I've searched but cant find anything, does the TT rear calipers discs etc fit the fabia so vented rear discs can be fitted?

I couldnt answer whether the TT rear brakes fit but what I will say is although the rear vRS brakes are crap you would notice so little difference by upgrading them thats its barely worth the money or effort.

256mm setup from Golf GTI, Octavia vRS and Audi TT as stated...

mate i have a full rear beam with brakes on with g88 disc and strada pads if you can get it picked up this week its yours for £125 an ablsolurte bagain buddy

im in rg412yb

256mm setup from Golf GTI, Octavia vRS and Audi TT as stated...

FWD TT

mate i have a full rear beam with brakes on with g88 disc and strada pads if you can get it picked up this week its yours for £125 an ablsolurte bagain buddy

im in rg412yb

reeeaaally...?

FWD TT

reeeaaally...?

yes mate you want???

also have front 312 calipers and carriers with pads X 2 @ £200 each set

where does the assumption the rear brakes make little difference to the braking come from... :wonder:

Edited 15 February, 201016 yr by warwick hunt

where does the assumption the rear brakes make little difference to the braking come from... :wonder:

Just from past experience and what Ive been told, front brakes do the majority of work so upgrading them is in an obvious choice whereas having spoken to people with upgraded brakes all be it some guys i met at a volvo meet the principle is the same.

I may have gotten it completely wrong if so I appologise.

where does the assumption the rear brakes make little difference to the braking come from... :wonder:

Back in the days before ABS was fitted cars used to come with brake proportioning valves to limit the hydraulic pressure to the rear brakes. This was to stop the rear wheels locking up and causing a loss of control. Under heavy braking the weight is thrown forward and so the front brakes need to do most of the work - if the rear brakes work just as efficiently then the rear wheels would lock up. People often found that if they lowered their cars the brake proportioning valves would be fooled into thinking there was more weight in the back than there actually was, and the result was the rear wheels would lock up under heavy braking. This could be alleviated by adjusting the proportioning valve.

Now all cars come with ABS this type of brake proportioning valve is no longer required, but the fact remains that on most road cars braking force to the rear wheels needs to be limited to stop the rear wheels locking up.

Given that breaking force to the rear needs to be regulated it therefore seems pointless upgrading rear discs. Also, many cars with an all disc brake set up end up needing to have rear discs replaced due to corrosion caused by lack of use rather than replacement due to them wearing out.

Mind you, I'm just a girl so what would I know

And here's a question for you - why do you always post in bold??

Back in the days before ABS was fitted cars used to come with brake proportioning valves to limit the hydraulic pressure to the rear brakes. This was to stop the rear wheels locking up and causing a loss of control. Under heavy braking the weight is thrown forward and so the front brakes need to do most of the work - if the rear brakes work just as efficiently then the rear wheels would lock up. People often found that if they lowered their cars the brake proportioning valves would be fooled into thinking there was more weight in the back than there actually was, and the result was the rear wheels would lock up under heavy braking. This could be alleviated by adjusting the proportioning valve.

Now all cars come with ABS this type of brake proportioning valve is no longer required, but the fact remains that on most road cars braking force to the rear wheels needs to be limited to stop the rear wheels locking up.

Given that breaking force to the rear needs to be regulated it therefore seems pointless upgrading rear discs. Also, many cars with an all disc brake set up end up needing to have rear discs replaced due to corrosion caused by lack of use rather than replacement due to them wearing out.

Mind you, I'm just a girl so what would I know

And here's a question for you - why do you always post in bold??

Respect to you! I thought that was the case hence the statement and you clarified thanks

Back in the days before ABS was fitted cars used to come with brake proportioning valves to limit the hydraulic pressure to the rear brakes. This was to stop the rear wheels locking up and causing a loss of control. Under heavy braking the weight is thrown forward and so the front brakes need to do most of the work - if the rear brakes work just as efficiently then the rear wheels would lock up. People often found that if they lowered their cars the brake proportioning valves would be fooled into thinking there was more weight in the back than there actually was, and the result was the rear wheels would lock up under heavy braking. This could be alleviated by adjusting the proportioning valve.

