Brake Tech Rules

[JeffYoung]

More to move this forum's discussion off of the SM issue than anything else, let me ask some opinions on brake heat control ideas and legality. I'd like to hear people's opinions on (and let me disclose I have a vested interest in this I have a severely brake challenged car):

1. Titanium or stainless steel backing plates siliconed to brake pads to insulate the piston and caliper seals from heat.

My take: Legal, as brake pads and pad material are free. This is certainly less of a tortured rule intepretation than the one that "allowed" spherical bearings.

Your take?

Disclosure: I do this already. I think this is legal.

2. Insertion of a shim that includes a heat sink that dissipates heat out of the caliper. I'm not describing it well enough, but it is basically the same as (1) above except the "shim" extends on out from the back of the caliper and has a heat sink that allows heat to escape as opposed to being transmitted to the piston and caliper seals.

While a much more tortured analysis than 1 above, I still think it legal if the shim is attached to the pad.

Your take?

I am aware this is being done by others (hell, the website for the product shows an ITS car), and have a set of these, but they don't fit under my current wheel setup.

3. Brake recirculator. Circulates fluid through the caliper so new fluid (and hopefully cooler) goes in the caliper with each pedal stroke. Legal under the brake circuitry may be revised rule? It is simply additional lines and check valves?

I had this in 2004, and removed it for a variety of reasons, one of which was concern over legality.

Your take?

[lateapex911]

I think the first two are perfectly legal, and am looking to add them to my car for longer tracks that have pushed my brakes before.

I am thinking that you;d use the bleeder screw hole on the caliper to get the recirc going? My first impression is that this is tortured, but it might just be legal to the letter of the rule. Will think on it.

[mbuskuhl]

the website for the product shows an ITS car[/b]

What's the website? I'd like to look into these.

[JeffYoung]

Correct on the recirc. I didn't install it on my car, I had someone do it before I started doing all of my own work. But, if I remember it correclty, fluid went in the caliper in teh normal place, and then out at teh bleeder screw adn back to the master. Air in the lines were released in teh master. A check valve made sure that pressure was applied to the pistons.

Basically, your brake fluid circuitry became a "loop" with check valves, and no bleeders.

While I don't think the IT rules progenitors ever anticipated something like this being legal, and it is a stretch from what IT is about, I have to think that as George used to say, if it says you can, you can. The rules clearly state that "brake circuitry may be revised."

EDIT -- Website is here: http://www.fourproducts.com/FSBC_Right.html#Graph

Interestingly enough, the ITS Z car picture that had as their lead ad is gone. If they don't have an application for you, I understand they can make you one. For me, the shim for a 240z is close enough that I can modify it and make it work.

[Z3_GoCar]

Hey Jeff,

Have you considered a high temperature pad? I'm running Hawk HT-10's without brake ducts just bent backing plates. I've heard may racer dis-like HT-10's, but this may be due to over cooling. If the pads don't get up to temperature they won't work like they should. I've still got lots of pad left after running four weekends, 2 SCCA and 2 BMWCCA. If cooling is an issue have you considered a water spray system? Not sure of the legality of this but maybe a good use of a washer fluid bottle :D

James

[Ron Earp]

James, Jeff's brakes work but we can't get the heat out of them fast enough. The pads are up to temperature, no problem there. But the heat fade is a definite problem, we need to keep them cooler.

At CMP he can eat a set of front pads (and yes the rears are working for all they are worth) in about 45 mins of track time.

That website did used to have a blue Z there. I also have a set of those sinks, but at least at my level of driving they haven't seemed necessary. While I can kill a set of pads at CMP and must manage brakes, I don't overheat and lose braking capability like the TR8.

I'm not sure the recirculator will do much. There is little thermal mass in the brake fluid, at least compared to your iron calipers which weigh about 13lbs each and get to 500F pretty quickly. You circulating two or three ounces of brake fluid through the caliper isn't going to cool the caliper off much at all. And, the lines aren't set up to dump the heat either. It isn't like you have a brake system with pumped through fluid and a brake fluid radiator to dump the heat.

R

[JeffYoung]

James, tell me more about the HT-10. I definitely have noticed a difference in caliper seal length based on the pad I am using. I got a bad recommendation to run high bite pad from Porterfield after PFC quit making 90 compound in my pad shape, and I think that was a large part of my problem. I'm now with Hawk Blues and the caliper seals are at least lasting a race weekend.

Is the idea with the HT10 that the pad runs cooler and operates at a lower temp? If so, I may do that. However, I suspect you have vented rotors, and I do not, which is a huge disadvantage for me. My brakes do not work without proper ducting.

I think Ron is right on the recirc although some swear by them. When I had mine on, it did not seem to help. I am not having a fluid boil issue so much as I am having a claiper too hot, seal melting problem. The recirc seems to help fluid temperature (which I know affects the seals, but still) more than anything. Not keeping the caliper temps down.

[Ron Earp]

The recirc seems to help fluid temperature (which I know affects the seals, but still) more than anything. Not keeping the caliper temps down.
[/b]

The heat transfer does not only work one way - the way that is benefical.

While the fluid might not cool the caliper, it means the inverse of that is definitely true - I bet the caliper can heat up a few cc's of fluid much faster than you can move it around in the lines.

We can easily test it though. I've got a logging meter and thermocouple that can be put in there to collect the data.

