Evo BBK Research/Dev Thread.
#76
12-16-2008 | 07:37 PM
Originally Posted by redlude97
Sean,
A perfectly designed 1piece rotor/caliper system would have NO unswept area. The clearances would be super tight between the caliper and the rotor hat. That is not the case with 99.9% of the brake systems out there, including in the akebono setup. There is still space to move the caliper closer to the hat, and have no unused area. Almost no brake systems are like this though, because unswept area doesn't really matter, other than adding additional weight. It is no different than using a caliper that is sized too large for the particular system though. There is no way around this without using a smaller rotor, or a larger caliper, both which have there positives and negatives. There is nothing wrong with Jeff's "BBK" based on unswept area. Not optimal? Maybe. A larger caliper could have probably fit on there, at the cost of additional weight, if the pistons were the same size, but would likely have a higher heat capacity. Is it needed? No. If the system was designed properly with bias kept in mind, then the performance would be fine, albeit with the weight penalty. Using a 1 piece caliper in the first place is already a larger penalty than the unswept area weight penalty.
A perfectly designed 1piece rotor/caliper system would have NO unswept area. The clearances would be super tight between the caliper and the rotor hat. That is not the case with 99.9% of the brake systems out there, including in the akebono setup. There is still space to move the caliper closer to the hat, and have no unused area. Almost no brake systems are like this though, because unswept area doesn't really matter, other than adding additional weight. It is no different than using a caliper that is sized too large for the particular system though. There is no way around this without using a smaller rotor, or a larger caliper, both which have there positives and negatives. There is nothing wrong with Jeff's "BBK" based on unswept area. Not optimal? Maybe. A larger caliper could have probably fit on there, at the cost of additional weight, if the pistons were the same size, but would likely have a higher heat capacity. Is it needed? No. If the system was designed properly with bias kept in mind, then the performance would be fine, albeit with the weight penalty. Using a 1 piece caliper in the first place is already a larger penalty than the unswept area weight penalty.
-Sean
#77
12-16-2008 | 07:37 PM
Originally Posted by CreativeDesignZ
honestly ive followed many of Jeff's brake threads on maxima.org and have seen the quality of work hes done i suggest taking his advice SERIOUSLY. I would never point a member in the wrong direction but Jeff>all on this forum as well as the maxima forum when it comes to brakes
There ARE better kits for the maxima than mine. But mine was never designed/meant to be the best. But a good budget option.
YOu want the best for the maxima? Those guys buy the $4000 AP racing front kit!
#78
12-16-2008 | 07:41 PM
Originally Posted by Nismo G
And that is exactly what i was getting at. It doesn't matter in all reality, but to have a rotor that has like 25%+ area being unswept is a poor design in my opinion and im sure many would agree with me. Jeffs, first design was poor. The rotor was way to "big" for that rotor. It didn't fit at all...that is what i was trying to debate the whole time. Why would you want a design like that on your car to begin with?
-Sean
-Sean
And where are you getting the 25% figure from? The rotor already has an area that doesn't get contact (as all of us have pointed out with the OEM rotor). My caliper's contact is a little bit less than that. So how do you get 25%? (like it matters anyway)
#81
12-16-2008 | 07:45 PM
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
Exactly how does "poor" design as you like to describe it, affect the designed function of the kit? What does it matter if the rotor is 100% swept or 50% swept if the pad has good contact?? Please tell me.
And where are you getting the 25% figure from? The rotor already has an area that doesn't get contact (as all of us have pointed out with the OEM rotor). My caliper's contact is a little bit less than that. So how do you get 25%? (like it matters anyway)
And where are you getting the 25% figure from? The rotor already has an area that doesn't get contact (as all of us have pointed out with the OEM rotor). My caliper's contact is a little bit less than that. So how do you get 25%? (like it matters anyway)
The whole point is that it is excess rotor not being used...that counts for more weight. Unsprung weight too. We all know that one peice rotors aren't very light. Thats my whole point. No properly designed system is going to have that much rotor unswept.
-Sean
#82
12-16-2008 | 07:54 PM
Originally Posted by Nismo G
I am just looking at the picture you provided. It looks to me like 25% of the rotor isn't being swept. It could be the angle though...you only provided one picture.
The whole point is that it is excess rotor not being used...that counts for more weight. Unsprung weight too. We all know that one peice rotors aren't very light. Thats my whole point. No properly designed system is going to have that much rotor unswept.
-Sean
-Sean
So I'll ask again for the THIRD time. How does that unswepted area affect the function of the brake system?? How? The OEM G37 rotor has unswept area also. You actually haven't figured out WHY the G37 rotor is the size it is and why mine is the size it is?
#83
12-16-2008 | 07:56 PM
Originally Posted by Nismo G
I am just looking at the picture you provided. It looks to me like 25% of the rotor isn't being swept. It could be the angle though...you only provided one picture.
The whole point is that it is excess rotor not being used...that counts for more weight. Unsprung weight too. We all know that one peice rotors aren't very light. Thats my whole point. No properly designed system is going to have that much rotor unswept.
-Sean
The whole point is that it is excess rotor not being used...that counts for more weight. Unsprung weight too. We all know that one peice rotors aren't very light. Thats my whole point. No properly designed system is going to have that much rotor unswept.
