red pads and focus on getting a really good bleed and then bedding in the pads and rotors properly.
Then I'd call it a day and start worrying about and spending money on other aspects of a bike that (really don't mean to be a dick here) came with Code R's. I bet there are number of non-brake upgrades that'd make more a difference then Code RSC's as described above vs something slightly fancier.
I've got Mavens on my enduro bike, but I have Code's on my midpowered, "lightweight "160/150 ebike and for most of the riding I do on the ebike the Codes are fine. Running 220/200 rotors front/rear. Maven's are a LOT of break.
I've never used them myself but from what I've heard from other people the crosshair alignment on the Hayes sounds great on paper, but not quite...
I've never used them myself but from what I've heard from other people the crosshair alignment on the Hayes sounds great on paper, but not quite so useful in practise.
It's possible to use them wrong. If you follow the procedure that makes the most of them they're great, quite an improvement over the standard process...
It's possible to use them wrong. If you follow the procedure that makes the most of them they're great, quite an improvement over the standard process. If you don't, and take the same kind of approach you would with a brake that doesn't have them then they kinda just get in the way.
- Back out crosshair screws - Push on caliper to move it inboard so outer pad is fully in contact with rotor - Tighten down caliper bolts until you just can't move the caliper by hand (not until play is gone, i mean until you are unable to adjust it by hand at all) - Tighten each crosshair screw until it hits the caliper bolt and starts to move the caliper outboard - Edge the caliper out slowly, alternating the screws. You get the feel for it. Once you do, it's easy to do in three adjustments: one crosshair screw, then the other, then back to the first for the final adjustment - Nip up rear caliper bolt then front caliper bolt.
If you try to use them with the bolts loose, they suck. Any movement at all in the caliper they suck. Don't try to loosen one bolt and then adjust it back the other way by loosening the crosshair screw while pushing on it with your thumb then retightening once it's in the right spot, it sucks. If you adjust while there's no tension on the bolt, everything hasn't squished down nicely yet so when you do tighten it down it moves the caliper slightly. If you do go too far outboard with your adjustment then back the screw out, push the caliper back, tighten the caliper back down, and then start again. But it's so easy to not overshoot the adjustment that you'll never do it once you're used to it.
That basically how I do it with "regular" calipers, but with the addition of a repeatable fine adjustment. Seems like there's no downside, cheers.
Yeah that's the impetus behind just getting a set of used Code RSC masters. I'd just change the top half. Easy.What I'm wondering is if the...
Yeah that's the impetus behind just getting a set of used Code RSC masters. I'd just change the top half. Easy.
What I'm wondering is if the the performance difference between R and RSC is significant, or marginal. I don't know anyone with Code RSCs so I cannot test them.
When I interviewed SRAM's Chris Mandell about the DB8 recently, he said the difference in brake power between a lever with Swinglink and a lever without...
When I interviewed SRAM's Chris Mandell about the DB8 recently, he said the difference in brake power between a lever with Swinglink and a lever without was slightly less than the difference between bumping up one rotor size (+20mm). So it adds power, but not worlds of power.
Which brings me to another question: what size brake rotors and what pads are you running? I ran 220 HS2 rotors and SRAM metallic pads on the DB8's (no swinglink) and had power for days for all the riding around here, and that's as a decently heavy guy with the heaviest wheels in the world (dual 29" DH tires with Cushcore on alloy rims). I actually liked riding the DB8's more than Mavens for the trails around me, but that would likely be different if I were banging out laps at Whistler or Morzine.
I've not touched the rotors. It came with Centerline 200s. I always suspected those to are junk, as even though my pistons are fairly even, the...
I've not touched the rotors. It came with Centerline 200s. I always suspected those to are junk, as even though my pistons are fairly even, the brakes still make that gurgling noise.
Might be worth spending some time getting the pistons nice and even and moving freely before wasting any money, IMO it makes a big difference to the spongy feeling and overall power. Bit of an older video but if you haven’t seen it ‘How to make your sram brakes not suck’ on YouTube has good tips and none of the fluff.
