Brake Upgrade Information

I am also running standard master/booster with 276mm fronts and rear discs. No issue. I dunno about it being a "good" idea but it certainly makes your brake pedal firmer and in turn probably contributes to being able to apply more even pressure while braking but I've never felt like it was necessary, and I've never felt like I was lacking braking performance.
 
mahlas69 said:
For those who are interested Wolf Racing Products are selling hel braided brake lines for an FTO that suit the 276mm brake setup for 130 dollars plus free delivery. Bargain!!!!!
http://www.wolfracingproducts.com.a...hel-performance-braided-brake-line-p-850.html
Click to expand...
Are you sure these are for the MIVEC FTO? Do you know if it matters what brake lines you get when you have converted a ce Lancer to Mivec FTO calipers? From what i can tell there are two different brake lines, one for MIVEC 6a12's and one for the rest of the engine's is this true?
 
Mitsiwatt said:
Are you sure these are for the MIVEC FTO? Do you know if it matters what brake lines you get when you have converted a ce Lancer to Mivec FTO calipers? From what i can tell there are two different brake lines, one for MIVEC 6a12's and one for the rest of the engine's is this true?
Click to expand...
All FTO's have the same brake lines engine doesn't matter. I run HEL FTO Braided lines with my FTO brakes and they work perfectly.
 
Ok well that EBay seller must be lying to me then. Most of the sellers of the Hel lines say that it excludes Mivec, not that i am doubting you luke-h but how do you know that they are all the same?
 
Mitsiwatt said:
Ok well that EBay seller must be lying to me then. Most of the sellers of the Hel lines say that it excludes Mivec, not that i am doubting you luke-h but how do you know that they are all the same?
Click to expand...
HEL says that on their FTO lines but the Mitsubishi parts catalog only lists one set of brakes line for all FTO models.asafto.PNG
 
FWIW first page:

-If upgrading to braided brake lines, ADR approved lines are recommended. This is a quote from HEL UK:
"A NOTE TO ANY COLT OWNERS - Whatever you are told, hear it from the horses mouth right here - Evo 1/2/3 kit IS NOT the same as the FTO kit, and NEITHER kit is the same as a Colt kit! The hose lengths are different in all 3 instances... (although on the face of it, the fittings are the same for all 3 cars)".


Guys on ColtUK.org have run into issues in using incorrect brake lines on the car causing them to burst. Don't ask me how, but HEL UK have acknowledged this and suggested to use evo 3 lines instead
 
donki said:
FWIW first page:

-If upgrading to braided brake lines, ADR approved lines are recommended. This is a quote from HEL UK:
"A NOTE TO ANY COLT OWNERS - Whatever you are told, hear it from the horses mouth right here - Evo 1/2/3 kit IS NOT the same as the FTO kit, and NEITHER kit is the same as a Colt kit! The hose lengths are different in all 3 instances... (although on the face of it, the fittings are the same for all 3 cars)".


Guys on ColtUK.org have run into issues in using incorrect brake lines on the car causing them to burst. Don't ask me how, but HEL UK have acknowledged this and suggested to use evo 3 lines instead
Click to expand...
FWIW

I used the hel braided lines for an FTO on my ce lancer for the fto 276mm front brake upgrade.
I had these lines for about a year with no problem until last month when the front left brake line split.
I am not sure whether the line split because if it was faulty or simply because of wrong size.
I replaced both front brake lines with a custom job from a brake specialist. Cost about 180 dollars.
 
For reference. Brake line lengths in mm from Mitsubishi ASA.

Evo 3
  • Front: 242+210 or 252+220
  • Rear: 217+210 (Disk)
FTO
  • Front: 262+220
  • Rear: 217+210 (Disk)
Mirage Cyborg
  • Front: 252+220
  • Rear: 217+210 (Disk)
Lancer MR
  • Front: 252+200
  • Rear: 230 (Drum)
Evo IV - VI
  • Front 252+220
  • Rear: 310 (Drum in Disk)
 
Last edited:
Has anyone used a FTO bias valve when doing a five stud swap. Or any 276mm front + rear disk swap. I got one to use but it only has 4 inputs where my CE lancer one has 6
 
ABrouwer said:
Has anyone used a FTO bias valve when doing a five stud swap. Or any 276mm front + rear disk swap. I got one to use but it only has 4 inputs where my CE lancer one has 6
Click to expand...
I used one I got from a non-abs GPX when doing my 5 stud swap and it had 6 ports and looked identical to the lancer one. Maybe you got an abs proportioning valve I think they only have 4 ports.

