Big Brake kit: Too good of a deal or Scam?
1. I guess I missed it. Where?
2. In reference to post #50, you speak of width here. I was only referring back to that.
3. Yes I do choose to change pads to change bias. How? Based upon both experience, conversation with the customer, and vehicle dynamics. I won't tune a Focus the same as I tune an Impala.
If we make changes we DON'T maintain the stock values; we make some alterations based upon what the vehicle will see in use. A stock bias value is out the window to a degree on a race track. You seem stuck on "maintain" for some reason. Even assuming track condition changes you don't maintain, you change to the suited need. Granted you don't have twin mc's and a bias **** but if it were raining I could pit your car and change pads to exploit more rear brake in the wet that wouldn't work in the dry. Optimum wet vs dry is different as is optimum street vs open track use.
I've posted a modest list of Wilwood bias values for you to review, what's missing? Pick a kit you want specific data on and with what pad compounds and I can tell you what the value is. If you don't care to change pads (on either the kits or the oem parts) use a constant value. Not sure what else to tell you here; you can use the calculator just as easily as I can.
2. In reference to post #50, you speak of width here. I was only referring back to that.
3. Yes I do choose to change pads to change bias. How? Based upon both experience, conversation with the customer, and vehicle dynamics. I won't tune a Focus the same as I tune an Impala.
If we make changes we DON'T maintain the stock values; we make some alterations based upon what the vehicle will see in use. A stock bias value is out the window to a degree on a race track. You seem stuck on "maintain" for some reason. Even assuming track condition changes you don't maintain, you change to the suited need. Granted you don't have twin mc's and a bias **** but if it were raining I could pit your car and change pads to exploit more rear brake in the wet that wouldn't work in the dry. Optimum wet vs dry is different as is optimum street vs open track use.
I've posted a modest list of Wilwood bias values for you to review, what's missing? Pick a kit you want specific data on and with what pad compounds and I can tell you what the value is. If you don't care to change pads (on either the kits or the oem parts) use a constant value. Not sure what else to tell you here; you can use the calculator just as easily as I can.
1. I read your #41 Jeff. What's there that's of any help? Sorry man, we're not communicating on this one. All I see you posting is a bunch of different rotor sizes and that some cars were single piston, later cars twin pot ect.
2. I see that. But Jeff that doesn't mean a lot on the face of it. You still cannot get the data you want from what's provided. Without the exact specs of all the options you still have only part of the information.
The reason for the rotor change is probably more to do with thermal capacity and temperature management than differences on brake torque. In fact unless you know all the variable it's just as easy to have less brake torque with the larger rotor.
Comparing the first two in post #50 I see a difference of .600"d which equates to .300r that change alone nets you but just over 1% value. We're hadly talking significant values here. 60/40 vs 61/39 ?
I agree with you fully that a reasonable balance is importan. And yes I'm aware of some the testing done by other companies etc. etc. I'm also aware that the general market runs out and buys more aggressive front pads for their harder use; both for temperature and (I hate this term) stopping power. So if you go from a factory street pad in the front and then change to Hawk HT10s for your track day (pick a brand and pad) and learned that you don't really need to do much to the rear, you've engineered another (rough est) 8% front bias into your car. If you add some mild rears it may be only up 5% to the front. As you know; variables by the pad Cf.
So if a larger front only application can provide the same change without the need for track pads is that so bad? A: maybe, maybe not. If the pad doesn't break down from heat you'd have the same results but often of course they do.
Example: I have numerous Lightning kits in service. Most guys run Poly H for the hard track days in their 13" kit. Way front brake bias? You bet, ever try keeping the *** end of a pickup on the ground from 140? lol Another customer runs a huge 16" kit and only a mid level street pad; BP20 in it. And he can darn near outbrake some of the most hardcore performance sedans with it you'll ever throw at him. (yea he's a bit nuts) Point is that you can tax the hell out of a smaller part or work a larger one more efficiently with the same results. The larger 16s don't need track pads.
