Type-S Brake life? And replacement options?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

10-10-2007 | 10:33 AM

#81

Excelerate

Former Sponsor

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Mar 2004

Posts: 9,877

Likes: 624

From: www.ExceleratePerformance.com

The TL 04-07 M/T and the TL-S share the same front rotor so it's the same size. I'm going from memory here but I believe the rotor is 12.2-12.3 inches.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 12:40 PM

#82

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bearcat94

My TL-S breaks are quiet as a church mouse. 6,500 miles, totally stock. In every day city/highway mixed driving, they stop better than anything I've ever owned. Quiet too. I think driving style has a lot to do with some of the "groaning" noises.

Here's some info on the effectiveness of the OE Brembo Set Up:

60 – 0 Emergency Stopping is OUTSTANDING compared to a WIDE VARIETY of modern sports sedans, regardless of market segment.

Acura TL-S 60 – 0 = 117 ft

EXCEPT for the BMW 330i, that’s best out of 25 cars with similar straight line performance.

Make & Model…………………........ 60 - 0
BMW 330i………………………......... 116
Acura TL-S…………………......… 117
BMW 335i………………………......... 119
Infinity G35 Sport……………....…. 120
Volkswagon GTI………………....... 120
Mazda MazdaSpeed6………….... 121
Audi A4 2.0T Quattro…………..... 122
BMW 545i………………………......... 121
Mini Cooper S…………………........ 122
Volvo S80 V8 AWD……………...... 123
Lexus GS430………………….......… 126
BMW 325xi……………………........… 123
Subaru Impreza WRX………….... 124
Lexus IS250 AWD……………....… 125
Lexus IS350……………………........ 126
Acura RL…………………….........…… 126
Subaru Legacy 2.5GT spec.B… 126
Infinity G35x……………………........ 127
Toyota Camry SE V6…………...... 127
Lexus IS350……………………........ 128
Mercedes-Benz E350 Sport….. 129
Volvo S40 T5 AWD……………...... 130
Dodge Charger R/T……………..... 132
Mercedes-Benz C350 Sport….. 135
Lexus LS460……………………....... 143

But wait, that’s not all. Against the same group of cars, the TL is WELL INSIDE the top 1/3 in stopping distances from 80 – 0 and at 214 ft SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER THAN AVERAGE.

Were all those cars tested by the same driver on the same track on the same day?

Answer: NO

Does a single stop from 60 MPH give a good indication of TOTAL braking performance?

Answer: No

Why is that?

Because the rotors don't get hot enough during one such stop to become heat saturated and induce fade.

Furthermore, braking from slower speeds is primarily a TRACTION LIMITED (tires and ABS algorithms) event, since virtually any modern car can lock the tires at 60 MPH. Hence, the advantage of larger rotors (greater mass for superior heat dissipation and a longer moment arm for more STOPPING POWER) don't really become evident at lower speeds.

That all changes at elevated speeds and/or in situations requiring multiple hard stops (e.g. on a road racing circuit).

Step on the brakes in a TL-S at 120 MPH and there's not much there.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 12:52 PM

#83

Evader

Let's Go Pens

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 1,843

Likes: 2

From: Hamilton, NJ

I've read through these pages and yet I'm still undecided on what to go with as replacement pads for my TL-S. I was leaning towards the Hawks over the stock pads. I went to pepboys (I wasn't aware that they sold the pads there) and they told me they have three different types of Hawks pads. Also, they told me they don't see a set listed for the 07 TL Type S but suggested to use the 04-06 and if they didn't fit they would give me a full refund. Can someone confirm which specific hawk pads I should go with for my 07 TL-S 5AT? (Please accept my apology and don't flame me if I missed it here, it's been a long day)

Thanks for the helps guys!

On another note.. I can't give you the answer in feet. But I have done an emergency stop (on purpose) from about 93 mph and I was friggen amazed at how quickly the car stopped. I also did an emergency stop from just above 80 and tried steering and had complete control. Regardless on what anyone thinks of these brakes, I have no objections and feel that in an emergency situation I am providing with all the equipment I need to stop as safely and as quickly as possible.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 12:54 PM

#84

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evader

No-one has yet been able to positively confirm that '04 - '06 6 speed pads will fit '07 - '08 TL-S cars.