Now all cars come with ABS this type of brake proportioning valve is no longer required, but the fact remains that on most road cars braking force to the rear wheels needs to be limited to stop the rear wheels locking up.

Given that breaking force to the rear needs to be regulated it therefore seems pointless upgrading rear discs. Also, many cars with an all disc brake set up end up needing to have rear discs replaced due to corrosion caused by lack of use rather than replacement due to them wearing out.

Mind you, I'm just a girl so what would I know

And here's a question for you - why do you always post in bold??

Good post and quite correct. The Fabia is well known for rear disc corrosion with the low rate of use being partly responsible for it.

The VRS is also a very front heavy car which means there is even more emphasis put on the front in proportion.

Edited 15 February, 201016 yr by Decron

I was going to snap up Clive's complete rear beam until I decided to go back to just having simple stock rear brakes. It's worth it for the full 256mm conversion alone.

"Good post and quite correct. The Fabia is well known for rear disc corrosion with the low rate of use being partly responsible for it."

i upgraded the rears to 256 vented and can say the braking is a lot better allround..i dont understand the "low rate of use" statement tbh...are you saying the front pads grab the discs but the rears dont?...my rears have never shown any signs of corrosion and after a few applications are as shiny as the fronts...in my 30+yrs of car ownership ive rebuilt/upgraded everything from cortinas/cosworths/amg mercs and lately the fabia...ive experimented with everything over the yrs and if anyone thinks the rear brakes serve little purpose try clamping the hoses on the front and only use the rear and vice versa and tell me the rears make little difference.

and i use bold as default font is rather plain...nothing else :p

Edited 16 February, 201016 yr by warwick hunt

I agree with most of what has been written to a point....

The standard suspension allows a lot of diving/rotation under braking. Lowering the car an inch on Eibachs sorts that out. Question: If the car's novediving less now, why not consider uprating the rear brakes? My rears developed noticable wear before my fronts. No need to go mad with it, just a ventilated rear setup with a similar pad material to the fronts.

In some (really rather old and chavvy) magazines I once bought... Uprating the rear brakes on a Clio gave a more balanced feel to the car under heavy braking.

J.

"Good post and quite correct. The Fabia is well known for rear disc corrosion with the low rate of use being partly responsible for it."

i upgraded the rears to 256 vented and can say the braking is a lot better allround..i dont understand the "low rate of use" statement tbh...are you saying the front pads grab the discs but the rears dont?

No.... if I had wanted to say that it would have been said. The use of the rear brakes is proportionally lower than the fronts, they provide a relative amount of stopping power which given the way the weight is set up in the car (Which lets face it is not a sports car) is not a lot. The tubby little diesel hatch shifts a lot of weight forward and for the potential cost of any rear upgrade it's just not worth it for your average joe to fit even upgraded pads. Fitting bigger brakes on the back may make overall improvements but

...my rears have never shown any signs of corrosion and after a few applications are as shiny as the fronts...

Most people end up replacing them the discs due to corrosion not wear. Quite a few even fail MOT's as a result. It's all been discussed previously on here in depth, and yes the contact area will be shiny..... it's the rest of the disc that rots like a turnip. They never get hot enough to dry them out like the fronts. Glad you have had a good experiance with your set up though.

in my 30+yrs of car ownership ive rebuilt/upgraded everything from cortinas/cosworths/amg mercs

That's nice. Whats it got to do with a Fabia?

and lately the fabia...ive experimented with everything over the yrs and if anyone thinks the rear brakes serve little purpose try clamping the hoses on the front and only use the rear and vice versa and tell me the rears make little difference

Ahh I see. Thats not what was said though was it... I have played with it all before too and I know what it's like to drive cars with no rear brakes, they make a huge difference to a point but the rear brakes on the Fabia by their very nature will do proportianally very little compared to the fronts. In short it's a poor value ugrade compared to a lot of other upgrades, not saying it's a waste of time but for the vast majority of people who cannot source cheap parts and do the work themselves the money would probably be spent on buying a fast car.

