08 TL-S 6MT: Braking, 70–0 mph: 163 ft
08 G35 6MT: Braking, 70–0 mph: 160 ft
08 IS350 6AT: Braking, 70–0 mph: 167 ft
08 335i 6MT: Braking, 70–0 mph: 157 ft
08 Passat 6AT: Braking, 70–0 mph: 180 ft
04 TL 6MT: Braking, 70–0 mph: 189 ft

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...type_s_feature

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...a_tl_road_test

Brembo is a marketing hype? Look at the numbers and see for yourself. 04 TL: 189ft, 08 TL-S: 163ft.

 

brakes aside, i think we can all agree it sounds bad ass at WOT

 

How exactly is that relevant?

Do Acura TLs uses carbon on carbon brakes?

Nope, but F1 cars do.

Do Acura TLs weigh 1,334 pounds - INCLUDING THE DRIVER AND A FULL TANK OF FUEL?

Nope, but F1 cars do.

Do Acura TLs use force fed, impeller driven rotor cooling aids?

Nope, but F1 cars do.

Do Acura TL cars only have to travel less than 200 miles before requiring a complete brake system replacement?

Nope, but F1 cars do.

Your argument is baseless because it compares apples to oranges. As such, it is utterly devoid of logic and good sense.

THIS TOPIC DEALS WITH 3,330 pound and above (PLUS DRIVER) street cars.

 

The rotors are the end game in any braking system, since they much dissipate virtually all of the vehicle's kinetic energy during braking (in the form of heat).

Larger rotors have more mass (for greater energy dissipation) as well as a longer brake torque arm (for greater stopping power at any and all wheel speeds).

By the way, I have a Bachelor's Degree in mechanical engineering....Do you?


Your comparison to F1 brakes is laughable:

Do Acura TLs uses carbon on carbon brakes?

Nope, but F1 cars do.

Do Acura TLs weigh 1,334 pounds - INCLUDING THE DRIVER AND A FULL TANK OF FUEL?

Nope, but F1 cars do.

Do Acura TLs use force fed, impeller driven rotor cooling aids?

Nope, but F1 cars do.

Do Acura TL cars only have to travel less than 200 miles before requiring a complete brake system replacement?

Nope, but F1 cars do.

Your argument is baseless because it compares apples to oranges. As such, it is utterly devoid of logic and good sense.

THIS TOPIC DEALS WITH 3,330 pound and above (PLUS DRIVER) street cars. [/QUOTE]

 

I rationalize it the way BMW, Porsche, GM (Corvette), Ferrari and EVERY high performance street car manufacturer rationalizes it.

http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...op_vehicle.pdf

Large rotors (relative to vehicle weight) are ESSENTIAL in real high performance braking systems and EVERY modern, high performance street car is so equipped.

The '07 - '08 Acura TL Type S stood out like a sore thumb with its dinky little rotors.

I drive a 2007 TL-S every day of my life and have for the past 13 months. I know FROM FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE that the brakes are laughable my modern, performance STREET car standards.

Have you ever even sat in one?

 

Don't take it personally but you don't, a former German colleague worked for Audi and we had a many conversations involving vehicle design and development. Your irrational views would not fit the ever compromising world of automobile engineering which involve defining requirements and designing/developing systems to fufill those requirements.

 

Get your facts straight, the 600Kg weight for a F1 car is for all times during a F1 event. That includes the fuel tank being empty.

Don't have a BSME, but a BSEE/MSEE/MSCS.

The F1 comparison was simple, it showed how other factors matter (in this case design and materials) in brake design wheither it's for a car, bicycle, airplane. It also proved your brake rotor size comcept as being illogical. Actually in all the things on a F1 car the brakes are actually the most common with road cars, but you truely need to understand the system as a concept of all the components.



[/QUOTE]

 

If there were any truth in that then BMW, Mercedes Benz, Audi, etc. would be fitting their 3,550 pound plus, 286 HP plus performance sedans with 12.2" X .98 F rotors and SOLID 11.1" X .35" rear rotors.