R

[BlueStreak]

On my last car, the RX3, with solid front discs, huge ducts, running Motul600, I was getting 2 sessions out of a set of pads, and 6 sessions out of a set of cryo'd rotors. If I had enough rear brake dialed in to get the car to handle right, I got less than 1 session out of the rear wheel cylinders before the plastic caps in the wheel cylinder extruded themselves over the "spring". It was the "less than 1" session part that really bugged me, or more importantly, bugged the poor guy who I was passing under braking on the inside when the brakes died.

I could have upgraded to the RX3SP "large" rear drums, if I could have found a set, but I couldn't, so I ran the nonSP base car rear drums. You can't purchase, at any price, a rear wheel cylinder for an RX3. The places that show it in stock can't actually deliver it if you try to purchase it. The story on the front rotors is the same.

My solution was to manufacture replacement parts myself that were dimensionally identical, but made of materials that could take the higher temps. Not having the money for carbon fiber :P , this usually meant replacing plastic parts with aluminum. Legal, NO, but it was a SAFETY issue, and having brakes was more important to me than losing positions due to a potential protest. Without the mods, I had two choices:
1) Run X seconds off the pace (unsafe).
2) Run on pace, knowing that at some point during the race, I was going to lose the brakes and potentially hurt someone (unsafe).

When I decided to quit racing, I sold the car to someone who had a large cache of stock parts, so it won't be an issue for them, but for me, it was a big problem.

Now that I'm racing (albeit not very often) again - I know there are guys out there that have to do these sorts of things to get their brakes to make it to the end of the race, and I don't have a problem with it. However, the rulebook does. I'm pretty torn on these brake issues. Brakes are critical to safety, BUT they can also be HUGE performance advantages, so where do you draw the line? I'm not sure. What I do know is that it is sad to see the number of formerly competitive vehicles that have been parked over the years because brake parts have become unobtainable. I wish I knew of a simple solution for these issues.

How do the guys in the historic series handle these kinds of issues?

Jeff - I, for one, applaud anyone with the tenacity to make a set of TR brakes last through a modern IT session using stock components with some added cooling.

[Z3_GoCar]

Jeff,

You're right that my rotors are vented, but I get enough air flow with only the bent backing plates and a hole in the finder well. Check this out:
Hawk Pads at Bimmerworld (http://store.nexternal.com/shared/StoreFront/default.asp?CS=bimmerworl&BusType=BtoC&Count1=148159205&Count2=65299630&CategoryID=27&Target=products.asp)

The temp range on the HT series is 300-1600, I suspect they work better at the upper range of that, while the blue's only go to 1000. If BW uses them for a 4-6hr World Challenge race on a ~3000lb car they'll work for our cars for many weekends.

James

[JeffYoung]

James, I might give that a try. Thanks for the information. I never thought to move down to the HT-10s.

Eddie, I am lucky in that all parts for the brakes on my car are readily available, except the calipers, and I've managed to acquire a few of them over the years....lol.....

To make it all work competitively, which really happened for the first time this season, requires (a) Castrol SRF; (B) ducts to rotor AND caliper with a good spoiler set up up front to actually get air in the ducts; and © shims to keep heat off the caliper pistons and seals. Then, you have to manage the car and the brakes to make them last. My plan now is to use the torque to squirt out as far as I can at the start, and then hold on as best I can to finish, taking it easy on the brakes when race situations allow. It can be done, it just takes a lot of work.

I too was in the quandary you were in. Brakes are definitely a performance issue, but a safety one as well. I have nearly taken people out twice due to brake failures (one was an unexpected m/c failure that was scary) and I never want that to happen - again. I also, admittedly, considered cheating -- not many would know if I put some of the easy upgrades on my brakes (2.8 Capri calipers and rotors bolt right on). But that is just not an option for me or how I want to run my program. So, we set about to make sure that everything on the braking system on the car was NEW and working CORRECTLY and that the ducting was as good as we can get it. It finally worked.

Thanks for the props though. I pulled a second and a fourth this weekend in a pretty competitive field at a brake intensive track, so the hard work (and Ron was in on it too) paid off and it was satisfying.

[Chris Wire]

I am thinking that you;d use the bleeder screw hole on the caliper to get the recirc going? My first impression is that this is tortured, but it might just be legal to the letter of the rule. Will think on it.
[/b]

About 5 years ago I talked to Tech in Denver (now Topeka) about this very issue. I could not see why a recirculating system would not be legal, given the brake circuitry language in the ITCS.

The opinion I got (and that's all it is, an opinion, with no more legal standing than my own) was that while brake circuitry was indeed unrestricted, the recirculator valve introduced an active component to the system where there previously was none.

I never pushed the issue to the point of actually installing such a device, even though I think they could be technically legal. The 86-91 RX7 is blessed with tremendous braking and therefore isn't really a candidate for this sort of upgrade.

[JeffYoung]

Chris, I heard that as well, which is why I removed it.

However, the recirculator doesn't actually DO anything active. It is not a pump -- your pushing on the pedal provides the "activity" in the line. The recirculator is just a check valve that controls the direction of fluid flow...kind of like a.... speed bleeder?

[Chris Wire]

Chris, I heard that as well, which is why I removed it.