"That's nice. Whats it got to do with a Fabia?"

correct nothing! mearly stated ive upgraded braking systems on many vehicles and know it makes a diff..

upgrading fabia rears isnt that expensive..256 discs are not that dearer and there are thousands of mk4 golfs in breakers yards and buying the calipers isnt expensive either..

granted on standard cars prob nt worth hassle but tis when they been upped in power.

Not fussed about stopping, as from everything iv read they make very little difference, however, for looks it`d be worth it. Someone at my local vag club has 312`s on the rear of his golf looks wicked

matt

really? never heard of that before...be interesting to know wot calipers were used..

mines got drums booooo and a lighter petrol engine i wish i could afford the afore mentioned full rear beam with brakes on with g88 disc and strada pads if only to make it easier to change the pads/disks when they need servicing.

As long as i have 4 pot brembos up front I am not bothered at all now about the backs.

256mm setup from Golf GTI, Octavia vRS and Audi TT as stated...

and mercedes s600 :yes:

be loads of s600's in scrapyards... :wonder:

"Good post and quite correct. The Fabia is well known for rear disc corrosion with the low rate of use being partly responsible for it."

i upgraded the rears to 256 vented and can say the braking is a lot better allround..i dont understand the "low rate of use" statement tbh...are you saying the front pads grab the discs but the rears dont?...my rears have never shown any signs of corrosion and after a few applications are as shiny as the fronts...in my 30+yrs of car ownership ive rebuilt/upgraded everything from cortinas/cosworths/amg mercs and lately the fabia...ive experimented with everything over the yrs and if anyone thinks the rear brakes serve little purpose try clamping the hoses on the front and only use the rear and vice versa and tell me the rears make little difference.

and i use bold as default font is rather plain...nothing else :p

standart car setup has brake balance set to 80/20% (front/back). If you do rally on FWD/RWD, you can set different brake balance to emulate handbrake and so on. Hence, rear brakes have litlle effect on stock tuned cars. You can fit BREMBO brake kit, but what is that extra brake force good for if ABS will correct all due the slipping tyres. Unless, you have good suspension, anti-lift kit, shifted weight distribution (driver/co-driver shifted far to the back to keep car balanced, roll cage, fuel cell moved) then there will be increased brake power on rear wheels until ABS interfere in case of standart road cars. I assume that racing car won't have ABS/EPS and other rubbish electronic ;-). Otherwise, there is no point of upgrade to rear brakes. It is same distorted belief like "high performance" filters. These fractional power gains may be seen only on sensitive electronic devices. Haven't seen many guys who can sense what his car does under his a*s. I have been racing for 3 years MTB Downhill. Same weird beliefs exist in this sport. So many discussions about suspension, HUUUGE brakes. But, if you ask guy why the hell has he got that and this. he doesn't even know what his bike does under heavy load during riding. Wrong suspension setup and so on. So how guy like that can even notice any difference? Most people don't posses this racing skills so It is usually just mental power gains and profit gains for comapanies making these "high performance" components.

Of course if you carry fully loaded car all the time and have trailer behind the car, then rear brakes make sense ;-)

Edited 24 May, 201016 yr by sniper29a

replacing my rears with new 256 vented discs..carriers/calipers/pads cost me bout £130 quid...hardly bank busting and looks better n performs better... :yes:

replacing my rears with new 256 vented discs..carriers/calipers/pads cost me bout £130 quid...hardly bank busting and looks better n performs better... :yes:

Could you explain me how you sense difference, please?

I assume you must be an expert racing driver. Thus, you are able to get maximum from a brake system. You must be able to use semi-lock and sense bit-point which can't be done with ABS.

Otherwise, I am not sure how you can sense any difference with public cars ;-) I tell you what happen. You slam the brakes front brake pressure increases, rear brake pressure shortly after. front of the car lean forwards and rear of the car lifts up. front brakes do 80% of the hard work. rear wheels start to slip. not even utilise max. brake power and tyre adhesion. ABS pump reduces pressure in rear brakes. Front brakes still do 80% of the hard work until wheels start to slip and ABS pump again interfere ;-)

I would say that average car enthusiastic may spot difference of suspension change and remap. otherwise, it is more likely mental upgrades ;-) I grew up from these mental upgrades long time ago, they cost money only.