2006+ Honda Civic Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

Premium Member
2,093 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi all found this brake bias calculator that works out the front and rear rotor torque that is basically the amount of torque that slows your discs down on front and back.

This is the link

Bias Calculator

I could not copy and paste results so I have worked out the results

I have worked out the ATR, CTR and 2.2 diesel(FK3)

ATR piston dia 1 = 1.653(42mm)
Piston 2 = 1.496(38mm)
Co-efficient 0.60 (y/stuff)
Disc dia = 11.811 (300mm)
Front pad height = 2.322 (59mm)

Ctr piston dia = 2.125 (54mm)
Co-efficient 0.60 (y/stuff)
Disc dia = 11.811 (300mm)
Front pad height = 2.047 (52mm)

FK3 piston dia = 2.125 (54mm)
Co-efficient 0.60 (y/stuff)
Disc dia = 11.102 (282mm)
Front pad height = 2.204 (56mm)

Here are the results - they are all in imperial (inches)

Front pads are for yellow stuff (0.60 co-efficient)
Rear pads Green stuff ( 0.55 co-efficient)
Rear setup is the same as I have not modified the rear anly put on gd discs and greenstuff pads)

All factors have been converted to inches to convert back to mm to under stand it multiply by 25.4.

If you want to have a go then go to link above and put in values- have a play around for best brake setup!


Therefore front rotor torque

ATR = 5823.748
CTR = 5290.867
2.2 = 4821.604

The only difference between the CTR and ATR is weight!

ATR calipers with carrier (no pads)= 5.8 x 2 = 11.6kg
ATR front pads (y/stuff) = 2.3kg
ATR EBC GD Discs 28mm =16.6kg

Total = 30.5kg

CTR calipers with carrier (no pads)= 4.5x 2 = 9kg
CTR front pads (y/stuff) = 1.6kg
CTR EBC GD Discs 28mm =13.8kg

Total = 24.4kg

So it is quite close then. Do you sacrifice some unsprung weight for better stopping power?

Cockup Specialist
12,885 Posts
Compared front+back setup.

FN + DC5 Brembo.

It appears the DC5 brembo setup is almost identical to the 2.2 setup with regard brake torque vs pedal effort and front/back bias.
So the 2.2 with brembos should feel identical...but last longer before fade with the bigger disk/pad.

40mm piston - 1.575
36mm piston - 1.417
300mm disk - 11.811
120*71*15 - 2.795

54mm piston - 2.126
300mm disk - 11.811
135*52*16 - 2.047

54mm piston - 2.126
282mm disk - 11.102
131.7*56*17.8 - 2.205

34mm piston - 1.338
260mm disk - 10.236


Cockup Specialist
12,885 Posts
Is the idea to get more braking effort for less pedal pressure or brakes which last longer before fade ?

Cockup Specialist
12,885 Posts
I am happy with the braking effort TBH.
Thats the way honda generally setup....kind of use to it now.
And it will also destroy the brake balance if you up the front too much.

It surprised me a long time ago when TDI remarked how they can almost get the back wheels off the ground.
With decent pads with loits of bite and disks...I could do the same.
So I really dont think pedal effort and one off performance is an issue.

Fade is a massive issue on the derv though.
No argument there.
Especially with the front disks being so small and the weight so high.

I do think its borderline if the DC5 setup can handle the derv flat out on track without fade though.
I'll let you know.
15% more pad area to spread heat and increase life
30% more active disk area (the ring under the pad) to spread heat and increase life.
15% more disk mass/volume/surface to shed heat
1 - 6 of 6 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.