SNEAK PEEK: OTTP Harcore Big Brake upgrade!!!
LSX RWD S/C conversion
iTrader: (2)
Joined: 03-25-05
Posts: 10,450
Likes: 277
From: Maple Ridge, BC, Canada
John, having all of these goodies for our cars is going to kill me. I want to finish one car and then I see all of these things for the other one.
Arrrgggghhhhhh, my head is going to explode
Arrrgggghhhhhh, my head is going to explode
Senior Member
Joined: 02-03-08
Posts: 3,454
Likes: 1
From: Port Perry Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 02-03-08
Posts: 3,454
Likes: 1
From: Port Perry Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 01-12-09
Posts: 4,220
Likes: 0
From: Illinois
New Member
Joined: 12-05-07
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
From: tempe, az
Because this is not a vendor thread where I'd not impose, I have some questions.
Lets play with some more numbers since you guys like to throw physics and stuff out there, we'll keep it simple but very relevant.
All numbers are purposefully random, but are constants. IE: Same pad coeffiecient of friction, same line pressure, and appropriate effective radii are used as required.
Numbers cannot be 'random' if they are used to express comparative values. How does that work?
SO.
Stock LSJ brakes with XXX pads, and XXX line pressure, our base line, creates: 375ftlbs axle torque.
Ok, so random value 1 equals 375.
Hardcore rotors with same exact pads and same exac line pressure as stock creates: 398ftlbs axle torque. a 5.7% increase with merely a rotor change.
What's a hardcore rotor?? You can't make a rotor only change and develop more torque unless it's larger. Wider, holes, slots etc...none of that will change the working value of the equation. Unless the oe caliper will accept a larger rotor inside its bridge how does this larger rotor fit?
Most common Wilwood(and similar)type brake kit with 4piston caliper and 12.19" rotor, same pad friction as above, same line pressure as above: 380ftlbs axle torque. A mere 1.3% increase in torque, but with a thinner rotor than stock arguably a downgrade.
Arguably dependent upon piston size of course. And with near equal clamping values the main working change would remain based on rotor size more than piston area or qty. Rotor width is not a downgrade dependent upon the use; certainly a TA car would benefit from a beefier rotor for it's intended use, however the Daily Driver and occasional spirited canyon run, weekend drag car....you'd never build enough heat to worry about it. And from the other side of the coin; 15lb rotors would arguably be a downgrade to handling and acceleration.
Wilwood DP6 and similar brake kits with 13" rotor, same line pressure, same pad friction: 419ftlbs torque. an increase of 5.1% over the Hardcore setup. This increase comes at a cost of many hundreds of dollars, possible wheel clearance issues, and reduced ease of serviceability, not to mention the without the benefits of the true floating rotor setup. If you needed that extra 5.1% the 6pots provide but couldnt or wouldnt use/afford them or the wheels they may need, a simple pad swap would gain that for you(as little as .025 higher cF on the pad in the Harcore kit would have it creating more torque than the 13" 6pot with our baseline pads.
Agreed that the 5% value (still unclear how it was calculated) is minimal. But with a larger swept area, greater Er, medium rotor weight it's equally suited to the demands of the average user. Cost being relative any true BBK is going to run upwards of $1200. Wheel clearance would seldom be an issue as in the case of the DP6 it offers a very low profile for fitment. So far I've not come into any 17" wheel they have not fit. Having installed this same package on a MINI with BBS's last Saturday they both look and perform flawlessly. I fail to see the service issues given the reasonable pad costs, lower replacement rotor costs and ease of pad change and lack of noisy rotors for street use.
What's often incorrect about some of these types of discussions is the notion that somehow fitting any of these parts to your ride will afford you a 5.1% increase (whatever number) in stopping power. Doesn't work that way. What changes are rotor tq relative to tire torque values. You've all read "tires stop your car, not brakes" and while that's a bit of an oversimplification there's truth to it.
To properly to comparative data you'd need to establish a threshold of rotor tq equal to maximum tire adhesion. With that number established only then can you determine what brake system changes are used to achieve that same value and how they are done.
Let's assume that a tire skids at a value of 10,000 with a stock brake set up. Guess what; with 14" rotors and 4 pot race calipers and pads....it still skids at 10,000. What's changed is only the mathematics of how we reached the 10k value. This is only done through a four main methods: rotor diameter, clamping force, pad Cf, and input pressure. Nothing more. The most common and effective means (beyond the first attempt at better pads which we all know only goes to short term gains) is a larger diameter rotor. The rotor dia change benefits in more ways than any other; increasing Er and total mass or overall efficiency where as pad changes and piston area changes can have negative side effects as we've discussed.