Edit:
I should mention that even though I changed mine (Because I didn't know at the time). According to ASA the lancer prop valve (MB699641) is the same as a non-abs mivec fto. So I wouldn't bother changing it

Small Brakes No ABS MR129300
Small Brakes ABS MR129301
Big Brakes No ABS MB699641
Big Brakes ABS MB699553
 
Last edited:
Just spent the last few weeks trawling & investigating, still stuck with a few things. Anyway, plan, as I've seen done a couple times just in this thread is to do a front brake upgrade involving:
TR/S Single Pot Magna Calipers (Second hand)
New Pads
276mm Mini Cooper Rotors (New)
and Keep original Booster
Replacing wheel bearings due to age & extra load/stress from bigger rotors*

What I'm stuck with is
Do I stick with the factory BMC & hope for the best, or
Upgrade to Evo3 1" BMC & find a proprtioning valve to match?
and with lines, do the magna fittings match up to the factory CE ones?

Just don't want to end up with brakes I can't use cause the rears lock up way too soon or have a real soft pedal feel.
I think Donki mentioned the rears on his locking under hard braking even with discs on the rear, which I'm assuming have bigger slave cylinder size ect. ?
Not desperate for answers, still in the planning stages and if it has been mentioned before, sorry, I've done my best to find/understand it aha.
Very open to discussion and other ideas, TIA
 
I went with evo 3 rotors. Magna/fto brakes have a higher 'minimum thickness' than coopers do and thus cooper rotors might not last as long as they 'start thinner'. The annoying thing is getting them redrilled but not too hard in the long run.

The lines fit as those brakes are on my car, I have HEL braided lines in the rear but didn't do the fronts because my fittings were hacked up from a previous life. They all fit fine. I would rebuild the brakes though, for piece of mind. The kits aren't too expensive for the Magna brakes comparatively to the twin pot ones anyway.

I would upgrade the cylinder, you won't encounter a lot of lock. If donki has locked up he's ploughed his foot enough to make a flinestone floor. I've been in that car many a time at full pace and full stopping and haven't encounter rd a lot of lock
 
Cheers, had considered the thickness difference and even the fact one pad might wear more than the other because of the 1mm difference in offset of the rotor. To compensate, I was going to have a look at some magna rotors and pads, find the minimum thickness for both and use the found values as my new "maximum wear limit" on the cooper rotors / new pads combo. Of course if the pads wear far quicker, I'll change them asap to prevent the caliper piston over extending. Should keep me out of trouble this way, and based on how many km's I do, I'll probably never even need to replace any of it aha. I think I'd cop a paddlin for not doing a rebuild from a bunch of my mates & mentors, so that's definitely on the list.

Good to hear that the factory lines fit up, not a fan of braided lines for a few reasons including that they're not legal on road cars, the fittings can be susceptible to galvanic corrosion, and the fact that you can't really see any wear externally. I'm sure they're great for some people, but just a personal preference to steer clear.

1 vote for BMC upgrade haha, best place to get my hands on one would be wreckers/pick&payless? or do mitsy still produce them?
 
SDate42 said:
Just spent the last few weeks trawling & investigating, still stuck with a few things. Anyway, plan, as I've seen done a couple times just in this thread is to do a front brake upgrade involving:
TR/S Single Pot Magna Calipers (Second hand)
New Pads
276mm Mini Cooper Rotors (New)
and Keep original Booster
Replacing wheel bearings due to age & extra load/stress from bigger rotors*

What I'm stuck with is
Do I stick with the factory BMC & hope for the best, or
Upgrade to Evo3 1" BMC & find a proprtioning valve to match?
and with lines, do the magna fittings match up to the factory CE ones?

Just don't want to end up with brakes I can't use cause the rears lock up way too soon or have a real soft pedal feel.
I think Donki mentioned the rears on his locking under hard braking even with discs on the rear, which I'm assuming have bigger slave cylinder size ect. ?
Not desperate for answers, still in the planning stages and if it has been mentioned before, sorry, I've done my best to find/understand it aha.
Very open to discussion and other ideas, TIA
Click to expand...

Your plan seems good just a few things.
Stick with the stock proportioning valve as it is the same as the fto. I'd also stick with the stock booster and run either a 1" or 15/16" booster.
Don't use the mini cooper rotors as their new thickness is the wear limit for standard fto/evo rotors which when its comes to brakes isn't really a risk you should take.
Not sure if the magna lines are the same as the lancer lines as some magnas did use a tapered fittting instead of a banjo fitting on the caliper side but it is possible to use the magna lines on the lancer as the car side fitting is the same.