My advice is to wait until you see it on a manufacturer's (e.g. Hawk's) application chart.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 02:14 PM

#85

MrHeeltoe

Former Sponsor

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Aug 2004

Posts: 6,944

Likes: 509

From: Pac Northwest

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evader

Order a set of Hawks for an 04-06 6MT from us and see if they fit. It takes 20 min to check. If they don't fit, send them back we'll refund you. This will constitute a loss for us, but it is worth it to know, wouldn't you say? It takes time to confirm product fitments and update catalogs. There is no sense in waiting for product listings to change when the likelihood exists it will fit and we have the capability of answering the question ourselves.

This debate is getting retarded.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 02:44 PM

#86

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrHeeltoe

Who pays for the shipping costs (both send and return) and/or sales tax if they don't fit?

Why don't you offer to send someone a pair at your (true wholesale) cost AND cover the upfront shipping? The customer is doing his fair share in the deal by fronting the labor, the tools (and the return postage) if they don't fit.

You'd get your money back plus a lot more in new sales if they do fit, as long as the test customer agrees to post a new thread on here saying they fit (while providing some proof).

Various vendors claim they're fit, yet never offer to put their own money on the line to prove it.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 03:38 PM

#87

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

....

....

Step on the brakes in a TL-S at 120 MPH and there's not much there.

Stop contradicting yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

....Swept area per ton is the single best gauge for quantifying available stopping power. ....

The Swept Area per Ton on the TL-S is ABOVE AVERAGE for cars with similar straight line performance, regardless of price.

TL-S = 273 sq. in.
Avg (16 Sport Sedans, incl Audi, BMW, MB, Lexus, Infiniti, etc, etc) = 270 sq in.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 03:42 PM

#88

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

....

Step on the brakes in a TL-S at 120 MPH and there's not much there.

Where is the data?

Excluding your fruitless pad break-in(s), how many times have you stopped from more than 80 to 0 repeatedly since you've owned your TL-S?

How many people do you know that have?

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 03:49 PM

#89

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evader

....

On another note.. I can't give you the answer in feet. But I have done an emergency stop (on purpose) from about 93 mph and I was friggen amazed at how quickly the car stopped. I also did an emergency stop from just above 80 and tried steering and had complete control. Regardless on what anyone thinks of these brakes, I have no objections and feel that in an emergency situation I am providing with all the equipment I need to stop as safely and as quickly as possible.

Yep. Me too. Once from ~50 mph. Over pretty bumpy surface, so some opportunity for hop/skip. The TL-S performed FLAWLESSLY.

On topic: I saw today a different OE pad. Not sure what it is or fitment, but it is listed with the '07 Base as an "A-Spec" Pad:

08P89-SEP-200 PAD, BRAKE (A-SPEC) List = $144.89.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 03:52 PM

#90

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bearcat94

Where is the data?

Excluding your fruitless pad break-in(s), how many times have you stopped from more than 80 to 0 repeatedly since you've owned your TL-S?

How many people do you know that have?

80 MPH isn't that fast for a car that can top 150 MPH.

I have a mechanical engineering degree.

I therefore know that Kinetic Energy (of the vehicle) = 1/2 MASS X VELOCITY SQUARED

I also know that brakes work by converting kinetic energy into thermal energy by friction (pads on the rotors).

Ultimately, smaller rotors simply don't have the necessary mass to dissipate all of that energy. That also don't have a large enough torque arm (distance from the hub center to the pad center) to generate adequate amounts of FRICTION HORSEPOWER.

And that energy SQUARES, relative to velocity. That's means that your TL traveling at 120 MPH has 4 times the kinetic energy than it has when traveling at 60 MPH.

A 3,600 pound car with those dinky little discs simply can't effectively dissipate that kind of heat form that kind of speed. Similarly, they can't effectively dissipate that kind of heat from multiple hard stops at slower speeds.

That's why virtually every other manufacturer that offers anything claiming to be a "performance car" offers larger rotors (relative to vehicle weight) than the TL-S.

So who's wrong? The laws of physics and thermodynamics, plus virtually every other manufacturer - or Acura?

FACT: A 3,600 pound Acura TL-S has SMALLER ROTORS than a 3,100 pound Nissan Sentra!

Get into the Sentra's brakes at real speeds and you'll see which car stops better. And it won' t be the TL-S.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:01 PM

#91

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

I can't believe you continue to post these lies.

