[gsxr6racer]

I disagree with the both brakes will decrease stopping distance. If you are braking to the maximum on the front then the rear tire will almost be off the ground, how can using the back brake then do anything but upset the chassis. I haven't used the rear brake for 5 years and I don't have any trouble stopping in the same or shorter distance than I did when I used both brakes. That's just my 2 cents...

[iwannadie]

I disagree with the both brakes will decrease stopping distance. If you are braking to the maximum on the front then the rear tire will almost be off the ground, how can using the back brake then do anything but upset the chassis. I haven't used the rear brake for 5 years and I don't have any trouble stopping in the same or shorter distance than I did when I used both brakes. That's just my 2 cents...

why do track bikes have rear brakes? if they didnt need/use them theyd take them off to save on weight, but they sure have/use them. the more stopping power you have the better. seems to me if your back wheel is coming off the ground then your over using the front brakes. youd be better off easing the front brake off to keep the back wheel on the ground to use its stopping power. but thats just me, not to mention not everyones bike will lift the back wheel off the ground when fully on the front brake either. ive yet to have the back wheel of the kat get that light ever. my old bike (maruader) certainly would never lift the back wheel lol. so yea, both brakes for me everytime.

[The CyberPoet]

I disagree with the both brakes will decrease stopping distance. If you are braking to the maximum on the front then the rear tire will almost be off the ground, how can using the back brake then do anything but upset the chassis. I haven't used the rear brake for 5 years and I don't have any trouble stopping in the same or shorter distance than I did when I used both brakes. That's just my 2 cents...

This analogy has some flaws... there is a difference between maximum braking potential and maximum effective braking potential while retaining full handling (including factors you ignored, such as the modulus of elasticity for the tire compounds and contact patch sizes).
Yes, in theory, you should be able to straight-line brake on a perfectly dry, perfectly clean surface at maximum force with the bike up in the air at about 42 degrees, supported only on the front tire -- and the steering & chassis geometry & weight of your particular bike puts so much more emphasis on the front than on the rear that the rear easily goes "light" and riders of super-sport bikes are prone to ignoring the rear (just like cruiser riders are prone to ignoring the front).
But the reality is that the limits of braking aren't in the pads, the friction rates, or even the suspension/chassis set-up, but in the interaction of the contact patches with the road surface (esp in the real world, where roads are not perfectly dry, flat and clean). Thus, by increasing the amount of contact patch effectively braking, you retain both a degree of steering capability (some bikes will want to "stand up" more than others under this load, but all will still steer better than on one wheel), you increase the total friction transfer (because tire rubber is an elastic compound travelling over an uneven surface, it behaves different than flat-friction materials), and you increase the lifespan and grippiness of the tires (because you aren't overheating/over-stressing one particular portion as heavily). There's a great write up with test comparisons in one of the last three or four issues of either Bike [UK] or TWO (Two Wheels Only) where they compared the various braking techniques and the inclusion/exclusion of ABS in the equation to come up with actual stopping distances on otherwise-identical set-ups.

PS - iwannadie's question about world-cup and pro-level racing bikes still having rear brakes is one I've raised before and is a very valid vindication -- in classes where removing as much weight as possible is hyper-desirable for performance reasons, why would they retain all the weight affiliated with a rear brake system (including both sprung and unsprung weight) unless it has a very valuable use? The reality is that the rear brake can be used to control the path in a turn (to permit the turn to be tighter if you come in too hot or too wide, or if someone goes down in front of your expected path), and helps shed speed without upsetting the bike as much (because the last thing you want to do on a featherweight bike with 210 - 250 HP is have the back end lift and step-out from under you due to excessive front brakes as you're coming into or in a turn). Additionally, in specific weathers (wet track/wet street), the added effect of the rear brake can easily spell the difference between stopping effectively and washing out the front trying to stop.

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[gsxr6racer]

I guess I should have been more specific in what I meant. What I was talking about was maximum straight up braking such as a panic stop or needing to stop in the shortest possible distance. Every time I ever practiced this or had to do it I have had far better success just using the front brakes. The first time I actually got the rear tire off the ground was on my Katana 600 and I almost binned it because I had the rear brake on as well. The back end got VERY unsettled when I braked hard for a stop sign that I hadn't realized was coming up. I braked very hard and fast with the front brakes and put on the rear brake fairly hard as well. Maybe it was a matter of grabbing too much brake too quickly, but since then I have been more comfortable and have never come across a situation where I wished I had more braking ability while only using the front. I use the rear brake very gently to correct my line in a corner from time to time, but for a panic/shortest distance type stop I feel like I have more control using the front brakes only. Maybe I need to practice using both brakes to an almost lock up state.
Another example is a friend of mine who crashed his bike when someone pulled out in front of him, he was basically doing a rolling stoppie he was braking so hard, how would the rear brake help then? He was an avid rear brake user and he told me that from then on he likely will not use it in panic/shortest possible braking situation again either.

[The CyberPoet]

I don't know how further to try to convince you except to say that you need to practice more and then compare differences again.

And try to remember this coming from a 22 year vetran rider who was also a German licensed driving instructor and who wants nothing but to see you ride well into your old age. Perhaps you need to stop being afraid of your rear brake and learn to apply only moderate pressure on it instead of panic-reacting it into lock-ups every time, then letting the fear dictate not using a vital piece of equipment on your bike...

Cheers
=-= The CyberPoet

[Gromit]

Tried moving your body weight rearwards as you apply the brakes? More weight on the rear wheel should reduce the likelihood of a lockup, and help you stop quicker.

[TurboMike]

I spent a summer on my learner old cruiser which had weak front brakes. When I got my Kat I was locking up the rear all the damn time but now I'm used to it. It brakes totally different from the big ol heavy cruiser and it was me that needed to adjust.