![]() |
Low Dollar Brake Upgrade unsprung weight reduction
4 Attachment(s)
-Update at 10:26 PM CST- Braking Distance 60-0 MPH dropped by 8 feet. I tested this by setting cruise at 60 mph using line spray painted on the road on a bump that can be felt to insure that I'm starting the braking at the same point. In 5 repeated stops letting the rotors cool to 115 degrees each time I had a Deviation of stops of only 4 feet from shortest to longest stop. The ABS Engagement feels just like stock. Same method I've used 3 times previous when testing to see if coil overs and rims and tires added to shortening stopping distance. This test has given consistent results each time. I'd guess the improvement in stopping distance is the new pad composition being better. I actually gained a better reduction in stopping distance when I upgraded my wheels and tires.
So, looking around on the Internet I stumbled upon DifTech.com and seen they make brackets for putting wilwood calipers on stock rotors. I've already Cut Almost 8 Pounds a corner off with the 16' wheel and tire combination I'm looking at almost 8 more pounds of unsprung weight with this upgrade. Next will be a set of 2 Piece rotors but for now just the caliper. The parts I used for this was the Diftech brake caliper adapter, Wilwood 350z rear braided brake lines which are 1/2 longer than what wilwood uses for the brake kit for a 86, a set of 1.62" wilwood 4 pot calipers from speedwaymotors which were on sale and than a set of Brake pads from wilwood I used the BP10 pads for now since the car is daily driven. All said and Done I'm sitting at $660. https://photos.app.goo.gl/qm5JqFDa93VHr14m6 https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/wP...=w1081-h608-no https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Zi...o=w493-h657-no This was the brake with pads and Cable Connected The scale only goes up to 11 pounds the other caliper without brakes or brake line was to heavy for the caliper to read. On a less Accurate Scale I was 13 pounds heavier holding the stock caliper with pads and brake line attached. https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/lK...=w1168-h657-no On the Car, https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/2d...=w1168-h657-no |
what's the bent pieces of aluminum for?
i hope that's not the new mounts! |
Quote:
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk |
Unless it's some drag racing build (for which twins make bad match), i'd care more about braking capability and keeping brake bias, then blindly trying to reduce weight and retrofit calipers from other cars ignoring hurting main function to gain in secondary one. And if weight savings are your goal, worth going to two-piece rotors too, not just lighter calipers. But by then it was more then worth to go right away to some BBK kit designed natively for twins, instead of having $660 spent on interim solution with serious flaws.
|
Proper weight reductions for a 86:
Sell car. Buy a Miata. Problem solved. |
Quote:
The stock brakes have a 1.68 piston the brakes i installed have a 1.62 piston the new calipers brake feel and function identical to the stock brakes. Please list the aforementioned serious flaws. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
grow boobs have a sex change sorry you missed the last three steps thought I'd finish that thought process for you. |
Quote:
Then again often impact/gains from that weight reduction by lighter wheels/brake assembly or even lugnuts are overstated, and it certainly is wrong if one hurts other more important areas for sake of enhancing less important ones, eg. if one puts too overlightened wheels too much at expense of their rigidity/strength, or if one chooses less grippier tires only because they are lighter, and same with brake caliper retrofits from other cars with different suspension, different weight, different weight distribution. You have done all homework properly before doing swap? Is pad area same? Is pad area geometric center at same distance from center? Similar piston area is just one of many variables affecting resulting brake torque. I'm guessing that you have no access to brake dyno, bet have you done skidpad tests on both stock & retrofit calipers? Have you enough track experience and consistent enough driver to trust your "feel"/"butt dyno" to properly gauge "feel and function identical"? Do you want based on your current experience put enough trust trailbraking from 200kmh into corner with small runoff zone till wall? In my eyes from retrofit from other cars at most i'd consider willwood 4pot for wrx (of course, full kit, including rotors of specific diameter), with stock rears for lighter weight, as twins stock fronts are same as wrx's (rears from legacy gt), so i'd expect similar bias. As to why it's important to retain brake bias, simply with it too far off one way car stability/handling safety under heavy braking will be affected, and to other end of spectrum - fronts (which do most of braking) will be underbraked, thus braking distances will grow. Also if one still uses some nannies, they are designed with specific bias in mind i guess. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also the place where I'm running my car for the most part is a winding road with a very uneven asphalt surface lots of dips. It is in the middle of nowhere so I can run it pretty hard. The look of the road Reminds me a lot of the road you see in the MOTORing Touge videos from back in the day. If you run down it with some heavy springs your rear end will bounce and slide mid corner. Quote:
|
RyuGuy2: examples on wheels are for example something like forged wheels vs overlightened (to same weight) kosei r4. Yes, later are among lightest and dirt cheap .. but then again on this forum i've heard of several cases of them breaking or bending eg. when driving over kerb or some potholes when DD. Or test of Enkei where their RC4, focused on rigidity not the very lightest wheel performed a bit better on track vs lighter one that flexed a bit and robbed a bit of handling. Wheels have to be sufficiently strong (for use. Of course, for example rally use, with those insane jumps, cutting corners over ditch, or being able to finish with flat tire, requirements are a bit higher :)) and then lightest, how much budget allows, while retaining that strength.
As for weight reduction efficiency .. there are many loud opinions of how efficient is weight reduction, how even more of unsprung weight and most of all unsprung rotational weight .. and yes, racing teams with high budgets of course can fit expensive forged (maybe even magnesium) wheels, but still, and rest being same, where even hundredths or tenhs of seconds may decide winner, but more down to earth, at enthusiast trackday warrior level biggest difference is from nut behind wheel, and usually later makes up tenfold or more difference in time then what lighter wheels or brakes may net imho. solidsnake11: including same master cylinder bias on those camaros? As for abs on twins, doubt it. After all, there are also ones driving with abs fuse pulled. What may differ rather, stability control, working individually on wheels, but that is among nannies, most switch off on track. And imho you have got it a bit wrong. I'm not hater, i'm just speaking about possible ill-effects, and so that people that are lazy and judge mods just by budget, would be more careful with modding something as important as brakes, instead of blindly bolting on calipers from different cars (though in most cases not for weight saving, but just for bling purpose, just to get brembo branding on them). There are already enough such that blindly put on STI/Evo/Cadillac calipers on twins for bling :/ |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
EBD bias brakes, if it's off due eg. pedal dance procedure, leaving just basic ABS, then if anything, ABS will change brake action closer to optimal bias by delocking wheels on end with too much bias that locked first while other end still underbraked .. at expense of longer then could have been braking distance.
Having brake bias adjuster is indeed nice thing to have on competitive racecar, as at different grip level different mass (and grip) transfer happens and different bias-es are optimal. The less the grip (in wet, or in winter on snow/ice, or on gravel) the closer to 50:50 "optimal bias" is, the more the grip (dry / slicks / lot of downforce) > more mass transfer > more bias to front "optimal". As for drugs i'm on, sorry, if i dared to reply in more details to your questions in post before that on "structural integrity" about wheels aswell. But yes, if arguments evolve to personal insults to ones having different opinions, it's not much of interesting discussion to keep participate in. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:43 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2026 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.