Its quite a big difference, my bike came with code r that I hated, eventually picked up a set of rsc levers and they were absolutely...
Its quite a big difference, my bike came with code r that I hated, eventually picked up a set of rsc levers and they were absolutely night and day. Much more power and better feel with the bearing etc. I swapped one lever over first and gave it a poke down the driveway and was very surprised at how much better it was. I've kept them on now and went straight to RSCs on my next bike. They are still not a nice as something like dominions but I don't think they are any worse than a 4 pot shimano. I dont buy that the power difference is the same as a 20mm rotor swap, I did that first (200 to 220) and while it was better it was nothing like the swap to the rsc lever. You would want to get the lever fairly cheap, I paid under half retail but if dominions were not pretty pricey here I'd still run them instead.
In reality, go to first page of this thread, Code R and RSC difference is virtually none in terms of power output with the same lever...
In reality, go to first page of this thread, Code R and RSC difference is virtually none in terms of power output with the same lever force, rotor, pads of course.
and a 20mm gain in rotor size it's actually more power gained then R to RSC, they might feel better but it's not much for the price.
I don't believe that test in the slightest, I went back to back and there is absolutely a huge difference in feel and grunt for the...
I don't believe that test in the slightest, I went back to back and there is absolutely a huge difference in feel and grunt for the same input force. I didn't touch the pads/rotors anything else. There was a fresh bleed, check, swap lever, test again and it was night and day.
I see you've questioned some of the results yourself?
Agreed, there are enduro mag tests where Code R is on par with Guide RSC and Code RSC way above that - the swing link adds as much as larger pistons do (Guide vs. Code).
Also, 'no added power' as per numbers, yet the stopping time is lower by 20 %. How is that possible other than with more overall braking power?
I've never used them myself but from what I've heard from other people the crosshair alignment on the Hayes sounds great on paper, but not quite...
I've never used them myself but from what I've heard from other people the crosshair alignment on the Hayes sounds great on paper, but not quite so useful in practise.
It's possible to use them wrong. If you follow the procedure that makes the most of them they're great, quite an improvement over the standard process...
It's possible to use them wrong. If you follow the procedure that makes the most of them they're great, quite an improvement over the standard process. If you don't, and take the same kind of approach you would with a brake that doesn't have them then they kinda just get in the way.
- Back out crosshair screws - Push on caliper to move it inboard so outer pad is fully in contact with rotor - Tighten down caliper bolts until you just can't move the caliper by hand (not until play is gone, i mean until you are unable to adjust it by hand at all) - Tighten each crosshair screw until it hits the caliper bolt and starts to move the caliper outboard - Edge the caliper out slowly, alternating the screws. You get the feel for it. Once you do, it's easy to do in three adjustments: one crosshair screw, then the other, then back to the first for the final adjustment - Nip up rear caliper bolt then front caliper bolt.
If you try to use them with the bolts loose, they suck. Any movement at all in the caliper they suck. Don't try to loosen one bolt and then adjust it back the other way by loosening the crosshair screw while pushing on it with your thumb then retightening once it's in the right spot, it sucks. If you adjust while there's no tension on the bolt, everything hasn't squished down nicely yet so when you do tighten it down it moves the caliper slightly. If you do go too far outboard with your adjustment then back the screw out, push the caliper back, tighten the caliper back down, and then start again. But it's so easy to not overshoot the adjustment that you'll never do it once you're used to it.
Makes sense. On Codes (or in general), I undo one bolt, tighten it back just a bit, then do the same on the other, then, when adjusting, untighten one bolt and move the caliper left-to-right to see daylight between pads and rotor, tighten back the bolt a bit and repeat the process on the other side. So I have one bolt fixing the caliper in place and providing a pivot point, but only ebough to be able to move the caliper by hand on the other side, where the bolt is loose.
In reality, go to first page of this thread, Code R and RSC difference is virtually none in terms of power output with the same lever...
