PYGA rear braking system

[Baaisikilist]

Wow, somebody posted something useful on the hub... Sjoe...

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Wow, somebody posted something useful on the hub... Sjoe...

And I've posted it on the pinkbike thread as well... 

[NicoBoshoff]

Oh ok, it's Friday, so I'll bite.

 

How does any of that detract from the fact that on Patrick's own statement it was a design compromise made in order to avoid patent infringements.  I.e. in a perfect world it's not how he would have designed it, which is kind of the point made right from the start.

 

Also, does that not reinforce the PB commentator ("retard" to some of you)'s point that you'll have a worse bedding in your pads because of the movement in caliper vis-a-vis rotor? 

[SCD]

Hey Guys, 

 

Just want to provide some insight into the whole braking discussion. Below are graphs created by the owner of Linkage, a linkage program used by the vast majority of bike designs, providing accurate information.  

 

"Anti-rise" is worked out as a percentage and relates to how much the suspension will or will not compress under braking. The higher the percentage of Anti-Rise, the stiffer and less responsive your suspension will be under braking. Leading to the feeling of 'Brake Jack' and more rear wheel chatter under braking. You will notice the conventional single pivot design (Sesta) has around a 90% anti-rise, and the horst link and VPP linkages are in the 60% range. Generally in a good design one will notice a lower percentage in downhill bikes due to extreme terrain conditions, accompanied by a much more progressive leverage curve. For XC and Trail bikes these parameters will change accordingly. 

 

On the PYGA braking system the brake pads will move up and down on the rotor by aprox 2-3mm. It is much easier for the pad to move up and down on the rotor, than the rotational force of the pads against the rotor. Therefore the up and down movement is not noticable (while riding). A static test will not give an accurate representation of how it reacts while riding, and will simply flex the rotor to the left. This does not happen when the wheel is rotating. Besides this, it will almost never occur that the brake is locked by the time the suspension is fully compressed. (In four years of using this design, PYGA have never experienced any shortcomings from this design, nor comebacks. Only compliments)   

 

PYGA Stage - Single Pivot - Starts at 54%, ending on 72%

 

IMG_04092015_125744.png

 

*snip*

 

I f/*%^& love science! 

[NicoBoshoff]

I f/*%^& love science! 

Except that website (IFLS) is a slap in the face of science...

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Oh ok, it's Friday, so I'll bite.

 

How does any of that detract from the fact that on Patrick's own statement it was a design compromise made in order to avoid patent infringements.  I.e. in a perfect world it's not how he would have designed it, which is kind of the point made right from the start.

 

Also, does that not reinforce the PB commentator ("retard" to some of you)'s point that you'll have a worse bedding in your pads because of the movement in caliper vis-a-vis rotor? 

No, the PB commenter's point from the start is that it was a **** design and Pat had no place building bikes 'cos it was super stupid and OMG BrakeJack. 

 

He's calmed down a bit since then, but that was how he opened. 

 

Yes, he wasn't able to use a split pivot design due to patenting issues, but that's the same for pretty much every bike unless they get into an agreement with the patent holder. He may also have had some sort of ROT against him designing another split pivot bike, or using existing design ideas from Morewood. 

 

Re the bedding in the pads - not so sure of that. I think it'll actually create a more even wear pattern over the whole disc surface, given the 2-3mm movement and the fact that most pads only cover a portion of the disc's surface, but then again it may not work that way in practice

[Hairy]

Oh ok, it's Friday, so I'll bite.

 

How does any of that detract from the fact that on Patrick's own statement it was a design compromise made in order to avoid patent infringements.  I.e. in a perfect world it's not how he would have designed it, which is kind of the point made right from the start.

 

Also, does that not reinforce the PB commentator ("retard" to some of you)'s point that you'll have a worse bedding in your pads because of the movement in caliper vis-a-vis rotor? 

all it means is that instead of brakes in the wet sounding like this ..... eeeeekkkkkkkeeeeek, they will now sound like this eeeeekkkkkwwwweeeekkkkkeeeewwww

[JXV]

Oh ok, it's Friday, so I'll bite.

 

How does any of that detract from the fact that on Patrick's own statement it was a design compromise made in order to avoid patent infringements. I.e. in a perfect world it's not how he would have designed it, which is kind of the point made right from the start.

 

Also, does that not reinforce the PB commentator ("retard" to some of you)'s point that you'll have a worse bedding in your pads because of the movement in caliper vis-a-vis rotor?

I think Pat did the best he could with an unavoidable situation.

 

I don't see that the radial as well as rotational movement of pads on the disc is a bad thing at all. I reckon it will prevent grooves being worn into the disc, keeping the surface smooth and aiding bedding in of pads.

[raptor-22]

but it could have been prevented with the brake mounted on the chainstay

[droo]

I think Pat's had more experience designing bikes than all of the Hub and PB experts combined. He did what he did for a reason, and it works unless you actually try to attack its one weakness, which is a situation you'll probably never encounter on a trail.

 

Moenie in die leeu se hol met 'n grassie krap nie.

[Headshot]

I think Pat's had more experience designing bikes than all of the Hub and PB experts combined. He did what he did for a reason, and it works unless you actually try to attack its one weakness, which is a situation you'll probably never encounter on a trail.

 

Moenie in die leeu se hol met 'n grassie krap nie.

Yes, quite.

[Headshot]

Thing is Pat could have gone FSR if he wanted to - patent has expired and everyone is doing them now. He stuck with his design and the bikes get rave reviews. No worries then. A whole thread about some dumb ****'s comment on PB :-)