Topic

I agree that it's safer to keep the valve in case you need to dial down the force to the rear wheels...but it does sound like you've tested it to the level that would lock up the rears if the balance was too rear biased..

Must admit I am also tempted...

David Aiketgate wrote: wrote:

Having done bit of digging it seems that the valve has 7 settings ranging from 0-60%. ie 0% reduction of rear braking to 60% reduction of rear braking. So logically it should be 10% increments.

In other words max setting appears to be no reduction.

So you have kind of proven that removing the old valve will give the exact same result...

Therefore would reducing front flow slightly further increase performance? Just asking...?

David Aiketgate wrote: wrote:

I have just noticed that the Torque App does a 60 to 0 time. Anybody know what the standard figures are?

240mm all round: 16 mins 24 seconds

304 front 240 rears: 12 mins 32 seconds


Made em up.. but know they ain't that fantastic compared to many other cars out there

Bigwigsdad wrote: wrote:

David Aiketgate wrote: wrote:

Having done bit of digging it seems that the valve has 7 settings ranging from 0-60%. ie 0% reduction of rear braking to 60% reduction of rear braking. So logically it should be 10% increments.

In other words max setting appears to be no reduction.

So you have kind of proven that removing the old valve will give the exact same result...

Therefore would reducing front flow slightly further increase performance? Just asking...?

Note the wording in my post. It seems... appears to...
In other words it needs proving before people start flinging the reducer valve away.

I think that the balance feels pretty good as it is now, over the various speed ranges I have tried hard braking from. It is dampish here at the moment too so that needs to be factored in to the results.

As I couldn't get the rears to lock I suspect that the only way to improve on my set up would be different pads especially at the rear, or bigger disc/calliper combination but then you start talking money for a proper set up!
From what I have seen of the blocked std calliper on a 280mm redrilled disc, there is a tendency for uneven wear caused by the calliper bracket flexing.

The only other thing I would want would be ABS.

To any new readers - Please be aware we are only talking about the AP front/ standard rear setup when we talk about the adjustable bias valve. .

This is fascinating stuff. Quite how you'd quantify, let alone optimise the abs system for the improvement in stopping power is a dissertation in itself. Does anyone on tbar have a spare runway?

Ok you have persuaded me again

Like you say it's better to have the option without it being fully tested.

So new pipes, SS hoses, drilled & grooved fronts, std rears with green stuff pads all round and a lever bias valve... I think I might need to get a seatbelt harness

Am I right in thinking that cars fitted with ABS do not have the restrictor valve ?

My Tf160 has the bracket, but just a plain pipe connector in place of the valve, when you think about it, with ABS the valve becomes redundant surely ?

That sounds about right.

...but don't call me Shirley.

So you wouldn't gain anything by fitting an adjustable bias valve to a car with ABS?

Robin

Correct.

My car HAD ABS and the valve


Has neither now..

How odd,
I wonder when the decided to scrap the valve on ABS cars, the paint on the bracket appears to be pristine, and the pipe connector original, mines an 03, chassis 608489, by time they got round to my car, the plastic covers in the boot had gone, maybe the valve went at the same time ?;