However, the recirculator doesn't actually DO anything active. It is not a pump -- your pushing on the pedal provides the "activity" in the line. The recirculator is just a check valve that controls the direction of fluid flow...kind of like a.... speed bleeder?
[/b]

I agree fully, that's just how it was explained to me. I never followed through on the installation.

I don't see anything "active" about the recirculator either. I wonder if someone would draw the same conclusion with the Wilwood Residual Pressure valves. They are inline devices that keep the fluid pushing against the piston (although they are much more common in drum brake setups) to keep it from flowing back toward the m/c and creating a "soft" pedal. Would that not be "active" as well, simply because it performs a different function from a recirculator?

[JeffYoung]

Good analogy on the pressure valves. I have one in my rear circuit (drums) and it is really no different from a check/recirculator valve system. A speed bleeder is the same way. Just allows fluid to flow one way and not the other.

[its66]

Jeff,
On the legality questions, I think(my opinion, no more) that number one and number two would both be legal as long as they are attached to the pads. Number three might be technically legal, depending on who you ask and how they are feeling that day. I don't think that was the intent, but you didn't question the intent of the rules...

On your braking issues. I remember you telling me at Daytona about it cooking the seals. While the HT-10's are good pads(currently on the front of my 7), I don't think they will fix the problem for you. If you were complaining of a pad fade, or heat at that end, they might help. I don't think they will reduce the heat(much) which is being carried through them into the pistons. This is whats cooking the seals, and I don't think that a pad with a higher temp range will help. Now, when you get the calipers cooled off enough that they don't cook the seals, it might be a different story....

[Joe Harlan]

YOu have to direct the heat the way you want it to go. If I remember correctly the TR8 runs the same pad as a 240z. To start you have to focus the largest part of your cooling on bringing the rotor temp down tot he operating range of the pads yoou are using. HT10's operate at a mid to very high temp and are a much more agressive pad than the R4 compound. With solid rotors you need to build a cooling can that goes over the top of the rotor and directs air to both sides or you rotor will warp and bend to one direction. Also remember heat will travel toward the coolest place first so if you cool the caliper body you will pull the heat from the pads toward the fluid which is a pad thing. Cool the rotor! Allow the pad to transfer its heat in to the rotor. The other thing that you need to do is use themo paints to know what your rotor temps are getting to so you will know how much yoou are bringing them down.

[JeffYoung]

Thanks Joe. We are working on cooling the rotor, and it seems to work.

I appreciate the information.

[bldn10]

"This is certainly less of a tortured rule intepretation than the one that "allowed" spherical bearings."



Of course, that ain't sayin much. :bash_1_:

[JeffYoung]

Amen Bill. That spherical bearing stuff was out of hand.

Of course, as soon as the CRB said "Legal!" I went and dropped $2k getting them made for my car.

[benspeed]

If we conclude the heat sink is legal under the GCR and we get somebody to verify that from Topeka, I'm buying a set for the ITA car - the brakes on the Fiero are about as good as the disks on my kids atv.

[JeffYoung]

Ben, I've got 15" wheels on the way. Once they get here, I'm running the things until someone tells me I can't under the "brake pads are free" theory. I think there is a good faith basis for doing so.

I'll let you know if someone busts my chops. :D

[lateapex911]

If someone does, I'd let the protest fly if I were you. As long as the part comes out attached to the pads, you're fine.

The only issue I could see is the "performing an illegal function" clause, but it has to be argued that brake pads are made to shed heat in some manner, so you're only increasing an already approved function.

I would bet that even if the protest were upheld, would fall apart in appeals.

[ddewhurst]

***If someone does, I'd let the protest fly if I were you. As long as the part comes out attached to the pads, you're fine.

The only issue I could see is the "performing an illegal function" clause, but it has to be argued that brake pads are made to shed heat in some manner, so you're only increasing an already approved function.

I would bet that even if the protest were upheld, would fall apart in appeals.***

Gee, do ya think maybe someone needs to read ITCS 9.1.3.C. the 3rd paragraph.............. :018: What don't some people understand about the word "exact equivalent"? "Brake pads" are unrestricted. Now try the glossary & look up the word/words Brake Lining/Pad. I expect MORE from people who are part of the rule making process for Improved Touring. You friken guys want to stretch the rules go play in a bigger pond. Look what has happened to Production cars over the last 40 years while THEY used the same mentality. MY car will not ___________ therefore lets strech rule _____________. :bash_1_:

This is just as far out of control as the Spherical bearing. :wacko:

[dickita15]

David, is it your thinking that the backing plate the friction material is bonded to is not part of the brake pad by definition and therefore must be an exact replacement rather than a unrestricted item.

That is actually not a bad argument, constant insults aside.

[Gary L]

The ITCS allows brake pads to be replaced, but someone needs to show me where it allows the addition of any sort of shim between the pad and the caliper, never mind a full blown heat sink. And if you argue that your stock brakes actually came with shims between the pad and the caliper, then the replacement shim (which is NOT part of the pad) must meet the criteria of the paragraph that David cites, because there is no allowance to do otherwise.

As for using the freebie brake system circuitry to pump fluid back into the master cylinder, please revisit the wording of that paragraph:


Brake system circuitry may be revised, but no modification or substitution of the original master cylinder, its location, or mounting is permitted</span>.[/b]So... How are you going to get the fluid back into the master cylinder without modifying it?