In reality, go to first page of this thread, Code R and RSC difference is virtually none in terms of power output with the same lever force, rotor, pads of course.
and a 20mm gain in rotor size it's actually more power gained then R to RSC, they might feel better but it's not much for the price.
I don't believe that test in the slightest, I went back to back and there is absolutely a huge difference in feel and grunt for the...
I don't believe that test in the slightest, I went back to back and there is absolutely a huge difference in feel and grunt for the same input force. I didn't touch the pads/rotors anything else. There was a fresh bleed, check, swap lever, test again and it was night and day.
I see you've questioned some of the results yourself?
Agreed, there are enduro mag tests where Code R is on par with Guide RSC and Code RSC way above that - the swing link adds...
Agreed, there are enduro mag tests where Code R is on par with Guide RSC and Code RSC way above that - the swing link adds as much as larger pistons do (Guide vs. Code).
Also, 'no added power' as per numbers, yet the stopping time is lower by 20 %. How is that possible other than with more overall braking power?
How was the test set up? I assume there were control tires and a control surface stopping from a specific speed?
That is the link of the group test most people are mentioning. The decelaration test were done at Sinter testing lab so no issue of control surface or tires, weather conditions and tire pressures. Brake pads tested were both the OEM one and also tested with Sinter green organic pads. Rest was either measured or controlled.
Full test procedure from Enduro and Sinter:
We carried out extensive test sessions at the Sinter lab in Slovenia. Here, Sinter not only manufacture their own brake pads, but also have a big test-lab, which they were kind enough to share with us for several days. Following their recommended break-in procedure, we put the brakes through their paces on the test bench using the original pads.
This procedure was followed by 20 sequences of two test procedures each: the first test simulated deceleration from 30 km/h to a standstill, while the second test simulated decelerating from 30 to 15 km/h. This is a classic scenario that occurs when braking before a corner. The brakes were given 10 seconds to recover between each of the 20 sequences. In addition, we ventilated the brakes constantly to simulate natural airflow. The results are the average of the 20 tests performed.
To generate the braking force, we always applied 40 N to the brake lever, which corresponds to a tractive force of 4 kg. After testing the brakes with the original pads, we carried out a second round of tests with Sinter’s in-house “Race” pads to find out how much tuning potential is in each brake. The Sinter pads – which are organic, by the way – improved deceleration on all models, but to very different degrees.
That is the link of the group test most people are mentioning. The decelaration test were done at Sinter testing lab so no issue of control surface or tires, weather conditions and tire pressures. Brake pads tested were both the OEM one and also tested with Sinter green organic pads. Rest was either measured or controlled.
Full test procedure from Enduro and Sinter:
We carried out extensive test sessions at the Sinter lab in Slovenia. Here, Sinter not only manufacture their own brake pads, but also have a big test-lab, which they were kind enough to share with us for several days. Following their recommended break-in procedure, we put the brakes through their paces on the test bench using the original pads.
This procedure was followed by 20 sequences of two test procedures each: the first test simulated deceleration from 30 km/h to a standstill, while the second test simulated decelerating from 30 to 15 km/h. This is a classic scenario that occurs when braking before a corner. The brakes were given 10 seconds to recover between each of the 20 sequences. In addition, we ventilated the brakes constantly to simulate natural airflow. The results are the average of the 20 tests performed.
To generate the braking force, we always applied 40 N to the brake lever, which corresponds to a tractive force of 4 kg. After testing the brakes with the original pads, we carried out a second round of tests with Sinter’s in-house “Race” pads to find out how much tuning potential is in each brake. The Sinter pads – which are organic, by the way – improved deceleration on all models, but to very different degrees.
