Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
2015+ Shelby GT350 Mustang
GT350 SHW Composite Brake Discs
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ry_Trapp0" data-source="post: 14557302" data-attributes="member: 27761"><p>extremely intriguing! i like to think that i have a good understanding of the majority of the systems involved in automobiles; engine, drivetrain, suspension, etc. but brakes, which are comparatively simple, have always posed some problems for me to mentally reconcile. the system as a whole is easy enough to understand, but brake rotors just seem to be a black magic device...</p><p> - lower rotational mass leads to shorter braking distances, but a lack of rotor material(especially without cooling ducts, which we all know was the '13/'14 GT500's issue) leads to overheating</p><p> - cross-drilling promotes cooling and a bit of de-gassing, but often causes stress risers leading to cracking</p><p> - it's one of the only parts of the modern day vehicle that we haven't found a realistically more suitable material to use than iron</p><p> - ring dimensions should in theory be no greater than pad swept area to reduce weight, but a larger ring is less likely to overheat</p><p> - 2-piece rotors are of course lower in weight, but typically have minor warping issues due to the temperature difference between the ring & hat as well as the attachment method, if not utilizing a very specialized method(such as SHW's design)</p><p> - single piece rotors are of course much heavier, but offer a lot more cooling capacity in exchange</p><p> - and, after considering all of this, automotive rotor design goes out the window when it comes to motorcycles, due to the massive difference in braking ability vs vehicle weight</p><p></p><p>...maybe it's just me, but i find balancing quench area, combustion chamber size, head gasket thickness, piston shape, and dynamic compression easier to understand than figuring out the "perfect" brake rotor, LOL. granted, with SO many different types/styles of rotors and their various features out there, it doesn't look like anyone in the auto industry has found the optimal compromise in a rotor either.</p><p>all of that aside, i'm DEFINITELY interested in seeing how these hold up on track on the GT350, especially over the long term with a heavy car like this(remember when the '00R used to be considered a 'pig' at 3590lbs, despite the "weight reduction?). i hate to say it, but i don't have high hopes under heavy use, because i've read some comments from lambo gallardo(which is equipped with similar discs when not optioned with CCs) owners, as well as a few audi RS owners, who've had to replace the factory SHW rotors after track use due to cracking around the - you guessed it - cross-drilling. granted, i believe all of the audi RS cars are 4000+lbs, but the gallardo is still lighter than the GT350 should come in at. </p><p>from my research, it looks as though porsche has put the most time and cash into ferrous disc research(decades worth), going as far as casting the 'cross-drilled' holes in to eliminate the stress risers caused by actual drilling, but even they weren't able to eliminate eventual cracking around the holes. it leads me to wonder if the cracking isn't caused by stress risors, but rather the temperature differential(and thus expansion rate) at the holes compared to the material around them. with the holes and the material around them constantly expanding and contracting at different rates as a vehicle is being used, something has gotta give, right?</p><p></p><p>...i might have fried my brain for the night...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ry_Trapp0, post: 14557302, member: 27761"] extremely intriguing! i like to think that i have a good understanding of the majority of the systems involved in automobiles; engine, drivetrain, suspension, etc. but brakes, which are comparatively simple, have always posed some problems for me to mentally reconcile. the system as a whole is easy enough to understand, but brake rotors just seem to be a black magic device... - lower rotational mass leads to shorter braking distances, but a lack of rotor material(especially without cooling ducts, which we all know was the '13/'14 GT500's issue) leads to overheating - cross-drilling promotes cooling and a bit of de-gassing, but often causes stress risers leading to cracking - it's one of the only parts of the modern day vehicle that we haven't found a realistically more suitable material to use than iron - ring dimensions should in theory be no greater than pad swept area to reduce weight, but a larger ring is less likely to overheat - 2-piece rotors are of course lower in weight, but typically have minor warping issues due to the temperature difference between the ring & hat as well as the attachment method, if not utilizing a very specialized method(such as SHW's design) - single piece rotors are of course much heavier, but offer a lot more cooling capacity in exchange - and, after considering all of this, automotive rotor design goes out the window when it comes to motorcycles, due to the massive difference in braking ability vs vehicle weight ...maybe it's just me, but i find balancing quench area, combustion chamber size, head gasket thickness, piston shape, and dynamic compression easier to understand than figuring out the "perfect" brake rotor, LOL. granted, with SO many different types/styles of rotors and their various features out there, it doesn't look like anyone in the auto industry has found the optimal compromise in a rotor either. all of that aside, i'm DEFINITELY interested in seeing how these hold up on track on the GT350, especially over the long term with a heavy car like this(remember when the '00R used to be considered a 'pig' at 3590lbs, despite the "weight reduction?). i hate to say it, but i don't have high hopes under heavy use, because i've read some comments from lambo gallardo(which is equipped with similar discs when not optioned with CCs) owners, as well as a few audi RS owners, who've had to replace the factory SHW rotors after track use due to cracking around the - you guessed it - cross-drilling. granted, i believe all of the audi RS cars are 4000+lbs, but the gallardo is still lighter than the GT350 should come in at. from my research, it looks as though porsche has put the most time and cash into ferrous disc research(decades worth), going as far as casting the 'cross-drilled' holes in to eliminate the stress risers caused by actual drilling, but even they weren't able to eliminate eventual cracking around the holes. it leads me to wonder if the cracking isn't caused by stress risors, but rather the temperature differential(and thus expansion rate) at the holes compared to the material around them. with the holes and the material around them constantly expanding and contracting at different rates as a vehicle is being used, something has gotta give, right? ...i might have fried my brain for the night... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
2015+ Shelby GT350 Mustang
GT350 SHW Composite Brake Discs
Top