[Chris Wire]

As for using the freebie brake system circuitry to pump fluid back into the master cylinder, please revisit the wording of that paragraph:

So... How are you going to get the fluid back into the master cylinder without modifying it?
[/b]

The brake recirculators I am familiar with do not plumb the return fluid back to the master cylinder. The line to the front calipers has a valve with 2 ports in it. One line feeds the caliper with pressure from the m/c, the other port is for the return, effectively creating a "loop" while never actually returning the fluid back to the master cyl. For cars like my ITS RX7, you would actually need 2 recirculators, since each front wheel has its own line off the master.

That&#39;s how.

[JeffYoung]

Chris is right on the recirc. You don&#39;t have to touch the m/c to make it work.

In fact, you can make an argument that all a recirc is is a big old speed bleeder in the line. They are the same -- on way check valves.

The arguments above about teh heat sinks are giving me some pause though. I can see the other side on this.

I guess the question is this -- does the "brake pads" are free rule mean that you can stuff anything in there that fits, or does it mean something else? I suspect the intent was to only allow different pad materials.....................however, it seems pretty hard to me to separate the backing pad from the lining even using the GCR definiton, which calls it "replaceable friction material" used to stop the car. I don&#39; t know bout you guys bug there have been times when my backing plates became friction material used to stop the car...lol....but in any event, they (the plates) are certainly replaceable.

The titanium shims can be modified to fit the pad almost like the original shims that were on my car, and almost all other cars as a anti-squeal device.

[Gary L]

Jeff - I was basing the master cylinder modification scenario on your description in post #4, where you clearly talked about taking brake fluid "... back to the master". If you don&#39;t mess with the master cylinder, then I have no problem with the free circuitry as described by Chris.

But I do have a problem with the shim-morphs-into-a-heat-sink stuff. This is not about trying to separate the pad backing plate from the friction material... there is no argument that both are part of a "pad", IMO. I&#39;m talking about a separate piece - a shim - being modified into, or replaced with, a device that is not a duplicate of what was there in the beginning.

[ddewhurst]

Dick, sometimes some of the people who are part of the IT rules process ride a little to tall in their saddle making them to far from the rule words so that they don&#39;t understand the words. :D Or don&#39;t care to. :o The words for replacement parts are very clear "exact equivalent" & when things are opened up for the brake pads the glossary is VERY clear as to what a brake pad is. Our 1st gen RX-7&#39;s came OEM with a specific coated heat sink shim between the brake pad steel backing & the caliper piston. That don&#39;t mean you may use a titanium or what have you material because it ain&#39;t "exact equivaint" heat sink shim material. & the heat sink shim material ain&#39;t part of the brake pad.

Glossary:

Brake Lining/Pad - Replaceable friction material which accomplishes braking action by making rubbing contact with the brake drum or rotor.

[JeffYoung]

And David, that&#39;s where your logic goes astray. Brake pad "material" is unrestricted. If the brake is defined to include the backing plate, you are wrong -- any thing attached to the backing plate is free.

Where Dick is right is whether there is a distinction between backing plate and pad material in the rule. If so, then you are probably required to use stock shims and nothing else. If the entire pad "assembly" is free, well then the assembly is free and anything that fits in the pad hole you can use.

I&#39;m not arguing about intent here, because I agree the intent back in 85 never envisioned something like this, like it never envisioned Motec, spherical bearings, etc. I&#39;m just telling you what the rule says, and what is arguably allowed under it.

[Andy Bettencourt]

a. Brake pads, brake linings, and brake fluid are unrestricted.</span></span>

Was glad I wasn&#39;t getting into this one but this is NOT a simple &#39;replace&#39; according to the rule. With no provision to modify the caliper or rotor, you can seemingly do whatever you want to a pad that can fit in the stock set-up. Constant insults aside that is...(good one Dick!)

[bldn10]

I&#39;m not going to use the term "backing plate" because it is a defined term in the Glossary and we aren&#39;t using it as defined. The friction material is mounted on, say, a pad mount, and although strictly speaking the Glossary defines a brake pad as only the friction material itself, I suggest that the friction material + the pad mount = the brake pad. My 2nd Gen RX-7 came w/ a brake pad and 2 shims. I think that replacement of the OEM shims implicates the "exact equivalent" and you cannot add a heat sink in the guise of a shim. However, if someone manufactured a pad that had a pad mount w/ integral heat sink, I think that just might get by.

Just what I need - $400 brake pads! :(

[JeffYoung]

Bill, if you accept that the "pad" equals the friction material + the backing pad, then the barn door is wide open. As Andy points out, "pads" are unrestricted. So, stock, not stock, made only in Yugoslavia in 1952, whatever, if it is a brake pad and fits in the caliper hole, looks legal to me.

IF you accept "pad" as including the backing plate. That is where the gray area/issue is I think.

[ddewhurst]

9.1.3.D.6.a.

BRAKES

Brake pads, brake linings, and brake fluid are unrestricted.

***Glossary:

Brake Lining/Pad - Replaceable friction material which accomplishes braking action by making rubbing contact with the brake drum or rotor.***

I&#39;ll only say this one LAST time. BRAKE PADS are FREE. Can you people understand what brake pads are when you read the previously stated rule? By glossary defination the "brake pad" is the REPLACEABLE friction material......................................... Put whatever type REPLACEABLE friction material you like on the steel material the carries the REPLACEABLE friction material but the steel carrier of the REPLACEABLE friction material SHALL be an "exact equivalent" to the OEM steel carrier of the REPLACEABLE friction material.

