160mm vs 203mm

lesz42

hey all!


i have a Scott Aspect 45, just wondering, on the rear, if i went from 160mm rotors to 203mm, using the correct adaptor, apart from the rotor and adaptor, there is nothing else needed?


and the upgrade, if possible, would it be worth it? better stopping "power"?


the bike has Shimano BR-M485's


regards

Les

nicklouse

No it would mean that you would just lock your wheel easier.

what is the actual problem?
what are the disc sizes now?

Front for braking and rear for steering.

lesz42

no problems! just wondering! i just was thinking heat dissipation, would be better!

thanks for the reply!

dhxcme

you wouldn't notice that much in the way of diserpation unless you are really cooking your brakes. So you are either going for miles down steep hills or braking too much.

nicklouse

Well i am not even sure that it would fit on the frame.

dhxcme

yep what frame would help.

nicklouse

dhxcme wrote:

yep what frame would help.

he has said! and i feel there is a mount for a kick stand that would get in the way of any bigger discs.

dhxcme

right understand now.

xtreem

If I were you, I'll put the 203mm rotor on the front.
Then you'll get a better stopping power. If you can lock the rear wheel
with the 160mm rotor then I don't think it's worthed putting the 203 at the rear.

trail jacker

what kind of riding do you do? if its xc/am then 180 up front would be easily enough

streako

I think it depends on your size and weight too.

If you are a big lad of 16 stone or so, then a 203 would be beneficial, but an average size guy would be fine with the usual 180 front,160 rear.

BlackSpur

Check if your fork can support a larger rotor.

Prowlus

XCRs only support a max of 185 . Any bigger may damage both the fork and the brake