Anyone run rear drum only

[jd750ace]

I lost a good friend last summer to the little 'ol lady that "never seen" Kenny Bob coming down the road 45 MPH with a 60 watt headlight on bright. Kenny was an accomplished rider and done everything he could. The police report says his hard front braking was evident because there was rubber transferred to the pavement from the front tire, but it was not enough. Kenny was a life-long rider with hundreds of thousands of miles under his belt. He was 35 years old and had 4 kids. The little old lady, 84 years old, had a license that had expired 15 years prior to the accident. It was a mostly stock Suzuki 800 Marauder with serviceable, properly inflated tires.

 

[mrriggs]

Since when is hitting the brakes the only option? Evasive maneuvers are almost always your best bet. Easy to do on my stripped down bike since it'll fit through small gaps and change direction quickly (being nearly 100 pounds lighter than stock).

There may very well be a day when the lanes, shoulders, and gaps between the cars are all completely blocked and I am unable to avoid a collision. That is a risk I'm willing to take.

I don't see why so many riders feel that it is foolish to take a chance on such a highly unlikely scenario. You are far more likely to get rear ended while stopped at an intersection, or driven over because the car next to you decided to change lanes without looking. These are relatively minor incidents when you are in a car, but far more severe on a bike.

Since we are having this discussion on a motorcycle forum I think it is safe to assume that you are willing to take a chance in these situations. So do you, a person willing to give up the security of a two-ton cage, REALLY find it THAT hard to believe that someone would get rid of one measly front brake?

 

[jd750ace]

Nobody says it's the only option, but when a car pulls out in front of you, where do you evade? In front of them, or behind them? Anybody notice what the average ass does when they realized they just pulled out in front of you? They FUCKING STOP! Right in the way. The woman that killed Kenny was crossing to turn left on divided streets with curbs on both sides, so he had no choice but to brake hard.

And yes, I do find it hard to believe that anyone would remove the front brakes from a motorcycle for looks. It happens to be illegal.

Have a read on this. http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.aspx?reg=571.122

2 systems required.

 

[mrriggs]

Did I miss something? You said he had a front brake.

Like I said before, if faced with that exact situation then I will gladly meet my maker.

I can't speak for everyone but, for me, the decision to run without a front brake was not based on looks. It goes much deeper than that.

 

[jd750ace]

He had a properly equipped bike. I was pointing out that even with the proper equipment, things can get beyond your control. With less equipment,it just has the potential for lots more of those situations.

And I don't understand how you come to the conclusion that we speak of a highly unlikely scenario? How long have you been riding? Go to the AMA web site and study some of the numbers. FACT: Failure to yield right of way to a motorcycle by a left turning vehicle is the most common cause of motorcycle accidents involving an outside variable. That meaning, you didn't just fail to operate your bike in a proficient manner.

You say your reasoning goes deeper than looks. How? Death wish maybe? You have no effective argument for your posiiton here partner. You want it that way, and you don't give a shit if it is illegal (did you read the MVSS above?) or dangerous. That's deep.

I have been riding nearly every day for the past 14 years, (approaching 300,000 miles) and have never once thought, "wouldn't it be great to have a bike that I have to ride slower than traffic to keep from getting killed on it?"

One more thing. If your van will not out-brake your rear only motorcycle, it IS a death trap.

 

[1974jh5]

Many years of off road racing taught me to depend a LOT on the front brake. It's like this: the only way you can go really fast is if you can scrub that speed quickly when the need arises and the rear brake by itself just don't cut it. The front anchor is the best friend you can have sometimes.

To me, the argument I read here is aesthetics (clean front end with no brake) vs safety/functionality (run a front brake because the bike will stop better). Put me firmly in the 'I don't give a shit how pretty it is, it better work right' camp. When Granny pulls her blind self out in front of me, I need all the 'stacked in my favor' options I can get. A functioning front brake is one of those options. It's also why I wear a helmet.

Laugh and point at my brain bucket all you want or make snide cracks about how 'heavy' or 'cluttered' my bike looks with that goofy dinner plate thing stuck to the side of the wheel. As long as I am still alive to hear it I don't care.

 

[gggGary]

The last time no front brakes was popular was in the 60's, Oddly heroin was last popular about that same time frame. The reasoning for both is a bit of a "stick it in your eye society" attitude. The high price to be paid shows up rather late for many.
There are some here who's minds are made up, it's your life, your decision. It's memorial day, we are honoring the many who have suffered so you have the rights to make those choices. For any possible fence sitters at least you know many of your fellow bikers want you to live.

