Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...

A1RM are 780 degree pads these are 800 degrees. So based on my previous bad experiences with A1RM these pads are 2.6% better (based purely on the max operating temperature,  yes very biased way of looking at them).

If money isn't not an issue, Project Mu HC+. Don't get the HC800 ones sold locally here, they don't seem to behave the same as the one from Japan ie HC+.

If you're after a happy medium between outright performance and money, then the Intima SR pads fit perfectly in 2nd place.

10 hours ago, boo5td6 said:

Anyone got any recommendations for what they feel are the best pads for short time trial courses to work from slightly warm but still pull up like a boss with gr8 bite?

 

For good bite from cold.... Winmax 6.5

I use them in my GTR for hillclimbs and a bit of circuit work and they pull up beautifully.

On the circuit, comparing feel to pmu Club racers, they do change feel a bit when they get hot (a few laps in) but still pull up as well !

A mate (who is sponsored by pmu) recently jumped in the car and was amazed by their initial bite. Brake hardware is otherwise stock

  • 1 month later...
23 hours ago, Missileman said:

Anyone tried Project Mu Brake shims, and if so how well do stop squeaks?...

http://www.project-mu.co.jp/en/products/other_shim.html

I have a mate with them, said it still squeals abit after all the copper grease has dried up or flaked off... initially it shuts up the pads squealing like a wh0re lol....

  • 4 months later...

I’ve been fortunate enough to have been factory trained with a couple of friction lining manufacturers around the world. Sintered metal, carbon metallic and low metal high carbon pads. 

One thing is for sure, its personal. Every driver has a different perception of what is good braking. 

The most basic of identifiers for brake lining characteristics is the good old SAE J661 hot and normal (cold) friction coefficient test which is the codes stamped on the pad backing plate. They will look like;

EF, FF, GF, GG etc

Normal , Hot 

E = 0.25 to 0.35 mu

F = 0.35 to 0.45 mu

G = 0.45 to 0.55 mu

H = 0.55 and above 

Key metrics for measuring performance;

Torque response  (initial bite)

Peak effectiveness (peak friction @ time/temp/pressure)

Release speed (speed to fully retract)

Modulation factor (compressibility and a combo of above)

Pad wear 

A good driver will understand these metrics and will be able to adjust his methods to suit in order to achieve the desired outcome whether it be sprints, endurance, off road, etc.

I haven’t discussed the technical aspects of ducks nuts, shit hot or awesome with the companies but I am in contact weekly.

I hope this terminology helps.

 

Cheers

 

  • Like 1
16 hours ago, Hadouken said:

So what do you find good for braking?

Hi Hadouken,

I started a new thread to explain in more detail. This probably isn't the best thread in hindsight.

What's good?

I don't sell anything so I'm not pushing any cart here.

For many many years sintered metal pads dominated in hard core racing. PFC, SBS, Hawk, etc

Then came the carbon metallics. Ferodo, Endless, Pagid, Proj Mu, etc

And the carbon/aramid fibre (Kevlar?) . Carbotech, Hawk, EBC, etc   (FYI Kevlar is a registered brand name of the DuPont company. Some pad manufacturers use the Dupont material but not all).

NAO (Non Asbestos Organic) pads are becoming more popular for road use. With a ceramic base the dust and wear is low with good friction properties. Too many brands to mention but I'll name a couple. Bendix, Fed Mogal Wagner, Ferodo, most OEM's and many rebadged brands. 

Carbon metallics are generally a good place to start for Skylines. DS2500 and RS4-2 were popular. A safe option but not specifically the best for everyone.

33 minutes ago, Hadouken said:

I think you took that the wrong way.
Just wanted to know which way you swing for pads.

Seeing as this thread covers brake pad user reviews. emoji4.png

Endless MA45 for endurance

RS4-2 or DS2500 for track days

DS3000, RS14 for more serious super sprints and rally

Hawk HT10's were also very good for a high initial bite on tarmac

The above will be noisy on the road and not ideal. Shop around and don't pay too much.

Road - Hmmm, if you bed them in properly NAO's are very good. Low noise, low wear. I'm doing some work on these and carbon ceramics at the moment.

 

About to grab some new pads, I've had the Intima SS on the front of the 34 for over 2 years now  - all road use but some decent drives thrown in that got them pretty hot

They are very kind on the rotors however - bugger all wear and I've done about 35,000kms on them since installing. Full weight 34 sedan with 250odd rwkw

I want to give the Intima SR or the Forza FP3 a try - to those who've used them, are there much difference between the 2? The SS pads are good but they lack a bit of bite compared to the A1RM's I had previously - however the trade off being zero noise and little dust makes me want to get these again, or try the next step up with the SR's

I've got a set of SR's on the back at the moment, no noise and only a touch more dust than the SS pads

Will be used with a DBA slotted rotor, which have been skimmed and ready to go

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...