Thanks for linking that. The data definitely seems a bit weird to me, and it's not clear on everything, though the methodology in the lab seems pretty good. I wish they disclosed exactly what Sram Rotor they used, I can see that it's an HS2 for the Maven, but it isn't clear for the Codes. We're those rotors fresh for each set of pads and bedded in the same way before the test? Where are they measuring the pressure, somewhere along the hose? Another thing I'm not sure what they are meaning by brake torque. Is that the average of the maximum torque experienced during each test or is it something else? I find it interesting that the Code Ultimate took significantly longer in the 30 - 0 tests, but the Bronzes took longer in the 30-15, with a significant drop in torque for the ultimates for the 30-0 test. Given the other controls, I wonder what caused that inconsistency. They should put out all the raw data from each test, I would love to go over it.
Yeah, there's too many red flags in the data to take it as gospel. I'm not the sort of person who demands a full engineering report to back up every scrap of data before i believe anything, but in this case it just doesn't seem like they had a reliable testing methodology.
Yeah, there's too many red flags in the data to take it as gospel. I'm not the sort of person who demands a full engineering report...
Yeah, there's too many red flags in the data to take it as gospel. I'm not the sort of person who demands a full engineering report to back up every scrap of data before i believe anything, but in this case it just doesn't seem like they had a reliable testing methodology.
I'm baffled by the apparently random selection of OEM pad compounds
I'm baffled by the apparently random selection of OEM pad compounds
Ehm, brakes comes with random pad choice from the factory, who's fault is that? They were testing STOCK brakes, if manufacturer opts to undersell their brake by cheaping out on pads, it's their reliability. Better pads and rotors make any brake better, after all those are the actual braking surfaces, of course they make a big difference.
Ehm, brakes comes with random pad choice from the factory, who's fault is that? They were testing STOCK brakes, if manufacturer opts to undersell their brake...
Ehm, brakes comes with random pad choice from the factory, who's fault is that? They were testing STOCK brakes, if manufacturer opts to undersell their brake by cheaping out on pads, it's their reliability. Better pads and rotors make any brake better, after all those are the actual braking surfaces, of course they make a big difference.
Pads and rotors are both things easily changed by the end consumer.
For the lab data, they should have used either control pads and rotors from someone like Galfer, or used the best available from each OEM. If they wanted to use whatever OEM pads were fitted for subjective on-trail testing that would be fine but you don’t get meaningful lab data with a random spread of pads.
Another note that makes me question their testing too: their setup photos for the Maven on the lab test make it look like they may not be applying force to the correct point on the lever. This wouldn’t matter for testing different pads in the same brake but would invalidate comparisons between brakes.
I do testing for a living. This shit drives me nuts.
Edit: what I’d also really have liked to see is a graph of brake torque vs lever force and another graph of brake torque vs lever displacement. I think it would give some really interesting insight into why certain brakes feel the way they do.
Pads and rotors are both things easily changed by the end consumer.For the lab data, they should have used either control pads and rotors from someone...
Pads and rotors are both things easily changed by the end consumer.
For the lab data, they should have used either control pads and rotors from someone like Galfer, or used the best available from each OEM. If they wanted to use whatever OEM pads were fitted for subjective on-trail testing that would be fine but you don’t get meaningful lab data with a random spread of pads.
Another note that makes me question their testing too: their setup photos for the Maven on the lab test make it look like they may not be applying force to the correct point on the lever. This wouldn’t matter for testing different pads in the same brake but would invalidate comparisons between brakes.
I do testing for a living. This shit drives me nuts.
Edit: what I’d also really have liked to see is a graph of brake torque vs lever force and another graph of brake torque vs lever displacement. I think it would give some really interesting insight into why certain brakes feel the way they do.
What part on the bike is not easily changed? (Forget headtube routing for a second). While we all would appreciate more detailed test and deeper analysis of braking performance, it's hardly something any online magazine is going to do for us, same with damping rates of different suspension products, wear rates of cassettes etc. Plus, I think more often than not we empirically know very well that is you want more mechanical advantage in a brake you have to either compromise lever feel or compromise pad rollback. That is unless you go for variable cam mechanism in a lever (even though that messes up the lever feel as well just in a different way).
Makes sense. On Codes (or in general), I undo one bolt, tighten it back just a bit, then do the same on the other, then, when...
