RR-Racing Sport Performance and AP-Racing Essex Initial Comparison
 

we recently picked up a Hyper Blue BRZ. While we have the endurance car many of the street oriented parts we can’t test on a car that’s been gutted and cut up for racing. Also, it’s a good looking car.
http://i.imgur.com/RfX2tnO.jpg
The first thing we did was wheels, coilovers and a big brake kit. We had planned on testing out the RR-Racing sport performance kit before even purchasing the car but also had an Essex kit on hand so we decided to compared the two.
http://i.imgur.com/0JcrXRA.jpg

First up was the Essex kit, we had run this briefly on the race car before switching over to the RR-Racing setup but street driving and racing have their own unique requirements. The biggest thing we noticed from the get go was the noise. the Essex kits tend to be on the noisier side no matter what car they’re on or pad they use. While this isn’t a huge issue for a track oriented car it is really annoying when driving around in traffic. Other than that the brakes felt good, obviously there was a little bit more front bias as one would expect with a front only kit but that was to be expected.



After a few weeks on the Essex brakes we decided it was time to try out the Sport Performance front and rear kit from RR-Racing.
http://i.imgur.com/Y3f9IA7.jpg
The first difference you notice is the price. You can buy the full front and rear RR kit for what the front Essex kit costs. While Essex uses their own 2 piece rotor design the RR kit works off a standard STI rotor. Ultimately this makes the kit cheaper to run and allows you to run practically any style of rotor you want.

This is mostly a bolt on operation with the one exception being cutting or drilling the rear dust shields. Most people trim the dust shields to size but we opted to remove them entirely by drilling out the spot welds.
http://i.imgur.com/crxe4RP.jpg

All in all this is a very well put together, well balanced kit that works great for an aggressively driven street car that sees occasional track usage. The price point and parts availability are the best out there
http://i.imgur.com/3DIuFjv.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/907bxe1.jpg
The stopping power of this kit with the BP-20 pads is fantastic, they make practically no noise and the car feels incredibly well balanced under heavy braking. They also look great in the silver.

Other than saying the RR Racing kit is cheaper, there's virtually no comparison done here.

"the Essex kits tend to be on the noisier side no matter what car they’re on or pad they use." - We've found the Essex kit to be perfectly quiet with street pads.

"obviously there was a little bit more front bias as one would expect with a front only kit" - Do you have any numbers and/or test data to indicate that the Essex kit has a front brake bias?

There's no comparison on the technical details, like brake bias (of both kits), rotor sizing, piston area, heat dissipation, or actual on-track performance. Is this really a comparison?


My suggestions for a more apples-to-apples comparison:

- Compare both kits on the BP20 compound
- Log brake pressure data
- Perform stopping tests measuring distance and number of stops to fade
- measure the piston surface area of all calipers (oem, AP, Wilwood)

And that in light of stock brakes being more then adequate for street/daily driving and even for some light track use. And you get matching front and rear brakes when using stock. And you get them for free when buying car. And you can even use oem parts in them and keep warranty! And certainly stock brakes have stock brake bias :).
BBKs (except for those buying them for bling/posing/"filling big wheels"/ego purpose) are for track use.
Haven't seen people complaining much about brake noise on trackdays. If BBKs are mostly for track use, where is serious comparison on brake performance on track? You claim that brake bias is off on Essex's - where data proving that? You claim that wearables are cheaper on RRR's .. but where is data on that? I've seen real-use data with wearables costs and how long they last only for Essex's kit. No data for RRR's. JRitt seeing different brake bias combinations for RRR's multiple kits chart and posts about shifting brake bias vs stock asked about piston sizing/disks effective radius in RRR's kits. IIRC it was left unanswered/ignored. But still, RRR's kits are "right", and Essex's is "wrong".

Sounds like bashing post/thread for competing products/vendors.

This wasn’t meant to be a bashing of anyone. We simply wanted to make our opinion public and. The title was a bit of a misstep it should have said “initial comparison”. Bottom line, you’re right it’s not a great comparison. However we are here to help make a good base of knowledge for the community as you are. So with that, @CSG Mike what was your best set up with the essex kit (tires and all) and we will test both set ups as soon as we can get track time and post the data.

Full disclosure we did test both kits on Wilwood BP20’s

No bashing here, I'm pretty happy about the start and look forward to the completion of the reviews. One suggestion as well can you test the front rr kit by itself and then with the rear kit after. Particularly since a lot of guys buy the front only at first and add the rears later.

