Kawasaki KLR Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The front brake rotor on my 2012 KLR was worn beyond service limits at 23,000 miles and the rear was worn beyond specs at 28,000 miles. Notwithstanding always using OEM pads, these rotors appear to be wearing out prematurely. I replaced the front rotor with the 320mm EBC unit, but have yet to replace the rear.

Is there source for an upgraded rear rotor and if so who/where is it?

Thanks,

Jason
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
3,563 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Hello klr4evr.

Thank you for responding to my query.

On the basis of the limited responses, I suspect many folks are ignoring the minimum thickness specification.

Indeed, the Tusk rotor does seem like a bargain.

Jason
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,684 Posts
Hello klr4evr.

Thank you for responding to my query.

On the basis of the limited responses, I suspect many folks are ignoring the minimum thickness specification.

Indeed, the Tusk rotor does seem like a bargain.

Jason
Most KLR owners don't read manuals or warning labels and don't even own a micrometer. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Update:

I purchased a new Tusk rear brake rotor and installed it yesterday.

It appears to be made from austenitic stainless steel (300 series) and is 0.210" thick. My old rotor was 0.198" thick, as measured in an unworn location.

Notably, the minimum service thickness as indicated on this new rotor is 4.0mm (0.157") whereas the old rotor shows a minimum thickness of 4.5mm (0.177").

So far so good; time will tell.

Jason
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,684 Posts
So whos minimum thickness are you gonna believe next time?

More metal acts as a larger heat sink. So wouldn't anything under the 4.5mm minimum limit of an OEM rotor be even more prone to overheating/fading?
Food for thought.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
So whos minimum thickness are you gonna believe next time?

More metal acts as a larger heat sink. So wouldn't anything under the 4.5mm minimum limit of an OEM rotor be even more prone to overheating/fading?
Food for thought.
More surface area will dissipate heat quicker than less area. And the Tusk rotor may have more surface area than the OEM unit. I'll probably go by the thickness stated on the Tusk rotor for replacement.

Jason
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top