2009 Brakes

[Caretaker]

Anyone else notice that the '09 brakes seem to take a lot of getting used to compared to the previous version? I know that rear drums perform much of the braking on cars. The '09, with rear disk, seem to stop less efficiently than the old drums. The pedal travel is a lot further, and it feels like you creep up on cars much faster at stop signs as a result. Anyone else notice the difference?

[goochsmooch]

Now that you mention it, I have noticed that the braking is a little more dicey than you'd expect in a 2009 vehicle with 4 wheel disk brakes. Although I've never had 4-wheel disk before so maybe I just need to get used to it. Or maybe it's that damn VSC or Traction Control kicking in?

[harryyiii]

The front brakes do 90% of the breaking, so the switch to disks alone should not make much difference. I have had 5 cars with rear disks, and the 95 vibe with drums definitely does not brake any better. The problem probably has to do with Toyota execution. Yes, Toyota does mess up also.

[Caretaker]

The front disks don't do 90% of the work when drums are in the rear, that's for sure. The first gen Vibe brake pedals do not travel as far to initiate maximum braking. The '09 allows for a lot of travel throughout which it decelerates the car slowly and relatively smoothly. But it definitely takes a lot of push to get to the point where substantial braking takes place. This is surely because there are disks all around, but I have to believe it is more than that. Perhaps the Toyota imperfection you mention.

[lowincash]

the brakes seem fine for me. i think they stop pretty well. i never need a lot of force to get the car to stop. i've never had rear drums on any of my cars before so i'm not sure how well or how bad they perform compared to 4disc brakes...but my friend had an accord with rear drums and it sucked lol

[Sublimewind]

Quote, originally posted by maxx4me »The front disks don't do 90% of the work when drums are in the rear, that's for sure. The first gen Vibe brake pedals do not travel as far to initiate maximum braking. The '09 allows for a lot of travel throughout which it decelerates the car slowly and relatively smoothly. But it definitely takes a lot of push to get to the point where substantial braking takes place. This is surely because there are disks all around, but I have to believe it is more than that. Perhaps the Toyota imperfection you mention. Not sure where either of you get your info from, but the numbers are more like 60-70% front and 40-30% rear, regardless of WHICH type of brakes are on the car... If the brake bias was toward the rear, the car would act as if you were pulling the E-brake all the time... please correct your knowledge... Ever consider bleeding the brakes? That could improve pedal feel greatly. Changing to a different fluid could help as well...

[kowell]

They seem to be fine by me.They work as well as any car I've tried with 4 brand new disk brakes. I used them in emergency situation once or twice and nearely hit my head on the steering wheel....they brake.A local car show tested the 2.4L vibe this summer and 100km/h to full stop took 37 meters which placed the car on the segment's average braking distances.Of course I can only vouch for the standard 2.4L version. The 1.8L version has slightly smaller brake disks and the GT gets slightly biggers then mine.1.8L: 275 mm front and 259 mm rear discs2.4L FWD: 296 mm front and 279 mm rear discs2.4 AWD/GT: 296 mm front and 281 mm rear discs

[Caretaker]

I'll do that Sublimewind, if you'll take a reading test. Nowhere did I quote any numbers for rear brake efficiency. Please direct your comment appropriately.

[harryyiii]

You are correct about 60-70% per literature I found on the web, but I am not completely wrong. A fwd car like the vibe has about a 60/40 weight distribution. Add the weight transfer under hard braking, and the front wheels could do over 80% of the braking. See the example below. With a 50/50 weight distribution, in the diagram, the front wheels are doing 75% of the work.

Attached files