There is always some kind of tension between RR and Essex that I don't get.

When Essex asked about data in the RR thread, that was looking a bit aggressive. I guess that's why they never answered.

AP is the greatest brake manufacturer ever. They don't need to worry much in my opinion.

Both offer quality products. We should be happy about that.

Thanks for posting this.

As far as consumers go, there is a sort of fanyboi-ism that develops around good products (usually for good reason, but sometimes it goes too far). AP Racing makes good stuff so we often see passive-aggressiveness by AP fans towards alternate brake products in threads. It's both unnecessary and fairly obvious.

Really there is no reason for Essex to be publicly attempting to vet RR's Wilwood integration in RR's thread. If Essex wanted to know RR's specs, all they need to do is order a kit and measure/test if for themselves. Essex is responsible for their own market research and PR campaigns. RR not being baited was a wise decision. Also it's against the forum rules for vendors to comment on other vendors products. RR should continue to do as they've done. Openly developing their product for their market is working and so far buyers seem to like RR's offerings very much.

I haven't read anything about the RR setup, but my Essex Sprint setup only makes noise with noisy pads when they get hot. Most of the time daily driving the car I never hear a single peep out of them.

This.

And this is why I will continue to sell and support specialists at what they do...when i want a brake kit I buy brakes from a brake company...when I buy valvetrain I buy valvetrain from a valvetrain company...when i want wheels i buy wheels from an actual wheel manufacturer, etc, etc....

dealing with the specialist gets you right to the point...it is what they do...it isn't what they want to slap their name on and try to sell today.

this is coming from 15 years of direct market experience..i have seen quite a lot come and go.

With regard to noise...Pads sometimes chatter a bit on the J Hook slots. We even see that on our brake dyno and burnishing machine. We therefore offer our Sprint Kit with the no-cost option of plain-faced discs, which eliminates that noise.:)

As for a 'comparison' thread, I agree that there's not a whole lot of viable comparo data here yet. That's okay though, and I do look forward to seeing some hard numbers. I would expect to see some differences, because our Essex Competition Kits and the RR Racing kits are very different products. Our kits have a singular objective, to go faster for longer. They are specifically designed to be extraordinarily lightweight, durable, and fade-resistant for optimal track performance. They address the FT86's brake deficiencies in the most simplistic manner, and provide the greatest improvements in the area where they are needed most (the front of the car). All other considerations are secondary. They aren't the prettiest, and definitely not the cheapest, but they are brutally effective.

Back to the bias comment from the OP...It is important to note that our kits bolt on without any other modifications and are intentionally designed to have minimal impact on the factory brake bias. As such, they integrate seamlessly, and have proven to be a winning solution in sprint racing, endurance racing, rallying, hill climb, time trial, HPDE, and autoX all over the world...all while running the OEM rear brakes.

*Update 4/19/16*
We finally had the chance to run the calculations for the front RR Racing/Wilwood BBK's. The figures below are the % of front brake with the rear OEM brakes left alone. Our Essex Sprint Kit actually has less front brake than stock, shifting a little bias rearward (the exact opposite of what was claimed in this post). Our Endurance Kit has a little more front bias than stock, but still less than all of the RR Racing kits. The RR Sport Performance Kit would probably be a bit too front biased for most of our customers. Heat would be increased in the front brakes, and the fronts would likely lock up while the rears were still rolling.

We haven't had a chance to do the calculations on their rear kits yet, but hopefully soon. As you can see though, any talk of our Essex/AP kits being more front biased are untrue. The opposite is in fact true. Thanks.

% of front brake:

Stock 67.1
Essex Sprint 66.3
Essex Endurance 68.5
RR Sport Performance 72.9
RR Stage 1 69.4
RR Stage 2 69.4
RR Stage 3 69.6
RR Stage 4 69.6

If you go back through our threads, you'll see that we looked closely at creating a rear competition brake kit for this car about three years ago. We determined that the value of such a kit was minimal for our typical customer given the capability of the OEM rear brakes. We'd much rather see our customers sink their money into the front, where the demands are greatest (most people tracking these cars will go through 3 sets of front pads and discs before needing replacements for the rear).

