[Ian S]

Anyone wanting to compare test results of old & new Puma brakes should check out:-

http://www.theaa.com/allaboutcars/carsearc...a&makeName=Ford

Test on a 1.7 Puma back in April 1998 gave the best stop from 50mph as:-
24.5mts with a pedal pressure of 32kg

This figure was duplicated in October 2001 when compared to a 1.6 Puma which gave figures of:-
25mts with a pedal pressure of 17kg

Based on that the only real difference is that the later brakes just need less of a prod.

Also interesting are the figures for the following:-

Peugeot 206 2.0 GTi ....... 25mts with a pedal pressure of 20kg
Peugeot 307 1.6 16v ...... 26.5mts with a pedal pressure of 12kg

I can vouch for the 307 pedal pressure figure after scraping myself off the windscreen after gently prodding the brakes (at least it seemed gentle after my 1999 Puma) :oops:

Food for thought :shock:

Ian

[richbay]

im looking to do a 2000 brake upgrade too, will the fit under standard 1998 alloys?

[Turby]

IMHO Braking effeciveness has nothing to do with pressure applied to the pedal but the amount of assistance given by the servo. Remember that the 2000 spec puma (with the bigger brakes) also has a different servo.

In the example of a 172 slamming your head against the windscreen just means it has got lots of servo assistance - not necesarrily more brake effort applied at the disc.

A lot of competition cars dump the servo altogether, less weight, less plumbing, allows simple but effective simple brake bias between front and brake, but more importantly it allows the driver to feel what the wheels are actually doing when braking, however it does mean you have to press the pedal hard if you want to stop.

Is your car trying to swap ends when braking hard from speed ? Its blinking dangerous and means too much braking effort is being applied to the back - the puma has Electronic Brakeforce Distribution to overcome this - maybe its knackered or exceeded its operational envelope. I suggest you get a brake proportioning valve (about £50 from http://www.raldes.co...003/page023.htm) installed which simply reduces braking effort to the rear.

[RobK]

When I said the rear was twitching out under braking, I didn't mean it as a flaw. It certainly makes driving more interesting, but I don't feel it's unsafe. It's very controlable and will correct itself mainly (normally only a slight twitch, but enough to make you grin a little). I say normally because it's when you push it out on purpose that it becomes fun, doing forestry style braking and turn-ins for junctions (not that I do it normally, honest officer).

Note that this does nothing to reduce stopping distanace, actually increses it!! Becomes more stable with the 17s on, wider tyre giving more grip presumably.

[RobK]

I suggest you get a brake proportioning valve (about £50 from http://www.raldes.co...003/page023.htm) installed which simply reduces braking effort to the rear.

Small point, and sorry to be pedantic, but doesn't a porportioning valve balance the brake pressure left to right? The part needed would be a brake bias valve which splits pressure front to rear. In my limited knowledge I believe the two are slightly diferent.

Isn't there a way to adjust this on the puma as standard?

[kahless]

IMHO If you want the brakes to feel better arent you just bettergetting braded hoses fitted, there cheap. Also the car can only stop as fast as the abs works (and the grip on the tyres) hence the fact that the two pumas in the test took 26m to stop each on abs, the advantage of bigger discs to me is that the surface area is bigger therefore they will last a little longer and will dissipate heat quicker therefore less fade.

Robert.

[Turby]

I suggest you get a brake proportioning valve (about £50 from http://www.raldes.co...003/page023.htm) installed which simply reduces braking effort to the rear.

Small point, and sorry to be pedantic, but doesn't a porportioning valve balance the brake pressure left to right? The part needed would be a brake bias valve which splits pressure front to rear. In my limited knowledge I believe the two are slightly diferent.

Isn't there a way to adjust this on the puma as standard?

Sorry forgot, this type of proportioning valves is only useful on competition cars which have had their brake systems split into front / rear (rather than the standard diagonal split) - so that won't work.

Allegedly "Vehicles fitted with the standard braking system have pressure conscious reducing valves (PCRVs) fitted in the master cylinder outlet ports. The PCRVs control the hydraulic pressure applied to the rear brakes reducing the risk of rear wheel lock-up under braking."

but I think this is nearer the truth...
"The electronic brake force distribution system limits the slip of the rear wheels before the anti-lock control comes into effect. The system is able to optimise the brake distribution, by comparing the slip of the front and rear wheels, for maximum driver control regardless of the vehicle loading. The system also eliminates the need for a load apportioning valve, as it automatically compensates for all conditions of vehicle loading."

And so it looks like you can't easily change it