| Author | Message | ||
     Chase Pursley (Iguitaryo1) New Member Username: Iguitaryo1 Post Number: 6 Registered: 02-2003 |
Are Kevlar brake pads better? Do they last longer? | ||
| Phillip Perkinson (Rover4x4) Member Username: Rover4x4 Post Number: 20 Registered: 02-2003 |
I have read on the board that they wear down rotors. well to say from what I have gathered OEM or Genuine pads are superior. I THINK | ||
| ksg Unregistered guest |
I bought some carbon gigs with drilled rotors from DAP. They stop almost 40-50% better. They do squeal a little. But the stopping power is great | ||
| Land Rover Certified Used A**hole (Jason) Senior Member Username: Jason Post Number: 283 Registered: 04-2002 |
40-50% better... that's scientific for "I did pre/post pad replacement tests on stopping distance from 30 mph, 60 mph, and 70 mph, and ultimate fade across 10 repeated trials at each of the speeds..." or "I just pulled these numbers out of my ass but they feel like they are working, there appears to be less pedal effort, and dang it, I paid twice over stock rotors and the advirtising info said I'd see 40-50% improvement". Lets say the low side of your guesstimate, 40% is the improvement. Since a stock Disco takes about 200 feet to stop from 70 mph (2003 Disco 2 takes 191 feet from Car and Driver's January 2003 test...I recall seeing previous Disco's requiring as much as 220 feet from 70 mph to 0). 40% of 200 is 80; a 40% improvement is 120 feet from 70 to 0. A preposterous value...are you comparing your Disco's stopping power...or your go-kart's stopping power? Hey, I don't doubt they made an improvement, but maybe a 5-10% improvement is more a reality. A 10% improvement would put you out-braking a Subaru WRX with 13.1" Brembo cross-drilled rotors and calipers...FYI. So I'll give you that range very loosely. | ||
| Todd Phenneger (Toddp) Member Username: Toddp Post Number: 72 Registered: 10-2002 |
THat 40% could be read as a mix of subjective and factual values. not JUST stopping distance but a mix of better pedal feel, better modulation, better fade resistance, better initial bite, and shorter stoping distances. If you were to Rate each of those values on a 1-100 basis, then add the results a 40% improvement could be feasible. Esp coming from worn brakes. He didn't say, my car stops 40% shorter than a Rover with Brand New Factory brakes. Reason I say this is that I have the DBA setup as well. IT works great, MUCH better fade resistance and modulation than the stock pads. Mine have been very quiet so maybe my compound is a bit different. But overall they are MUCH better than what they were (worn OEM) and definately better than what new OEM brakes like. At least judging fromt he differences in my buddies car since he went OEM. The biggest difference is in high speed braking on freeway offramps, etc. Around town they feel very similar to stock. l8r Todd | ||
| Todd Phenneger (Toddp) Member Username: Toddp Post Number: 73 Registered: 10-2002 |
Oh yea, In response to the original message. I would NOT run Kevlar pads on a Rover. The pads that AB sells for instance work great when hot, I run the same pad compound on my Audi Track car, but they do NOT work well when cold. Better off getting a hybrid pad. The pads I got with my DBA rotors are a Kevlar/Aluminum matrix pad. The Aluminum seems to heat up much faster helping the pad bite better. The Carbon/Kevlar pads heat up much more slowly. That said, my Alum/Kev pads still work VERY well when bloody hot, even while driving way to fast down MT roads using the brakes way more often and harder than I should. BTW...I also upgraded to RRC Vented front rotors and used spacers to space the calipers out to clear the rotors. That more than anything is largely responsible for the increase in fade resistance. :-) l8r Tdd |
