The brakes on the Yeti are good but not brilliant, so why are they only good?

are there better pads or calipers in the Superb range.

 

If you try the brakes on the 170 Yeti, you will find that they are brilliant, not good.

I agree I have the Octavia VRS/170 discs and the appropriate mountings for what are the same calipers as the 140/1.8tsi. tThe larger discs and carriers  are brilliant although the standards are good enough.

The brakes on the Yeti are good but not brilliant, so why are they only good?

are there better pads or calipers in the Superb range.

Is yours the 110 by any chance?

The 140 brakes are reasonably easily upgradeable to 170 brakes (new front disks and calliper brackets), but upgrading the 110 brakes is a somewhat different matter

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

Now I'm on the PC rather than tapatalk, I can see that yes, you've got the 110.

 

When I bought my 2WD Yeti 110 I was less than impressed by the brakes, I mentioned it on here and found I was very much in the minority. I investigated the upgrade to the brakes on the 140 or 170 and found it was prohibitively expensive and my insurance company wouldn't cover the "modified" vehicle. So I traded the 2WD for a 4WD 170.

 

As per...

 

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/308049-might-be-about-to-be-less-than-honest-with-the-missus/

 

You may find this useful

 

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/149047-yeti-brake-disc-calliper-general-technical-guide/

apparently, there is a vcds tweak that will 'tighten' 'em up - it was covered a long time ago on here, maybe when gyp was considering options

Mine's the latest 110PS and have to say that I haven't found the brakes lacking so far. I haven't driven the equivalent earlier model so don't know if they have been improved.

 

And whilst I fully understand high performance cars requiring better brakes I've never really understood why in a car like the Yeti different braking performance across the model range is provided by the manufacturer.

 

Yes, the 170 for example, accelerates more quickly than the 110, but I doubt that there will be much difference in the top speed that both will be driven out, around 80 mph I guess, and both can/will be used for towing, so the braking requirements will be pretty similar?  

 

I realise of course that most who regularly tow a caravan or heavy trailer will choose 4x4 and the more powerful engine so I guess that is the rationale behind it and the justification for the manufacturer saving a few pennies on the less powerful models?

Edited 16 April, 201610 yr by VAGCF

Have you just answered your own question...   ?

  I realised I was going that way but still thought I'd offer it for discussion!

I have a 110 2.0L diesel and am happy with the brakes. The brakes are designed to stop the car, and bar a few kg [OK somes 10's of kg] the weight of a 110, 140 and 170 diesel  are not really all that different. ie the kinetic energy they are dealing with is the same. You only need bigger brakes and increased stopping power if you are driving faster. If you are having problems braking you are driving to fast. It's simple physics. Slow down or learn to read the road.

 

Colin

Edited 16 April, 201610 yr by eribaMotters

.....learn to read the road....

Sometimes it's what you read  :peek: that encourages enthusiastic anchor work

Go and buy the larger disks, callipers and pads so the 110 Yeti has the same brakes as the 170 Yeti.  I had a 170 Yeti and the brakes were really good, if you are concerned about your Yeti's brakes upgrade, you will not be disappointed.

Go and buy the larger disks, callipers and pads so the 110 Yeti has the same brakes as the 170 Yeti.  I had a 170 Yeti and the brakes were really good, if you are concerned about your Yeti's brakes upgrade, you will not be disappointed.

 

See post #5.

It isn't that easy!

Out of interest, what size brakes are on the 1.4 TSI 150bhp? The brochure isn't helpful on the subject. I have to agree, the brakes on my current facelift 2wd 110 TDI Euro v are 'ok' rather than good as others have said. An improvement on my inbound 1.4 TSI would be nice though.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited 17 April, 201610 yr by Falmouthboy

I have a 110 2.0L diesel and am happy with the brakes. The brakes are designed to stop the car, and bar a few kg [OK somes 10's of kg] the weight of a 110, 140 and 170 diesel  are not really all that different. ie the kinetic energy they are dealing with is the same. You only need bigger brakes and increased stopping power if you are driving faster. If you are having problems braking you are driving to fast. It's simple physics. Slow down or learn to read the road.

 

Colin

 

Whilst this is of course completely correct and I can't fault your logic, for me (and I suspect the OP) the brakes on the 110 didn't quite feel in balance with the rest of the car. On the 170 they do, and following your logic that the 110, 140 and 170 all have similar kinetic energy, would it not make sense to fit the 170 brakes to all of them rather than requiring the owners of the lower powered cars to drive more slowly?

 

I don't regret changing to the 170 at all, but I'd have been quite happy to stick with the 110 if the brakes had been better.

Edited 17 April, 201610 yr by Gyp

For me, I guess a part of it is that our other car is a BMW M135i with front discs the size of dustbin lids so lots of stopping power. Therefore the pedal pressure needed to slow the Yeti, particularly at motorway speeds is that much greater than the BMW and the emergency stopping distance at 70 mph is considerably greater so less reassuring.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Another example of deskilling is the emergency braking response is to not attempt cadence braking but to hammer them and let the electronics do the rest.

For me, I guess a part of it is that our other car is a BMW M135i with front discs the size of dustbin lids so lots of stopping power. Therefore the pedal pressure needed to slow the Yeti, particularly at motorway speeds is that much greater than the BMW and the emergency stopping distance at 70 mph is considerably greater so less reassuring.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

See post #6

Ok mine is the 2.0 4x4 DSG diesel but have to say I find the brakes are fine... In fact they are far better than the equivalent Tiguan I had before. The Tig had the dreaded electronic handbrake and I'm not sure if it was the electronics but the brakes did worry me.

See post #6

 

I am sure it has been reported that this "trick" no longer works on the more recent models.

Whilst this is of course completely correct and I can't fault your logic, for me (and I suspect the OP) the brakes on the 110 didn't quite feel in balance with the rest of the car. On the 170 they do, and following your logic that the 110, 140 and 170 all have similar kinetic energy, would it not make sense to fit the 170 brakes to all of them rather than requiring the owners of the lower powered cars to drive more slowly?

 

I don't regret changing to the 170 at all, but I'd have been quite happy to stick with the 110 if the brakes had been better.

My point exactly.