295 discs on the rear too???

With the standard calliper?

Well, looks like it could be possible, I could always see how you can space out the front callipers easily.

But the rears seemed fixed… But just seen this:

A couple of brackets like this and “job’s a carrot”, spaced out rear callipers to also have a bigger disc inline with the front, can only be a good thing IMHO.

Just thought I’d share

what thickness should they be?

Which AP Racing rotors the best for road and track?

Ideally I guess the saem as the fronts, as that’s the Lotus spec and balance is the same discs front and rear.

My only concern with going to 295mm discs up front (minor) was the slight shift of brake balance to the front (undesirable IMHO) and it’d be nice to do the same to the rear without having to get (mega expensive) GT hubs and loose the handbrake kinda setup.

So when I saw this, I thought it’d be ideal! Can space out the standard rear callipers and fit bigger discs to the rear an have a matching set all round

I’ve not done it at all but though it may be proove useful!

looks like it will work

good thinking

where is the best place to get the rotors from?

Well, the same as the front, ali bells / AP discs or a few others…

Check out the front brakes threads for all the info, I think they’re AP CP3000’s or something.

But then you could have the same as the front on the back!

Surprised no one else has found this of any interest

Are you sure you’re trying to sell your car. With all this research into new brakes it looks like you are not taking the sale seriously.

I like it, think I’ll do it.

Are you sure you’re trying to sell your car. With all this research into new brakes it looks like you are not taking the sale seriously.

LOL! Well, knowledge is power and all, very useful to know and when I saw it I immediately thought of you guys


Ahh, you’re so considerate

But if most of the braking is done at the front is the balance change that much of an issue?


Being midship RWD means there’ll be a lot more balance to the rear than your usual motah, or the rear will want to overtake the front if it goes too much to the front

Yeah, Ian, you would be suprised at how much the rears do. I have my brake bias set very much to the back and it never locks up the rears. And in the wet, you can set it even more to the rear!!

In my opinion the standard bias setting is very much to the front, I guess for ultimate safety. I think improvements could be made to the standard setup by increasing the rear bias. Unfortunatly on the standard car the bias is set within the master cylinder


Very true Sean.
I have 4pots front and 2 pots rear with 295 discs allround. Once i mesured discs temperature during a track session
and i was surprised how much heat was coming from rear discs. I also set the bias valve pretty much on the rear without problems.


Sean, what about the idea of just replacing the master cyl and fitting a bias adjuster, without changing the calipers.

Or, would the MS master cyl be a mismatch to the original caliper volumes?

I would give that a go Uldis, what is the worst that can happen. The Master cylinder isn’t very expensive and is dead easy to fit. Plus plumbing in a bias valve is easy.

Go for it.


But is it a different displacement? Because if so, it may feel wooden…

Am I confused or can a bias valve only decrease the pressure/braking to the rear?

You’re correct there, a bias valve can only decrease the pressure anywhere it’s installed.
So the 295’s at the rear look lke a good mod but on its own, they will never give a strong rear bias, probably restore the original balance.

And the MS master cyl will only alter the pumped volume, but the ratio front to rear is the same, so we are back to square one.
The only solution -which nobody recommends, including AP- is to fit a limiter in the front circuit.
It would have to be a very linear one, so that shortens the list of options to only one, the AP CP 3350-14 , but even that one has a non-linear behaviour in a zone.

So, theres no free lunch.
I’m very finicky about my brakes, and wouldn’t like to introduce any non-linearity.

Why the 4 pt front and 2 pot rear (fronts to rears) works is because the 2 pot at the rear gives immediately a strong rear-bias, and with the lmiter you can bring it back to normal.

But there you go, food fr thought.

Exactly, for instance, in the rain, when the weight transfers forward, less bias is needed to the rear because of decreased traction. Less force is needed to lock up the rears. The only place I have seen front bias adjhusters used is on oval racers whare they want to be able to adjust left to right balance. I would be afraid of using an adjuster on the front. The last thing you want is the fronts to lock up first!