In all it looks like a fine package of replacement rotors for sure, I'm just not following some of the other points.
Lets play with some more numbers since you guys like to throw physics and stuff out there, we'll keep it simple but very relevant.
All numbers are purposefully random, but are constants. IE: Same pad coeffiecient of friction, same line pressure, and appropriate effective radii are used as required.
Numbers cannot be 'random' if they are used to express comparative values. How does that work?
SO.
Stock LSJ brakes with XXX pads, and XXX line pressure, our base line, creates: 375ftlbs axle torque.
Ok, so random value 1 equals 375.
Hardcore rotors with same exact pads and same exac line pressure as stock creates: 398ftlbs axle torque. a 5.7% increase with merely a rotor change.
What's a hardcore rotor?? You can't make a rotor only change and develop more torque unless it's larger. Wider, holes, slots etc...none of that will change the working value of the equation. Unless the oe caliper will accept a larger rotor inside its bridge how does this larger rotor fit?
Most common Wilwood(and similar)type brake kit with 4piston caliper and 12.19" rotor, same pad friction as above, same line pressure as above: 380ftlbs axle torque. A mere 1.3% increase in torque, but with a thinner rotor than stock arguably a downgrade.
Arguably dependent upon piston size of course. And with near equal clamping values the main working change would remain based on rotor size more than piston area or qty. Rotor width is not a downgrade dependent upon the use; certainly a TA car would benefit from a beefier rotor for it's intended use, however the Daily Driver and occasional spirited canyon run, weekend drag car....you'd never build enough heat to worry about it. And from the other side of the coin; 15lb rotors would arguably be a downgrade to handling and acceleration.
Wilwood DP6 and similar brake kits with 13" rotor, same line pressure, same pad friction: 419ftlbs torque. an increase of 5.1% over the Hardcore setup. This increase comes at a cost of many hundreds of dollars, possible wheel clearance issues, and reduced ease of serviceability, not to mention the without the benefits of the true floating rotor setup. If you needed that extra 5.1% the 6pots provide but couldnt or wouldnt use/afford them or the wheels they may need, a simple pad swap would gain that for you(as little as .025 higher cF on the pad in the Harcore kit would have it creating more torque than the 13" 6pot with our baseline pads.
Agreed that the 5% value (still unclear how it was calculated) is minimal. But with a larger swept area, greater Er, medium rotor weight it's equally suited to the demands of the average user. Cost being relative any true BBK is going to run upwards of $1200. Wheel clearance would seldom be an issue as in the case of the DP6 it offers a very low profile for fitment. So far I've not come into any 17" wheel they have not fit. Having installed this same package on a MINI with BBS's last Saturday they both look and perform flawlessly. I fail to see the service issues given the reasonable pad costs, lower replacement rotor costs and ease of pad change and lack of noisy rotors for street use.
What's often incorrect about some of these types of discussions is the notion that somehow fitting any of these parts to your ride will afford you a 5.1% increase (whatever number) in stopping power. Doesn't work that way. What changes are rotor tq relative to tire torque values. You've all read "tires stop your car, not brakes" and while that's a bit of an oversimplification there's truth to it.
To properly to comparative data you'd need to establish a threshold of rotor tq equal to maximum tire adhesion. With that number established only then can you determine what brake system changes are used to achieve that same value and how they are done.
Let's assume that a tire skids at a value of 10,000 with a stock brake set up. Guess what; with 14" rotors and 4 pot race calipers and pads....it still skids at 10,000. What's changed is only the mathematics of how we reached the 10k value. This is only done through a four main methods: rotor diameter, clamping force, pad Cf, and input pressure. Nothing more. The most common and effective means (beyond the first attempt at better pads which we all know only goes to short term gains) is a larger diameter rotor. The rotor dia change benefits in more ways than any other; increasing Er and total mass or overall efficiency where as pad changes and piston area changes can have negative side effects as we've discussed.
In all it looks like a fine package of replacement rotors for sure, I'm just not following some of the other points.
