Ok from reading through this forum, I have found that most guys need to change out the rear pads before they need to change the front ones. This is exactly the reverse of what I was always used to. Back in the day when I was into riding the hell out of jap sport bikes, I would go through two sets of front pads to each set of rears....regardless of what brand or type of pads I was using. Then reading about people here on the touring forum changing out pads, I was taken by surprise when most had said they go through two sets of rears to a set of fronts. First I took a look at the pad material that was left on my SE-Deuce, and even on the Softail the rears were down to like 1.5mm-2mm, and the fronts had way more than that that I could see by eye with out even mesuring. Cant tell too much from my 08 FLHX yet just because it dont have enough miles on it to judge. But....going from my own experience and what I had read here I figured it was confirmed. Most were going through the rear pads faster then the front.
So I thought it over, and couldn't understand why if at least 75% of the braking force is generated up front, they why are the rears getting used up twice as fast as the front???

The only thing I could come up with was the twin disc set up that the touring models have allows that much more force to be generated that you dont need to apply so much brake up front. In other words the force applied to the front wheel is divided equally into the two calipers making the bike slow down twice as fast as just the rear with its single disc (and in some cases a single disc of smaller diameter I am not 100 sure of the size the MOCO is using). So if your going down the road at a set speed lets just say you used only your rear brakes to stop the bike, it would take you about 2X the amount of stopping power to get the bike stopped with just the single disc. If you did the same exact thing with using only the fronts, it should only take about half the pressure pad against disc to get it stopped.

So what do you guys think......am I just smoking too much ****, and over thinking this thing....or am I about right???

OH.....and the reason my Softail went through two sets of rears to a set of fronts.....is because like on all SE-models, there are twin discs up front.

 

not sure about the new style of riders but the "old guys" never had front brakes on their choppers so even with the dual front we still use the back the most. just my .02

 

Sounds about right to me,I am not sure both calipers work equally though, as the caliper furthest from the master cylinder does not get as much pressure.
I don't know if the hoses are the same length from the distro block.

 

Hoses are the same length on both sides. There should be equal pressure.

Rick

 

I believe so......the only time I have seen uneven wear between the two sets of front pads was when a caliper piston was hung up because of too much dirt and stuff not allowing it to retract into the bore correctly. As far as I know the proportion valve under the lower tree should allow equal pressure to get to both calipers.....no?

 

Well here's my take on this. My Honda Interceptor, and Night Hawk S had the Anti dive on them way back when, mid 80's so I never used the rear brake on those bikes, never had to. Well that all changed very quick when I first grabbed the front brake on my Road Glide and realized I was not going to stop in time with just the front brake alone, not to mention the dive in the front end. Plain and simple, Harley makes a great bike, but their brakes suck big-time and them some, not to mention the dive in the older bikes, 05 and earlier. So these days I push on the rear brake pedal first then grab the fronts. Whole different ball game trying to stop a HD verses a crotch rocket.

 

Heat probably has something to do with the relatively faster wear of the rear pads compared to the identical pads located in the front. Very little air circulation on the rear pads, and lots of engine, exhaust, etc. heat compared to great air and no bike-generated heat to speak of on the front pads.

 

I'd say your theory is correct biz44 - twin discs in front distribute the braking over double the area compared to the rear.

 

Try this. Many people use the rear brake most of the time. (My wife is afraid of the front brake after she washed out in gravel. She was on the high side of a banked curve and gravel somehow found its way to the right track. As soon as she used the front brake to slow down, she went down. I was ahead of her towing a trailer and rather than attempting a major slow down with gravel on blacktop I just rode up onto the gravel and gradually slowed. That's a difference of me with years of on and offroad riding and her with maybe two months. Later she said the moment she applied the front brake she new she was in trouble. )

Given the same mass the rear brake will have to exert twice the energy to stop a bike in a given distance from a given speed. The front brakes (two disks) will have to use the same energy but that energy is distributed across two disks. That's for only one brake being applied at a time. For me I change the front pads first. The front brakes are used most of the time. It's only with rain, gravel, sand,etc that I use rear first. In a panic stop, given weather and road conditions both brakes go on as quickly as I can with as much force I think I can use before the brakes lock up.

 

everybody in this section has seen the ride like a pro videos, you know where Jerry says, (the front brake will pull you to the ground like a magnet)

So we all stopped using the front brakes, now they just wear out because the rotors warp and the pads rub and squeal by themselves.