Acura has more Swept Area per Ton than most similar straight line performance cars. 273 sq in versus 270 sq in for the average.

The TL-S is not "light" on Brake. It is ABOVE AVERAGE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

.... Comparing apples to apples (i.e. modern, luxury/performance sedans), the TL-S's swept area per ton is on the light side. ....

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

....

Anyone who understands the concept of swept area per ton can see that. ....

I'm not making this stuff up. You have a Mechanical Engineering Degree. I am using the "single best gauge for quantifying available stopping power."

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

....Swept area per ton is the single best gauge for quantifying available stopping power. ....

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:03 PM

#92

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

Nissan Sentra?

Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V 60 – 0 = 134 ft
Acura TL-S 60 – 0 = 117 ft (that’s best in class, save one, for cars with similar straight line performance and similar market segment).

Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V 80 – 0 = 246 ft
Acura TL-S 80 – 0 = 214 ft (significantly better than average; top 25% in performance segment and top 1/3 in market segment).

134 FEET and 246 FEET!! Holy Crap. Do you realize how pathetically fucking bad that is?

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

.... Nissan Sentra SE-R has bigger brakes (12.6" F/11.5" R) than an Acura TL-S!

And the Sentra is a whopping SIX HUNDRED POUNDS lighter!

….

They ain't helpin'!!

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:07 PM

#93

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bearcat94

Nissan Sentra?

Were those tests performed by the same driver on the same track on the same day?

No, they weren't. They therefore can't be directly compared to one-another.

Asphalt alone makes a huge difference in braking, since it directly effects the coefficient of friction between the tires and the road. Temperature also makes a big difference, as does the driver.

And why are you comparing the 60 to 0 performance of the TL with the 80 to -0 performance of the Sentra and calling it "f**ng pathetic."

You need to compare 80 to 0 with the same.

I've never claimed that the TL-S isn't capable of yielding one (or perhaps 2) good "panic stops" from 80 MPH.

Thing is, that in no way represents how the brakes would perform around a road racing circuit.

Acura is getting those results with OVERLY AGGRESSIVE PADS that make noise and compromise rotor life.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:21 PM

#94

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

...

And why are you comparing the 60 to 0 performance of the TL with the 80 to -0 performance of the Sentra and calling it "f**ng pathetic."
.....

Do they teach reading and/or analysis at these Mechanical Engineering places?

I'll go slow.

60 - 0:

Nissan................Acura
134 ft..................117 ft

80 - 0

Nissan.....................Acura
246 ft .....................214 ft.

134 ft and 214 ft is Fucking Pathetic because the Nissan SE-R is at or next to BOTTOM of a group of 30 modern "sports" sedans in both stopping distances.

Even though the "Nissan Sentra SE-R has bigger brakes (12.6" F/11.5" R) than an Acura TL-S!

And the Sentra is a whopping SIX HUNDRED POUNDS lighter!"

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:23 PM

#95

260 HP

Three Wheelin'

iTrader: (3)

Joined: Oct 2000

Posts: 1,363

Likes: 2

From: Socal

Go, Bearcat94. I was going to post the same to aid the mechanical engineer.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:27 PM

#96

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bearcat94

That has VERY LITTLE TO DO with how those brakes would hold up after MULTIPLE high speed brake applications.

That's the part you aren't getting.

One or two stops from 60 MPH or 80 MPH simply doesn't get the brakes hot enough to invoke fade.

The Acura's numbers are coming from overly aggressive pads, wider tires and more weight transfer. That works - once or twice and from lower speeds. It doesn't work for real performance driving, though.

The downside to Acura's approach is brake noise and reduced rotor life (due to the pads).

The RL's rotors (and pads) would produce similar low speed, "panic stop" result if fitted to a TL, but would be MUCH better for multiple hard stops while being quieter and yielding longer rotor life.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:33 PM

#97

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

http://www.se-r.net/about/sentra_se-...ct98/index.htm

And no, I don't own an SE-R:

"Rotor size is the most commonly bragged about since it is the most easily seen and quantified. Rotor diameter determines how much leverage the calipers have. Brake torque (or any torque for that matter) is determined by the force applied by the calipers times the distance from the center of the rotor at which it is applied. If two calipers can deliver the same friction force, the calipers dragging on larger diameter rotors will deliver more stopping torque. A larger rotor will also have more mass to absorb heat from a sudden stop, and more surface area to dissipate that heat into the air."