Changing the front brakes isn't going to change anything to do with the rears locking unless you don't change the master cyclinder. Not changing the brake master to compensate for the bigger caliper may change the pressure in the system/how its applied which could lead to locking. The proportioning valve is what prevents the rear brakes locking as it basically reduces the brake pressure to the rear brakes proportionally to the front brakes which always get full pressure. But FTO proportioning valve is the same as the lancer one.

SDate42 said:
Good to hear that the factory lines fit up, not a fan of braided lines for a few reasons including that they're not legal on road cars, the fittings can be susceptible to galvanic corrosion, and the fact that you can't really see any wear externally. I'm sure they're great for some people, but just a personal preference to steer clear.
Click to expand...

Braided lines are road legal provided they have the proper certification which HEL brake lines and others have. Galvanic corrosion is not a problem at all with any good quality lines using stainless steel fittings. It is true that you can't see internal wear due to the braid but most lines have a protective cover and most damage will occur from something hitting the line which can easily be seen. Rubber brake lines also have an internal layer that you can't see so it's really a non-issue.
 
Stock lines and stock BMC will be fine, ive never had lock up except the front under rapid hard braking as expected, but i brake what would be considered "aggressively" for a car (braking technique slightlyyyy different in the daily motorbike than a car). I am also running 276mm fronts and 260 rears, so that may be why the rears dont lock (up).

The caliper piston is like 15-20mm deep, and the discs have a "limit" of wear of something around 4mm. Realistically, the piston will never come out far enough be of concern and if it does you'll have bigger issues in the rotor being completely ground away lol. Personally i think its smarter to stick with the correct disc thickness for the caliper - fto/magna caliper=fto/magna disc
 
^^ evo 3 is the same but it comes 4x114.3 which means the redrill will share no holes
 
What should someone expect to pay to get the Evo III rotors redrilled to 4X100?

Also what is the source on saying the Lancer prop valve is the same as the FTO? From the (limited) research I have done, Mitsubishi uses a variety of prop valves on these cars (there are 10+ different part numbers).
I can't say I am sure, but I think that cars with drum rear brakes stock have prop valves that allow for less action at the rear since drum brakes have stronger initial grip that disc brakes.
My theory is supported as I left the stock prop valve when I did the 276mm rotor conversion and when my car went over the pits and did the roller brake test the distribution was 91/9 Front/Rear, whereas ideally it should roughly be 70/30
 
I paid $50 to have mine redrilled but mine was a weird situation. No engineering places near me would do it but I found a custom car guy who went to a workshop an hour away once a week to pick up parts for the cars he built, and that workshop did engineering things that he couldn't, like drilling rotors. For $20/rotor he took them with him on his next run and had them drilled and returned 2 weeks later. I gave him $50 and said keep the $10 for being a champ and buy some beers on me.
 
Spetz said:
What should someone expect to pay to get the Evo III rotors redrilled to 4X100?

Also what is the source on saying the Lancer prop valve is the same as the FTO? From the (limited) research I have done, Mitsubishi uses a variety of prop valves on these cars (there are 10+ different part numbers).
I can't say I am sure, but I think that cars with drum rear brakes stock have prop valves that allow for less action at the rear since drum brakes have stronger initial grip that disc brakes.
My theory is supported as I left the stock prop valve when I did the 276mm rotor conversion and when my car went over the pits and did the roller brake test the distribution was 91/9 Front/Rear, whereas ideally it should roughly be 70/30
Click to expand...

I posted it above but I'll post it again here.
The Mitsubishi parts catalog only lists 1 part number for the lancer coupe and the mirage which is MB699641 and 1 part number for the sedan which is MB699551.
The Mitsubishi parts catalog lists 4 part numbers for the fto which are assigned to the following model types
Small Brakes No ABS MR129300
Small Brakes ABS MR129301
Big Brakes No ABS MB699641
Big Brakes ABS MB699553

Of these MB699641 is the only one of interest and is the same part number as the lancer.

Your theory isn't supported as you don't know Mitsubishi's chosen ratio and didn't test with a swapped valve. How do you know the ideal split is 70/30? Plus a proportioning valve reduces rear brake pressure in proportion to front pressure and so the split would change once the split point is reached and continue to change.

Edited to correct wrong part numbers
Another edit. The sedan proportioning valve (MB699551) is the same as evo 3 (also MB699551)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top