2019+ Solid Brake Rotors = Improved Life

[svttim]

and yet NOT a SINGLE data point in the entire word salad. When will techies dare to provide some actual FACTS and not a bunch of unsubstantiated hand waving? The pronouncements were presumably made upon hard data. PUBLISH IT.

What kind of dressing would you like on your word salad. If you dont like what Ford engineers are saying, why dont you pick up several sets of each and come back here and reprt your data points? There is plenty of data available to support the assertion not only do solid rotors last longer, they save pad life. Moat serious racers and people who track hard shy away from drilled rotors. Unless they are very expensive, chafered outside and inside, its not wirth the risk. Until recently, always ran slotted rotors. They are safer then drillec but, wth new pad designs, there is no advantage. Yes, all rotors crack. But untill the get to the edge of the rotor and are nit deep or wide, they are usable.

Sponsored

 

[shogun32]

What kind of dressing would you like on your word salad.

Low-fat balsamic.
I want to know 'previous rotors lasted 3000 track miles and the XYZ pads lasted 2000 miles' - and then to proceed to define what 'last' means. The new/solid ones lasted 5000 track miles and the same pads 3000 miles'. Or whatever the observational data was. Are there no journalists capable of goading a source (an engineer no less) into producing some semblance of evidence to support his assertions?

I deal with this kind of hand waving in the suspension business and it ticks me off to no end. If you don't dyno the shocks, you have no idea what it's doing or what it's capable of doing. If you won't publish the damping curves you're dealing in pure fiction.

 

[oldbmwfan]

Low-fat balsamic.
I want to know 'previous rotors lasted 3000 track miles and the XYZ pads lasted 2000 miles' - and then to proceed to define what 'last' means. The new/solid ones lasted 5000 track miles and the same pads 3000 miles'. Or whatever the observational data was. Are there no journalists capable of goading a source (an engineer no less) into producing some semblance of evidence to support his assertions?

I deal with this kind of hand waving in the suspension business and it ticks me off to no end. If you don't dyno the shocks, you have no idea what it's doing or what it's capable of doing. If you won't publish the damping curves you're dealing in pure fiction.

Well, I posted my data. 3 hours per set of front pads at the track I run, all stock on my R. For what it's worth, my friend at FP said the braking engineer there confirmed 3 hours as normal. So, someone should use the stock pads on the solid rotors and track hours of track use through several sets of pads and let us know.

 

[honeybadger]

Low-fat balsamic.
I want to know 'previous rotors lasted 3000 track miles and the XYZ pads lasted 2000 miles' - and then to proceed to define what 'last' means. The new/solid ones lasted 5000 track miles and the same pads 3000 miles'. Or whatever the observational data was. Are there no journalists capable of goading a source (an engineer no less) into producing some semblance of evidence to support his assertions?

I deal with this kind of hand waving in the suspension business and it ticks me off to no end. If you don't dyno the shocks, you have no idea what it's doing or what it's capable of doing. If you won't publish the damping curves you're dealing in pure fiction.

While I normally appreciate the sentiment of real data, you're just not going to get that. I've gotten 4.5 days out of OEM rotors with Raybestos ST43s and I've gotten 12 days out of OEM rotors with Raybestos ST43s. Difference? temps, tracks, my driving style, aero, etc. Only way you could *reasonably* test this as a normie is to only run the same track in relatively identical conditions, focusing on consistent lap times. And that would require many, many hours of track time. And THAT would be a VERY small sample size. All data here will be anecdotal.

Speaking of anecdotal, I initially wasn't impressed with the 2019 rotors because I started to see micro-cracks in only 1.5 days. But they've lasted very well since then. Have about 12 days on them now and they definitely haven't been babied (see pic below). Can't say I've seen any improvement in pad life as my ST43s always outlasted my cross-drilled rotors.

 

[svttim]

While I normally appreciate the sentiment of real data, you're just not going to get that. I've gotten 4.5 days out of OEM rotors with Raybestos ST43s and I've gotten 12 days out of OEM rotors with Raybestos ST43s. Difference? temps, tracks, my driving style, aero, etc. Only way you could *reasonably* test this as a normie is to only run the same track in relatively identical conditions, focusing on consistent lap times. And that would require many, many hours of track time. And THAT would be a VERY small sample size. All data here will be anecdotal.

