View Single Post
Old 06-27-08, 11:45 PM
  #21  
Cadfael
Senior Member
 
Cadfael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by kramnnim
Maybe they want the pads to wear out sooner, so they can sell more replacements...
A valid point!

But... it is a fact that on my 'owd MTB, the braking is better when the static pad is 'just' touching the rotor. If you think about it make sense. If one pad it static... and both are equidistant from the rotor, then when you brake either the rotor has to deflect for both pads to contact it, or the whole calliper assembly has to bend or flex... putting strain on the fork bosses. Logic to me dictates the static pad has to be as close as possible to the rotor to have the best braking power. I stress again, this is for systems that have a static pad, other systems may be different. It also cannot be stressed enough... the static pad it 'JUST' touching the rotor... not rubbing. Rubbing would produce fiction, and some noise that could be heard when riding, and whould have some braking action. If I lift the the wheel and spin the wheel I hear nothing. But if I put my ear real close and turn the wheel slowly I hear just the lightest of scraping.

My commute is only 10 miles there and back... but I do it five days a week, and when I had my brakes serviced a few weeks ago at my LBS he told me the pads were good for another few months... and that was after two years from new.
Cadfael is offline