will 4 piston calipers fit on the rear instead of the 1 piston ones?

 

ummm..NO. and why would you wanna do that btw?

 

word even if you put 4 pots on the back, there would be no reason, they are proportioned to do about 20% of the braking duties, and dual pots are more then adequate for that, just upgrade the pads and rotors if you want more stopping power.

 

You need to go read up on braking systems and theory.
What you're proposing is downright DANGEROUS.


-Ted

 

yeah bad idea. But keep trying to come up with new things though!

 

i agree with ted, its dangerous.

it would be cool though.... if it were safe.

 

what are some good dual pots that will easily fit in the back?

 

Define "easily".
Looking through the wreckers I noticed that Saabs (circa early 90's) sport very nice, compact 2 piston (opposed) rear calipers. They were so tempting that I did a rear disc conversion on my 240Z.
It was pretty simple but I never did figure out how to incorporate an ebrake...the Saab has shoes that run in the brake disk hat.

In short, it would probably be relatively simple to upgrade the rear braking (although it's already been pointed out that the rears are only a small part of your total braking capabilities), but to retain all the functionality of your stock setup would be more difficult.

 

Why do you feel the need to upgrade them?
You're just adding more unsprung weight to the corners, and that's BAD.


-Ted

 

How much weight Ted, 3lbs total?

 

I know on Miatas 3lbs is considered quite significant, and many people can feel the difference in a blind test.

The point is that for 99.99% of the time the rear brakes are more than sufficient. "Upgrading" them will only lead to premature rear lockup and LONGER stopping distances.

 

I'm not debating that, I'm debating the additional weight. And to negate that weight you could get lighter wheel, the stock ones are like lead bricks, for the most part.

 

Anyone that asks about randomly shoving 4-pots onto the rear to replace the 1-pots isn't going to notice the weight difference, even if it were 50 lbs.

For that matter, anyone proposing this probably shouldn't be worried about safety either, just don't drive on public roads where you might hurt someone else. Let natural selection do it's thing.

 

Three pounds of unsprung weight is a lot more than it sounds.

The car is obvioulsy not heavy enough to need a larger brake in the rear, it would problably do just fine with basic organic pads and your every day brakke rotor.

 

My point was that unsprung weight is bad, and you should always try to minimise it. The thing is that all else being equal it'll still probably be heavier, which is bad. Sure you could use lighter wheels, but you could do that with the stock brakes and be that much farther ahead, so you'd still end up with a heavier package with different rears. The only really heavy FC wheels are the S4 TII wheels, the NA and the S5 TII wheels are much lighter.

Now with opposed piston calipers you might end up lighter due to not having to have the fixed bracketry that surrounds the caliper, but you probably won't be able to get much below.

 

dual piston calipers on the rears would accomplish very little.

 

Dude, just keep the rear brakes stock. Changes the pads, if you feel that you need more braking power (although it will be unnoticable), get performance pads. Done, now people can stop arguing over an added 3lbs, or 6lbs if you counted both sides. The arguement is pointless because chances are, he'll never take the car on a track and if he does, the stock rear brakes will always be more than adequate for the job.

DONE

 

Talking about unsprung weight...
I went from heavy stock '87 Turbo II wheels at 27 (?) lbs. each to lightweight GAB Sport wheels at 15 lbs. each.
The handling difference was nigth and day...


-Ted

 

sorry to bring back a dead post, but why is it so dangerous to use the 4 pots on the rear? i dont know much about the science behind brakeing

 

The front handles the larger amount of the breaking duties in order to maintain control of the car. Im sure youve see people pull their e-brake(which locks the rears) in order to lose traction in the back, if you had more braking power in the rear this loss of control could easily occur by accident.

 

Now what about the difference between the vented and non vented rear brakes that fc's have? I have an s5 gtu, I've been considering getting 4 pot front rotors off a t2 or s4 and I don't know if I should convert the rears because they have bigger rotors and are vented too. What do you guys think? Would it be a waste of time and money?

 

The vented rotors stay much cooler which helps the stopping power tremendously.