200mm Rotor Users

Curious Yellow

I'm trying to fit some 200mm discs on my bike at the moment and I'm looking for some opinions.

I am going up from 160mm (admittedly on faulty brakes) so I know I should definitely see a difference in stopping power. However, is there anything you like/don't like about them?

S-M

You get used to the extra power after a while, i found i had to pump up my front shock a little more as the front was diving more.

Mine seam more noisy, but i did fit sintered pads at the same time.

Dave-B

I found that there was a lot less moderation in the brakes due to the rotor upgrade.

tom_howard

I run 203 on the front of my orange, and 160 at the rear, the weight difference in the rotors is scarcely believable, the front weighs (in a 'not actually weighed them just held them both at the same time' test) around double the rear, both same rotors, aside from the size. Something to bear in mind, esp as youre adding to wheel weight.

cooldad

Less modulation, and in an extreme case you could damage your forks depending on whether they are designed for big rotors.
Surely if your brakes are faulty you are just dealing with symptoms, not cause?

Anonymous

cooldad wrote:

Surely if your brakes are faulty you are just dealing with symptoms, not cause?

Very much so.
I run 203mm rotors on the front of my bikes, and although I love having "land-anchor"esque brakes, other people who've ridden them have expressed concern about using them.
Some people just do not get on with huge brake discs - Nicklouse here for example prefers the greater modulation of a smaller disc.

97th choice

Horses for courses, what bike and what lind of riding?

The Northern Monkey

I have 160 on the HT and 203 on the FS, both with Avid Elixir R Brakes and standard pads.

You get a lot more feel with the 160, you use some modulation with the 203.
The 203 has bags more power available though!

Curious Yellow

Cheers for the responses, and thanks for the concern about my brakes!

I'm replacing the previous brakes completely. They are leaking DOT fluid and I'm not sure I've got the patience to repair them right now. Shame, because they were great brakes.

I'm forced to go 200mm because those were the only option left for purchase on the brakes I wanted. I'm hoping to go back to 160mm or 180mm front, 160mm rear at some point.

Definitely think they're overkill for the kind of riding I'll be doing right away, but I'll have to live with them for the time being.

Raymondavalon

+1 for big (203mm) rotors up front. Two fingered braking on demand
I think once you get used to a bigger rotor you do prefer it, it was certainly the case with me, hence both of my bikes with discs have 203/185 rotors.

cooldad

I have 160 both ends and only ever use one finger. I probably don't go very fast though, being a coward and having an aversion to pain.

weescott

With 200mm discs they take a while to warm up and get optimal braking power/modulation. Once they do, then modulation is just as good as with smaller rotors, but with bags more power and less fade.

nicklouse

in my opinion they are not needed on anything other than gravity based bikes. DH/FR etc.

180(5) on the front and 160(5) on the rear will do 99% of the population (XC racers 160/140)

Anonymous

You know what burns more than a hot brake disc?
The "stupid" that people spout about brakes :roll:

The Northern Monkey

Raymondavalon
2 finger braking?!

Sod that wit 203mm disks! 1 finger only, and that on the DH!

thel33ter

I have a 203mm on the front, partly cause my fork only takes a 203mm rotor, but also cause my current brakes have no power whatsoever. I brake with two fingers, more out of habit than necessity.

nicklouse

thel33ter wrote:

I have a 203mm on the front, partly cause my fork only takes a 203mm rotor,

what fork is that?

supersonic

I'm thinking of dropping my rear rotor to 140mm to add a bit more lever travel and feel.

cooldad

Redundant post

thel33ter

nicklouse wrote:

thel33ter wrote:

I have a 203mm on the front, partly cause my fork only takes a 203mm rotor,

what fork is that?

Magura Wotan, it has a 203mm post mount built in.

Anonymous

cooldad wrote:

Redundant post

This space intentionally left blank.

cooldad

weescott

S-M

nicklouse wrote:

in my opinion they are not needed on anything other than gravity based bikes. DH/FR etc.

180(5) on the front and 160(5) on the rear will do 99% of the population (XC racers 160/140)

Hmm my XC bike came with Elixer R 160 front and rear as standard, and i cooked them and suffered from brake fade at two different trail centres.

I have a front disc somewhere that has started to turn purple and the "spokes" have went brown :oops:

The first time this happened was on the black route at Hamsterly Forrest, i only just managed to get around the corner, but the brake leaver was nearly touching the bars, anyway the second time with my new shiny 203`s i was pushing a lot harder, infact it was a LOT harder, and i think they might have scrubbed a decent amount of speed off before the rear locked, the front started to lock, and i left the trail @ 30mph+ on my way to dislocating a shoulder

I might go a little slower on that section next time.

Edit: I should have added that power needed is different for every rider, if your a heavy chap, its going to take more force to slow you down, fatties need bigger brakes = fact!

nicklouse

to that I can not comment as I do not now the "black" route at Hamsterly. or have regular use of ELIXIR brakes.

but at (well Fat censored size) I can manage most DH trails in the Swedish "Alps" on an HT with 180/160 and 160/160 on the FS Xc. and even on a DH race bike 180/160 but i supose it depends on how the brakes are used. Also I had issues on the same trails with Codes at 203/203 one year buit did not have any issues with formula the ones the following years.
maybe I just dont brake quite as much.

yes I have draw a temper colour on my brakes as well but they were also censored brakes as well.

well at 203 I could not go bigger really. but Yes if you are drawing a temper colour on the brakes and cooking them you will need a bigger disc for your braking or you may cook the brakes.

from what i have seen of the trail centers in the Uk I would be very happy with 180/160 or 160/160 and at plus 100kg.

S-M

I was 133kg at christmas

Currently around 112kg and it was still dropping until i fell off and had some time out

Anonymous

nicklouse wrote:

from what i have seen of the trail centers in the Uk I would be very happy with 180/160 or 160/160 and at plus 100kg.

Ditto.
I like my 203mm front disc, and although I have had overheating problems with brakes in the past, on various disc sizes, it has never happened at a trail centre. The descents just aren't steep and long enough.

mrfmilo

Really depends on the brake and riding, and person. For example I currently run Juicys with 203/185 riding DH, the power is just about the minimum i'd have. I wouldnt think about running any smaller rotors. Say I had Saints, i'd run smaller rotors.

Anonymous

I had a juicy up front, with a 203mm rotor, and found the power to be exceptionally poor, verging on the dangerous on some rides. And the overheating issues just compounded it.
Since replaced the front with an XT M785, but kept the same rotor, and i have an excess of braking power available, and haveb't run into any heating issues yet.

mrfmilo

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

I had a juicy up front, with a 203mm rotor, and found the power to be exceptionally poor, verging on the dangerous on some rides. And the overheating issues just compounded it.
Since replaced the front with an XT M785, but kept the same rotor, and i have an excess of braking power available, and haveb't run into any heating issues yet.

Secret to Juicys is a good bleed and set up But yeah they don't have much power do they.

Anonymous

Bleeding doesn't prevent boiling, or prevent them from being utter shite.