Suzuki SV650 Riders Forum banner
21 - 40 of 57 Posts
^^those rotors in that pic seem good enough for me.. especially if it really does remove a pound of metal.. I wonder if it makes them more susceptible to cracking from heat, or if they in fact stay cooler.?. less material = more friction on existing material = more heat.?. BUT more venting of gasses = better dissipation of heat....
 
^^those rotors in that pic seem good enough for me.. especially if it really does remove a pound of metal.. I wonder if it makes them more susceptible to cracking from heat, or if they in fact stay cooler.?. less material = more friction on existing material = more heat.?. BUT more venting of gasses = better dissipation of heat....
Only good thing holes do is save weight.
 
Yeah, I know the mass of a rotor is relatively close to the hub and doesn't have as much of an effect as one might think (I shouldn't have said "huge" in my last post), but since I can't go with light weight wheels, reducing the weight of the rotors (a pound at the rear rotor & two at the fronts) is the next best thing & it's all that I can do to reduce unsprung rotating mass. It still has an effect.

Interesting article though. I wish it talked about the gyroscopic effect when changing direction, too. NHMS has a lot of "flip-flop" areas and at the expert level, I need all the help I can get...

We'll see... not too many places where I can improve the bike's performance & still be within SS rules, but this is definitely one.
 
Okay, Mr. Devil's Advocate. Tell me why it shouldn't. Tell me why upgrading my rotors won't do a thing to make the bike perform any better.

How bout you tell me something that's useful instead of just telling me they're useless.

(said tongue in cheek, by the way :p)
 
Okay, Mr. Devil's Advocate. Tell me why it shouldn't. Tell me why upgrading my rotors won't do a thing to make the bike perform any better.

How bout you tell me something that's useful instead of just telling me they're useless.
Start reading what I posted, not what you interpreted :)
I did not say it should not. I said you will save unsprung mass and rotational mass gain is small (not huge as you said). Ultimately for us racers lap timer tells everything. If you do go faster feel free to claim it to rotor weight :)
 
I do. I have that same EBC rotors on my gsxr wheel. They are identical in weight of stock 320mm gsxr rotors they replaced.
Most of aftermarket rotors are not really lighter than stock, in fact Vesrah rotors I have are almost pound heavier than stock. There are lighter rotors out there but don't assume they are lighter just because they are aftermarket.
Funny part is that 1st gen sv stock rotors are lightest ones I weighed despite steel carriers.
 
Yeah, I corrected myself with the "huge" statement... I know it's not a huge difference, but I'd think they're still supposed to make a reasonable one. I'm just exploring ways to improve the bike and this is one of those ways, albeit expensive ($500)

Anyway, I don't suppose you've got any 2nd gen stock & Galfer waves that you can weigh for me?
Galfer claims they're lighter than stock by almost 2 pounds.
 
Yeah, I corrected myself with the "huge" statement... I know it's not huge, but they're still supposed to make a difference. I'm just exploring ways to improve the bike and this is one of those ways.

Anyway, I don't suppose you've got any 2nd gen stock & Galfer waves that you can weigh for me?
Galfer claims they're lighter than stock by almost 2 pounds.
Do they make difference or not is not arguable, even 1 gram will make difference ;D
Will rotor alone make noticeable difference to you is only question. To me it did not. I dropped about 100# from my bike compared to stock, that made huge difference. If I drop another pound now it will not make any difference worth mentioning :)
I don't have set of Galfers but set of stock 2nd gen sv are about 6.5# (1st gen are ~5.2). 1st gen wheel is also lighter than 2nd gen wheel, reason I made spacers to mount it on 2nd gen bike :)
When buying rotors ask them what actual weight is. Don't go by claims, get weight and compare to your.
One thing about drilling stock ones is for sure, they will be lighter ;D
 
I disagree.
Here is what rotor manufacturer has to say about it, quoted straight from their site.


Do holes in discs help?
Well, it depends what you mean by “help”. Holes in the “blade” of a disc (the part that the brake pad sweeps over as it is in motion) will save a bit of weight but contrary to public opinion, they do not help to cool a braking system. Notice on MotoGP motorcycles and most race cars, there are no holes on the rotors. There are actually situations where holes can be detrimental to your braking. In muddy conditions, dirt gets trapped in these holes and proceeds to chew up pads that, in turn will chew up rotors because of the constant uneven abrasion between the pads (which have the dirt imbedded in their surface) and the rotors, which get gouged to heck by that dirt. If you’ll notice, if there are holes in a Galfer rotor, they are never round. They are usually oval, teardrop or cylindrical in shape so that foreign debris is directed away from the rotor via centrifugal force.
 
1st gen wheel is also lighter than 2nd gen wheel, reason I made spacers to mount it on 2nd gen bike :)
Well crap, I wish I knew that last year when shopping for wheels! :p






(Edit: I hate the freakin censor function on this website. George Carlin must be turning over in his grave... can't say ****, ****, ****, ****, **********, mother****er or tits... OH HEY! I CAN SAY TITS!)
 
I had mine done by "Phat Chance" on wera board as well for $75 and picked up 5hp ....NOT!! I can't tell the difference on track, but it looks cool :)

Edit: Forgot to say that I don't actually use my rear brake on the track, so I can't say how this holds up with regular/heavy use.

before


after
 
21 - 40 of 57 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top