ssjason232

iTrader: (14)

anyone know how to make this work. fronts seem pretty straight forward, but havent seen much info on the rears.

MJs1FastSS

iTrader: (149)

not too sure but i am sure someone will chime in, but i am almost positive you need brackets for the rear like you need for the fronts if running the c6 z06s

ssam98

iTrader: (5)

save your money, its not worth time and the breaking improvment, not even sure it can be done.

tbird31

iTrader: (22)

You need brackets. I've seen someone that's done it. He's got a custom blue SS. Has the front and rears done. I just don't have time to find the thread. Keep searching for the C6 Z06 rear upgrades.

hiltsy855

iTrader: (35)

It can be done easily w/o the e-brake. I hope someone figures out how to do it using the stock e-brake.

MJs1FastSS

iTrader: (149)

^^^ yeah the guy with the blue 98 ss i believe has done the front and rear was an automatic car w no e brake


i looked into this and called the company they said with the ebrake kit (i have an m6) and brackets for the rear it would be <600 if i remember correct just for the rear

mesospeedy

iTrader: (8)

$600 isn't that bad. Not trying to start a war, but why does everyone seem to think that these brake upgrades are not worth it? If it only stops you from 60mph-0 six inches shorter, that could be the deciding factor in wheather or not you hurt your car or somebody! Just my 2 cents, ignore it if you wish.

MJs1FastSS

iTrader: (149)

yes i believe its 600 just to keep the e brake plus 70 for brackets for the rear to adapt the rotors plus whatever you pick up the c6 z rotors and calipers for .....

its up to you since i am almost sure the braking ratio is 70 to 30% in the rear

hiltsy855

iTrader: (35)

I think it's a worthwhile upgrade. If the Z06 has 14" fronts & 13.4" rears and you put the 14" fronts on a Camaro, why not put the rears on to maintain the same ratio? Especially if you have wider tires on the rear w/ more grip.

Foxxtron

iTrader: (1)

Fair question, but I'd like to respond with these provocative questions:

1. Whats the GVW of the vehicle and it's respective weight distribution from front-to-rear?
   
2. How does the static vs. dynamic weight disrtibution play a role in braking?
   
3. How does rotational mass actually work and where is the mass most optimally located?
   
4. Explain how the thermodynamics of ventilated brakes work?
   
5. What job does rebound suspension control play in regards to braking?
   
6. What does the overall coefficient of friction of the brake pad to rotor friction surface play?
   
7. What does the overall coefficient of friction of the tyre to a somewhat dry surface play at its optimal operating temperature?
   
8. What methodology is used to approximate the stopping distance between brake systems?

Personally, I'd take even 1 inch of shortened braking distances, however if anyone thinks the solution are fancy brake kits for the majority of situations, then you're chasing the wrong parameters.

I speak not only from using and testing these brakes in an engineering situation, but also from years of trying multi-thousand dollar brake kits (some even totalling 5 digits) on cheap performance rebuilds as well as "mid-priced" exotics. Oversimplified marketing is responsible for the misleading and anecdotal mindset of purely focusing on the brakes themselves.

Now, AFA bigger brakes in the rear, do it strictly for looks. Messing the with factory brake biasing like that will really make for some unbalanced braking.

Tiago

iTrader: (27)

kore3 makes the brackets for the rear

Dom

iTrader: (2)

You're saying not to change the factory brake biasing. So you're against vette brakes just in the front also?

Foxxtron

iTrader: (1)

Please re-read the quote you posted as is suggests nothing of the sort.

It's OKAY to change the factory brake bias, however if you notice those questions I posted, there's much more to brake improvement than just messing around with complete brake sets per se.

Also, if anyone notices on a vehicle that's has a stock weight distribution of 58% front/42% rear and then decides to apply much more than the ~10-20% rear brake biasing, yet totally disregards the vehicle dynamics, they're actually screwing many other parameters up with regards to improving the braking. Even if one retrofits the complete Z06 system, it will actually be more rear biased than a plain factory setup, yet that's only the beginning of the problems. A Z06 is certainly different in many ways, but the most important things to deal with here is that the Z06 is closer to 50/50 (most likely 48/52) and actually has the majority of it's rear weight sprung over the rear axle through a SLA suspension with half-shaft axles attached to uprights. Also, the brake hydraulics are different.

