When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Yeah, I know. We seem to be doing this at the same time. (I should be working, you probably should too, LOL.)
Just looking at front rotors, that's a $300 premium over OEM components, for the potential of performance gains, and the added look of two-piece construction. So if you're at the point where it's time for new front brakes...
...$300, Lego. Seems like a solid argument to me.
Last edited by Rochester; Jun 6, 2017 at 09:13 AM.
This was a great read, Lego! I'm glad I took the time to review that PDF.
Braking - small but noticeable improvement
Handing - significant improvement
Launch - a loss in traction
Rolling Launch - big improvement
Although I was predisposed to do the rears first, the negative impact on hard launches gives me pause to think otherwise. Add to that the positive impact of front rotor weight reduction being a full 2x the rears, and considerations like handling and rolling acceleration speak with more authority.
So... fronts first. Rears second, if at all. In fact, it's feeling like rears are mostly a cosmetic consideration compared to the fronts. An important one, though. It could look goofy not having the rears match.
I am not sure the launch issue would be as prevalent on a RWD car, right. The ST is a FWD car so the launches will tip the car back, putting less weight over the front wheels, and therefore, less grip. Not that I think doing the rears first is a good idea, just saying...
I am not sure the launch issue would be as prevalent on a RWD car, right. The ST is a FWD car so the launches will tip the car back, putting less weight over the front wheels, and therefore, less grip. Not that I think doing the rears first is a good idea, just saying...
Fair point. Although with 4.083 gears, it's already stupid easy to spin from a standing start, even with 275 PSS and LSD. Coming out of the hole hard takes practice... and even then, it's pretty easy to screw it up.
I like the spinkle slot, don't like the slotted and drilled look. It looks cheap. The sprinkle slot looks more like what they run on Indy and Formula 1, but that might have changed.
I don't think the rears are that great of an upgrade, considering the weight loss and price. If you just get the fronts, you don't have to worry about a bad launch. The fronts should provide better handling and braking. You can always adjust the launch, ie release at a lower rpm.
I would love it if someone came up with some rotors that had some weight taken out, either in the casting process or drilling afterwards. One time I had a chance to get some BMW Performance rotors for not much more than regular rotors. I didn't need them at the time, so I didn't buy.
Lighter than stock, I think I could have gotten them for 135 each. I think aftermarkets were around 80 at the time. Apparently Zimmerman has ones that look like the BMW ones. They are pricey at 215.
Fair point. Although with 4.083 gears, it's already stupid easy to spin from a standing start, even with 275 PSS and LSD. Coming out of the hole hard takes practice... and even then, it's pretty easy to screw it up.
Touche. I had forgotten you swapped out the gearing on your third member.
For most people, mod money is a balancing act, weighing subjective ROI on everything. So thanks for the input, guys. I'm glad people weighed into this discussion, taking me from a vague future mod consideration to something more concrete. Where I've ended up on future brakes is a plan to go with Z1 two-piece blanks up front, matched with OEM blanks in the rear.
Have you considered Racing Brake's 2-Pc rotors. They are a SoCal company that specializes in, you guessed it, racing brake applications. They are big in the Corvette and exotic car market. They actually used my car for the original measuring and test fitting when they designed their 2-Pc rotors for our cars back in 2010-2011. They were one of the first ones to offer a 2-Pc rotor for our cars, but they are often overlooked. The main issue with them is that they really think a LOT of their product... meaning they are not cheap at all. If mine hadn't been comp'ed I may not not have ended up with them... although we did do a group buy on them over on G35Driver when they were first released, which offered them at a fairly reasonable price.
Here are a couple of threads that I started over on G35Driver regarding these rotors.
The plan has always been Hawk HPS, but I suppose that could change.
And then there's brake lines, and fluid... details, details, LOL.
Hawk HPS pads all the way. Still the best street performance pad that I've used.
Originally Posted by Lego_Maniac
I think Hawk has the new 5.0 pads.
I'm happy with the Nismo Pads, Hard Brakes titanium backing plates and Z1 MCB. The two piece blanks will round out my setup.
I tried the 5.0 pads when they first came out last year and wasn't happy with them at all. Way too much brake dust for me. They were only on the car for a couple of months before I bought another set of HPS pads. I probably still have them in my garage if anyone local is interested in them.
Last edited by 2GoRNot2G; Jun 8, 2017 at 05:11 PM.
OEM vs. Z1, fronts: 21.0 lbs, vs. 11.0 lbs.
OEM vs. Z1, rears: 17.5 lbs vs. 12.5 lbs
So the fronts are twice the weight reduction as the rears. That's interesting.
As an E-brake, it would give me pause. As a P-brake, nah.
Those must be the specs for the non-Sport brakes, as the OEM front Sport rotors weigh in at just under 30 lbs. The Racing Brake 2-Pc front rotors came in at right around 19 lbs. The OEM rear Sport rotors are just under 20 lbs and the RB 2-Pc rotors are 16 lbs. So almost 11 lbs weight savings per corner (for the front) and around 4 lbs per corner (for the rear).
I can't find the pics where we weighed the fronts, but I will keep looking for them. Here are the pics of the rear rotors being weighed.