All of that said, we don't inherently have anything against rear brake kits. We sell competition rear brake kits for other platforms such as the Corvette, various M3's, etc...even using the same CP8350 caliper body (see pic below). Some platforms benefit from them far more than others. The FT86 just isn't one of them.

http://www.essexparts.com/imagecache...Large/pat3.jpg

We also sell the AP Racing Factory rear BBK's for the FT86. If you want to look cool, nothing beats a huge four-wheel brake kit. You won't get any argument from us there. There's certainly nothing poseur about these kits either. They are serious hardware. For some customers they are the ultimate solution. For serious track enthusiasts however, we tend to steer them away from those kits. They just don't offer as much bang-for-the-buck.
http://s8.postimg.org/96w2avtxx/PX7_A6928_1a.jpg

I'm going to start this reply by saying I like your (Essex's) AP kits. They're well executed with strong R&D. They seem to work and when buyers have problems, either yourself or another person from Essex are responsive. Your passion about the market importantly drives the market forward.

With that being said, I don't think I saw anyone from RR mention Essex's AP configurations specifically. If another member did then I think it's appropriate to retort about your product to the person who mentioned it.

IMO RR referring to "other leading products" was the correct and professional way of talking about where their product fits into the BBK market as a whole. Brembo, Stoptech, Alcon, Endless, other Wilwood configurations, heck even Stillen's AP configurations all come to my mind as "other leading products". Essex does not have a monopoly on good BBKs for this platform.

It's reasonable for customers or distributors to expect data from RR and request it. It's not reasonable to do this...

Strawman, aggressive, borderline unprofessional. There could be many other reasons why RR releases product information, R&D results, etc on this board and/or on their website the way they have.

This was not aggressive but passive-aggressive. If you intended on buying or distributing any of their products my guess is that RR would appreciate feedback on their marketing materials. As far as I've seen, in their threads RR has engaged each customer's questions actively. However, you are a competitor pointing out deficiencies or asking for more data in a public forum. IMO it was wise for RR to not engage that as it can devolve quickly. There is a good reason for the vendor rules on this board.

As I've mentioned, RR seems to be actively interacting directly with their potential customers and distributors. I have little doubt that if a customer asking for the same info directly from RR they would provide it directly. I also have little doubt that if a distributor wanted the same information they would also be provided it directly. Is Essex either a customer or distributor of RR products? Or are you asking for info from RR so that you can speak intelligently about it with your potential ccustomers? It doesn't seem to serve RR much to engage with competitors in a public forum. As a matter of observation, when that happens things can go south really fast, and for what purpose? Is the competitor going to espouse or advocate for anyone but themselves? Not often.

These are solely my observations.

JRitt: those that seen aggressiveness probably seen it in fact that you posted in other vendor thread. Imho that was perfectly valid question with no real agressiveness. Actually i find thread like this of "our kit is better then that kit" without any data backing it being way more agressive. But i guess pointing that out lines me up 'in your fanboy camp' just like your post was lined up as 'agressive', even while i'm still using stock brakes and haven't bought any BBK yet :).

What?

He asked a question..I don't care if he is a customer, distributor or the Prince of Monaco....either an answer is known or not.

I have no idea what thread you guys are even referring to but I do know if you want to promote and market a product you better be ready to answer any and all questions regardless of where they come from.

As mentioned by @DAEMANO, I don't agree that RR Racing choosing not to respond with simple specifications indicates that they have something to hide. I can't find any publicly released piston sizing information for the APs kits with a quick forum or Google search either although I'm sure you'd be happy to release that info to anyone who asks for it. For the sake of disseminating information, I will comment on the RR Racing sport performance (4 pot) front BBK because I bought one.

When I first got the kit (a few weeks ago now) I measured the pistons and recall they were ~38mm based on my eye and a crappy school book ruler. The rest of the relevant info is available on their website so I stuck the values in a torque calculator and came out with a slightly higher torque value with the RR Racing front kit than stock. I did this a while ago so I don't remember the exact values but my point was that Rafi mentioned this was the case so I can confirm he never said anything misleading or incorrect.

I realize it seems the real issue CSG and JRitt have is the claim that increasing rear bias is beneficial when their own findings indicated that wasn't the case and are looking for data from RR Racing to back their claim up. I'm not going to lie here, I DO think the rear kits are primarily superficial especially for cars with no rear downforce so I have no plans on getting one.

In the end, I'm of the opinion that AP's caliper and rotors are the best so if you want the best, you need to pay the extra to go with AP. In my case, I'd love to get an AP kit but the reality is that I cannot pay for it now or in the forseeable future. If an affordable alternative never appeared, I'd never be able to upgrade. Suggesting that I save up for it isn't helpful because I'm also saving for a house and every dollar spent on something else is a dollar that doesn't go into the house. This is why I look for products that are 70% of the high end product for 50% of the cost and RR Racing has released an offering that appears to be in this range, targeting people like me.