Read the rules as they are written & not for what you wish they were to staisfy your needs. After reading this post do any one of you really believe that the steel carrier of the REPLACEABLE friction material is what the GCR calls the brake pad? It don&#39;t matter what you tell the parts store guy you want to buy, it&#39;s what the rules spec a brake pad is that counts.

***you can seemingly do whatever you want to a pad that can fit in the stock set-up.***

Andy, you want in, I have a question directed to you alone. In your above sentence what is this thing you call a "pad". Is that a brake pad per the GCR glossary or is that a brake pad as in when you talk to a parts supplier ? Each meaning is different.

[Gary L]

Bill, if you accept that the "pad" equals the friction material + the backing pad, then the barn door is wide open. As Andy points out, "pads" are unrestricted. So, stock, not stock, made only in Yugoslavia in 1952, whatever, if it is a brake pad and fits in the caliper whole, looks legal to me.

IF you accept "pad" as including the backing plate. That is where the gray area/issue is I think. [/b] It is not a gray issue IMO, because it really doesn&#39;t matter whether you accept "pad" as something beyond the friction material itself, or not. The allowance is... unrestricted pad material.

This does not allow you to change the shape or dimension of anything, and it certainly does not allow you to add a "shim" where there wasn&#39;t one, never mind a heat sink.

[Chris Wire]

I could argue each side of this and probably win both arguements! :cavallo:

But alas, I don&#39;t intend to use them so why waste my breath (errrr....typing skills?) :dead_horse:

Jeff, use them if you like, you&#39;ll get a pass from me on &#39;em.

Carry on.....

[Andy Bettencourt]

I could argue each side of this and probably win both arguements! :cavallo:

[/b]

I agree 100%. The pad material can not &#39;float&#39; without the backing plate in which it is bonded. Arguements could be made either way IMHO.

[JeffYoung]

Same here. I see both sides. I think that the "for" position - based on the idae that you can&#39;t have a "pad" without a backing plate -- is strong enough that I can try this until someone gets a ruling saying i can&#39;t.

Interesting that the item I thought the most questionable, the recirculator, is probably the most technically legal.

[Ron Earp]

Out of all the things discussed a titanium insulator plate in the guise of a shim is the most suspect. I think that shim has to be as OEM, no questions on that one.

I think one can definitely make an argument for the heat sinks on the brake pad - especially if one bonds or rivets the heat sink to the brake pad backing plate, thereby making it all on piece. If I were using these I&#39;d make sure my heat sinks were physically attached to the backing plate, not just in contact with them the way they were designed. If done without physical attachement to me it is a separate part and not part of the "pad", if pad is to include backing plate and pad material.

On the other hand, I can also see where a protest could get a ruling that says brake pad material is free, all that other stuff isn&#39;t.

[bldn10]

"After reading this post do any one of you really believe that the steel carrier of the REPLACEABLE friction material is what the GCR calls the brake pad?"



Sorry, David, your post did not give me an epiphany. :P Since, as others have pointed out, you cannot have a pad w/o the "steel carrier/pad mount/backing plate, I absolutely do believe that the original and continuing intent of the rule is that the whatchamacallit + friction material = brake pad. Another case where the language could perhaps have been more precise. But do you see any techs going around and comparing those whatchamacallits to OEM? No, legal brake pads are deemed any that will fit. But, as I acknowledged, you are right that the Glossary doesn&#39;t exactly say that.

OTOH, Jeff, I don&#39;t think you can do it unless the heat sink is manufactured into the "backing plate." .

[JeffYoung]

It&#39;s been a good informative debate, and I&#39;m glad I started the thread. I am going to try the shims as I see a good faith basis in the rules for doing so. We will see how it goes.

[Andy Bettencourt]

David, while I see your point, can you provide us with data that the backing plates (attatchment plates) on the aftermarket pads you use are exact in material and dimensions to your OEM ones? I have NO idea on the ones I use. I ASSUME they are the same size or else they wouldn&#39;t fit but I would THINK they would be made of a more durable and/or better heat dissapating material than OEM...and I would think that was fine because they are all one piece. I consider the friction material and teh backing plate to all be the &#39;brake pad&#39; because you can&#39;t buy them any other way.

[ddewhurst]

***I would THINK they would be made of a more durable and/or better heat dissapating material than OEM...***

Andy, being that as Bill calls it the whatchamacallit shall be the exact equivalent (steel) & for thermal conductivity practical purposes all steel is approx equal. ;)

Now to the sarcastic side. :o All of this MODIFYING brake whatever crap-o is illegal in Prodution what makes anyone think it&#39;s legal in IT? B)

[JeffYoung]

The rules are different?

Let me clarify. The Production rules appear to me (I&#39;m no expert) to allow a number of brake modifications that take care of the problem of heat overwhelming stock brakes in other ways. Off the top of my head, I know for example that 240zs can run rear discs in Production. So, we in IT have to work harder to find ways allowed by the rules to keep what are essentially stock brakes working.

