Gt500: Loses weight, get's faster avoids gas guzzler tax.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 658
From: Madisonville, Louisiana
Good news for Mustang fans.
Amazing that ford built a 550 hp car that weighs basically the same or less than the 426 hp Camaro. If I weren't so attatched to the Camaro nameplate and the looks of the new Camaro I think I would have to buy myself a mustang.
Amazing that ford built a 550 hp car that weighs basically the same or less than the 426 hp Camaro. If I weren't so attatched to the Camaro nameplate and the looks of the new Camaro I think I would have to buy myself a mustang.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
It seems to me that this is reinforcing my point. Actually, that article doesn't imply anywhere that the track brakes are any larger than the standard brakes. It says they are solid instead of slotted (interesting, since the whole slotting / cross-drilling idea was cooling, I thought), and I assume they use a more track-friendly pad compound. But it doesn't say anything about going to a larger wheel to clear these same-size brakes. The CTS-V has 19" wheels standard. It may be that they needed 19" wheels to clear the brakes. But those are the standard sized brakes and wheels. It was the previous generation CTS-V (with smaller 14.x" rotors) that had 18" wheels. When did I say otherwise that you needed to correct me?
Anyway, obviously when you go to extreme brake sizes (for bragging rights or performance or whatever), you will need the wheels to be able to fit over them. I mean, you aren't going to fit a 14" rotor and caliper assembly inside a 15" wheel. But the Camaro most certainly does not need 20" wheels (or even 19" wheels) for the brakes it has, which is what started this whole discussion.
As for these track brakes on the new CTS-V, they sound pretty awesome. I would imagine that it is actually the pad material that allows the brakes to work even better when they get a little heat in them. The fact that the bigger rotors are solid only means they are cheaper to make than slotted versions while still providing good heat dissipation.
As an aside, this was actually a problem with some other cars that had early implementations of carbon-ceramic brakes. They were stupidly powerful, but only after they got some heat in them. The first few applications were often noisy and less powerful than expected, with unsatisfactory pedal feel (again, until the temperatures elevated some).
Yes there are cooling benefits to cross-drilling but cross-drilled rotors have durability issues ... the rotors are prone to cracking and exploding!
In regards to the solid rotors on the CTS-V, they are cheaper to make than the slotted rotors while still providing the benefit of good heat dissipation afforded by larger rotors. Bob intimated that 19" and 20" wheels didn't provide additional functionality - I supplied 'some evidence' that it does. Didn't you agree entirely with Bob's statement... which has ultimately led to this expanding discussion, not just about Camaro?
You are right that Camaro doesn't need 19" or 20" wheels but that doesn't mean Camaro won't use bigger rotors for a track pack version using the same brake package as the CTS-V, though, does it?
Last edited by SSbaby; Feb 15, 2010 at 11:23 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
Yes, you could fit 14" rotors under 19" wheels but so what's the big deal about going one size bigger? Don't tell me it's all about weight? 
Using your logic of "what's the big deal about going one size bigger", then you would never get to a wheel size that is "too big".
To each their own. For me, given that I don't feel the need to walk in lock-step with my favorite car maker, I can express the opinion that xx size wheel is "too big". 18" is a good point for me (no matter if we're talking the Camaro, Mustang, or whatever). For you? I don't know....22"? One size bigger? One size bigger than one size bigger? Whatever GM wants to use?
I think that last one probably hits the closest to home.
Anyway, obviously when you go to extreme brake sizes (for bragging rights or performance or whatever), you will need the wheels to be able to fit over them. I mean, you aren't going to fit a 14" rotor and caliper assembly inside a 15" wheel. But the Camaro most certainly does not need 20" wheels (or even 19" wheels) for the brakes it has, which is what started this whole discussion.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,217
From: Greenville, SC
Iv'e seen some nice low mileage, one owner 07's and 08's for $31-32k recently. Thats a pretty darn good deal.
Last edited by ZZtop; Feb 16, 2010 at 07:14 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,650
From: Indianapolis, IN
Anyway, obviously when you go to extreme brake sizes (for bragging rights or performance or whatever), you will need the wheels to be able to fit over them. I mean, you aren't going to fit a 14" rotor and caliper assembly inside a 15" wheel. But the Camaro most certainly does not need 20" wheels (or even 19" wheels) for the brakes it has, which is what started this whole discussion.
I think you actually quoted me there, Bob. I was the one agreeing with you.But SSbaby did eventually agree with that statement (which perhaps you meant to quote):
Originally Posted by SSbaby
You are right that Camaro doesn't need 19" or 20" wheels but that doesn't mean Camaro won't use bigger rotors for a track pack version using the same brake package as the CTS-V, though, does it?
But that is not what has led most newer vehicles to have such mondo size wheels. The Ford Edge Sport doesn't even need 18" wheels to clear its brakes, let alone the monster 22" wheels it actually uses.
The Chrysler LX cars do not need 20" wheels to clear their brakes, but they got them. Why? IMO, because the styling of the cars is so "thick" / "blocky" that it needs the bigger wheels to look right. They look OK on the 18" wheels that the standard cars have, but 20" wheels actually look correct for the styling. I don't think they provide one iota of increased functionality for those cars.
The general trend is about styling, not about clearing pizza pan brake rotors for the 0.0001% of the driving population who drive their cars on road courses. That is certainly the case for the Camaro, which, again, is what this was about originally.
EDIT: Plus, I still want clarification about your claim of fixing understeer by fitting bigger brakes...
Last edited by 96_Camaro_B4C; Feb 16, 2010 at 07:12 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
I think you actually quoted me there, Bob. I was the one agreeing with you.But SSbaby did eventually agree with that statement (which perhaps you meant to quote):SSbaby, as I said, of course if you go to extreme brakes, you will need wheels big enough to clear them.