For clarity, both AP & Wilwood make the major braking components in discussion, not Essex or RR. Both Essex and RR produce integrations/configurations (kits) made with those parts. Stillen also produces an AP kit. Essex sells many other parts not related to braking, as does RR Racing and Stillen. None are "specialists" in the way you seem to have defined them above. Although all have done an admirable job.

Folksy and tough sounding. Can you clarify, when you say "you" who are you speaking of?

More importantly though, generally speaking vendors should keep from commenting on other vendors products in their respective threads to prevent flame wars, F.U.D., etc from starting up. People/vendors sometimes do have intent behind the timing and location of their questions. If not, sometimes the conversation can become that.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/newre...reply&p=337716

How dare you ask a question about my product....

My head hurts...I am going back to under my rock...I let my guard down and attempted to participate in the community but thankfully you have made me realized why I don't.

Yikes...breathe everyone. Please keep in mind that all of these things are First World Problems! I wanted to know an answer to a question. I tried to find that answer on my own, but couldn't. I therefore asked the question. It felt pretty straightforward to me. Maybe I shouldn't have? It seemed fairly basic and benign to me at the time. :iono:

I wasn't implying anything bad about RR's website, that they have a brake bias conspiracy going on, or that they're bad people who are preying upon their customers. To my knowledge, I have yet to say a single negative word about anything related to them. I'm not trying to pick on them, or anyone else in the brake business. I have friends who work at or sell StopTech, Brembo, Race Technologies, PFC, etc. We all visit each other at trade shows, go out to dinner, email each other, etc. It's all a pretty friendly atmosphere (as is most of the aftermarket). Also, many of the people who work at these companies have worked at one or more of the others. I was the Sales Mgr. at StopTech for years, we have a former PFC employee here, one from Wilwood, etc.

I also have nothing against "the little guy," "the new guy," etc. When I started at StopTech in 2003, we had about 10 employees. We were going up against all of the big boys with a completely unknown brand, a handful of brake kits, and very little budget. I've been there, and it wasn't easy.

When I post something about our products in a technical forum, my expectation is that people are going to ask me every reasonable and ridiculously unreasonable question under the sun about that product (for the record, my all-time favorite is, "Which stops better, red or black calipers?"...yes, someone really asked me that once :bellyroll:). That's okay though, because that's why people are here...to learn about something with which they are unfamiliar.

As I said in my last post, I don't think one product is right for every person or situation. That's why we sell different types of brake kits, brake pads, etc.

Thanks for the kind words about our products and customer service. We bust our butts to do our best.:cheers: I don't get to visit this forum as often as I'd like, because we are involved in so many markets. I do my best to help people when I do make it here though.

Oh...for reference, if you click on the technical specifications tab on our product page and scroll down, the piston bores and other specs are there. It's going to look like a mess due to HTML tables issues posting here, but here it is:

Caliper
CP8350-2S4L/3S4L

Weight no Pads
4.8 lbs.

Piston Sizes
38.1mm x 2

41.3mm x 2

Piston Area
49.56cm^2

Inlet Thread
M10x1.0

Mounting Type
Radial

Mtg. Centers
152mm

Mtg. Offset
44mm

Pad thickness
20mm
15mm

Disc
CP3862-104/105GA

Type
2-piece bolted

Weight
10.71 lbs.
Diameter
299mm
Thickness
32mm
Radial Depth
43mm

No. of Vanes
60

Actually, that would be the AP. Ironically the math is almost perfect, in my example below, using crude calculations

My kit of choice is a Brembo front, but that costs $3895 retail. The AP Sprint is $2099 retail, and gets the job done just as well for 90% of the people out there. For those running full slicks, and/or are boosted and/or want the best and/or will only run forged wheels, the Brembo *is* the superior product.

The AP is, hands down, the best bang for the buck (especially when you consider longevity and the cost of upkeep with heavy duty use), and that's why the CSG car runs the Essex AP kit. The cost is brought down by using a genuine racing product, that is acceptable for street use in a variety (but not all) conditions. Because there is no fancy paint (which burns off), dust boots that will burn off under hard use anyways, and a lot of common components (e.g. pads), the cost is brought down, while maintaining top notch quality.