Another thought. Ducting is free. What if the heat sink is not attached to the pad, but rather to the duct running to the caliper? It&#39;s not performing a prohibited function, as it is cooling the brakes and ducting is completely and entirely free.

Shutting up and signing off. I see enough room here to do this. David, if you feel strongly enough otherwise, write to our boys in Kansas and see what they say.

[ddewhurst]

***David, if you feel strongly enough otherwise, write to our boys in Kansas and see what they say.***

Not required Jeff. I don&#39;t talk about what I may do with my car that&#39;s on the illegal side. ;) I also feel that when I take part in rule discussion I understand the WRITTEN rule very well. :D

Nuff said from me. :birra:

Now off to the Mile for the IRL race.

[JeffYoung]

I gotcha. You do stuff that may be legal or may not on your own instead of discussing it with the guys in the club you race with.

That&#39;s cool.

Have fun at the Mile. I&#39;ve always wanted to see that track.

[evanwebb]

So, among all involved so far there is what seems to be well-intentioned disagreement on whether or not the recirc or the brake pad backing plate or shims with a generally non-stock size and shape and/or material is technically legal according to the rules as they are currently written. But would we all agree that the more liberal interpretation which believes these things are legal is at least an escalation of the status quo? THis stuff has pretty much not existed in IT prior to recently (please spare me the anecdotal stories of what this guy or that guy used to do, I&#39;m talking about the vast majority of IT racers here.) I think a rules clarification might be in order to keep it that way. Let&#39;s keep it simple folks, no need to start down the same path as the RR shocks or the replacement FI computers...

BTW, anyone can "win" an argument with themselves in their own mind.

[JeffYoung]

Evan, I do agree it is an escalation of the status quo. Completely agree with that as a matter of fact.

The thing for me though is this. The status quo of ALL of IT has increased greatly since 1985, or 1995, or even 2000. When the rules were written in 1985 or whenever, Hoosier tires and coilovers and 30% gains on engine builds and Motec etc. were NOT anticipated.

In at least one area, admitteldy on MY car..(lol..your statement about people looking out for themselves is accurate), the "rest" of the IT ruleset has far outstripped the brake rules. Cars are going faster, turning faster and carrying way more speed, I think, than in the past.

So, yes, I am looking to move the status quo on brakes forward to keep up. There are guys out there now who are having serious brake issues because of the "advancement of IT speed."

I&#39;m not asking for any rule changes. I am however looking to "do" to the brake rules what has been done to almost all of the IT ruleset which is move it out of 1985 by using grey areas in the rules. You used to be able to compete with a stock motor, some decent shocks and brake pads. Well, the suspension and motor stuff has just skyrocketed, while the brake stuff has not.

[ddewhurst]

***I don&#39;t talk about what I may do with my car that&#39;s on the illegal side.***

***You do stuff that may be legal or may not on your own instead of discussing it with the guys in the club you race with.***

& you appear to do stuff that&#39;s illegal & you type about the same stuff. Oh. I get it now sharing illegal stuff with the site makes the same stuff legal. At the least within my statement I say "what I may do". Kind of open ended for......................


***BTW, anyone can "win" an argument with themselves in their own mind.***

Evan, I like that ^ a lot. :023: I like to win an arguement on the legal side.

Jeff, the "D" girl did vey well comming from 17th to 5th before a car cut down in T1 & clipped her R front damaging the steering arm. She may have gone in a bit deep a bit late. Have know her & Hornish since WKA Karting days in the early 90&#39;s.

[JeffYoung]

No dude, I try to hash out grey areas here first to see if my interpretation of the rule (and if you think everything is as black and white as "legal" or "illegal" you have a lot to learn my friend) is the same as others.

I saw the Danica-Dan clip on ESPN last night. Looked to me like Wheldon came down on her for sure. She can drive. Like Hornish too, he seems like a racer-racer. they as down to earth as they come across on TV? Wheldon on the other hand seems like a Class A......you know.

[BlueStreak]

Evan, I do agree it is an escalation of the status quo. Completely agree with that as a matter of fact.

The thing for me though is this. The status quo of ALL of IT has increased greatly since 1985, or 1995, or even 2000. When the rules were written in 1985 or whenever, Hoosier tires and coilovers and 30% gains on engine builds and Motec etc. were NOT anticipated.

In at least one area, admitteldy on MY car..(lol..your statement about people looking out for themselves is accurate), the "rest" of the IT ruleset has far outstripped the brake rules. Cars are going faster, turning faster and carrying way more speed, I think, than in the past.

So, yes, I am looking to move to status quo on brakes forward to keep up. There are guys out there now who are having serious brake issues because of the "advancement of IT speed."

I&#39;m not asking for any rule changes. I am however looking to "do" to the brake rules what has been done to almost all of the IT ruleset which is move it out of 1985.
[/b]

THIS is the crux of the issue. Engine management improvements have allowed higher speeds, brake compounds have improved to create far greater stress on the rotors/drums/bearings, ultimate tire grip has improved substantially. This will get worse if it is not addressed, especially for the antiques among us. But, I don&#39;t think anyone will do anything about it, because it&#39;s a self solving problem. The cars with these issues will slowly fade away as they are totaled one failure at a time, just remember that those of you in newer cars might be taken out by one of these brake failures.