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:41 PM

#98

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

http://www.aa1car.com/library/brake_rotors.htm

"The amount of heat that is created at the rotors depends on the speed and weight of the vehicle, and how hard the brakes are applied. A normal stop from 60 mph can easily raise the temperature of the front rotors 150 to 250 degrees. Several hard stops in quick succession can send rotor temperatures soaring into the 600, 700 or even 800 degree range!

If rotor temperatures keep going up because the driver is riding the brakes (as when traveling down a steep mountain) or is driving aggressively, the brakes may get so hot they start to fade. Once this occurs, it takes more and more pedal effort to slow the vehicle. Eventually the point may be reached where the brakes can't generate enough friction no matter how hard the driver stands on the pedal.

Large heavy vehicles like fullsize SUVs and trucks obviously create more braking heat than small passenger cars. Consequently, the rotors on trucks are larger than those on cars. The bigger the rotors, the more heat they can handle. That's why race cars and performance cars typically have oversized rotors -- so they can stop quickly without frying the brakes."

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:46 PM

#99

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

http://968s.com/brake.htm

"The rotor must have the necessary mass to absorb the heat generated by applications of the brakes, in effect it is a "heat sink". After the initial temperature "spike" from a hard brake application, the rotor must be able to cool or dissipate the heat ready for the next application."

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:48 PM

#100

260 HP

Three Wheelin'

iTrader: (3)

Joined: Oct 2000

Posts: 1,363

Likes: 2

From: Socal

harddrivin1le, magazines (reputable ones at least) measure braking distance repeatedly and then average the numbers. Granted this is still low speed to your standards but still will heat the brakes considerably and also reduce driver inconsistencies.

I don't know if you have noises or performance issues on your car, but mine is quiet and stops well, even at canyon carving driving in the middle of summer. I have almost 25k on them and they still have some pads left. The rotors also look pretty good.

I'm not sure why you complain about rotor life or agressive pads. Cars that stops well, repeatedly, usually also eat their rotors for breakfast. Just look at BMW. Usually when BMW brake pads are done, the rotors are, too.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:49 PM

#101

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

http://www.minituner.com/tuning/?tSfID1=10&tuningID=8

"Also, remember that when you brake, you are converting kinetic energy (forward motion) in to thermal energy (energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only change forms…see, those science classes in school…or those public learning channels…are applicable in the real world :-). The larger surface area/mass allow better heat dissipation (which make your rotors less prone to warping under extreme usage…like track days)."

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 04:52 PM

#102

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by 260 HP

1) The shortest stopping distances obtained by the magazine will occur before fade sets in (when the brakes are still relatively cold). So your argument on that point is moot.

2) Larger rotors (and pads with larger surface areas) = LONGER LIFE (both pad and rotor) for any given driving style PLUS better braking!

Look at the brakes BMW is installing on their 5 series. Even their base model 528 (230 HP) gets brakes that are larger than the RL's!

www.bmwusa.com

The 535 (300 HP and about the same weight as the TL) uses brakes that are much larger still.

Do you think BMW is installing those large rotors for no reason?

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 05:02 PM

#103

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/5/528iSedan/techdata.htm
528i:

Brakes
Front - diameter 12.8 inch
Rear - diameter 12.6 inch

http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/5/535iSedan/techdata.htm
535i:

Brakes
Front - diameter 13.7 inch
Rear - diameter 13.6 inch

http://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/M/M5Sedan/techdata.htm

M5:

Brakes
Front - diameter 14.7 inch
Rear - diameter 14.6 inch

And I'll bet ROAD AND TRACK'S 60 - 0 and 80 - 0 stopping distances for all of those cars are about the same as the TL-S's.

Think they're the same from 140 MPH to 0? How well do you think the TL-S's brakes would hold up around 10 hard laps at Lime Rock compared to even the 528 (not to mention the 535 or the M5)?

