Naf

iTrader: (1)

Fair,

I am runnin heat shields between my pads and caliper, thus i have to center my caliper for i barely have any clearance.

Even when i bought brembo kits i centered then horizontally and vertically where i get the best contact between the pads and disc...

Naf

iTrader: (1)

Track time is like Russian roulette, most of the time you dont have an issue, but thats not always the case, you're taking everything past its limit and it still have to preform. So you swap pads for more fad resistance, that puts more pressure on the discs and calipers, not to mention the brake oil as well. If you get any of the recipe incorrect you will have life threatening results.

I run Syn dot 4 castrol brake oil, ss brake lines, Brembo calipers, Ti heat shields, and RB discs, for now. I would love to install a full set of brembo t5 or t3 slotted rotors but thats a dream right now. For the street i run Hawk HPS pads, but for the track i have DTC60 pads. I have seen dtc30 melt after one track session so decided to go with 60 instead. 70 starts to hurt the discs quicker...So far everything in my recipe is in the green, with an exception of the discs. Those are tendin towards the yellow...Not because of use, but because of the lack of give for thermal expansion...

itsslow98

iTrader: (18)

Especially when the name of the company is "Racing Brake" lol

UnsafeAtAnySpd

That's a typo. It's supposed to be "Racing Break"...

AAIIIC

iTrader: (19)

Here's how it goes in my head - admittedly, I could be wrong.

If the rotor is already offset to one side or the other, hub flex under heavy cornering load could cause the pistons to "bottom out". So even if the rotor doesn't contact those machined surfaces I indicated with the black arrows, you could still end up putting a side load on the rotor. That would be particularly true with new or new-ish pads, because the pistons are almost fully retracted to begin with, thus it wouldn't take much hub flex to cause the pistons to bottom out on that offset side.

It may be worth noting (or it may be coincidence) that the rotor failed right after a high speed turn to the right, which would have caused hub flex to push the rotor to the inside (the side with less clearance).

Regarding the pistons equalizing across the caliper to account for the offset, I was trying to visualize how the forces interact with each other. I agree that braking in a straight line it shouldn't matter if the rotor is offset to one side or the other - the pistons on either side of the caliper would "equalize". But when I'm braking and I enter a turn, hub flex will try to flex the rotor to one side or the other relative to the caliper, and the clamping forces already acting on the rotor would resist that movement (at least, in my head they would). This probably isn't really an issue, as I wouldn't normally be on the brakes hard at the same time as I'm cornering hard, and if I'm not cornering hard then hub flex should be minimal.

yooperLS6

Fweasel

iTrader: (6)

Hub flex, now there's an unknown, nearly impossible to measure real time, that I hadn't even considered. We can hypothesize all day long about the cause without ever really knowing, but RB's response that the remaining hardware doesn't look deformed is just insane.

Buzzmanb12

iTrader: (11)

Those oblong (D shaped) insert retainers are normal. They look like they are squashed a little because they are, that is how they make them "Self Locking" and re-useable. As long as the bolts being used thread in easily to that "squashed" point and then get too tight to thread in without a wrench or socket they are doing their job. The bolts need to protrude out of the insert a couple of threads also. If the bolts were too short to reach the self locking section of the insert then #1: They could come loose. #2: Even if they were tight but not in far enough to self lock, they could cause the insert to rock back and forth and pull itself out.

yooperLS6

IMO this is the front brake system for anyone who aggresively uses their CTSV 1st gen on a road course.

http://api.viglink.com/api/click?for...%2F%20355x32mm

Scroll down and take a good look at the CP5773 72 vane discs. Notice their floating design mount and hardware.

This is the type of disc design that I should have worked with a few years ago when we did the coleman 2pc deal through Bob F.

They have a BBK available also for those who may not need the competion kit.

http://www.essexparts.com/shop/compl...rake-kits.html

Some more brake info

http://www.essexparts.com/shop/compl...e-systems.html

Hope this helps

liqidvenom

iTrader: (2)

i think those rotors would be a good upgrade, but i never saw an issue with our caliper that an Ap racing unit would fix. maybe a larger unit with more pistons but that would be it.

Naf

iTrader: (1)

did you ever take apart the rear discs to see if there is any signs of failure?