 

[Phail]

You can be killed standing in your driveway, walking down the street, walking next to your pool, crawling in your attic, standing in your office building, and a million other ways.

When it's your time to go, it's your time to go. A front brake isn't going to save you.
That being said, yes, it's safer with a front brake, but you are never really safe.

(I've know people that have died doing the above)

 

[jd750ace]

I agree, there's a million ways to die, but don't most of us try to stave off every one of them?

 

[mrriggs]

The reasoning for both is a bit of a "stick it in your eye society" attitude.

Getting warmer...

Humans, as far as I know, are the only species that know that they are going to die. Most people surround themselves with STUFF and isolate themselves from life in a futile attempt to avoid the inevitable. For me, riding a motorcycle is a way to step out of that trap and truly experience and enjoy life while I have it.

When I originally built my bike, it had a dual disk setup on the front. My previous bikes were all sport bikes and I "knew" that front brakes were needed for safety and performance. I finished the bike just days before a planned road trip across the state. The stock brake lines weren't long enough for the extended front end and the local hydraulic shop was out of stainless line. I figured that since the brakes would not be functional before the trip that I would just take them off. I was scared to ride it without the brakes because I had heard all the horror stories and possessed enough "common sense" to know how dangerous it was. But after a thousand miles or so it occurred to me that the front brakes weren't needed, I had only put them on out of fear. The front brake was just more STUFF keeping me from experiencing contentment.

I realize that my life philosophy differs from most. I'm not trying to tell anyone that they are wrong and that they should do things my way. It is up to each individual to decide how they live. I don't care if you run a front brake or not.

All this is really irrelevant to the original question which was asking if a single drum can stop as well as a single disk. The answer to that is YES. The limiting factor in both cases is rear tire traction. Either brake will provide enough power to slide the wheel. He never asked if he should put a brake on the front.

 

[Reid]

Thank You. I didnt mean to start a fire storm of responses but it is quite interesting reading the arguments from both sides. I am going to run only a rear brake until I dont feel comfortable with it any longer, sounds like some of you are already there. If safety was my main concern I wouldnt have a bike I would be in the latest IIHS top safety pick car.

 

[jd750ace]

I hope you are either a sole survivor or independently wealthy. If not, you really cannot afford to think like that.

 

[ReycleBill]

I first read this thread a few days ago. So I decided to test front vs rear braking. Shoes and pads are not new but are in very good condition. No scientific measurements here just a few panic stops from about 55mph for comparison sake.

Rear drum only equals about 3 times the distance as using both front and rear.
Front brake only is about 1/2 the distance as rear only.

Using front only is easy-- just grab it and stop. The front end dives but there are no stoppies on these old bikes with stock brakes. If I were to do a stoppie the heart attack would kill me before I hit the pavement.

Using rear only gets really tricky when the wheel starts to lock.

Like I said, visual estimates only but enough to convince me I'll be keeping both front and rear brakes.

Here's my advice: Get your bike on the road with front and rear brakes and ride enough to get used to using both. Then unhook your front brake and ride some more. I think we all know you'll hook the front brake back up.

 

[ReycleBill]

Since when is hitting the brakes the only option? Evasive maneuvers are almost always your best bet. Easy to do on my stripped down bike since it'll fit through small gaps and change direction quickly (being nearly 100 pounds lighter than stock).

There may very well be a day when the lanes, shoulders, and gaps between the cars are all completely blocked and I am unable to avoid a collision. That is a risk I'm willing to take.

I don't see why so many riders feel that it is foolish to take a chance on such a highly unlikely scenario. You are far more likely to get rear ended while stopped at an intersection, or driven over because the car next to you decided to change lanes without looking. These are relatively minor incidents when you are in a car, but far more severe on a bike.

Since we are having this discussion on a motorcycle forum I think it is safe to assume that you are willing to take a chance in these situations. So do you, a person willing to give up the security of a two-ton cage, REALLY find it THAT hard to believe that someone would get rid of one measly front brake?

Dude, the most evasive maneuver you can hope to do is to stop. Running off the road or crossing into another lane are the last resorts-- always. And I have 3 million miles in heavy trucks and almost a million miles in cars and motorcycles and the safety awards, driver certifications, Smith System, Blow out school, rollover school, skid school, jacknife school, National Traffic Safety Administration and experience as a North Carolina Class A drivers license examiner to prove it.