^^ everything you said is basically what i explained earlier. However, the added stopping power from these brakes becomes a necessity when the heat levels of a rotor/pad become so intense that they would not be able to deliver enough stopping power to reach that 10,000 value you mentioned with a stock setup, but it WILL be able to with the use of a larger caliper, better pad, and larger diameter rotor. In addition, the larger rotor will cause the system to be able to absorb more energy dispersed from braking, preventing (or at least delaying) the onset of this inability to provide the required force, aka brake fading
Im gonna guess you already knew all of that though, and were merely educating the others. Im just saying its already beenmentioned and explained (by me
) earlier in this thread
Im gonna guess you already knew all of that though, and were merely educating the others. Im just saying its already beenmentioned and explained (by me
) earlier in this thread
New Member
Joined: 12-05-07
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
From: tempe, az
No I didn't....lol
I was only looking at it from a point by point basis from the post is all. And frankly as it was at least in part targeted at a product I represent I feel it's only in the consumers best interest to be hear all sides of the issues. I confess that I didn't read, only scanned your posts, and saw nothing to take issue with.
Couldn't agree more on the added speed and need for a greater heat sink. To that end the fore mentioned rotors would appear to be very much in line with the needs of the TA application. But let's be honest here: that's the far less than 1%ers out there too. The vast majority of the end users fall far more into the Joe Consumer and Eddie Enthusiast market where the need and trade offs are seldom if every exploited.
I should correct myself on one point: I said that the fit of such kits will not make for "more brake power" before referencing maximum deceleration. What I should have said was that despite making more rotor tq (regardless of how) the maximum tire torque will remain the same and thus you'd only be able to exploit these gains to that level. For guys running Race compound tires on the track- you can see some benefits for sure. Street tires; not so much.
I was only looking at it from a point by point basis from the post is all. And frankly as it was at least in part targeted at a product I represent I feel it's only in the consumers best interest to be hear all sides of the issues. I confess that I didn't read, only scanned your posts, and saw nothing to take issue with.
Couldn't agree more on the added speed and need for a greater heat sink. To that end the fore mentioned rotors would appear to be very much in line with the needs of the TA application. But let's be honest here: that's the far less than 1%ers out there too. The vast majority of the end users fall far more into the Joe Consumer and Eddie Enthusiast market where the need and trade offs are seldom if every exploited.
I should correct myself on one point: I said that the fit of such kits will not make for "more brake power" before referencing maximum deceleration. What I should have said was that despite making more rotor tq (regardless of how) the maximum tire torque will remain the same and thus you'd only be able to exploit these gains to that level. For guys running Race compound tires on the track- you can see some benefits for sure. Street tires; not so much.
just for emphasis this was my earlier post
this was my earlier postwhat you said would prove why you dont want to just lock the tires, and i completely agree, however, clamping force is not an issue though. lets say if you push the brake 90% in with a stock caliper/rotor, then the tires lock. If you push more than that, then the amount of gripping force stopping the rotor becomes greater than the amount of gripping force from the tires that are trying to keep the rotors spinning. Lets say you dissipate X joules of energy/sec in the form of heat, of course.
You want to push the brake as hard as possible WITHOUT the tires locking, like you said, so you push the brake in 89%.
Now, lets do the same thing with a larger rotor and caliper. Now, when you push the brake in 80%, the tires lock, instead of the 90% you had to push before. So here, you would push the brake pedal in 79% of the way, so the amount of gripping force trying to stop the rotors doesn't exceed the amount of gripping force from your tires making them keep spinning, just like the previous example.
Now, I hope you agree that these two examples are pretty much what a good driver (or a car's ABS system) attempt to do. If you look though, since the amount of force between the tires and the pavement has not changed between these two examples, then the amount of joules/sec of energy that the brakes can remove from the car without locking the tires has also not changed. Adding larger rotors and calipers did absolutely nothing to improve your 60-0 time.
I might as well make this a full lesson for everyone else reading this:
Now, the reason we would want larger rotors, is because as the calipers clamp down on the rotors, the rotors become extremely hot. Think about it, you're converting all the energy it took to move a 3,000lb object 60 miles per hour directly into heat within just a couple of seconds. As the rotors heat up, the brake pads on the calipers have a harder time gripping the rotor, so while you may only need to push the brake in 80% the first stop, you may need to push it in 82% the second time, then 85%, then 90%, etc., until the stock system is no longer able to create enough friction between the calipers and the rotors to lock the tires. This number will go up exponentially, not linearly btw.
A larger rotor would dissipate that heat, leaving you the ability to continue braking to your tires limits for long periods of time.