But that is not what has led most newer vehicles to have such mondo size wheels. The Ford Edge Sport doesn't even need 18" wheels to clear its brakes, let alone the monster 22" wheels it actually uses.
The Chrysler LX cars do not need 20" wheels to clear their brakes, but they got them. Why? IMO, because the styling of the cars is so "thick" / "blocky" that it needs the bigger wheels to look right. They look OK on the 18" wheels that the standard cars have, but 20" wheels actually look correct for the styling. I don't think they provide one iota of increased functionality for those cars.
The general trend is about styling, not about clearing pizza pan brake rotors for the 0.0001% of the driving population who drive their cars on road courses. That is certainly the case for the Camaro, which, again, is what this was about originally.
EDIT: Plus, I still want clarification about your claim of fixing understeer by fitting bigger brakes...
Forget what the argument was originally about. It took a detour when you agreed with Bob's comment regarding anything over 18" wheels is not needed. I don't believe I've digressed from arguing this exact point.
I have proven to you both that there are in fact cars that require brakes with the necessary clearance for wheels larger than 18". If you want me to give you examples of rotors needing 20" wheels for clearance, forget it, I can't. The fact that I used such cars as the current CTS-V, HSV GTS as facts (this is what Bob requested, btw) is proof that 15" rotors are being used for necessity and not for looks.
My simple rule is diameter of the wheel minus 4" as the maximum rotor size allowable. On this note, I have not heard of 16" rotors being made widely available for certain production cars.
Let's not just use GM cars to prove my point (just in case you thought I was just another GM fan boy) look at the all mighty Nissan GTR.
In regards to the understeer and brakes... the understeer can be cured with suspension changes. Where that fails to provide a solution - and the car continues to understeer - then you need to look at your brakes. If the car doesn't stop quickly enough or the brakes/tires "go off" then understeer will result if you continue to brake the same distance from the corner as when the brakes/tires were fresh. Of course, having healthy brakes alleviates that problem. I place emphasis on the word "alleviates". Note, I didn't say cures! It just allows the driver more car control, that's all. EDIT: You applied the term 'fixes understeer' to my statement - your wrong.
PS: Thanks for putting 'humble' Bob in his place!
Last edited by SSbaby; Feb 16, 2010 at 05:21 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
Eh, might want to go back and read my original statement. To wit....
Do believe I'll stick by that. You provided two vehicles that "require" 19" wheels (to get over huge brakes that are "needed" to stop a "performance car" that weighs over 2 tons). Got it. Even so, I think "almost totally about style" is quite accurate. Certainly it is for the 2010 Camaro.
Disagree if you wish.
Bob
Big wheels today are almost totally about style and virtually nothing about functionality.
Disagree if you wish.
Bob
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,327
From: Hartford, CT
Ive been silently watching this thread's battle of semantics since the beginning and honestly have nothing constructive to add other than "I like big wheels."
This thread reminds me of why I try not to debate with people on the internet.
This thread reminds me of why I try not to debate with people on the internet.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Eh, might want to go back and read my original statement. To wit....
Do believe I'll stick by that. You provided two vehicles that "require" 19" wheels (to get over huge brakes that are "needed" to stop a "performance car" that weighs over 2 tons). Got it. Even so, I think "almost totally about style" is quite accurate. Certainly it is for the 2010 Camaro.
Disagree if you wish.
Bob
Do believe I'll stick by that. You provided two vehicles that "require" 19" wheels (to get over huge brakes that are "needed" to stop a "performance car" that weighs over 2 tons). Got it. Even so, I think "almost totally about style" is quite accurate. Certainly it is for the 2010 Camaro.
Disagree if you wish.
Bob
It might well do OK with smaller wheels and brakes but at the same time you cannot ignore progress even if that progress means a simpler, cheaper avenue to solving a potential or known problem.
And yes, I do love the HSVs and Camaros with 20" wheels. It suits them perfectly.
Although such wheels may look out of place on other cars. I've also seen 300Cs with 22" wheels and, no, that's not for me! 
Anyway, I've made my points. If I continue with this discussion, I'll just be regurgitating everything I stated. And yes, I can accept that others do disagree with my views.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
I don't know about all that, but I do know it creates a problem with increased rolling mass....
I don't think it's any coincidence that brake packages have gotten bigger and bigger as cars of this ilk have gotten heavier and heavier....
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Or is "more mass" just a dirty term around this neck of the woods?
Btw, I hear the difference between similar spec 19" and 20" wheels is around 4kg (10 lbs) per wheel.
Last edited by SSbaby; Feb 16, 2010 at 10:17 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
It might well do OK with smaller wheels and brakes but at the same time you cannot ignore progress even if that progress means a simpler, cheaper avenue to solving a potential or known problem.
And yes, I do love the HSVs and Camaros with 20" wheels. It suits them perfectly. Although such wheels may look out of place on other cars. I've also seen 300Cs with 22" wheels and, no, that's not for me!
Although such wheels may look out of place on other cars. I've also seen 300Cs with 22" wheels and, no, that's not for me!
Wait - isn't that where this started? Hehehe....and we can play semantics, if you like (Steve might have issues with it though
).
Anyway, I've made my points. If I continue with this discussion, I'll just be regurgitating everything I stated. And yes, I can accept that others do disagree with my views.
Have a good one.
Bob
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Bigger wheels are progress? Just one size bigger? Just one size bigger than one size bigger? Does it ever stop? We've heard a lot around here about "diminishing returns" when it comes to consistently adding more HP to go along with more weight. Do we get to the same with bigger brakes to go with more weight?
Different strokes for different folks as they say.