AAIIIC

iTrader: (19)

I'm just using regular 1-piece rears. I don't remember if they're factory or Centric, but that's kind of moot.

Suns_PSD

A response to this failure from Racing Brakes:

http://forums.racingbrake.com/showthread.php?t=1482

The other failures I have found while researching which brakes to get for my Vette were about 10 years ago on Subarus due to some poorly forged/ treated hats, I was told by RB.

FYI

Naf

iTrader: (1)

Doesnt make sense, even if they were bought through a dealer they were made for the v1.

Nice cover story

liqidvenom

iTrader: (2)

Thats why i stopped using their stuff

InfrareV

I don't know if the physics make sense, I'm not an engineer but they're stating the retrofit hats and the V1 hats are not the same. There is a 1mm difference in offset and that this difference caused the failure. They had no way of knowing the customer was going to install V2 rotors on V1 hats.

AAIIIC

iTrader: (19)

Except that there was a thread in which I specifically asked about using the V2 rotor rings on my V1 hats and was specifically told that it would work. Strangely enough, that thread seems to have disappeared. I'm going to have to do some digging around to see if I can find an old link.

There's some other BS in that thread of theirs, too. I've been out of town the past few days, have some other stuff to catch up on, but I'll come back to this (and to their thread on their forum) with more later. Pretty sure I have a bunch of emails saved on gmail that tell the real story.

Edit: Cutting and pasting from gmail (this is from my response to an email they had sent me - the initial part in quotes is from their email, the part in blue was my response)...
(4) "Since you didn't purchase the complete rotor assembly for CTS-V from us, nor you informed us of your intension, so we really can't see at this point why we have to be responsible for the failure." - I did inform you of my intentions. They were intended for use with the RacingBrake hats that I already had, and that combination of parts was specifically discussed on your own forum! See this thread - http://forums.racingbrake.com/showthread.php?t=529 - and note my question (post #25) and the responses (posts #36 and #38). Here, allow me to quote one of your employees for you: "Yes, that is correct. If you already have the V1 RB front rotors, then you can purchase the V2 rings and bolt them onto your existing hats. The rings can be purchased at this link."

So, yeah, RB is full of ****.

Naf

iTrader: (1)

They are just not intended for track or any heavy abuse for the design is flawed.

If they just said that we can all understand

There is no difference between the v1 and v2 offsets. But like any critical build you always make sure your system is centered and full pad contact .

serik21

1mm offset difference is so minute that the pads wearing out differently would compensate in a day.

FuzzyLog1c

iTrader: (4)

Looking back on this thread--now that I've gained a few more years of engineering experience--I think there's little bit of blame to spread around.

First, RacingBrake should--must--understand that designing 6061-T6 rotor hats requires the engineer to account for the catastrophic loss in ultimate tensile strength (UTS) that this alloy suffers at elevated temperatures. Brand new 6061-T6 has 40 ksi UTS at room temperature but only 7.4 ksi UTS at 500F. It's not unheard of for rotor hats and brake calipers to reach those temperatures--discoloration of some Type II anodize dyes occurs at 450-500F, and we can see that in AAIIIC's rotors on page 1.

Second, although it's hard to place blame on AAIIIC since, at some point, you have to trust your vendor to do their homework, I would've been worried by the color change on the hats, revised my cooling duct design, and called RacingBrake to ask their engineers what their design temperature was and what their fatigue limit provisions were. I know that it's very common to consider the color change on calipers as a point of pride, but that attitude is a Darwin-award level of idiotic. The color change is telling you something; you've exceeded the design requirements for the component. In some cases, it's fine--we've seen Brembo calipers handle those temperatures and live long and productive lives--but assuming that it's fine for everything else based on a sample size of *one* company is going to get you hurt.

RacingBrake isn't required to account for the unique design details of every individual's modified car, and inadequate rotor cooling on a car that's seeing intense track use is--in my opinion--a legitimate reason to say "we're sorry, but it's not our fault that our hat melted on your car." However, their quasi-technical, unprofessional response that points fingers and does not address the failure mode IS something to get angry about. The offset isn't the reason why the hat failed. The pads weren't scrubbing. The hat failed because it got too hot at the points where the hat meets the ring. Whether that failure ultimately occurred because the design was inadequate or because the cooling system was inadequate I can't say--but that's the conversation that should be happening, not this BS that's happening now.