The reason you would have a larger caliper, however, is this:
If you use a larger caliper on the same car, you would agree that you would not need to push the brake pedal as hard to get the same force exerted by the caliper onto the rotor, correct? So, if you start the above scenario, but you now use 60% maximum braking effort as your starting point, instead of 80% as before, then you will have more room to work with.
The reason why I am saying a larger rotor is more important than a larger caliper is because like i said, this brake fading is an exponential figure, so using a caliper that's 2x the size of a stock caliper will NOT yield 2x as many stops before heat soaking, whereas if your rotor is 2x bigger than stock, it is not only harder to heat up because there is more material to have to heat, but there is more surface area as well, so the rate of cooling will increase also. With a larger rotor, it is possible to avoid brake fading all together, since the rate of cooling might match the rate of heating/braking in a larger than stock rotor, whereas a larger caliper will never prevent heat soak, it will merely band aid the problem by allowing a couple additional stops before brake fade occurs.
I hope this helped explain, because it sure as hell took me a while to type...lol
BTW, i dont autoX, just FYI
You want to push the brake as hard as possible WITHOUT the tires locking, like you said, so you push the brake in 89%.
Now, lets do the same thing with a larger rotor and caliper. Now, when you push the brake in 80%, the tires lock, instead of the 90% you had to push before. So here, you would push the brake pedal in 79% of the way, so the amount of gripping force trying to stop the rotors doesn't exceed the amount of gripping force from your tires making them keep spinning, just like the previous example.
Now, I hope you agree that these two examples are pretty much what a good driver (or a car's ABS system) attempt to do. If you look though, since the amount of force between the tires and the pavement has not changed between these two examples, then the amount of joules/sec of energy that the brakes can remove from the car without locking the tires has also not changed. Adding larger rotors and calipers did absolutely nothing to improve your 60-0 time.
I might as well make this a full lesson for everyone else reading this:
Now, the reason we would want larger rotors, is because as the calipers clamp down on the rotors, the rotors become extremely hot. Think about it, you're converting all the energy it took to move a 3,000lb object 60 miles per hour directly into heat within just a couple of seconds. As the rotors heat up, the brake pads on the calipers have a harder time gripping the rotor, so while you may only need to push the brake in 80% the first stop, you may need to push it in 82% the second time, then 85%, then 90%, etc., until the stock system is no longer able to create enough friction between the calipers and the rotors to lock the tires. This number will go up exponentially, not linearly btw.
A larger rotor would dissipate that heat, leaving you the ability to continue braking to your tires limits for long periods of time.
The reason you would have a larger caliper, however, is this:
If you use a larger caliper on the same car, you would agree that you would not need to push the brake pedal as hard to get the same force exerted by the caliper onto the rotor, correct? So, if you start the above scenario, but you now use 60% maximum braking effort as your starting point, instead of 80% as before, then you will have more room to work with.
The reason why I am saying a larger rotor is more important than a larger caliper is because like i said, this brake fading is an exponential figure, so using a caliper that's 2x the size of a stock caliper will NOT yield 2x as many stops before heat soaking, whereas if your rotor is 2x bigger than stock, it is not only harder to heat up because there is more material to have to heat, but there is more surface area as well, so the rate of cooling will increase also. With a larger rotor, it is possible to avoid brake fading all together, since the rate of cooling might match the rate of heating/braking in a larger than stock rotor, whereas a larger caliper will never prevent heat soak, it will merely band aid the problem by allowing a couple additional stops before brake fade occurs.
I hope this helped explain, because it sure as hell took me a while to type...lol
BTW, i dont autoX, just FYI
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: 05-25-05
Posts: 7,661
Likes: 7
From: Southern New Jersey
Numbers cannot be 'random' if they are used to express comparative values. How does that work?
Clearly I mispoke/typed. Random as in I did not use the exact specs from the Cobalt, or any specific pads cF. Not random as in my values were ever changing, as I stated all the values were constant unless otherwise noted. pad cF, line pressure the same among all examples, the appropriate piston areas for the stock LSJ caliper and the comparable 1.38 FBDL and 1.38/1.0/1.0 DP6 were used to keep things relevant to the Cobalt. I believe you know this since you had no problems with my comparisons merely decided to point out "defficiencies" in the verbage of my post as a way to in some way devalue them
What's a hardcore rotor?? You can't make a rotor only change and develop more torque unless it's larger. Wider, holes, slots etc...none of that will change the working value of the equation. Unless the oe caliper will accept a larger rotor inside its bridge how does this larger rotor fit?