Makes sense. On Codes (or in general), I undo one bolt, tighten it back just a bit, then do the same on the other, then, when adjusting, untighten one bolt and move the caliper left-to-right to see daylight between pads and rotor, tighten back the bolt a bit and repeat the process on the other side. So I have one bolt fixing the caliper in place and providing a pivot point, but only ebough to be able to move the caliper by hand on the other side, where the bolt is loose.
I've been a bit curious about how most people center their calipers. I initially would center based on the gaps in the pads, but when I worked at a shop, I learned to center the rotor between the caliper gaps and ignore the pads initially. Then if the pads made uneven contact (assuming the pistons had been cleaned and lubed), you could work the brake lever and use a small flat head to massage fluid from one piston to another to get them dialed in. If I've helped someone trail side with brake rub, I just center to the caliper and it seems the fluid in the pistons balance out after some braking
Not sure if it's an odd way to do it but I've found its been simple and effective compared to other methods I've tried.
I thought you were #mullet4lyfe??
I really am not surprised
I even had to warranty one as it was completely warped out of the box, like seriously bent
cant be as bad as my TRP r1 rotors lol - bought 10 pairs off a shop that was shutting, they were dreadful. atleast half were bent from new
sometimes i wonder if they're even checked from factories, so far the rs01 and rs05 were almost perfect for me, but i guess it's luck at this point
looking back at rotors i've had, Theres alot more 'bad ones' than good ones, like whats honestly so hard to make a flat rotor? I know hope and Magura prefer their vented/floating as the track moves to be inline to reduce vibration.
If steel has been cold formed/worked, or heated without subsequent uniform cooling, it can end up with uneven residual stresses that get released when it's later annealed by heating, resulting in deformation. Could be a factor.
Absolutely could be a factor. I've been wondering how most companies make their rotors. I would assume laser cutting would be the best, efficient and fast, but the heat might be an issue.
Who do you think has the best venting pattern on their rotors?
Id like to assume they all do it like Hope... Laser cut and then heat treated, im assuming the stamped rotors are not treated.
https://nsmb.com/articles/galfer-rotors-and-pads/#:~:text=All%20of%20Galfer's%20rotors%20are,heat%20treated%20for%20each%20application.
here they explain a bit how the Galfer ones are made
Its quite a big difference, my bike came with code r that I hated, eventually picked up a set of rsc levers and they were absolutely night and day. Much more power and better feel with the bearing etc. I swapped one lever over first and gave it a poke down the driveway and was very surprised at how much better it was. I've kept them on now and went straight to RSCs on my next bike. They are still not a nice as something like dominions but I don't think they are any worse than a 4 pot shimano. I dont buy that the power difference is the same as a 20mm rotor swap, I did that first (200 to 220) and while it was better it was nothing like the swap to the rsc lever. You would want to get the lever fairly cheap, I paid under half retail but if dominions were not pretty pricey here I'd still run them instead.
Has anyone modified their non-Hayes calipers to tap a grub screw into the mounts, as in Hayes's "crosshair" caliper alignment feature, and lived to talk about it?
I'm curious, although I don't have a drill press or mill or any way to align it properly, so I'm not about to try it myself.
Closest I've gotten is filing down Shimano and Magura Calipers so hope rotor rivets clear them. I bet you could, probably would recommend using a drill press and vise to make sure it's lined up well, but honestly, those screws haven't done much for me, they tend to move around under vibration
In reality, go to first page of this thread, Code R and RSC difference is virtually none in terms of power output with the same lever force, rotor, pads of course.
and a 20mm gain in rotor size it's actually more power gained then R to RSC, they might feel better but it's not much for the price.
I've never used them myself but from what I've heard from other people the crosshair alignment on the Hayes sounds great on paper, but not quite so useful in practise.
I don't believe that test in the slightest, I went back to back and there is absolutely a huge difference in feel and grunt for the same input force. I didn't touch the pads/rotors anything else. There was a fresh bleed, check, swap lever, test again and it was night and day.