Also, with regards to simply slapping on a front and rear 06 Z06 system goes, has anyone here experienced serious pad knockback? I have, and I can tell you that it's not easy to get rid of nor to deal with. That's also disregarding the extra unsprung and rotational masses to an already unsprung laden rear end.

My point of posting is NOT to tell people what to do or to simply disagree, but to encourage posters to start thinking more about how to approach their mods instead of just simply seeing if it "fits." Fitting is only 10% of the "battle" whilst the ideal operation itself is the much larger approach.

Dom

iTrader: (2)

Great explanation. Makes sense about the weight distribution of both cars.

Foxxtron

iTrader: (1)

Oh and if I can add one more thing. The variation in the percentage of brake biasing with regards to the OE rear brake system that I mention is through the variation of usable brake pads. With regards to a majority of stock rear brake systems on OE front biased weighted cars, they usually use "mild" compounds with them. If one actually does use a significantly more aggressive pad in the rear without regard to the instant centre at the fullest brake engagement possible, then some serious wheel hop can be triggered. In an already unsprung laden rear axle, this is actually bad enough to cause serious loss of vehicle control.

Again, no such thing as a free lunch.

ssam98

iTrader: (5)

You said it best dude.

Bouvs

iTrader: (12)

Alright so if I understand all this correctly, you're saying its important to try and keep the same stopping power ratio as stock for the vehicle in question not the donor vehicle which makes sense. So in your opinions because you've obviusly given this more thought then I have. Would slapping the factory front calipers onto the rear rotors be a little bit closer to factory braking ratio?

Again what I mean is upgrading the fronts to C6 Z06 brakes and then taking your un-used front calipers and retro-fitting them to your rear rotors.

Foxxtron

iTrader: (1)

You've got a good rudimentary train of thought as I would initially think towards the same direction. Now, before anyone actually tries something like what's suggested above, it's imperative to actually try the math out first before going to the effort of assembling it in the "real world." Even then, it's actually imperative to ensure that one knows how to make both theory and practical performance to match.

With that stated go to the stoptech website and follow through this breadcrumb order: technical information>technical white papers>"the physics of braking systems." I actually work with these equations on a daily basis and truth is, subject to the limitations of real world inefficiencies, it's very accurate and very precise. In order to work out the inefficiencies they mention, you'll then have to get into materials chemistry and thermodynamics, and from that point, I'd rather discuss that in the advanced sections of this forum.

In my findings by doing the math, mounting the front 4th Gen PBR calipers on the rear of an OE weight distributed 4th Gen F-body combined with the CTS-V caliper/C6 Z06 rotors is going to screw with the factory hydraulics and add additional/uneeded unsprung weight. I'll state again that doing something like this is chasing the wrong parameters.

EchoMirage

iTrader: (3)

thread revival.......ill put my thoughts in and hopefully some people will listen who still want to upgrade rear brakes. take a look at all the f-bodies that professionally race.....CMC, AI, autox, solo 1/2, etc. nearly 100% of them have STOCK rear brakes, except for pads. STOCK rotors, STOCK calipers, STOCK brackets. the fronts, of course, are changed. only if you get an adjustable brake bias setup or a decoupled torque arm is it worth it to increase rear brake. if youve ever been on a track with good front pads, you would have seen the rear locks up and hops under hard braking. i use CHEAP, no-name pads in the rear, and i still have hop......which means there already is TOO MUCH rear brake. if i and nearly every single other person with the same setup has that problem, why would we want to increase rear brakes even more?

i have a set of brand new HPS rears.....never put them on, never will, for the reason i just explained.

Bouvs

iTrader: (12)

I only want to upgrade me rears if I feel its actually necessary not for the sake upgrading it.

If what you guys are saying is true, performance wise it actually has a negative effect to do your rear brakes unless you're going ***** deep to do it absolutely correctly. Which if thats the case I'll just stick with my front brakes upgrade...

The only problem I have with this is appearances... I think the rear rims look awkward when the fronts are competely filled in and the rears have these little tiny rotors and calipers... ohwell I guess.