Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey everyone,

i have just bought a nissan skyline r32 gtst and the brakes was really squeeky so i went out and bought a pair of bendix ultra but then realise that the original brakes wernt evan 1000k used so they still look brand new. But the brakes are still squeeking though can any one help me by telling me what i should do??? and just to let you know at the moment i have gtr cross drilled rotors and r33 calipers if anyone knows wat i should do please get back to me ASAP

thanks

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/334009-my-brakes-wont-stop-squeeing/
Share on other sites

All performance brake pads squeal to some degree... that is the trade off with pads: silence for performance

I got EBC yellows on the front of mine - no noise at all. QFM A1RMs on the back occasionally squeal a little bit, but they're cheapies and i just chucked them in and didnt take much care with the install. I'm sure if I did it properly they'd be silent as well. You just need to take more care with performance pads.

Mate if you don't want the squeal you will likely need to go for standard pads.

All performance brake pads squeal to some degree... that is the trade off with pads: silence for performance

Learn to live with it mellow.gif

Not entirely true.. Its how you install it that makes the difference. the key is to use some coppercote. simple. I have done this a few times, and coppercote has fixed ALL the squealing, for good.

clean, straight anti squel shims. maybe a touch of anti squeal stuff (copper, goop, whatever)

clean calipers, pins, springs, clips. dust allows movement that causes squeal

straight, unwarped discs

properly bedded pads.

I've used probably 10 different types of pads including very aggressive race only pads, and none of them squeal when installed properly except super aggresive endurance racing pads.

My Front Breaks Also seem to be Screeching aswell, but i was told cause they may be heavy duty thats the reason why the screech.. but its starting to get alot louder then when i first had it and quite annoying

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...