I may be all alone on this one, but I&#39;d like to see this addressed early enough that some of these antiques are preserved. Unfortunately, the only suggestions I can come up with to fix this really stink. One would be to require everyone to use a spec tire with less grip (I HATE THAT IDEA), or require everyone to use a spec pad/shoe material (IMPOSSIBLE to police). Like I said, all of my ideas for this stink, but I&#39;d like to see us do something to extend the lives of what will otherwise be parked or totaled race cars.

[Chris Wire]

***I don&#39;t talk about what I may do with my car that&#39;s on the illegal side.***

***You do stuff that may be legal or may not on your own instead of discussing it with the guys in the club you race with.***

& you appear to do stuff that&#39;s illegal & you type about the same stuff. Oh. I get it now sharing illegal stuff with the site makes the same stuff legal. At the least within my statement I say "what I may do". Kind of open ended for......................[/b]

I would disagree with that characterization. I applaud Jeff for sharing his thoughts on something that *may* be illegal and not just doing it and hiding. And it has been clearly shown that there could be circumstances in which both items discussed are technically (if not in spirit) legal. The heat sink falls here, the brake recirc valve is a slam dunk.



***BTW, anyone can "win" an argument with themselves in their own mind.***

Evan, I like that ^ a lot. :023: I like to win an arguement on the legal side.
[/b]

Well, the argument in your mind is the first one anybody would have before coming here to hash it out. If you can&#39;t win the one in your head, you&#39;re a dead duck on this board.

I appreciate your position on the brake pad/heat sink issue, David. The problem is not your stance, since I actually agree with you in spirit. The problem, as Andy and others have shown, is that the wording fails your position. You are making an assumption that since the GCR only references the pad material in the glossary, that all else must be OEM. Andy makes the assumption that since the pads are free and you can&#39;t get the pad material without the supporting mounting plate, then the mounting plate is free as well. Different sides of the same coin in my view. The answer may be that you&#39;re both right......you in spirit, Andy/Jeff technically. Under the current language in the GCR, legal in this instance is definitely gray.

[shwah]

Backing plates that reduce thermal loading of the piston/fluid are not recent developments in IT. If it is escallation, then it took place in the 80s/90s.

[Greg Gauper]

I have no problem with the idea of using shims as thermal heatsinks, provided there is absolutely no modification to the caliper or rotor assembly to install. I don&#39;t think we want to ban some new idea that improves braking on our cars.

In my opinion, I think the GCR wording should be changed to specifically allow alternate shims of any material. If not for the cooling/insulating use, shims can also used to compensate for pad wear, by pushing the pistons back into the calipers the same ammount that a set of new pads do. This dramatically reduces caliper flex and tapered wearing. This is a common practice in most of the other classes. There was a good post over on the Formula car website by 7-Time national champ Dave Weitzenhof discussing how he prepared his shims, and uses progressively thicker shims as his pads wear. This is not done for performance reasons, it&#39;s done for cost savings. The alternative is to throw away a set of pads with only 5-10% wear. While I can&#39;t speak for other cars, but Hondas have really crappy calipers that flex like hell. The pedal always feels the best with brand new pads, but gets progressively worse as the pads wear, due to increased caliper flex. Adding shims to the pads restores the pedal feel to something almost as good as brand new pads.

When I ran IT, to meet the spirit of the rule, I used to glue thicker shims to the backs of my pads to accomplish this. Since the GCR says &#39;Brake Pads&#39; are free and isn&#39;t restricted to &#39;Pad Material&#39; and since &#39;free&#39; does mean &#39;anything goes&#39; by having the shims and pads bonded together, I was satisfied that I met the rule. I also only used them on the outboard pad on my single piston calipers, so in my case, there was no insulating effect since the piston side had no shim.

With shims, I was able to get several race weekends of life out of a set of pads. That would have gotten pretty expensive if I had to toss the pads with minimal wear.
That said, it&#39;s a hell of a lot easier maintenance if you don&#39;t have to glue the shims to the pads. IMHO, the extra step to glue the shims on is similar to the old threaded body shock rule from years ago i.e. buy a set of threaded body shocks, machine off the threads, and install a threaded collar to meet the spirit of the rule.

Even if the PTB decide that the high tech cooling shims sould be banned, I would still like to have a shim provision to compensate for pad wear. If somebody is concerned about making shims out of &#39;unobtanium&#39; then specify ferrous or stainless steel. Restrict them to the outboard side of single piston calipers.

[JeffYoung]

Chris, agree with your post totally. I think the "spirit" of the original rules would not allow this stuff, but I think the words do.

David, question -- if the words of the rule are to be read to mean that only the pad friction material is free, doesn&#39;t that mean that you can only use stock backing pads or their EXACT equivalents? To take Andy&#39;s point to the extreme, are we reduced to sending stock backing plates to Carbotech, etc. to have our "free" material applied to them?

I don&#39;t think that is the "spirit" of the rule either.

[evanwebb]

Some cars accelerate well, some cars handle well, some cars brake well. This whole discussion has boiled down to the "if I can&#39;t go as fast as I want, I&#39;m going to call the part on my car that is holding me back a safety problem. We have to fix all safety problems, right?" By the same thinking, can I add a larger throttle body to my car so that I can accelerate faster and not pose a safety problem to other cars when coming off a corner?