I see you've questioned some of the results yourself?
It's possible to use them wrong. If you follow the procedure that makes the most of them they're great, quite an improvement over the standard process. If you don't, and take the same kind of approach you would with a brake that doesn't have them then they kinda just get in the way.
- Back out crosshair screws
- Push on caliper to move it inboard so outer pad is fully in contact with rotor
- Tighten down caliper bolts until you just can't move the caliper by hand (not until play is gone, i mean until you are unable to adjust it by hand at all)
- Tighten each crosshair screw until it hits the caliper bolt and starts to move the caliper outboard
- Edge the caliper out slowly, alternating the screws. You get the feel for it. Once you do, it's easy to do in three adjustments: one crosshair screw, then the other, then back to the first for the final adjustment
- Nip up rear caliper bolt then front caliper bolt.
If you try to use them with the bolts loose, they suck. Any movement at all in the caliper they suck. Don't try to loosen one bolt and then adjust it back the other way by loosening the crosshair screw while pushing on it with your thumb then retightening once it's in the right spot, it sucks. If you adjust while there's no tension on the bolt, everything hasn't squished down nicely yet so when you do tighten it down it moves the caliper slightly. If you do go too far outboard with your adjustment then back the screw out, push the caliper back, tighten the caliper back down, and then start again. But it's so easy to not overshoot the adjustment that you'll never do it once you're used to it.
I'd second a lot of this.
If had Code R's on anything short of a full-blown enduro bike, I'd trying to find a deal on two RSC levers with the old-school hose angle that works better with mechanical shifting (what I run) and then use good 2mm thick rotors with MTX red pads and focus on getting a really good bleed and then bedding in the pads and rotors properly.
Then I'd call it a day and start worrying about and spending money on other aspects of a bike that (really don't mean to be a dick here) came with Code R's. I bet there are number of non-brake upgrades that'd make more a difference then Code RSC's as described above vs something slightly fancier.
I've got Mavens on my enduro bike, but I have Code's on my midpowered, "lightweight "160/150 ebike and for most of the riding I do on the ebike the Codes are fine. Running 220/200 rotors front/rear. Maven's are a LOT of break.
That basically how I do it with "regular" calipers, but with the addition of a repeatable fine adjustment. Seems like there's no downside, cheers.
Might be worth spending some time getting the pistons nice and even and moving freely before wasting any money, IMO it makes a big difference to the spongy feeling and overall power.
Bit of an older video but if you haven’t seen it ‘How to make your sram brakes not suck’ on YouTube has good tips and none of the fluff.
Agreed, there are enduro mag tests where Code R is on par with Guide RSC and Code RSC way above that - the swing link adds as much as larger pistons do (Guide vs. Code).
Also, 'no added power' as per numbers, yet the stopping time is lower by 20 %. How is that possible other than with more overall braking power?
Makes sense. On Codes (or in general), I undo one bolt, tighten it back just a bit, then do the same on the other, then, when adjusting, untighten one bolt and move the caliper left-to-right to see daylight between pads and rotor, tighten back the bolt a bit and repeat the process on the other side. So I have one bolt fixing the caliper in place and providing a pivot point, but only ebough to be able to move the caliper by hand on the other side, where the bolt is loose.
How was the test set up? I assume there were control tires and a control surface stopping from a specific speed?
https://enduro-mtb.com/en/best-mtb-disc-brake-can-buy/
That is the link of the group test most people are mentioning. The decelaration test were done at Sinter testing lab so no issue of control surface or tires, weather conditions and tire pressures. Brake pads tested were both the OEM one and also tested with Sinter green organic pads. Rest was either measured or controlled.
Full test procedure from Enduro and Sinter:
We carried out extensive test sessions at the Sinter lab in Slovenia. Here, Sinter not only manufacture their own brake pads, but also have a big test-lab, which they were kind enough to share with us for several days. Following their recommended break-in procedure, we put the brakes through their paces on the test bench using the original pads.