Speaking of anecdotal, I initially wasn't impressed with the 2019 rotors because I started to see micro-cracks in only 1.5 days. But they've lasted very well since then. Have about 12 days on them now and they definitely haven't been babied (see pic below). Can't say I've seen any improvement in pad life as my ST43s always outlasted my cross-drilled rotors.

Damn, wish there was a better way to get cooling on those rotors

 

[honeybadger]

Damn, wish there was a better way to get cooling on those rotors

Agreed. This is with dedicated ducting, too. It's nuts.

 

[Bullitt 2159]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned what the GM guys are saying is the reason for the solid rotors on the new Corvette. From a Hagerty article:

"Brake rotors are a touch larger in diameter at both ends of the car in consideration of the added speed available for 2020. One feature missing from the new Corvette is the cross-drilling and slotting that is useful in flushing water from the friction surfaces during wet driving. Juechter explains that more rigorous federal standards limiting the amount of dust permitted from pad wear eliminated copper content from the new friction material recipe. As it turns out, the new material is less resistant to abrasion by drilled holes and slots, so they’re gone in C8. That’s not to say you won’t see them when carbon-ceramic brake rotors reappear on hotter Corvettes such as the Z06 planned for introduction in the near future."

 

[madlag]

The smooth non drilled ones are cheaper to make. Period. Everything else is marketing. They won’t tell you they save X amount of dollars per car bc that wouldn’t sound race car-ish. Plus drilled rotors eat pads faster. There isn’t any diff in performance.

 

[UnhandledException]

Here is a real word data point.

I have 57,100 miles on my 2017 track pack. The front pads are still 40% to go whereas rears are practically new.

I expect the pads to last until 80,000 miles for fronts and well over 100,000 miles for rears.

No track use.

 

[proeagles]

OEMs are going away from drilled/slotted rotors because of the wearing out of brake pad issue according to a source from GM. Chevrolet switched to smooth faced rotors for the C8 because the material in the brake pads of the new C8 were wearing out at an alarming rate during development.

 

[lenFeb]

"Ford swapped the GT350/R's previous cross-drilled brake rotors for solid rotors because they're more durable on the track and yield double the pad life, according to Ford representatives. Used with purpose, the brakes stink, but neither the pedal nor our braking distances weakened over multiple sessions."

 

[proeagles]

"Ford swapped the GT350/R's previous cross-drilled brake rotors for solid rotors because they're more durable on the track and yield double the pad life, according to Ford representatives. Used with purpose, the brakes stink, but neither the pedal nor our braking distances weakened over multiple sessions."

Just curious, what's wrong with the brakes? I find them to be amazing.

 

[Caballus]

"Ford swapped the GT350/R's previous cross-drilled brake rotors for solid rotors because they're more durable on the track and yield double the pad life, according to Ford representatives. Used with purpose, the brakes stink, but neither the pedal nor our braking distances weakened over multiple sessions."

The brakes have been a consistent strong point of the car from 2015 through today. OEM brakes have proven more than sufficient for the vast majority of conditions anyone can expose this car to. Per HB's experience, it seems that the solid rotors are a net gain, but probably one that won't be realized by the average driver.

 

[Deleted member 37397]

While I normally appreciate the sentiment of real data, you're just not going to get that. I've gotten 4.5 days out of OEM rotors with Raybestos ST43s and I've gotten 12 days out of OEM rotors with Raybestos ST43s. Difference? temps, tracks, my driving style, aero, etc. Only way you could *reasonably* test this as a normie is to only run the same track in relatively identical conditions, focusing on consistent lap times. And that would require many, many hours of track time. And THAT would be a VERY small sample size. All data here will be anecdotal.

Speaking of anecdotal, I initially wasn't impressed with the 2019 rotors because I started to see micro-cracks in only 1.5 days. But they've lasted very well since then. Have about 12 days on them now and they definitely haven't been babied (see pic below). Can't say I've seen any improvement in pad life as my ST43s always outlasted my cross-drilled rotors.

My data says this pic is bad ass

 

[Optimum Performance]

Just curious, what's wrong with the brakes? I find them to be amazing.

Stink as in Smell.

Sponsored