uh_infinity Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I have found what I was wanting to know about the brakes on my newly purchased 2000 Outback. The question I have is: Do I need to obtain both front and back brake parts or just front brake parts? I have come across a 2002 Outback that has both front and back, just want to make sure before I take only the front and find out I should have taken both front and rear. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forester2002s Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I don't understand your question. What brake problem are you trying to address? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porcupine73 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Right what brake problem are you addressing? I would say yes, you can just use the FRONT calipers, brackets, pads and rotors from the 2002 while leaving the rears the same. The 2000 usually had I think the 10.9" was it rotors, whereas later models got a larger rotor. I actually had mine messed up on one side for a couple years, with a later caliper and bracket, so the pad didn't sweep the entire rotor area, and always wondered why it felt funny braking and pulled when braking. So I upgraded the other side to the larger rotor size and caliper bracket. It seems to work just fine. The bulk of the braking occurs in the front anyway. The rear is just along for the ride so to speak. Usually the rear is underbraked from the factory to begin with anyway to give it more stability on the skid pad tests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uh_infinity Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 The problem I want to address is the need for more braking power. I found a thread here that mentioned the 2000 Outbacks had smaller rotors than the 2001 and newer. The thread never mentioned whether I would need just the front brake parts, or both front and back. Just wanting to know if 2001 and newer Outbacks had all brakes increased in size or if it was just the fronts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porcupine73 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Ah ok got it, well yes the fronts were definitely smaller on the 2000's, I believe 10.9", and they were maybe 11.5" on 2001 iirc. I have done this conversion, on the front only. Not sure off hand if the rears are bigger, checking the part #'s at for example subarupartsforyou.com would lend some insight. The majority of the breaking comes from the front anyway; that's not to say the rears should be ignored, but the fronts are going to give the best bang for the buck. If you do the rears, you may have to check the parking brake setup then too, if indeed the rotor sizes are different. It's not likely but possible that if the rears are bigger, the radius for the little parking drum brake is different too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) you can do front and rear or just one, doesn't matter, whatever you want - people do it various ways all the time. get the entire assembly - braker, caliper pins, and caliper. some folks just swap fronts and sometimes there are cases where folks just swap rears (usually when going from drum to disc brakes) bigger brakes won't necessarily give you "more braking power". if your current brakes can lock up your tires (which i'm sure they can) then larger improvements will be seen with new brake fluid and new/better tires. if your current brakes can't lock up your wheels then the problem isn't the size, but something is wrong with the system - probably just 13 year old brake fluid. Edited October 21, 2012 by grossgary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uh_infinity Posted October 21, 2012 Author Share Posted October 21, 2012 Thanks all for the info, that was what I was looking for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porcupine73 Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Also larger front rotors gives you more swept area and more rotor mass equals more thermal mass, i.e. the brakes should be cooler after a stop if all other conditions are the same. You may gain better brake feel and modulation. I didn't really notice a difference when I did it on the 2000 Outback, but, it already had dual piston front calipers; just the rotors were a bit bigger from the 2001. I imagine on the older single piston front calipers for the 14" wheels, yes those things are just marginal to begin with. If you have much rotor rust at all they become inadequate quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 Lucky Texan Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 consider new hoses when you swap in the new calipers. and like gg said, TIRES stop your CAR, brakes stop the wheels from turning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 consider new hoses when you swap in the new calipers.do those help much? i have two sets of stainless steel hoses that i bought years ago and have never installed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 Lucky Texan Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 do those help much? i have two sets of stainless steel hoses that i bought years ago and have never installed. just depends on how 'aged' the rubber ones are. I also have stainless braided hoses on my WRX. But I swapped them when it was only at 1900 miles or less IIRC. I kinda had buyers remorse on those. No detectable difference. (unlike switching to StopTech Street Perf pads, very noticeable improvement with that) But, from what I've read, everyone says if I had put those, or new rubber hoses, on an old car, it likely would have been noticeable due to the 'ballooning' of the old hoses. Basically, think of radiator hoses and alternator belts, they get old right? Refreshing the brake hoses on an old and/or high mileage car just seems right anyway. Since the OP seems to want to do quite a bit of swapping anyway - easy enough to put fresh hoses on the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 at 200,000 now on my wagon and planning on 300,000 for it and my other sedan so might as well install them since i have themn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 Lucky Texan Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 at 200,000 now on my wagon and planning on 300,000 for it and my other sedan so might as well install them since i have themn. let us know, if you don't make any other changes, if you feel they improved anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forester2002s Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Just bleeding the brake fluid may make the pedal feel firmer. So, it would be hard to factor-in new hoses too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porcupine73 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I put stainless braided lines on 2000 Outback some years ago, I think they were for a WRX, they went on fine. I didn't really notice any difference. I think probably if you do a lot of really hard/heavy braking would be the biggest noticeable difference, it seems like that's when the regular rubber hoses would be most likely to swell, under the higher pressure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.