taz composed the following ...
>> Most things are possible, practical is another question altogether.
>>
>> If available brake force is the problem I'd direct my efforts to the
>> front brake. Dicking around with the rear is a waste of time and money.
>
> I would agree with you for road use but The bike in question is one I use
> over in a large quarry and I was thinking of shareing the load out on the
> back
> wheel a bit more.
I ride a '79 Beamish Suzuki Trials and a '91 Fantic 307 Trials .. the
Suzuki doesn't have brakes, or it does, but not so's you'd notice, the
Fantic can stop on a sixpence. The Suzuki is easier to ride 'on the brake'
but the Fantic locks up rear (and front) at will with very little effort.
It's almost impossible to feather the brakes, they seem either on or off (I
suspect a change of pads might help me with that), but I still mostly use
front.
Rear brake is only really used on very steep downhills, when it's just as
good locked, for balancing, or for sliding round obstacles and skids, it
doesn't really slow the bike much, the front does that, whatever the
conditions.
>> If it's a question of confidence "Oooh, don't want to lock up the front
>> 'cos I'm a girly pansy foo foo" I'd go out and practice. Or buy a car.
>
> I will ignor this coment. Say it again though and I'll scratch your eyes
> and hit
> you with my hand bag :-)
As my bit above suggests, I agree with Sweller ...
--
Paul ...
http://www.4x4prejudice.org/index.php
(8(!) Homer Rules ...

"A tosser is a tosser, no matter what mode of transport they're using."