Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I think it has more to do with getting an even force across the entire pad. 'Stilhetto effect' doesn't really apply because the piston pressure is applied to the pad which is then applied to the rotor via the surface area of the pad, not the pistons. That was worded really poorly.... what I'm trying to say is any pressure applied to the pad from the pistons is spread over the surface of the pad acting on the rotor. Even pressure means even heat dispersion and less prone to frying brake pads.

Yep... thats it... :)

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yeah, but 6 bigger pistons is going to have more surface area, which in turn would produce a more even spread of pressure. Im not knocking the idea of 8 tiny pistons, I just find it a bit strange. Like 6 pistons means less expencive rebuilds etc. 4 pistons less again.

Alcon made 16 piston calieprs that ran on 2l Super Tourers. Its more to do with the piston size, the differential size between leading and trailign pistons etc that all helps ensure even pad pressure and temps. It help stops glazing hot spots etc etc.

hows is the handling of the car affected by the new brake setup? I would say with having much bigger disc's and huge 8 piston calipers that there is going to be a lot more unsprung mass as well as gyroscopic force.

Honestly if i had to guage it it would be 5/10 on the f**k all meter.

Rotational inertia has distance^2, there for having weight that is firther out is far worse. Looking at the disc sure its a bit firther out, and a bit heavier, but look at the tyre and rim, its huge compared to the disc in diameter and quite hefty.

so for arguments sake if you have 5 kg at 20 cm radius its 0.2 kg m^2

then we take 5 kg at 40 cm radius its 0.8 kg m^2, you can see a 4 times increase.

Honestly if i had to guage it it would be 5/10 on the f**k all meter.

Rotational inertia has distance^2, there for having weight that is firther out is far worse. Looking at the disc sure its a bit firther out, and a bit heavier, but look at the tyre and rim, its huge compared to the disc in diameter and quite hefty.

so for arguments sake if you have 5 kg at 20 cm radius its 0.2 kg m^2

then we take 5 kg at 40 cm radius its 0.8 kg m^2, you can see a 4 times increase.

Rotational inertia (Properly called the second moment of area - I) is measured in mm^4. As in Torque = I * alpha where alpha is angular acceleration measured in radians per second squared. This is the rotational equivalent of Newtons famous Force = mass * acceleration.

The only reference I have ever seen to the direct effect on steering was in reference to the Indy cars where some drivers noticed a change in steering effort due to a change in gyroscopic effect when they changed the material the rotor was made out of. This was at rather ridiculous speeds, however.

What a heavier rotor/caliper does do is add to the unsprung weight of the car which affects the ability of the suspension to keep the tyre on the road. This is something to be avoided if possible.

Does anyone have the weight of a standard 4 pot caliper and rotor, as i will weigh my 356mm G4 set to get a comparision.

I have some pics of the second set of pads as i think Roy noted he would like to see the wear of these but cant post any pic for some reason.

I also noted last night the the leading pistons in the G4 caliper is quite a bit larger than the 6 trailing ones.

If anyone can tell me how to post pics now i will bang them up for all to see

  • 5 weeks later...

Just wanted to mention in here that we are running the G4 brakes without any problems, including Targa Tasmania last month - their performance has been excellent.

There was an offset problem with the early kits which meant that the caliper was rubbing on the lower control arm ball joint, but anyone affected has been sent new brackets and hats which fixed the problem.

I've had no issues with the brackets or bolts at all.

Mine are on atm....but I think the overall volume of the pistons will be similar to stock - which is one benefit of the calipers - you don't need to change the master cylinder.

As discussed above the biggest benefit of more pistons is spreading the force more evenly across the pad and to change leading/trailing pressures.

Yeah, but 6 bigger pistons is going to have more surface area, which in turn would produce a more even spread of pressure. Im not knocking the idea of 8 tiny pistons, I just find it a bit strange. Like 6 pistons means less expencive rebuilds etc. 4 pistons less again.

An 'even spread of pressure' would also depend on the rigidity of the calipers, the more the calipers flex the more uneven such pressure will be. No matter how many pistons the caliper has.

Those G4 calipers have a very open and long bridge which is unsupported, unlike eg Stoptech calipers. My bet is that those G4's flex quite a bit.

Okay...

So whats the final answer on these brakes?

This thread seems to lean more towards dont get them, as they are a waste.