For the record, I quickly scanned back through the RR thread and found our products mentioned in posts #34, 35, 36, 61, 82, 205, and 208. Some of those posts called for a direct comparo to our product. There were also some inaccurate posts about NASCAR discs, which is one of our core markets. I never commented on any of those items. All I asked about was clarification on a technical point to answer a customer question. I feel like I've been showing rather solid restraint.:thumbsup:

I would consider Essex a brake specialist.

They have specialized equipment that many, many major brands "rent out" or buy time on.

Sure, they sell some other things, but Brakes are their primary market. @JRitt has been in the brake industry for how long now?

F@*K you CSG! Brembo is cheap Italian junk. I think you are anti-Anglo-Saxon racists (***sneaking off to jump in my Brembo-equipped daily driver***). :D

Now that's how you handle competitors on the web.

NSFW....






































brake porn

https://scontent-lax3-1.cdninstagram...02412316_n.jpg

This was in reference to @IPGJames definition. Following his example below, I'd never buy TSG wheels from CSG because you guys don't make the wheels (obviously that doesn't make a lot of sense). Certainly a company that performs thorough 2nd hand R&D for their integrations and also supports their customers is worthy of a purchase whether they're 1st or 3rd party.

Please let us know how your purchase pans out. Looking for inputs from mostly a durability/reliability perspective since this is marketed as a dual purpose "sport" kit by RR.

Essex has been in business for over 30 years, and the bulk of our business is brakes. We do a few other small things, but we have about 25 full-time people almost solely focused on brakes. We sell directly to NASCAR Sprint Cup teams, IMSA teams, IndyCar, World Challenge, etc. We have a brake dyno, brake burnishing machines, caliper re-certification center, etc. Since graduating evil medical school, aftermarket brakes is pretty much what I've been doing all day, every day for the past 13 years. You can watch our company overview video here (please excuse the fact that I look like a zombie in the vid...it was bad lighting!).

Okay, at this point I have to officially apologize for the thread-jacking. Sorry to the OP. I owe you a beer or three if we ever meet in person.

Definitely see what you're saying here. As someone who covets the AP kits, I think Brembos are just ridiculous so I don't even look at them. Instead of saying "best" I should have said "high end." The falling CAD makes things even worse for me, my RR Racing kit was $1150CAD and now looking at over 3k for the AP Sprint kit just isn't happening in the foreseeable future.

For sure! They won't go on the car until April but once I've done some driving on them, I'll do a full detailed review. I'm not too worried, they use Wilwood calipers and Stoptech rotors which both have good reputations. My only concern about the kit itself is that Rafi mentioned there might be uneven taper wear on the pads because it doesn't use staggered pistons.

I'm more concerned about the pads themselves. Wilwood BP10 are known to wear really fast when hot and EBC Yellowstuff has a few reports of the compound falling apart under track use. I found a thread on another forum where someone asked EBC about the reports of the pads falling apart and they said to make sure you use same pads front and rear and stressed to properly bed them so I'll be making it a point to do this and monitor them closely. I'll report my findings when it happens.

Sorry for being so absent, we've been a bit busy.

First, we want to be clear that we have no problems with the AP kit at all. We run a version on our shop WRX currently and we tested the enduro car on it as well as the hyper blue brz we have. Second, if the OP seems one sided it's because we just thought the info on the AP brakes have been discussed many times and we didn't think we needed to reiterate it. We wanted this to spark a conversation about the different set ups, but absolutely not in any negative way. We think the AP kit does what it does extremely well, no one is arguing that. From what we see with our customers it appears to be the most popular and well regarded bbk out right now. The goal here was to show people another viable option whether it be for street or track or a show car.

Second, it is a pretty bare bones OP because we were excited to just let people know about the new RR stuff. Cost analysis of repeated track days will be studied and any technical data we have will be posted....As soon as it warms up and we can get some track time.

With that said, during testing of the enduro car last year our drivers didn't quite like the AP racing kit. They felt the kit was a tad bit too front bias. We decided to adjust accordingly with a kit we saw as better balanced. With the drivers running nearly 3 hour stints it's important to keep our drivers input at the forefront. Now, we did NOT run the sport performance kit during our race at VIR. We ran the Stage IV kit front and rear, and nine hours into the race they were still perfect and we were doing well....then we got bumped off. The point is RR makes quality stuff too, and we think everyone should know that.

One thing we always keep in mind is that not everyone is into the same car based hobby. Some people like stance, some like racing or HPDE, some like daily driving a cool looking car. We just want to hopefully provide info for all those crowds.

