Radial masters have different leverage ratios than goldlines/small pivot, which have different leverage than coffins/big pivot.
I'd wondered about why a 16mm coffin felt squishier than a 16mm goldline, examining the drawings showed the coffins have more leverage on the piston.
Brembo muddied the waters of that trend with the radials, which have even more leverage, but with generally larger pistons.
Drawings representing each style:
Radial:
https://www.oppracing.com/images/cmsuploads/Brembo/OEM_Schematics/oppracing%2010-8210-10%20brembo.pdfSmall pivot:
https://www.oppracing.com/images/cmsuploads/Brembo/OEM_Schematics/oppracing%2010-6870-18%20brembo.pdfBig pivot:
https://www.oppracing.com/images/cmsuploads/Brembo/OEM_Schematics/oppracing%2010-5053-16%20brembo.pdfIf we take the distance from the pivot to their approximate "index finger position", divided by the distance from the pivot to the piston bore axis:
[18/19] Radial - 98/19 = 5.16
Small pivot - 77/24 = 3.21
Big pivot - 75/22 = 3.41
Then divide those numbers by piston area, we get:
[18/19] Radial = 0.0203
Small pivot = 0.0160
Big pivot = 0.0170
Bigger numbers mean more net leverage.
Further muddying the water is (my suspicion!) differences in piston seal/bleed hole arrangements.
The coffins seem to require the most lever travel to 'harden up', small pivots are better, and radials better yet again.
Additionally, Brembo has produced a bewildering array of radial configurations; [17/18], [18/19], [19/16], [16/18], [19/20] etc, etc.
Just those 5 have net leverage numbers ranging from 0.0173 to 0.0271.
IMO, they could have had a logical and clear family of piston/leverage combinations, rather than the seemingly random combinations they have.
Perhaps I've just not been able to break their code...
Yet again, Italy has decided to not contact me for help
.
I'm going to try to make a bit of sense of their selection.