The "hardcore rotor upgrade" is what OTTP is calling this kit, had you read the very first post you would know they are larger and include a caliper relocation bracket. Perhaps skimming some posts and trying to show people "all sides" isnt ideal.
Arguably dependent upon piston size of course. And with near equal clamping values the main working change would remain based on rotor size more than piston area or qty. Rotor width is not a downgrade dependent upon the use; certainly a TA car would benefit from a beefier rotor for it's intended use, however the Daily Driver and occasional spirited canyon run, weekend drag car....you'd never build enough heat to worry about it. And from the other side of the coin; 15lb rotors would arguably be a downgrade to handling and acceleration.
As I stated above and I can only guess that you know, I was comparing similary sized calipers, had I been using a Wilwood caliper with significantly larger or smaller than stock piston area there would have bveen a much larger gap between stock and the 4piston setup. Too light a rotor is a worthless upgrade, you know this as well, and based on your continued comments regarding daily driving, I am sure you know that many of the 12.19 x .81 kits are often used merely for show and arent actually an upgrade when the rotor is concerned.
Agreed that the 5% value (still unclear how it was calculated) is minimal. But with a larger swept area, greater Er, medium rotor weight it's equally suited to the demands of the average user. Cost being relative any true BBK is going to run upwards of $1200. Wheel clearance would seldom be an issue as in the case of the DP6 it offers a very low profile for fitment. So far I've not come into any 17" wheel they have not fit. Having installed this same package on a MINI with BBS's last Saturday they both look and perform flawlessly. I fail to see the service issues given the reasonable pad costs, lower replacement rotor costs and ease of pad change and lack of noisy rotors for street use.
I can post the values I used if I must, but clearly you have more of an issue with me not "showing my work" than coming up with the proper answer. Larger swept area, greater Er, rotor mass, and floating construction are all the key points of this upgrade. I like how you feel the need to specify "true" BBK, as if somehow a larger rotor, higher quality rotor in of itself isnt worthy of the BBK moniker. As you mentioned short of increasing caliper clamping force, the rotor is the realistically rthe single most important part of the system, this upgrade takes full advantage of that. Serviceability as in ease of aquiring parts locally, and the ability of finding technicians familiar with the system.
This is only done through a four main methods: rotor diameter, clamping force, pad Cf, and input pressure. Nothing more. The most common and effective means (beyond the first attempt at better pads which we all know only goes to short term gains) is a larger diameter rotor. The rotor dia change benefits in more ways than any other; increasing Er and total mass or overall efficiency where as pad changes and piston area changes can have negative side effects as we've discussed.
Yup, thats why the rotor being offered here is larger than stock.
Clearly I mispoke/typed. Random as in I did not use the exact specs from the Cobalt, or any specific pads cF. Not random as in my values were ever changing, as I stated all the values were constant unless otherwise noted. pad cF, line pressure the same among all examples, the appropriate piston areas for the stock LSJ caliper and the comparable 1.38 FBDL and 1.38/1.0/1.0 DP6 were used to keep things relevant to the Cobalt. I believe you know this since you had no problems with my comparisons merely decided to point out "defficiencies" in the verbage of my post as a way to in some way devalue them
What's a hardcore rotor?? You can't make a rotor only change and develop more torque unless it's larger. Wider, holes, slots etc...none of that will change the working value of the equation. Unless the oe caliper will accept a larger rotor inside its bridge how does this larger rotor fit?
The "hardcore rotor upgrade" is what OTTP is calling this kit, had you read the very first post you would know they are larger and include a caliper relocation bracket. Perhaps skimming some posts and trying to show people "all sides" isnt ideal.
Arguably dependent upon piston size of course. And with near equal clamping values the main working change would remain based on rotor size more than piston area or qty. Rotor width is not a downgrade dependent upon the use; certainly a TA car would benefit from a beefier rotor for it's intended use, however the Daily Driver and occasional spirited canyon run, weekend drag car....you'd never build enough heat to worry about it. And from the other side of the coin; 15lb rotors would arguably be a downgrade to handling and acceleration.
As I stated above and I can only guess that you know, I was comparing similary sized calipers, had I been using a Wilwood caliper with significantly larger or smaller than stock piston area there would have bveen a much larger gap between stock and the 4piston setup. Too light a rotor is a worthless upgrade, you know this as well, and based on your continued comments regarding daily driving, I am sure you know that many of the 12.19 x .81 kits are often used merely for show and arent actually an upgrade when the rotor is concerned.