Answer: POORLY

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 05:54 PM

#104

ARX-01b

Banned

iTrader: (1)

Joined: Jul 2002

Posts: 680

Likes: 1

From: Floyds Knobs, IN

Why should we put any stock in 140 - 0 stopping distances, because it is not relavent to 99% of all TL drivers. I'm sure there are those who track their car and that is probably less than 1% of all TL owners. Changes are that those who track their cars probably have gutted their car which make the stopping distances were arguing about meaningless anyway

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 06:28 PM

#105

260 HP

Three Wheelin'

iTrader: (3)

Joined: Oct 2000

Posts: 1,363

Likes: 2

From: Socal

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

1) My point is, which isn't moot, your assumption that the braking distances Bearcat94 listed isn't from 1 braking attempt, rather it was the average of multiple attempts. Without you going out there and testing each vehicle individually, we have to rely on publicly available data to compare the braking performances between cars.

2) If you have ever owned a BMW, you'll know that even with larger pads and rotors, their brakes don't last longer than Hondas' do. Actually, their rotors are usually shot at the end of the pads' life.

3) We can't compare braking performances between a TL-S and M5 because these cars are intended for different markets and driving style.

By the way, I have tried braking my 2001 M3 at 140 mph and there's not much there either. There's no different that I can feel compared to my TL. So your argument of this point is also moot.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 06:36 PM

#106

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by 260 HP

Braking ULTIMATELY comes down to the rotors ability to dissipate heat. PERIOD.

The TL-S weighs almost 3,700 pounds (in automatic form). 12.2" fronts rotors and 11.1" rear rotors are simply too small to dissipate the kind of heat that would be generated from hard, multiple stops.

The rear rotors are SOLID (not even ventilated)!!!!

It's a simply matter of thermodynamic laws and Acura isn't doing anything "magical" to change that.

These brakes are "fine" for 1 or two hard stops from up to 85 MPH or so.

They ARE NOT SUITABLE for true high performance driving or anything that resembles even light track use - assuming the driver is remotely competent.

Can we compare the brakes of a 535i and an TL-S or are those "intended for different driving styles," too? THERE IS NO COMPARISON BETWEEN THOSE BRAKES! Go park your TL next to a new 535i and that will become patently obvious to you.

Furthermore, 2001 is 7 model years ago. Brakes have come a LONG way in those 7 years. It's 2008 now (in case you didn't know).

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 06:51 PM

#107

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Originally Posted by 260 HP

Quote:

1) My point is, which isn't moot, your assumption that the braking distances Bearcat94 listed isn't from 1 braking attempt, rather it was the average of multiple attempts.

Published stopping distances are THE BEST single result from multiple attempts. That generally happens when the brakes are cold to warm (but not hot).

ALL published performance data is represented by the single best result.

Send a letter to Road and Track if you require verification of that:

RTLettersOnline@HFMUS.com

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 06:53 PM

#108

Kennedy

OMGWTF4THGENTL

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Apr 2006

Posts: 3,859

Likes: 23

From: NoVA

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

These brakes are "fine" for 1 or two hard stops from up to 85 MPH or so.

They ARE NOT SUITABLE for true high performance driving or anything that resembles even light track use - assuming the driver is remotely competent.

Tell that to the R&D nerds who won 25 hours at Thunderhill in a near stock TL...
http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=309350

Quote:

While the engine, drivetrain and brake system remained stock, the team augmented the TL's 3.2 liter V6 with a cold air intake, and a custom exhaust header from Prototype Racing.

Dem's Brembo's doin the job right there...

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 06:57 PM

#109

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kennedy

Tell that to the R&D nerds who won 25 hours at Thunderhill in a near stock TL...
http://www.vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=309350

Dem's Brembo's doin the job right there...

From your "Thunderhill link:"

"These modifications plus the removal of luxury and convenience features reduced the TL's weight to 2797 pounds (without driver)..."

A TL-S automatic is NINE NINE HUNDRED POUNDS HEAVIER THAN THAT!

A stock Civic Si sedan weighs 2,945 pounds! That's 152 pounds LIGHTER than that "nearly stock" TL!

http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-s...oup=dimensions

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:03 PM

#110

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Make that 148 pound lighter...

This Civic Type R weighs just 2,800 pounds:

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...6/pageNumber=1

And guess what?

It had BIGGER BRAKES than an Acura TL Type S!

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:05 PM

#111

trancemission

Senior Moderator
Regions Leader

Joined: Aug 2004

Posts: 8,893

Likes: 218

From: Dallas TX

are we doing this again?

