Ducati.ms - The Ultimate Ducati Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I had some on order years ago, got tired of waiting so I changed my order to the regular breaktechs, now the cfc's are out anyone tried them? Do they work as advertised?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
If CFC is carbon fiber, if your not on a full blown race only bike, they are useless. If You ment to say CMC, They just came out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
I've got one on my monster. Looks cool and weighs 2.0lbs so I dropped alot of weight. Expensive.
I plan someday to just run the one rotor to see how it works.

Another option for about half the price is MMC rotor that Motowheels sells. Weighs 2.1 lbs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,910 Posts
I've tried both rotors--but the best bang for the buck is still with the lightest wheels you can afford since the diameter is much larger and the weight savings is greater.

Reducing rotational weight is worth much more than reducing sprung weight. The faster you go the more difference it makes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
Unsprung Martin, unsprung. (Brainfade ?) Sprung weight is everything on the "other side" of the suspension. The motor, chassis, rider, etc. On the brakes, the discs and calipers are considered to be unsprung.

I think you are correct in your comment about the smaller diameter of the discs because they have a much lower MOI than would a wheel. It would probably be hard to feel the difference in MOI effect with those discs, but reduction of unsprung weight is great no matter where you get it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsprung_weight

moto said:
I've tried both rotors--but the best bang for the buck is still with the lightest wheels you can afford since the diameter is much larger and the weight savings is greater.

Reducing rotational weight is worth much more than sprung weight. The faster you go the more difference it makes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,910 Posts
OK. Sorry, English is my second language...

If that does not make sense--here is what I meant to say: 4 pounds off your wheels will make more difference than taking 4 pounds off of your exhaust canisters--especially if it is on the rim or tires rather than the rotors.

My BST carbon wheels reduced the weight of the bike only by about 12 pounds. The CF body, CF tank, TI exhaust, light swingarm, magnesium and other pieces was over 40 pounds reduction. The wheels made a bigger difference--especially at speed. At 100 MPH, the effort required to turn was about the same as 30 mph.

Maybe I should have compared rotational weight to static weight rather than unprung weight when it came to the benefit of reducing MOI. The unsprung weight: lighter swingarm, TI axles, Caliper bolts, smaller rear calipers did not contribute as much to the ease of stopping, accelerating or turning at high speed as the wheels - but they did make the bike feel more supple on bumpy roads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
Correct - the're inertial effect is SUBSTANTIALLY less than C/F wheels - much much less - but they do none-the-less contribute (and the faster you are going, the more youu will feel the differance), and just like putting c/f fairings, c/f tank ect ect ... all adds up, so does the addition of these discs - and more so, because as moto rightly comments, it is unsprung mass reduction

Allegedly they offer brilliant and ongoing fade-free performance however hard they are used (wet and dry), which exceeds that obtained from iron and steel discs, and they are also supposed to last a lot longer as well - so they also have distinct technical advantages.

These new rotors are I believe slightly different from the earlier or first Braketec versions, which suffered huge production quality problems.

I have Sicoms on my 853 - from what I have read, these are better - and I can tell all, the Sicoms are good.

Neil996r
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
862 Posts
I'm not an engineer, but I was taught there are basically 3 cateogries of weight.

1) Most important weight loss is spinning weight (affects handling and acceleration)
- Wheels, brake rotors, tires
- crank, flywheel, clutch, chain

2) Next most important weight is sprung weight (affects suspension performance)
- axles (plus the wheels and rotors)
- brake calipers/bolts, etc.

3) Last is unsprung weight, the farther away from the CG the more valuable the weight loss
- CF tank
- light subframe or fairing stay
- light muffler
- etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
bc1 said:
#2 & #3 are backwards but good discription otherwise.
+ 1
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
Martin,

No worries ! I corrected it only to expand the discussion on the subject, which it apparently has.

moto said:
OK. Sorry, English is my second language...

If that does not make sense--here is what I meant to say: 4 pounds off your wheels will make more difference than taking 4 pounds off of your exhaust canisters--especially if it is on the rim or tires rather than the rotors.

My BST carbon wheels reduced the weight of the bike only by about 12 pounds. The CF body, CF tank, TI exhaust, light swingarm, magnesium and other pieces was over 40 pounds reduction. The wheels made a bigger difference--especially at speed. At 100 MPH, the effort required to turn was about the same as 30 mph.

Maybe I should have compared rotational weight to static weight rather than unprung weight when it came to the benefit of reducing MOI. The unsprung weight: lighter swingarm, TI axles, Caliper bolts, smaller rear calipers did not contribute as much to the ease of stopping, accelerating or turning at high speed as the wheels - but they did make the bike feel more supple on bumpy roads.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top