|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,459
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,459 |
A couple of months ago, I had the front rotors turned, installed new front pads, lubed the caliper pins, installed new rear drums, rear shoes, and rear wheel cylinders. I flushed all four brake lines, and bled the lines repeatedly. When I finished, the brakes were "okay", but not great. Now, after driving a couple of months, the brakes are much better. What's going on? Have the pads and shoes finally become matched to the rotors and drums?
95 Contour Zetec, ATX (wrecked, sitting in the barn)
95 Mystique Zetec, MTX
2000 Taurus SEL 3.0L Duratec
1994 Crown Victoria LX 4.6 V8
1993 Chevy Silverado 4.3 V6
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,867 |
Yes.
How many miles? What kind of driving?
Function before fashion.
'96 Contour SE
"Toss the Contour into a corner, and it's as easy to catch as a softball thrown by a preschooler." -Edmunds, 1998
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,007
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,007 |
Well, also if your pads were tapered at the edges, its seems that wear over time would expose more of the pad to the rotor, more surface area = better braking, seems like that might explain a little.
1998 Mystique LS:
-2.5 Duratec ATX
-Vibrant White
--------------------
=Pics=
=Info=
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 383
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 383 |
Originally posted by amarv12:
Well, also if your pads were tapered at the edges, its seems that wear over time would expose more of the pad to the rotor, more surface area = better braking, seems like that might explain a little.
Except that it's not true.
They've bedded themselves, that's all.
Pacific Green '96 Contour LX V6
â??98 GTP, light mods, 14.66/94
Calypso Green '92 Mustang LX coupe, 13.56/101
Crown Autocross Club 1999 Street Tire Champion, 2000/2001/2002 Street Modified Champion
KCR SCCA 2002 Solo II Street Modified Champion
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,007
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,007 |
Well i have bendix titaniums up front, and they had the tapered edges, so when they were fresh, only the center portion was making contact with the rotor, now approx. 15k later, almost the whole pad area touches the rotor. So why doesn't it make a difference?....i'm not contesting what you said, but i thought that would also make a difference (more friction area, right?).
1998 Mystique LS:
-2.5 Duratec ATX
-Vibrant White
--------------------
=Pics=
=Info=
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015 |
2000 SVT Turbo 295hp/269ftlb@12psi
#1 for Bendix Brakes Kits!
Knuckles rebuilt w/new bearings $55
AUSSIE ENDLINKS $70
Gutted pre-cats $80/set
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 397
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 397 |
Stazi, Are the Bendix ceramics available for the EO pads? (he he he...massive thread hi-jack...) 
T-red E0 SVT
ATS 17x7.5 Comp Lites, 215/45/17 Falken 512s, Ausi Bar, Boxed subframe, Poli all around, Warmonger's Opt Y, Opt TB, AFE, DMD, NGK's, Bendix Ti, Alpine, Polk, Mobil-1 0W-40, Redline MTL.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015 |
No, not yet at least.
I have to check with my distributor to see if they are making them, but I doubt it as essentially only one car (the SVT E0), for one year or so, used those pads so it wouldn't be economically viable to make it for them.
2000 SVT Turbo 295hp/269ftlb@12psi
#1 for Bendix Brakes Kits!
Knuckles rebuilt w/new bearings $55
AUSSIE ENDLINKS $70
Gutted pre-cats $80/set
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 383
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 383 |
Here's the formula for calculating torque at the rotor, from StopTech Systems, a leading aftermarket brake manufacturer:
Quote:
TW = PS x AP x �µ x 2 x RE
PS = Pressure of system; AP = Total Area of pistons in one half of caliper (one side of
opposed type or active (piston) side of sliding or floater type); �µ = Friction Coefficient; x 2, since
there are two sides of the rotor that the pads are exerting force against;
RE = Effective Radius of clamping force.
TW = PS x AP x �µ x 2 x RE
1. Torque created by the caliper on the rotor (at the wheel) = TW
Quote:
Braking torque: When we are talking about results in the braking department we are actually talking about braking torque - not line pressure, not clamping force and certainly not fluid displacement or fluid displacement ratio. Braking torque in pounds-feet on a single wheel is the effective disc radius in inches times clamping force times the coefficient of friction of the pad against the disc all divided by 12. The maximum braking torque on a single front wheel normally exceeds the entire torque output of a typical engine.
Notice pad surface area is not a factor. Coefficient of friction is, but the sizing of the pad does not change its coefficient of friction:
Quote:
Clamping force can only be increased either by increasing the line pressure or by increasing the diameter of the caliper piston(s). Increasing the size of the pads will not increase clamping force.
Pacific Green '96 Contour LX V6
â??98 GTP, light mods, 14.66/94
Calypso Green '92 Mustang LX coupe, 13.56/101
Crown Autocross Club 1999 Street Tire Champion, 2000/2001/2002 Street Modified Champion
KCR SCCA 2002 Solo II Street Modified Champion
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 768
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 768 |
MFE is correct b/c by increasing the area you are decreasing the pressure accordingly. the force stays the same of course, so the work stays the same too...  fun, I know. some people did not concentrate during their physics classes hehe
|
|
|
|
|
