Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Folks,

I run a nice set of 18" Zepter Mesh wheels and getting them clean can be a royal pain in the arse, but they look fantastic when they are.

However, keeping them that way can often be the biggest pain of all and the biggest culprit is that damned nuisance, brake dust! You know the stuff I'm talkin' about.... wash the car today and in two days time the friggin wheels are almost black again!!! :)

I'm up for a set of brake pads very soon and wanted to see whether anyone else has factored "brake dust" into the equation when selecting pads.

Speaking to a friendly, knowledgable fellow in a local brake shop the other day, he suggested that EBC Green Stuff Pads offer excellent performance with negligible brake dust. He reckons they've had a great response from clients that have complained of the same problem, particularly drivers of expensive euro cars.

Wouldn't mind something that could handle the odd track day once in a blue moon, but ultimately I'm just looking for a high performance street solution, not kamakazi race pads.

Does anyone have any experiences / preferences that they would care to share?

Cheers,

Mike

The EBC greens work quite well and the dust is low, great for street pads for sure.

I use reds on the front and greens on the rear. Reds dont dust too bad either.

work well enough for me using them in bitumen sprints. Bite well from cold too.

Gary

I have a pair of Project Mu HC Titan Kai in mine.

they are super good and dont give out a lot of brake dust.

Grab very very well no matter what the temperature.

Don't go with RB74's if you don't like dust.... :woot:

I just purchased some Ferodo DS2500's... will let you know how they go, dust-wise.... though they'd probably fall in your "Kamikazi race pads" category

Um, the RB74's I use on the front generate far less dust than the pads I use on the rears - which are Bendix ultimates.

I use rb74's and they are low dust on the street.

They will handle the odd track day too.

Most pads ive seen either - dusty (cos the pads wear fast), or non dusty (cost they chew the rotor out more so than the pad)

Edited by Bl4cK32
Don't go with RB74's if you don't like dust.... :ermm:

I just purchased some Ferodo DS2500's... will let you know how they go, dust-wise....

Bwhahahaha.

DS2500's? I hope you like gunmetal wheels, because that's the colour they're going to be after a few days.

I have a pair of Project Mu HC Titan Kai in mine.

they are super good and dont give out a lot of brake dust.

Grab very very well no matter what the temperature.

Are your's really really really loud? I had the same pads in my old 33, with slotted rotors. They were an awesome peforming brake pad, but the squeal mine let off was SOOO loud. Louder than trucks. I had to take them off as you couldnt drive with them on the street, if you went in an underground carpark you would literally have to block your ears. i tried re-bedding them but nothing changed. But apart from the sound best brake pads i've used so far

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...