Hope Mono Mini Disc Rotor Size

[David North]

Guys

Firstly sorry for asking what in various forms has no doubt been asked
before (I know I have searched google groups!)

However as I am about to spend £200 some reasurance would be
gratefully received!

I am planning on changing my current discs (old deore hydro's) to Hope
Mono Mini's, as the last upgrade on my new bike build (my old deores
going to my brother along with all the other bits!).

I ride a lightweight hardtail setup, on general XC stuff and only
weight 9.5/10stone.

I am sure that 160mm up front is correct however I have had
conflicting advice for the rear size. Hope suggested 160mm on the
rear also 'as its nice to have that extra bit of power' and several
shops including Merlin have said 140mm.

The differance in weight does not concern me, making the right
purchase does!

Thanks for your time.

Dave

 

[AndyC]

"David North" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Guys
>
> Firstly sorry for asking what in various forms has no doubt been asked
> before (I know I have searched google groups!)
>
> However as I am about to spend £200 some reasurance would be
> gratefully received!
>
> I am planning on changing my current discs (old deore hydro's) to Hope
> Mono Mini's, as the last upgrade on my new bike build (my old deores
> going to my brother along with all the other bits!).
>
> I ride a lightweight hardtail setup, on general XC stuff and only
> weight 9.5/10stone.
>
> I am sure that 160mm up front is correct however I have had
> conflicting advice for the rear size. Hope suggested 160mm on the
> rear also 'as its nice to have that extra bit of power' and several
> shops including Merlin have said 140mm.
>
> The differance in weight does not concern me, making the right
> purchase does!
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
> Dave

Not sure there's a hard & fast answer to this, other than personal
preference and what you want the bike to look like...

Personally, I've got 185/165, and that's fine for me, I wouldn't go smaller
on the rear - but then I'm heavy compared to you!

I guess there are a number of things to consider:

1. Your weight - lighter = smaller disks.
2. Your riding style - Riding the brakes = larger disks I'd say.
3. Where you ride - Big hills = bigger brakes (less chance of fade on the
drops).
4. Future planning - Ever going to upgrade? - generally people go for larger
brakes over time as finances allow.

I know that on a DH bike I have I went with 205/Twin pot front and
185/Single on the rear and on reflection I'd have matched the rear to the
front - though not enough that I'd go out and spend £150+ on a replacement!

AndyC

 

[bandicoot]

"AndyC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "David North" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Guys
>>
>> Firstly sorry for asking what in various forms has no doubt been asked
>> before (I know I have searched google groups!)
>>
>> However as I am about to spend £200 some reasurance would be
>> gratefully received!
>>
>> I am planning on changing my current discs (old deore hydro's) to Hope
>> Mono Mini's, as the last upgrade on my new bike build (my old deores
>> going to my brother along with all the other bits!).
>>
>> I ride a lightweight hardtail setup, on general XC stuff and only
>> weight 9.5/10stone.
>>
>> I am sure that 160mm up front is correct however I have had
>> conflicting advice for the rear size. Hope suggested 160mm on the
>> rear also 'as its nice to have that extra bit of power' and several
>> shops including Merlin have said 140mm.
>>
>> The differance in weight does not concern me, making the right
>> purchase does!
>>
>> Thanks for your time.
>>
>> Dave
>
> Not sure there's a hard & fast answer to this, other than personal
> preference and what you want the bike to look like...
>
> Personally, I've got 185/165, and that's fine for me, I wouldn't go
> smaller on the rear - but then I'm heavy compared to you!
>
> I guess there are a number of things to consider:
>
> 1. Your weight - lighter = smaller disks.
> 2. Your riding style - Riding the brakes = larger disks I'd say.
> 3. Where you ride - Big hills = bigger brakes (less chance of fade on the
> drops).
> 4. Future planning - Ever going to upgrade? - generally people go for
> larger brakes over time as finances allow.
>
> I know that on a DH bike I have I went with 205/Twin pot front and
> 185/Single on the rear and on reflection I'd have matched the rear to the
> front - though not enough that I'd go out and spend £150+ on a
> replacement!
>
> AndyC
>
Iv'e got Hope minis on my hardtail and Iv'e got 180 on the front and 160 on
the rear. I was told the bigger the rotor the better stopping power.

 

[bomba]

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 04:17:14 -0700, David North wrote:

> I am sure that 160mm up front is correct however I have had
> conflicting advice for the rear size. Hope suggested 160mm on the
> rear also 'as its nice to have that extra bit of power' and several
> shops including Merlin have said 140mm.
>
> The differance in weight does not concern me, making the right
> purchase does!

I could explain it, but all you need to know is that 140 should be fine.

 

[[email protected]]

9 stone thats Down Under or OZ. I say 6 inch
not 8 inch.

 

[OMaurizio]

On 28 Apr 2005 04:17:14 -0700, [email protected] (David North)
wrote:

>Guys
>
>Firstly sorry for asking what in various forms has no doubt been asked
>before (I know I have searched google groups!)
>
>However as I am about to spend £200 some reasurance would be
>gratefully received!
>
>I am planning on changing my current discs (old deore hydro's) to Hope
>Mono Mini's, as the last upgrade on my new bike build (my old deores
>going to my brother along with all the other bits!).
>
>I ride a lightweight hardtail setup, on general XC stuff and only
>weight 9.5/10stone.
>
>I am sure that 160mm up front is correct however I have had
>conflicting advice for the rear size. Hope suggested 160mm on the
>rear also 'as its nice to have that extra bit of power' and several
>shops including Merlin have said 140mm.

Hi Dave,
I got 160Fr/140Rr Hope discs on a previous Specialized FSR I used to
race and I had many overheating troubles expecially on long tecnical
descents in the mountain marathon races, so I switched to 160 both
front and rear and there is a huge difference in long descents.
Obviously if you ride only on fireroads, where you get speed (and the
brakes are cooled by the air) and you don't brake a lot except before
turns, you can go with 140 rear, but if you like technical riding,
definitely go for 160. It isn't that 40 grams more that count!!
Bye
Maurizio (Italy)

 

[Coyoteboy]

Personally I wouldnt go below 160 as i find the braking power of my 165
rear pretty poor. I am 14 stone and my bike is a 6 inch bounce freeride
on the heavy side, but I cant squeeze enough to lock my mini rear with
weight on the back tyre. My 185 M4 front is mental though, like truck
brakes lol.
My bro also runs a 165 and finds it fine though we did blue all the
rotors on an alpine descent.

 

[stevemtbsteve]

I asked exactly the same q in the tech corner about 18 months ago:

http://www.cyclingforums.com/t72489-140mm160mm-rotors.html

i've got the 180 up front and 160 rear, on my santa cruz superlite, and ride uk trails, with a few trailquests and the 24 hour things thrown in, am about 11 stone and it all feels perfect to me, i took the more power option. Its all personnel mind, you taken the smaller option up front, and ur not stoppin a lot of weight, so whatever makes you happy, usually its a power v weight debate! but as u've gone smaller up front, but say ur not concerned about the weight: its hard to see waht ur priority is

Cheers
Steve