And yes, I once ran a spool wheel... But I got over it very quickly.

 

[jd750ace]

Bill, I don't have all that, but I've got lots of selfish and stupid behavior in my past, and with age, I have come to understand that the unintended consequence is the highest cost of both. It hits you on the blind side, and hopefully gets your attention.

I'll just bet the D.O.T. won't just let you peel shit off your truck just because you are a free spirit, right? Might be a bit irresponsible? Illegal? Indefensible?

Ride Safe, all of you!

Ride Safe.

 

[1974jh5]

All this is really irrelevant to the original question which was asking if a single drum can stop as well as a single disk. The answer to that is YES. The limiting factor in both cases is rear tire traction. Either brake will provide enough power to slide the wheel. He never asked if he should put a brake on the front.

Bull. Do not confuse a skidding tire with good braking. BTDT more times than I care to count.

A skidding tire does NOT stop you; that is why Bosch etc have spent billions on developing ABS systems. The highest rate of deceleration comes JUST BEFORE the tire skids.

Weight transfer on deceleration or braking places a higher percentage of the load on the front wheel. It's why sport bikes have double disc on the front and a single on the rear. It's why you will find cars with big disc brakes on the front and drums the size of a salad bowl on the back. It's why my race car has an adjustable proportioning valve, so I can tune the rear brake 'bite' to suit changing track conditions.

For this reason you WILL skid the rear wheel faster than you will the front. I know that for a fact; it's how you place a dirt bike properly into a turn. Lean into the turn, then hit the rear brake, the back of the bike comes around till the bike is pointing the way you want to go, grab a handful and haul ass.

But the car/bike/whatever will NOT stop quicker just because one or the other will skid.

If you don't want to run a front brake, be my guest. Have at it. Just don't use fake physics to try to justify it.

 

[Phail]

I'm going to put a front brake on at some point. The only time I've used a front brake is when I did my bike school. So I don't really know what it's like to have one.

 

[ReycleBill]

Bill, I don't have all that, but I've got lots of selfish and stupid behavior in my past, and with age, I have come to understand that the unintended consequence is the highest cost of both. It hits you on the blind side, and hopefully gets your attention.

I'll just bet the D.O.T. won't just let you peel shit off your truck just because you are a free spirit, right? Might be a bit irresponsible? Illegal? Indefensible?

Ride Safe, all of you!

Ride Safe.

When I first started driving trucks there were many heavy trucks without any front brakes from the factory. Others removed their front brakes or plugged the lines. Still others had a factory installed front brake limiter that worked via a toggle switch on the dash. Sometime along about 1980 the Feds banned such things and even forced owners of trucks that had come from the factory without front brakes to install said brakes or park their rigs. A lot of drivers were unhappy then but I suspect most of them are glad it came about.

 

[ReycleBill]

I'm going to put a front brake on at some point. The only time I've used a front brake is when I did my bike school. So I don't really know what it's like to have one.

Learn to use it and you'll learn to love it. Seriously, I used to be scared of front brakes but not any more.

 

[gggGary]

There is a good bit of distinction between a good brake and one that will skid the tire.
1974 the skid was not their ideal they are just saying either disk or drum HAS ENOUGH STOPPING POWER TO go beyond the tire's limit of adhesion. Probably true. I have to say probably because once we are talking about one brake only bikes we have NO IDEA what the linkage is like whether or not bike has rear suspension, how much air they run in the tire, the tire size, or a bunch of other variables.
Here's the thing, like 1974 says, best braking power is just found below the tire starting to skid. So you need a brake that you can MODULATE to maintain that "just below the skid" force. In my humble opinion that is a job for a disk and hydraulics between the pedal and the pads. Long runs of thin rod through multiple bell cranks and fork joints is not going to get you the feel you need to reliably keep the tire near the best braking force. Odds are in an emergency you are going to lock the rear tire, it's going to start sliding and by the time you release it, regain control and reapply serious braking force you will have hit what ever it is you were braking to avoid. I won't go to the problems of not having suspension on a wheel acting under high braking forces. Car went hydraulic brakes in what the 30s?

Was swapping bikes into the shop tonight and said forget this I'm going riding. I fired up the heritage special and went for an evening cruise, sunset, great warm evening. Nice winding hilly country roads out near the river. Yup, you guessed it. I had to ramp on the brakes three times in twenty miles. Total of 7 deer and a bunny rabbit avoided. At least one of those would have been ugly with only a rear brake.