This procedure was followed by 20 sequences of two test procedures each: the first test simulated deceleration from 30 km/h to a standstill, while the second test simulated decelerating from 30 to 15 km/h. This is a classic scenario that occurs when braking before a corner. The brakes were given 10 seconds to recover between each of the 20 sequences. In addition, we ventilated the brakes constantly to simulate natural airflow. The results are the average of the 20 tests performed.
To generate the braking force, we always applied 40 N to the brake lever, which corresponds to a tractive force of 4 kg. After testing the brakes with the original pads, we carried out a second round of tests with Sinter’s in-house “Race” pads to find out how much tuning potential is in each brake. The Sinter pads – which are organic, by the way – improved deceleration on all models, but to very different degrees.
Thanks for linking that. The data definitely seems a bit weird to me, and it's not clear on everything, though the methodology in the lab seems pretty good. I wish they disclosed exactly what Sram Rotor they used, I can see that it's an HS2 for the Maven, but it isn't clear for the Codes. We're those rotors fresh for each set of pads and bedded in the same way before the test? Where are they measuring the pressure, somewhere along the hose? Another thing I'm not sure what they are meaning by brake torque. Is that the average of the maximum torque experienced during each test or is it something else? I find it interesting that the Code Ultimate took significantly longer in the 30 - 0 tests, but the Bronzes took longer in the 30-15, with a significant drop in torque for the ultimates for the 30-0 test. Given the other controls, I wonder what caused that inconsistency. They should put out all the raw data from each test, I would love to go over it.
Yeah, there's too many red flags in the data to take it as gospel. I'm not the sort of person who demands a full engineering report to back up every scrap of data before i believe anything, but in this case it just doesn't seem like they had a reliable testing methodology.
I'm baffled by the apparently random selection of OEM pad compounds
Ehm, brakes comes with random pad choice from the factory, who's fault is that? They were testing STOCK brakes, if manufacturer opts to undersell their brake by cheaping out on pads, it's their reliability. Better pads and rotors make any brake better, after all those are the actual braking surfaces, of course they make a big difference.
Pads and rotors are both things easily changed by the end consumer.
For the lab data, they should have used either control pads and rotors from someone like Galfer, or used the best available from each OEM. If they wanted to use whatever OEM pads were fitted for subjective on-trail testing that would be fine but you don’t get meaningful lab data with a random spread of pads.
Another note that makes me question their testing too: their setup photos for the Maven on the lab test make it look like they may not be applying force to the correct point on the lever. This wouldn’t matter for testing different pads in the same brake but would invalidate comparisons between brakes.
I do testing for a living. This shit drives me nuts.
Edit: what I’d also really have liked to see is a graph of brake torque vs lever force and another graph of brake torque vs lever displacement. I think it would give some really interesting insight into why certain brakes feel the way they do.
What part on the bike is not easily changed? (Forget headtube routing for a second). While we all would appreciate more detailed test and deeper analysis of braking performance, it's hardly something any online magazine is going to do for us, same with damping rates of different suspension products, wear rates of cassettes etc. Plus, I think more often than not we empirically know very well that is you want more mechanical advantage in a brake you have to either compromise lever feel or compromise pad rollback. That is unless you go for variable cam mechanism in a lever (even though that messes up the lever feel as well just in a different way).
I've been a bit curious about how most people center their calipers. I initially would center based on the gaps in the pads, but when I worked at a shop, I learned to center the rotor between the caliper gaps and ignore the pads initially. Then if the pads made uneven contact (assuming the pistons had been cleaned and lubed), you could work the brake lever and use a small flat head to massage fluid from one piston to another to get them dialed in. If I've helped someone trail side with brake rub, I just center to the caliper and it seems the fluid in the pistons balance out after some braking
Not sure if it's an odd way to do it but I've found its been simple and effective compared to other methods I've tried.
Post a reply to: Nerding out on Brakes shall we? Not another tech deraliment