The other G4 thread says nothing but praises about them however.

I need to know for sure as I was going to order these a few days ago for my high power GTR33.

Get them or pass and pay the extra for a name brand pair? As I said above, this is for a high powered GTR33.

-Sayajin

from a bystanders veiw

they seem like a good calliper and rotor senario.

but their was the issue of:

-bracket bolts-(fixed with the help of a spring washer and nut.have you thought towards a loctite and split pin setup?)

-aftermarket pads-fixed by machining the top edge a 1mm or 2.

My R33

G4 brakes (356mm disk, G4 'street' pads): 130 degrees

Standard rear brakes (Nissan OEM pad) 280 degrees

Another R33

F40 Brembo brakes (340mm disk, Ferrodo 2500 or 3000 pads): 300 degrees

Standard rear brakes (pad unknown): 150 degrees

R34 GT-T

CSC brakes (343mm disk, Ferrodo 2500 or 3000 pads): 150 degrees

Standard rear brakes (pad unknown) 80 degrees

they obviously are up to the task.

Either way ducting,the best fluid and regular upkeep/brake and its assemblies seem to be the norm.

in conclusion:-

when they are compared to the other brakes,the temps are good.and given that they have had track and targa testing i can only see the plus's outweighing the negatives.price is also good.

if i were in your position i would lean towards them.just do the right thing and use the knowledge and experience that others have given you.

Craig.

well...people who haven't used them or who spent 3 times as much to buy a "name" brand recommend against them.

People who have used them think they are excellent.

Ben had a strange problem with the brackets that no-one else has reported so it could just be a one off.

Fact is there are a lot of people in the world who don't beleive cheap can ever = good. Feel free to spend far more than you have to :)

i have them, and i have used them as their sole purpose as brakes for a track car. Car is good enough to run with porsche GT3, ferrari 599, 430 360, aston DB9, BMW M3 csl with AP brakes etc but cant catch them bloody Z06 corvettes they are seriously fast.

I have them so far no issues i am worried about. 3 sets of pads used with good wear pattern, been off and on many times and still bolt up perfectly. You will need to duct air to them as all brakes require if you are going to push the car to 100% of it performance

As far as i am concerned i would buy them again.

Edited by tacker
well...people who haven't used them or who spent 3 times as much to buy a "name" brand recommend against them.

People who have used them think they are excellent.

Ben had a strange problem with the brackets that no-one else has reported so it could just be a one off.

Fact is there are a lot of people in the world who don't beleive cheap can ever = good. Feel free to spend far more than you have to :)

yeah.im sure that the name brand ones are better than the generic aftermarket equivelent.but not every1 has the cash to fork out.thats where these are good.

aside from the obvious problems.as i am sure every good brake manufacturer endless,harrop and the rest etc has had teething problems with.these are pretty good at an entry level point of veiw.

good write up. worth noting is using a bolt/nut would mean going down a size so it fits? or just a longer bolt with a nut aswell?

and it seems the fact the pedal is harder means theres less fluid area (force) being put to the pad compard to the standard one wich in turn will over heat the rears.

and the tru test is to get them red hot (literally) a few times and see if they crack :)

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

    • Even with the piston at TDC there was room for it to drop, but I don't think it can drop fully into the cylinder, the problem you have is that you need something pushing against the valve to hold it up so you have enough room to put the new stem seal on and the spring etc.  I used compressed air only because putting rope in the cylinder seemed a bit risky to me, I know people have done it countless times before like this. Overall it's a pain in the ass job. Honestly you'd probably be better off taking the head off because the risk of dropping something in the engine and the finicky-ness of it all is very stressful. If you are going to attempt it though i 10000% recommend a 36050 valve spring/keeper tool. I had both the traditional lever type and after doing 1 cylinder it was absolute pain to get those valve keepers in place, even with 2 people. That 36050 is amazing, you do have to push hard to get them in place but it works perfectly almost every time. Back to my actual issue I think my engine is just tired and old and the rings have gone bad. The comp numbers (cold, no oil) were: Cyl 1 -129psi Cyl 2 - 133psi Cyl 3 - 138psi Cyl 4 - 137psi Cyl 5 - 157psi Cyl 6 - 142psi   Cylinder 5 and 6 having the most carbon on them.
    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
×
×
  • Create New...