No attitude, I'm not really planning on coming back to this thread and it saved me a lot of typing trying to explain it nicely.

Brakes cool from the inside out. The rotor naturally "throws" air out from the center (and is backed up by the information you posted). Trying to use the veins backwards to pull air in, against the natual energy that is pushing it out is not a good idea, and doesn't work very well. Brake ducts are effective, but it's because they concentrate cool air into the center of the rotor and it is naturally distributed by the rotation and the veins of that rotor. None of this is really up for debate. So, when Aaron91RS started referring to people as "ricers" because they wanted brakes that were designed and built properly, it became obvious that he missed the point. The point is that they took the time to build 6 piston calipers (usually considered an upgrade) and put them on a $70,000 sports car and didn't bother to optimize the package at the additional cost of $100 or less to the manufacturer. Many people look to GM parts for inexpensive upgrades to existing cars (like you, putting C6 stuff on your C5), but when it's not really an upgrade, or not as much of an upgrade as it could/should be, due to the manufacturer taking an unacceptable shortcut, it's frustrating. Chris posted this because it seems dumb for GM to save $100 (or very likely $100-ish) on a $70,000 car and seriously flaw the performance of the brakes in the process. It's probably not an issue for 99% of the guys who buy these cars, but for that last 1 or even 10%, it's a very big frustration to spend good money to "fix" a brand new car to make it perform as it should have from the factory.

You either understand this, or you don't. He obviously didn't. He has his opinions (that we who are concerned are ricers) and I have my opinion (that he's an idiot). We can agree to disagree, or we're going to have to this time.

I'll report myself to the admin now.

Have a wonderful day!

 

Best Post EVARRR!!!1111!!!1!

 

 

Yeah TB you're a big stupid, meanie head!!! You suck!!!

It's odd how the armchair experts in this thread are calling people internet engineers when all they are doing is speculating themselves (i.e.; Aaron91RS).

The brakes are seriously flawed bottom line. And whomever designed them is a dumb@ss. Ok, ok the beancounter that placed the constraints that caused this. Opps did I post that in the GM leghumping section of CZ28.com? That reminds me why I don't post here anymore.

I'm done here. bye

 

i know its been said before, but there is no need for dry sump oil systems on street cars either


its just very odd that a $70,000 "supercar" that is supose to be pretty damn close to a race car off the lot would have been cheaped out on the rotors. GM really shouldn't have done it simply because its what it is, a high profile, expensive sports car.

 

Guys, I don't disagree...but even $1 per car is huge as for as the beancounters go.....but I do agree that it should not have been saved here...on this car.

I also don't know why Ford & MB did the exact same thing, so don't just crucify Chevy over it.

Why is it that AX & RR guys are so self-righteous though? I've met more people like this in this part of the hobby than any other....

 

Funny I am an idiot and yet no one has posted independant scientific tests showing it doesn't work.
I'm sure Ford, Chevy and MB all 3 overlooked the same thing

 

If everyone else jumped off of a bridge.....

GM put the correct veins in the rotors on the C5 and even the lowly C4's (with the HD package at least). GM has always done it right....until now.

I swore I wasn't coming back here, but I was referred back by someone.

From Brembo's FAQ's (because Brembo wouldn't know anything about brakes).

http://www.buybrakes.com/brembo/faq.html#q28

http://tetra.mech.ubc.ca/CFD03/papers/paper30PD1.pdf

The airfoil shaped veins cooled the best, but they do not specifically note the direction of rotation.


Most of them are frustrated with being asked the same questions over and over that a basic search would usually turn up the answers to and then getting argued with about stuff that's widely available knowledge.

Oddly, the same road race/autocross guys are the best guys ever to meet at the track. Every single one of them will help the competition (unlike most of the drag racers I know, who seem to form a clique and talk to nobody but their friends. Maybe it's because there is money involved....).


It appears that GM, Mercedes, etc have decided that (assuming that the other cars have the veins running backwards and not just the drilled holes) they could save a few bucks and risk someone noticing that they cut corners. Again, as we already stated, for street use, it's probably not an issue for most people. But, for a performance car (and a 500 hp one at that) that they took the time to build roughly 14" diameter brakes, hang 6 piston calipers on and then not finish the job properly is just not acceptable. If they felt that it needed 6 piston brakes with 14" rotors, why didn't they feel the need to cool them properly?

Of course, they also know that cross drilled rotors are just there to be pretty, so maybe they designed the whole system with "curb appeal" in mind and didn't intend for it to work well at all.

I'll stand by my original statement.

 

I find it strange you are arguing that there's no negative effect of the rotor trying to pump air in opposite of all the centrifugal force caused by the rotation at, oh, 100+mph.

I think Trackbird's example is sufficient info. Its RICE not to put the correct parts on the car.

Bling cross drilled rotors are hardly better than fake plastic intercoolers.

 

There's some better info here...starting around post #6....

http://www.z06vette.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92672

Pay particular attention to post #19.....Jeff Ritter from StopTech...

 

Okay, I read the first 20 posts or so and got tired of checking to see if someone clarified this. Sorry if I'm reposting something that's already been said:

If the slots are going backwards, that does NOT mean it's going to add extra heat to the rotor. It's just not going to cool as efficiently.

Regardless of your brake setup, braking is going to cause the rotors to increase in temperature. Good cooling characteristics will slow the increase, and reduce the time the rotor takes to cool again afterwards.

Backwards slotted rotors have better cooling characteristics than rotors with no slots at all (all other things being equal).

 

quoted for the lazy:

 

Also quoted from Post #19....

 

Sounds like apparently someone overlooked it, for whatever reason. Your arguement is going to sh*t, by the way. What could you have expected by calling people ricers for caring about the way the hardware on an expensive sportcar is supposed to work?

 

What's the difference? Net effect in the end is increased rotor temp on one side of the car vs. the other.

Duh!

Yes, and a properly cooled but smaller rotor will actually stop better than a bigger, poorly cooled rotor. So GM chose big, poorly cooled brakes when they could have saved just as money by doing the proper rotors and less diameter and less caliper.

There's a difference between SLOTS and cooling vanes inside the rotor. We aren't talking about the dumb slots, as the Z06 rotors aren't slotted anyway, we're talking about the internal cooling veins between the two rotor surfaces. There's not been a domestic car built I can remember that had solid front disks, so yes obviously vented discs cool better than non vented, but its the same principle as above....a properly cooled rotor will have as good or better stopping power as a bigger rotor that is not properly cooled.

Even if this was $50 per car, they're going to sell maybe 5000 of these cars a year, so they have saved $250,000.....pennies compared to what these guys drop on countless other non-product related luxuries.