2. I see that. But Jeff that doesn't mean a lot on the face of it. You still cannot get the data you want from what's provided. Without the exact specs of all the options you still have only part of the information.
The reason for the rotor change is probably more to do with thermal capacity and temperature management than differences on brake torque. In fact unless you know all the variable it's just as easy to have less brake torque with the larger rotor.
Comparing the first two in post #50 I see a difference of .600"d which equates to .300r that change alone nets you but just over 1% value. We're hadly talking significant values here. 60/40 vs 61/39 ?
I agree with you fully that a reasonable balance is importan. And yes I'm aware of some the testing done by other companies etc. etc. I'm also aware that the general market runs out and buys more aggressive front pads for their harder use; both for temperature and (I hate this term) stopping power. So if you go from a factory street pad in the front and then change to Hawk HT10s for your track day (pick a brand and pad) and learned that you don't really need to do much to the rear, you've engineered another (rough est) 8% front bias into your car. If you add some mild rears it may be only up 5% to the front. As you know; variables by the pad Cf.
So if a larger front only application can provide the same change without the need for track pads is that so bad? A: maybe, maybe not. If the pad doesn't break down from heat you'd have the same results but often of course they do.
Example: I have numerous Lightning kits in service. Most guys run Poly H for the hard track days in their 13" kit. Way front brake bias? You bet, ever try keeping the *** end of a pickup on the ground from 140? lol Another customer runs a huge 16" kit and only a mid level street pad; BP20 in it. And he can darn near outbrake some of the most hardcore performance sedans with it you'll ever throw at him. (yea he's a bit nuts) Point is that you can tax the hell out of a smaller part or work a larger one more efficiently with the same results. The larger 16s don't need track pads.
If the rears aren't that important,why did the factory decide to upgrade the rears even for minor differences in the front brake spec? After all, it's pretty expensive to reengineer and build a new rear brake.
Who said anything about the rears not being important? The only reference I made was that your change was extremely minimal. And no you wouldn't know it driving the car.
Why? How would I know why? Could be they changed wheels, felt that the change in a caliper design required it, it could share a rotor with an SUV, the caliper supplier changed the mounting spec, they wanted to match a change to accompany the front, because larger parts sell more cars, the Toyota Celica had bigger rears?? Pick a couple. So they made the rears larger; so what? Unless you have the rest of the info you know no more now than you did 50 posts ago.
This conversation is going nowhere Jeff. You're asking for information to draw conclusions from while you don't even know where to begin. You're walking around with part of the information and drawing assumptions based on the limited info you have. There's no way to answer your question as you haven't provided one that's tangible yet.
If you want hard factual data get the specs from the particular vehicle you have and produce the numbers. Once you have them come back and share them with everyone.
Why? How would I know why? Could be they changed wheels, felt that the change in a caliper design required it, it could share a rotor with an SUV, the caliper supplier changed the mounting spec, they wanted to match a change to accompany the front, because larger parts sell more cars, the Toyota Celica had bigger rears?? Pick a couple. So they made the rears larger; so what? Unless you have the rest of the info you know no more now than you did 50 posts ago.
This conversation is going nowhere Jeff. You're asking for information to draw conclusions from while you don't even know where to begin. You're walking around with part of the information and drawing assumptions based on the limited info you have. There's no way to answer your question as you haven't provided one that's tangible yet.
If you want hard factual data get the specs from the particular vehicle you have and produce the numbers. Once you have them come back and share them with everyone.
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
I thought you would have them since you're the one actually crunching the numbers. ie.. researching what the oem specs are and developing your kit.
Didn't mean to go too far off the cuff above. Been a trying week.
No sir. I make no claim to the design of the Wilwood factory kits. I can only share with you specs based upon their fit and how they can be tuned to suite ones needs or wants. (those were the many variation of both size front and rear kits and pad options fit to them at random above) Whereas I can give you nearly limitless data on house kits I have not inquired with them as to what model they were using to design around some years ago when they started. Feel free to post up any info you find and I'll be happy to review it with you.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