Agreed that the 5% value (still unclear how it was calculated) is minimal. But with a larger swept area, greater Er, medium rotor weight it's equally suited to the demands of the average user. Cost being relative any true BBK is going to run upwards of $1200. Wheel clearance would seldom be an issue as in the case of the DP6 it offers a very low profile for fitment. So far I've not come into any 17" wheel they have not fit. Having installed this same package on a MINI with BBS's last Saturday they both look and perform flawlessly. I fail to see the service issues given the reasonable pad costs, lower replacement rotor costs and ease of pad change and lack of noisy rotors for street use.
I can post the values I used if I must, but clearly you have more of an issue with me not "showing my work" than coming up with the proper answer. Larger swept area, greater Er, rotor mass, and floating construction are all the key points of this upgrade. I like how you feel the need to specify "true" BBK, as if somehow a larger rotor, higher quality rotor in of itself isnt worthy of the BBK moniker. As you mentioned short of increasing caliper clamping force, the rotor is the realistically rthe single most important part of the system, this upgrade takes full advantage of that. Serviceability as in ease of aquiring parts locally, and the ability of finding technicians familiar with the system.
This is only done through a four main methods: rotor diameter, clamping force, pad Cf, and input pressure. Nothing more. The most common and effective means (beyond the first attempt at better pads which we all know only goes to short term gains) is a larger diameter rotor. The rotor dia change benefits in more ways than any other; increasing Er and total mass or overall efficiency where as pad changes and piston area changes can have negative side effects as we've discussed.
Yup, thats why the rotor being offered here is larger than stock.
Senior Member
Joined: 02-03-08
Posts: 3,454
Likes: 1
From: Port Perry Ontario
x 2. Add this. With brakes MASS IS EVERYTHING. There. I said it.
OOPS. I goofed. CARBON ROTORS CHANGE EVERYTHING. There. I said it. for sure.
Oh ...one more thing: that OTTP Hardcore Time Attack floating rotor BBK kit? They rock, for the least amount of money and the highest "made in the USA" quality of any BBK kit. Life on the rotors? 30k miles and 2 seasons and counting...
Next up? TC OEM Brembos. THey rock too...coming soon? Floating rotors for the TC.
And they said life could not be this good....
Thanks Maven, thanks Josh 
OOPS. I goofed. CARBON ROTORS CHANGE EVERYTHING. There. I said it.
for sure. Oh ...one more thing: that OTTP Hardcore Time Attack floating rotor BBK kit? They rock, for the least amount of money and the highest "made in the USA" quality of any BBK kit. Life on the rotors? 30k miles and 2 seasons and counting...
Next up? TC OEM Brembos. THey rock too...coming soon? Floating rotors for the TC.
And they said life could not be this good....
Thanks Maven, thanks Josh
..... NOW
New Member
Joined: 12-05-07
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
From: tempe, az
We're on more of the same page Maven than you may think. In a pm I also fully endorsed your proposal of the above rotors for the use you have selected.
I noted the rotor in the post, but without mention of a relocation bracket in the longer one I took it to be that there was a proposal to use larger 0E part with ease and failed to make the connection between "hard core rotors" being the tag for the complete package.
I'll remain leery of applying the name BBK in the truest sense to such kits only for the reason that they don't often include calipers (the customer scours the junkard at times) nor are they calipers of the conventional BBK design- multi piston, fixed mount etc. This design is nothing new, Powerslot offered them some years ago and I have supplied replacement rings for some.
Semantics perhaps but the two largest issues for me to over come would be the down side of a single piston caliper still and the sizing of that piston. **Proven effective I'm sure I am only explaining my resistance to calling it a BBK. The single pot caliper will continue to exhibit uneven pressure points on the pad and not be as efficient in clamp and release as the other. The second bing piston sizing, touched on by both you and the hunter is that such a change in rotor size without a reduction in piston area will/may over bias the front end- especially with proper race pads. True this remains a fundamental problem with all FWD cars but the huge gains in effectiveness by way of dia, grippier pads, and a need for lower pressure from the large caliper will also mean that the rears will receive far less pressure than normal. That can translate into an even greater demand on the front than what the intent of the heat sink had been asked for.
