Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

They required a hell of alot of hard braking before the full surface of the pad had bedded into the disc. I did my normal bedding in procedure and when I pulled over after letting them cool only the middle inch or so of the disc looked good. The rest was still rough. Ended up going on a 200km drive to the mountains to get them properly bedded in. Then I glazed them up again braking normally on the way home. :(

My experience with the A1RMs has been pretty average - bedded in with the basic 10x 100km/h-0 stops then took them up to Mallala. Mallala is notoriously hard on brakes with hairpins at the end of two straights. First lap fine. lap two stopping from 180 into the hairpin brakes faded to zero whilst still going 80+, so ended up deep into the gravel.

Perhaps they needed more bedding, as during the rest of the day they **just** held up but still got really soft and felt very unreliable after lap 2. Having run the Ferodo DS2500 before they are (in my limited and personal opinion) *not* comparable - I've never had any problems with the ferodos even with much less bedding in.

Second trip to Mallala same thing happened - first outing into the gravel with on lap 2 zero brakes. Same barely adequate but not catastrophic performance for the rest of the day. by the end of that day (so after ~40 laps) they had 0.1% left. I've now put Project Mu HC16-03s on which stop it like a brick wall, but are not drivable on the street at all due to noise. Once they're gone will try the HC+ and see if they're a good middle ground.

I still have them on the rears and have easily 80% left.

I also feel there's a bit of spin around the A1RMs, but then

a) they're half the price of the DS2500 for a couple of reasons, including perhaps better value but also lower level of performance

b) no-one on an internet really knows your specific application and what you're going to be doing with them, so really it's buyer beware.

Cheers,

I had Project Mu type NR pads matched with SCR rotors.

The NR pads were garbage for street driving as they needed warming up to actually stop.

Changed to A1RM and i think are perfect for the street with a bit of hard braking. Great initial bite with no fade with long hard braking. Hardly any noise.

Used them at Oran Park and were great for about 5 laps, then started to shudder pretty bad and had to bring it in.

Ill keep using the A1RMs for street but might try the Competition ones next track day.

So Jetpilots description of the A1RM pads is spot on. Good for street and light track work.

So Jetpilots description of the A1RM pads is spot on. Good for street and light track work.

Yeah that is fair, although "light" track work doesn't really happen on circuits. Motorkhana/autocross/hillclimbs are fine as there's generally little high-speed braking, but any day at a circuit track that includes 2+ laps with braking from faster than 150km/h is probably more than "light" unless you take it really easy - and who does!?

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...