Quote:
Originally Posted by sickmint79
i recently wrote an article on this comparing a bunch of kits - http://sickmint79.kinja.com/ats-and-...brz-1786142903
i don't understand the dismissal of bias given that a lot of r&d and testing goes into getting it right. and we are talking about brakes here. do people spend money on heavy wheels, crappy all seasons, and make their cars perform worse all the time? yes. but i find that particularly egregious when done so with brakes. why pay money for an upgrade that is really a downgrade?
the calculations i had resulted in the OEM bias of 0.697 going to ATS bias of 0.738. 0.738-0.697 is 0.041. 0.041 / 0.697 = 5.88% deviation from stock more forward. in terms of Front:Rear ratio, 2.3 to 2.8.
this is audi 2001 s4 data, but look how large a swing "only" 5.88% of a change can make moving 0.5 along the F:R ratio.
at least with heavy wheels maybe someone is naive about how that stuff works. but with brakes, people knowingly dismiss that the bias is off based on arbitrarily deciding 5% is a problem or not. something 5% off in your engine blows it up. how is anyone deciding that 5% can/should be ignored or not?
would a 10% swing suffice? that would be 0.7667 forward or 0.6273 rear. or for F:R, 3.29 and 1.68. it's "only 10%" but it's starting to reach the extremes of both ends of the stoptech chart. |
Idk. The guys from Essex Brakes said within 5% was cool in the Z32 caliper thread. So I'd say the probably wasn't to arbitrary and would trust their judgement considering their expertise. The issue is the electronics gettin wacked out so as long as it doesnt do that it is safe I think is the point. Im guessing they know how big a change the system can take.
I'm not saying I would buy this kit based on that but just saying it's been said by experts. Props for running the calcs on all those btw