Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I am thinking that I may have to replace my front discs sometime in the near future as theres a fair difference in height/thickness of the disc from where the pad wares on the disc to the small area on the edge of the disc that the pad dosent touch.

Was wondering if its the same setup as the 350z non brembo for pads and discs? and if anyone knows what the min safe thickness is

Cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/277476-v35-std-brakes-non-brembo/
Share on other sites

Should be.

I have Z33 non-brembo pads in my M35 and they fit perfectly.

Considering that the Brembo package is the same between the Z33 and V35 (also a bolt on for my M35), I would imagine that the non-brembo would be the same and fit all three models.

Edited by iamhe77

same setup

I sold quite a few rotors and pads for early V35 coupe and they're basically early 350Z rotors and pads...

The late model update is a bit tricky at the rear 308mm, V35 coupe 2005~ has rear park brake of around 170mm but a late 350Z has rear park brake around 190mm - so fitting a rear 350Z late model rotors will render the park brake useless.

No issue for early V35 / 350Z either non-brembo or brembo....

I can definitely say that for a series 2 V35 std brakes are NOT the same as 350z.

A couple of years back i had pretty much one of the first series 2's and went to a place to have them changed thinking they were the same but when i got there, quite different.

The V35 pads are much larger than the 350Z non brembo's. Not sure about disc size.

I think the pads should be the same, just the rotor size different?

Rotor Sizes:

V35 early 2001-2004

Front 296mm Rear 292mm (same as 350Z early)

V35 track 2003-2004

Front 324mm Rear 322mm (same as 350Z track)

V35 late 2005-2008

Front 320mm Rear 308mm (Front is same as 350Z late 17" EXCEPT rear rotor inner diameter)

Pads:

V35 early 2001-2004

Front DP2775 or DP21636 Rear DP21666

V35 track 2003-2004

Front DP21644 Rear DP21537

V35 late 2005-2008

Front DP2775 or DP21636 Rear DP21666

DP2775 and DP21636 have very similar shape and interchangeable.

  • 4 years later...

Did anyone end up solving this issue ? I have sane problem right now please help.. im sick of rda denying that their database is incorrect. I have v35 2005 6mt coupe series 2 .... I need correct rear rotor... inmer diameter is provlem right now.

:) I feel your pain.. I have had the same problem with brake suppliers refusing to accept their catalogues are wrong regardless of how much evidence you give them.

Just about all local brake suppliers will tell you that all V35 non brembo brakes are the same.. This is WRONG!

The listings they have are for Series 1 brakes only!

After researching this quite a bit in the past, this is what I came up with -

early non-brembo 350z (pre 05) and Series 1 V35 front and rear brakes are the same (296mm front rotors, 292mm rear rotors, single piston front and single piston rear callipers).

05+ non-brembo 350z and Series2/3 V35 front and rear brakes are the same (320mm front rotors, 308mm rear rotors, twin piston front and single piston rear callipers)

Not too sure about the brembos, but I wouldn't be surprised if they are the same.

Rear pads are the same across all.

Front Pads are different.

As for the handbrake, I researched this a little and couldn't find anything to suggest the 05+ 350z rear rotors have a 190mm handbrake, all the resources I found said it was a 170mm just like the V35. However, I did find the Brembo rears have a 190mm handbrake.

However, some have claimed the have seen non-brembo 350z rear rotors with a 190mm handbrake, so I am not to sure of this.

As for real life experience, I have a 05+ 350Z rear rotor on my S2 V35 and it fits perfect, same size handbrake.

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

    • 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...