My only thoughts for using such a beast of a rotor would be to source a caliper for it with a 10-15% reduction in area. Now if you have done so; hats off for it. Much for that reason I certainly don't expect you to "show me the numbers" but on the other hand data seldom lies. You are free to spend time on the bias calc and see what happens- establish a 'skid' value and then watch the rear line pressure when you achieve the skid with large increases in pad and rotor. Not trying to be an ass (although not new) if I didn't enjoy the discussions I'd not bother extending you a helping hand.
Truth be told the primary reason for scanning some of this and rebutting it was that it takes shots at my TCE/Wilwood product in unexplained ways that are not always clear to the average consumer. Actually I'm flattered to be the bench mark to compare too! And I pay to advertise and promote these products- the good and bad. For that reason alone if it's being dumped on I'd at least want a clear understanding of why and be obliged to request more details. I have no issue with your design only ask that if we're going to have a comparative discussion that we both bring all the info and allow the consumer to weigh the pros and cons of both.
I noted the rotor in the post, but without mention of a relocation bracket in the longer one I took it to be that there was a proposal to use larger 0E part with ease and failed to make the connection between "hard core rotors" being the tag for the complete package.
I'll remain leery of applying the name BBK in the truest sense to such kits only for the reason that they don't often include calipers (the customer scours the junkard at times) nor are they calipers of the conventional BBK design- multi piston, fixed mount etc. This design is nothing new, Powerslot offered them some years ago and I have supplied replacement rings for some.
Semantics perhaps but the two largest issues for me to over come would be the down side of a single piston caliper still and the sizing of that piston. **Proven effective I'm sure I am only explaining my resistance to calling it a BBK. The single pot caliper will continue to exhibit uneven pressure points on the pad and not be as efficient in clamp and release as the other. The second bing piston sizing, touched on by both you and the hunter is that such a change in rotor size without a reduction in piston area will/may over bias the front end- especially with proper race pads. True this remains a fundamental problem with all FWD cars but the huge gains in effectiveness by way of dia, grippier pads, and a need for lower pressure from the large caliper will also mean that the rears will receive far less pressure than normal. That can translate into an even greater demand on the front than what the intent of the heat sink had been asked for.
My only thoughts for using such a beast of a rotor would be to source a caliper for it with a 10-15% reduction in area. Now if you have done so; hats off for it. Much for that reason I certainly don't expect you to "show me the numbers" but on the other hand data seldom lies. You are free to spend time on the bias calc and see what happens- establish a 'skid' value and then watch the rear line pressure when you achieve the skid with large increases in pad and rotor. Not trying to be an ass (although not new) if I didn't enjoy the discussions I'd not bother extending you a helping hand.
Truth be told the primary reason for scanning some of this and rebutting it was that it takes shots at my TCE/Wilwood product in unexplained ways that are not always clear to the average consumer. Actually I'm flattered to be the bench mark to compare too! And I pay to advertise and promote these products- the good and bad. For that reason alone if it's being dumped on I'd at least want a clear understanding of why and be obliged to request more details. I have no issue with your design only ask that if we're going to have a comparative discussion that we both bring all the info and allow the consumer to weigh the pros and cons of both.
Senior Member
Joined: 02-03-08
Posts: 3,454
Likes: 1
From: Port Perry Ontario
fair post.
tell you what. I have to go to the us to pick up parts (unexpected, pita)tomorrow. You take a rotor and give me all the dimensions, and send it to me. That will speed up the process. Tomorrow on the way to NY I will stop and get the alloy for the hats...
tell you what. I have to go to the us to pick up parts (unexpected, pita)tomorrow. You take a rotor and give me all the dimensions, and send it to me. That will speed up the process. Tomorrow on the way to NY I will stop and get the alloy for the hats...
Last edited by qwikredline; Apr 14, 2009 at 08:14 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Joined: 05-25-05
Posts: 7,661
Likes: 7
From: Southern New Jersey
Want me to send you the measurements Qwik? When do you need it by? Id have to do it at lunch time. Ive got rotors in the trunk.
Senior Member
Joined: 02-03-08
Posts: 3,454
Likes: 1
From: Port Perry Ontario
Senior Member
Joined: 02-03-08
Posts: 3,454
Likes: 1
From: Port Perry Ontario
Thank you thank you spec sheet emailed THursday will do i wish i had more rear bars ready i am going to niagara falls ny tomorrow last minute pickup of ARE dry sump and brembo parts; next week may go for tires....so race truck for your next shipment i think....we are sooooo busy and i am not complaining