Again, the initial comparison was made for cars that would be mostly daily driven with occasional track use. A comparison of what is considered the best option on the market vs a budget friendly kit. A more apples to apples comparison is the RR racing stage IV vs the AP racing. And after 9 hours of wheel to wheel racing and multiple test days, we think the RR rotors will be good for at least two seasons worth of track days.

That was a lot...haha hopefully this clears some things up!

We're OK with that!

Not sure why there is a problem with RR racing not publishing data on brake bias. Theres a gragh on page 11 of their thread where they were showing the ratio front to back.

The calipers are all standard wilwood calipers. Took me all of about 5 minutes to look up piston sizes on their website.

Its the rear brakes that move the bias back ~8-10%. The RR racing fronts have a piston area of 52cm^2 which is very similar to the CP8350 (~50cm^2 IIRC)


I agree that this "comparason" is not really very in-depth or technical. My suspion is that you'd be hard pressed to tell much difference between the $1600 RR and $2100 AP kit front kits.

Obviously at some point one will fail for whatever reason, but for the average weekend track junkies they will both do a good job.

That graph is essentially meaningless. It shows relative bias within the product line. That chart only allows comparison among the RR Racing kits. There are no absolute values to use for the calculations vs. OEM or anything else. Using that chart to compare bias to anything else is essentially the same thing as comparing an engine dyno plot from one type of machine to another (Dynojet vs. Mustang). It's basically meaningless.

Yes, but disc diameter also comes into play. They use 328 and 330mm discs on the front, which also adds more front brake torque on the front axle (in addition to larger piston bores).

I dug the numbers up on Wilwood's site and we're going to run them and see what we're looking at in terms of how they impact bias. That should give an actual scientific look, with real numbers, at how their kits compare to ours (which I believe was the original purpose of this thread).

Does anybody know what the piston bores are on RR's two rear kits? Wilwood has three piston options on the Wilwood Powerlite, and two piston options on the rear Superlite. I'd rather not have to run all possible simulations if we don't have to do so. Thanks.

Hardly meaningless, it shows the RR front / OE rear combo as ~ 2.6:1 which is ~72% front. Stock car is about 71%.

The powerlite used in the sport performance are 1.25" IIRC and its a ~316mm brembo STI disc.

Here's my graph - I have a 355mm AP kit from an imprezza so that why I have that included in the numbers but you can see the effect the various rear brakes have in comparason.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a2...psvkssxcyc.png

Hmmm...I swore when I looked at it, it didn't have a scale. Regardless, I'm going to run the numbers anyway and see what we come up with. The OP's comments about our kit being "too front biased" in particular was very odd to me. My memory was that we were very, very close to stock bias. Thanks for the tip on the rear piston bores!

I ran the numbers on your kit a while back and they were both within a percent of stock. Sprint slightly less, endurance slightly more. I missed the comment about too much front bias otherwise i'd have spoken up.

By "too much", I think what was meant was "same as stock".

Well FWIW I tried a slightly higher friction pad in the back of my car to try it out and I didn't notice any ill effects. I think you probably need to do the pedal dance to really notice it (which I didn't).

Pretty much, but again these weren't track conditions or anything super scientific. That was just our initial feel after having them on the car for a few weeks, once we get some warm weather and clear roads we'll throw the datalogger in the car and take it back out.

We finally had the chance to run the calculations for the front RR Racing/Wilwood BBK's. The figures below are the % of front brake with the rear OEM brakes left alone. Our Essex Sprint Kit actually has less front brake than stock, shifting a little bias rearward (the exact opposite of what was claimed in this post). Our Endurance Kit has a little more front bias than stock, but still less than all of the RR Racing kits. The RR Sport Performance Kit would probably be a bit too front biased for most of our customers. Heat would be increased in the front brakes, and the fronts would likely lock up while the rears were still rolling.

We haven't had a chance to do the calculations on their rear kits yet, but hopefully soon. As you can see though, any talk of our Essex/AP kits being more front biased are untrue. The opposite is in fact true. Thanks.

% of front brake:

Stock 67.1
Essex Sprint 66.3
Essex Endurance 68.5
RR Sport Performance 72.9
RR Stage 1 69.4
RR Stage 2 69.4
RR Stage 3 69.6
RR Stage 4 69.6

I guess, RR's are intended for car setups with more rear aero downforce, while Essex's for no aero or balanced aero setup. Thanks for all the testing performed. I guess it took lot of $ & time.

What causes the difference between stage 1/2 and 3/4? I thought that the calipers are the same and rotors are the same size. is the coefficient of friction different between the two rotors?