-Sean
This is what an OEM 300zx caliper and rotor combo look like
Are you somehow saying the nissan designers are horrible for not using all the rotor surface area?
If you just extended the rotor surface area all the way to the hat on the akebono setup, it would have the same amount of unswept area
two designs, essentially the same result.
#84
12-16-2008 | 08:06 PM
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
It's more like your calculations
What do you mean it's not being used? That area doesn't make up mass that's being used for thermal dissapation????????
So I'll ask again for the THIRD time. How does that unswepted area affect the function of the brake system?? How? The OEM G37 rotor has unswept area also. You actually haven't figured out WHY the G37 rotor is the size it is and why mine is the size it is?
What do you mean it's not being used? That area doesn't make up mass that's being used for thermal dissapation????????
So I'll ask again for the THIRD time. How does that unswepted area affect the function of the brake system?? How? The OEM G37 rotor has unswept area also. You actually haven't figured out WHY the G37 rotor is the size it is and why mine is the size it is?
Anyone who has any racing background would look at that thing and be speechless. I don't get how you continue to think that what you made is proper in anyway. Im done arguing over this.
-Sean
#85
12-16-2008 | 08:16 PM
Originally Posted by Nismo G
Jeff, you are getting off topic again. Thermal dissapation? That has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Here it is in a nut shell for the 3rd time. The rotor that you are using shouldn't be used, it is to "big" for the caliper and the whole car for that matter. Even if 25% is to big of an unswept estimate 20% probably isn't. That rotor is adding extra weight to the car and is pointless. That is a crap design and you know it. You should redesign whatever kind of half *** brake kit you call that thing.
Anyone who has any racing background would look at that thing and be speechless. I don't get how you continue to think that what you made is proper in anyway. Im done arguing over this.
-Sean
Anyone who has any racing background would look at that thing and be speechless. I don't get how you continue to think that what you made is proper in anyway. Im done arguing over this.
-Sean
I don't know why you are even IN this thread in the first place. You are in a discussion way above your knowledge level and happen to choose the wrong person to debate with.
Put this THIS way. Of all the level headed/knowledgable people to post their opinion, why hasn't anyone come out and taken your side?
Think about it. And since YOU have NO RACING BACKGROUND and apparently no working logic period, you shouldn't be in this thread much less speaking on behalf on those that might actually have. LOL!
#86
12-16-2008 | 08:19 PM
#87
12-16-2008 | 08:33 PM
Go ahead. Show them BOTH pics and tell me what they say. Not that they really know enough about the design to really comment but eh, you're the one that says they would know. I'll wait.
What technical reason does that caliper "not belong" on the car? YOu have failed for the LEAST the 4th time to post anything resembing an ounce of sound technical logic in this entire thread.
So the evo calipers "belong" on the G? why not? 4 piston willwoods/ap racing/project mu/akebono on an older G belong on a G? Why? Just because of the pad sweep?
You might want to review and email Racing Brake that their brake systems are 'crap' and that the OEM calipers apparently don't "belong" on the car it just came from based on the pad sweep of it's larger rotors.
Just give it up. Everyone can see right though your thinly desguised insults that attempt to cover your lack of knowledge. Better go and run to your racing experts now. Perhaps they might be able to save you from further shame
What technical reason does that caliper "not belong" on the car? YOu have failed for the LEAST the 4th time to post anything resembing an ounce of sound technical logic in this entire thread.
So the evo calipers "belong" on the G? why not? 4 piston willwoods/ap racing/project mu/akebono on an older G belong on a G? Why? Just because of the pad sweep?
You might want to review and email Racing Brake that their brake systems are 'crap' and that the OEM calipers apparently don't "belong" on the car it just came from based on the pad sweep of it's larger rotors.
Just give it up. Everyone can see right though your thinly desguised insults that attempt to cover your lack of knowledge. Better go and run to your racing experts now. Perhaps they might be able to save you from further shame
#88
12-16-2008 | 08:35 PM
Originally Posted by Nismo G
I have no racing background? lol I would love to see some of the engineers i know laugh at your design. LOL! 
I can't believe you just said the rotor is like that for a reason. The reason it is like that is because that caliper doesn't belong on the car lol
-Sean
I would love to see some of the engineers i know laugh at your design. LOL! I can't believe you just said the rotor is like that for a reason. The reason it is like that is because that caliper doesn't belong on the car lol-Sean
#89
12-16-2008 | 08:49 PM
can't believw that this thread has gone six pages in only a few hours. Seriously, I think it's great that this guy is trying something new.
PErsonally, I think all these overpriced, underengineered BBK on the market are ridiculous. these companies aren't designing these BBKs for these cars.........they are making them fit.....just like this guy is doing.
the best bang for the buck would be to change the front brakes only. How's that sit with all the brake bias gurus!!!???!!!! the rear brakes perform about 30% or less of the braking work in almost every car. upgrading them will provide little to no gain, unless you are tracking your car.
PErsonally, I think all these overpriced, underengineered BBK on the market are ridiculous. these companies aren't designing these BBKs for these cars.........they are making them fit.....just like this guy is doing.
the best bang for the buck would be to change the front brakes only. How's that sit with all the brake bias gurus!!!???!!!! the rear brakes perform about 30% or less of the braking work in almost every car. upgrading them will provide little to no gain, unless you are tracking your car.