BMW R1200R R1150R/T F800 K1200R R1100R/T R1250R RnineT Message Board

I finally got around to changing my front brake pads. Getting the pads out could hardly have been easier. When I got the pad out I was surprised to see that there was still a lot of pad and wear marker cut ( or whatever you call it ) left. I held it up to the new EBC pads and the old pads were thicker than the new ones.
The outside right pad was .337
inside right .287
outside left .337
inside left .330

I don't know how to measure it or what the measurement is supposed to be but front to back counting metal and pad it measured what I listed. It has been a while since I used my micrometer but I think I still know how.
I make a conscious effort not to use my brakes when motorvating through the twisties. Maybe this is what is keeping my brakes in shape.
I have 24XXX on the bike.
Maybe this is normal for front brake wear?

Mark

I bought all my 24K tune-up stuff from Beemerboneyard. I also ordered replacement brake pads; cannot remember the name right now, but they are of French manufacture. At 24K, the rear pads were toast, but the fronts still have about 3/32" deep wear grooves @ 27K. Seems weird to me, as I trust the integrated brakes system to apply the rear brake and I thought the front brakes were responsible for 70% of braking performance. Seems like my pads should have worn in reverse of how they did.

... burp ...



Let the cantankerous grumbling begin...

Did you check the rears?

I think that the linked brakes make for longer lasting front pads, but rears that wear out fast.

It's been my experience - at 34,000 miles, my fronts look about half-worn. I'm on my 3rd set of rear pads. Normal I think.. (and I only use the rear pedal to hold the bike when stopped or once in a while at parking lot speeds for trail-braking.)

For what its worth I rarely use my front brakes.

I think it would stand to reason that the light weight of the bike, coupled with the fact you don't have the weight of a fairing on the front end would make the pads last much longer. I think that also explains why the front tire has a habit of leaving the ground. But seriously, this bike is a full 200 lbs, or 30% lighter than my old 91 KRS and my 98 RT and 300 lbs lighter than my Yamaha cruiser ! And to Dad2g5, you really should be using that front brake...it's should be 70 % of your stopping power, and you never know when you are going to need all that you have. ANd by hardy ever using it , it won't be an instictive move when the time comes.

Dad2g5 wrote:For what its worth I rarely use my front brakes.

That's a bad idea with modern brakes. Unlike brakes of yore (I had them - made by Girling..) these won't "throw you over the bars" if you use them.

The linked brakes on an R12R are a thing of wonder to me - I almost never use the rear brake because the linked brakes are using it for me - much better than I ever could. As was pointed out - a large proportion of your braking power is the front brake (especially as weight is transferred to it under braking) - not using it is shortchanging yourself on the pretty amazing braking ability of these bikes.

Dad2g5 wrote:For what its worth I rarely use my front brakes.

I seem to recall from MSF class that 70 percent of braking happens on the front pads, linked brakes or not. I press the rear brake only to hold position on an incline and for slow-speed turning. I let the bike do the rest via the linked front-brake lever.

i guess my riding style is weird. i spend most my time 100+MPH and engine braking is great, front brake is only used on hot entries into turns or slowing down for cages in the way. i am more comfortable down shifting keeping my left hand busy instead of both hands.

Dad2g5 wrote:i guess my riding style is weird. i spend most my time 100+MPH and engine braking is great, front brake is only used on hot entries into turns or slowing down for cages in the way. i am more comfortable down shifting keeping my left hand busy instead of both hands.

Do yourself a favor. Get it up to 100 and stop with just the back brake. Measure the distance. Now do the same with just the front and measure that.

Take the difference between the two very seriously. It's the difference between hitting something VERY hard and missing it all together.

Last thing i want to do is argue but read what i wrote then think about what you wrote

I think you're going to have a tough time selling your position, Dad2g5. If you ever need to stop RIGHT EFFING NOW, your predilection for engine braking (which I, and most of us do - a lot) as a primary means of slowing (I'm pretty much always at LEAST covering the brake lever) may, in a moment of panic, lead you to hesitate for a split second. Those split seconds are pretty important when you're headed for disaster.

Not trying to tell you what to do, 'ride your own ride' and all that, but in my humble opinion you're asking for it. Read any documentation available, I think you'll find they pretty much all come to the same conclusion: your front brakes are the only ones that count when they HAVE to count.

Naked Rider's suggestion is a good one, but he didn't say "do a PANIC stop" from 100. Try it, front then rear. You'll be surprised, I think.

Anyway, don't take this as personal, except that we ride the same bike, so I want to see you around here for awhile

Peter

Dad2g5 wrote:Last thing i want to do is argue but read what i wrote then think about what you wrote

I understand what you are saying.

thanks chitown. Big fan of your pics and rides by the way.

Dad2g5 wrote:Last thing i want to do is argue but read what i wrote then think about what you wrote

I strongly agree, I don't want to argue either. It's just I don't agree with using the rear as the only brake except at parking lot speeds.

Dad2g5 wrote:For what its worth I rarely use my front brakes.

OK.
But please consider: Muscle memory.

fine i will use my front brake. happy guys?

You guys ALL missed what he said in the 2nd post and focused on his first post, while trying to be the ever so helpful and predictably annoying SAFETY PATROL.....

He was even polite and posted to READ what he was saying in his post 3....

I've spent a LOT of time and many miles at 100+MPH on the 12R, just like Dad clearly stated he does.
I also don't see the need to use the front brake often EXCEPT WHEN COMING INTO A CORNER HOT, because at those speeds and RPM's, engine braking is more than enough to drop your speed rather quickly.
Judging from the many, many miles people say they get out of their tires, I doubt many of you would understand.
NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT EMERGENCY BRAKING, SAFETY PATROL.

Jeeze, he didn't say he only used the rear brake on his daily, boring commute....

He said he HAULS ASS and actually rides the bike as it should be as often as possible- around three digit speeds, downshifting, using the engine, etc.

It's OK Dad, they mean well, but I think few understand how fun it is to use engine braking around 100 consistently... and "coming into a corner hot" probably means turning around in a parking lot that happens to be in warm temps while getting ice cream on their weekly sunday club ride....

Ride on Dad.




Back to the OP...

If the front brakes account for 70% of the braking, and there's 2 pairs of pads up there, doesn't that make each PAIR of pads on the bike responsible for around 30% of braking?
So, if that's the case, doesn't the rear pad wear out faster because it's made of a softer compound than the front pads? I always thought so...

Dad2g5 is just pullin' our legs...he does use the front brake, and here's proof

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dl4AGBx12zw

But running 100 mph in that neighborhood could be interesting