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:07 PM

#112

Kennedy

OMGWTF4THGENTL

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Apr 2006

Posts: 3,859

Likes: 23

From: NoVA

Quote:

Originally Posted by trancemission

are we doing this again?

Only my 2nd post this time... I'm just having fun.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:08 PM

#113

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by trancemission

are we doing this again?

People can't understand that a 3,700 pound car with 12.2" F/11.1" R brakes is nothing more than "adequate" in terms of ultimate stopping power (e.g. on a road racing course) - based on the simple laws of thermodynamics (heat transfer).

I am attempting to prove otherwise.

Honda itself is selling Civics that have larger brakes than the TL Type S!

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...6/pageNumber=1

Why would Honda fit 12.6" brakes (with 4 piston Brembo calipers) to a 2,800 pound Civic if a 3,700 pound Acura with smaller brakes is some kind of super stopper?

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:41 PM

#114

trancemission

Senior Moderator
Regions Leader

Joined: Aug 2004

Posts: 8,893

Likes: 218

From: Dallas TX

hey as long as you guys keep it civil I say debate on. Kennedy, he's all yours...

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:47 PM

#115

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

....

Honda itself is selling Civics that have larger brakes than the TL Type S! ....

60 - 0

Civic Si ..................Acura TL-S
130 ft........................117 ft

80 - 0

Civic Si ..................Acura TL-S
235 ft........................214 ft

And the Civic is 900 Pounds Lighter.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:49 PM

#116

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

Your Big Rotor Theory is flawed. Maybe you're missing this:

You're a Mechanical Engineer, figure it out. When you include this, though, you'll still come up short.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:50 PM

#117

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Again:

I have been suggesting that the TL Type S (nearly 3,700 pounds in automatic guises) could have really benefited from the RL's larger (12.6" F/12.2" R) rotors, since those rotors have a longer torque arm, significantly more mass (able to better dissipate heat) and would therefore perform much better from HIGHER speeds and/or repeated hard stops.

People have generally chided that suggestion, in large part because they can't get past the fact that Brembo builds the rotors and that the laws of thermodynamics no longer apply.

Come to fund out, Honda is specifying those very same rotors (and 4 piston Brembos) on a...2,800 pound CIVIC!

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...6/pageNumber=1

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:55 PM

#118

harddrivin1le

Drifting

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 2,372

Likes: 0

From: Portsmouth, RI

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bearcat94

Your Big Rotor Theory is flawed. Maybe you're missing this:

You're a Mechanical Engineer, figure it out. When you include this, though, you'll still come up short.

Explain the units for those variables and I will explain what YOU are missing. (Variables don't always mean the same thing - even in engineering).

A larger diameter rotor has a longer torque arm and is therefore capable of producing more friction horsepower (stopping power) for any given caliper force at any given speed.

That same rotor is generally heavier and is therefore more than capable of dissipating that excess heat, which I think is the point you are (erroneously) attempting to "debate."

This is not "theory." It is FACT.

This is why road racers will always run the largest rotor allowed by the rules.

That is why Honda fits Acura RL rotors to their REAL performance sedan (Civic Type R).

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:55 PM

#119

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

The 535 (300 HP and about the same weight as the TL) uses brakes that are much larger still.

Do you think BMW is installing those large rotors for no reason?

Yes as far as what you or I will use.

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

….

BMW 535i

…. the cars are very similar in terms of weight and acceleration and top speed.

….

Wrong Market Segment.

BMW 535i (as tested) = $61,125
Acura TL-S (as tested) = $38,795

GOOD GOD! That’s half again as much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

…. the cars are very similar in terms of weight and acceleration and top speed.

….

WOW! I guess that means Big Rotors must cost A LOT!!.

Reply Like

10-10-2007 | 07:56 PM

#120

Bearcat94

AZ Community Team

Joined: May 2007

Posts: 32,488

Likes: 7,771

From: N35°03'16.75", W 080°51'0.9"

“.... BMW's brakes are large by industry standards ….”.

http://autos.nytimes.com/2007/BMW/5_...spx#topSection

Kind of shoots this speculative bit drivel in the ass, doesn’t it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by harddrivin1le

12.5" or larger rotors on all four corners is now THE STANDARD for vehicles in that market segment.

Reply Like

Reply Share

First
Prev
3 / 7
Next
Last