It would be a win-win situation for them, since those small rotors would reduce expense, unsprung weight, rotational inertia and total vehicle weight.

Yet, ALL of those manufacturers (plus Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Aston Martin, etc.) specify MUCH larger rotors.

Why is that?

Do you really believe that a glorified Accord that was spec'd out sometime in the 2002 time-frame represents the state-of-the-art in modern performance sedan braking?

Even Acura knows the old TL's brakes sucked. That's why they INCREASED ROTOR SIZE to 12.6" F and 13.1" R in the new TL!

 

I'll have to go over in the future to the Corvette threads and see how your logic measures up with those rational folks

FWIW, I have ridden in my boss'es TL Type-S but never driven one. Although he is a BSME/MSME and designed the resin/binder/composite for the C4 Corvette's latteral leaf spring (which by the way is the first thing they get rid of when they race them, the C6R using coil over dampers!).

 

Why don't you go over to these websites instead and see how many AMG MBs and BMW M cars are using '07 - '08 Acura TL Type S sized brake rotors?

http://www.mercedes-amg.com/index_us.html

http://www.bmwusa.com/



The "rational folks" on the Corvette site know that a Z51's brakes will put you through the windshield @ 140 MPH if you hop on them without wearing belts.

The PRIMARY reason for that is this. (Note the size and mass of the Z51's Corvette rotors, relative to its curb weight). And that 'Vette uses simple, 2 piston, sliding calipers!

http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...op_vehicle.pdf

http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...perf_0-100.pdf

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ff+page-4.html

 

for someone who likes to talk a lot about brakes, he sure doesnt know when to stop.

 

You really aren't that smart, are you? Maybe, just maybe the brakes are bigger because the car weighs 400lbs more.

I was wondering how long it would take you to pull the ME degree BS. You may or may not have an education but you definately lack basic common sense.

The TL is not a sports car nor was it meant to compete with one. You are holding it to sports car standards. How hard is this to understand?

Once again, how many of us have ever, ever, ever had our brakes fade in our TLs? Screw your physics, in real life, not in your world, I have not heard of anyone complain of the brakes fading. I could give 2 shits about your Vette and it's brakes. The TL is grossly undertired compared to the Vette. I would put my TL up against any Vette in stopping from 70mph since I have comprable sized tires.

Go away and drive your mid-life crisis car and jack off to your brakes. You don't see us going to the Vette forum and talking about the road noise, stiff ride, wind noise, plastic interior, rattles, lack of space, etc. Personally, the Vette I drove didn't have enough power to make me overlook it's other shortcomings.

I enjoy the TL for what it is. I have a fast car, lightyears ahead of your Vette and I wanted the TL for what it has to offer and never have I been let down.

 

Just thinking out loud but isn't the % change in front brakes less than the % increase in weight? Brakes are roughly 9% larger compared to old base brakes while the weight goes up 10-11%...

Or a 3% change in rotor size from the old Brembos to the new brakes... Looks like you got all excited for nothing.

 

Okee dokee that's enough of this thread.

 

One more

 

don't worry, i know a tool when i see one.

your contention that 70-0mph stops are meaningless, yet "aggressive canyon runs", whatever that is, proves anything should feel rediculous even to you.

but honestly if you think the base model brakes were as good as the brembos then all the power to you...

 

from what i've read i think the entire forum agrees... if you took your tl to the track, you would definately feel brake fade. they just heat up so much from the constant braking. but you could say that about almost any production car brake setup. you would never feel fade on the street, you'd have to be driving like a complete maniac to do that. and on the street is where we do 99% of our driving, and the numbers don't like, the brembos do a very good job.

its odd that someone would dismiss a 70-0 stop comparison because of all the different variables, yet their only argument is that rotor size is everything.

 

Exactly, and again referring back to the TL-S lap time on Willow Springs, if the brakes really suck I doubt that it could beat the other two by such a large margin. Like I’d say the brakes might not be as good as others, but it’s far from being mediocre.

 

GTFO of this forum man, no one here likes you. Arrogant little !@#$#@!!@$^%^