[JeffYoung]

Evan, I understand your point and your concern. But two things make this different, way different, from your example:

1. We are not talking about brakes that just stink, but work. I am talking about brakes that at one point were not even lasting a single session before caliper seals failed. The fellow above was having the same problem with his RX3 wheel cylinders. My car will never stop well, and that stinks but it is fine and I have to live with it.

2. You have to agree with me that the 1985 rules on brakes lag quite a ways behind what has gone on with suspension development and engine development in IT. We are at a point, as the RX3 driver said above, where either gray areas get exploited for older cars, or they get put away and don&#39;t race anymore. As the owner of an older car, I&#39;d like to race it for a few years more.

Trust me, I understand the "me-first" attitude and the damaging effect it can have on the IT ruleset. I don&#39;t want and don&#39;t expect to have a car that stops like a SM, or a Second Gen RX7 or even a 240z. I just want a car that has brakes that (sort of, actually) last 30 minutes. With good ducting, careful brake management, and titanium shims, I&#39;m there. And I don&#39;t think I am tossing out the rulebook to do it. I do agree that I am operating in a gray area and exploiting it, but that is racing right?

And not to go tit for tat, but are the valve springs that Volvo sells now for your car the 100% equivalent of what was sold back in the early 70s? Didn&#39;t Volvo update/upgrade the springs to account for failures? I&#39;m not knocking you or Volvo if that is the case.

[Joe Harlan]

Evan, I understand your point and your concern. But two things make this different, way different, from your example:

1. We are not talking about brakes that just stink, but work. I am talking about brakes that at one point were not even lasting a single session before caliper seals failed. The fellow above was having the same problem with his RX3 wheel cylinders. My car will never stop well, and that stinks but it is fine and I have to live with it.

2. You have to agree with me that the 1985 rules on brakes lag quite a ways behind what has gone on with suspension development and engine development in IT. We are at a point, as the RX3 driver said above, where either gray areas get exploited for older cars, or they get put away and don&#39;t race anymore. As the owner of an older car, I&#39;d like to race it for a few years more.

Trust me, I understand the "me-first" attitude and the damaging effect it can have on the IT ruleset. I don&#39;t want and don&#39;t expect to have a car that stops like a SM, or a Second Gen RX7 or even a 240z. I just want a car that has brakes that (sort of, actually) last 30 minutes. With good ducting, careful brake management, and titanium shims, I&#39;m there. And I don&#39;t think I am tossing out the rulebook to do it. I do agree that I am operating in a gray area and exploiting it, but that is racing right?

And not to go tit for tat, but are the valve springs that Volvo sells now for your car the 100% equivalent of what was sold back in the early 70s? Didn&#39;t Volvo update/upgrade the springs to account for failures? I&#39;m not knocking you or Volvo if that is the case.
[/b]

I am not going to go read through all the bullcrap that is being said here. But please do not try to upgrade the rules becaue you feel you don&#39;t have enouigjh brake to get the job done. There are so many legal things that can be done that have not even been considered that I would be all over shutting down any rule prop that opens up brake allowances. Cars are classed and the brake are considered during that classification. Jeff you have a partner that is a scientist look at the swept area of a drum brake and compare it to the disc partner....Drum brake has more surface in play an more opportunity to cool if you go looking for the proper way to get it done.... With PROPER prep work the 240z is not short on brakes in anyway... When was the last time you measured your operating temps of your drums shoes discs and pads? What is the surface temp of your caliper compared to the piston temp at the backing plate? If you can&#39;t answer those questions then you have not done your home work.

PS a heatsink behind the pad on a racecar will be as effective as a swirl tube in the intake......Both items have little to no effect but will get you bounced in the tech shed....Some times I think you all need a little more fiber in your diets....

[Greg Gauper]

Joe,

Ok, you feel that shims designed to assist in cooling/shielding should not be allowed. That&#39;s fine.

Would you have a problem with a wording change to permit a thicker shim to replace the OEM anti-squeal shim, on the non-piston side (i.e. outer pad) of the caliper to compensate for pad wear for single piston type calipers?

[Andy Bettencourt]

I just placed a quick call to Hawk to try and understand what they do.

- They use steel for the backing plates for no other reason than cost. There is no guarantee that they, or any other aftermarket company won&#39;t change, modify or otherwise upgrade/downgrade that composite. It just happens to be the same as OEM right now but some exotic pads are not.

- The bonding agent is significantly upgraded. As you can imagine, the temps these see is much higher so the resin they use is much different than OEM.

- The friction material is obviously different and only uses OEM for shape and proper fit.

So, while I do see both sides to this, I can&#39;t see how it&#39;s cut and dry. Joe and David, would you be saying that the aftermarket bonding material used for these pads is &#39;free&#39; under the hardware rule? If only the friction material is free, then do you consider everything else to be taboo?

Like I said, I see the grey and have always considered the pad/bonding agent/backing plate to be one unit. Just trying to learn. I have always been of the mindset that any pad within a stock caliper on a stock rotor was the intent.

[Joe Harlan]

I just placed a quick call to Hawk to try and understand what they do.

- They use steel for the backing plates for no other reason than cost. There is no guarantee that they, or any other aftermarket company won&#39;t change, modify or otherwise upgrade/downgrade that composite. It just happens to be the same as OEM right now but some exotic pads are not.

- The bonding agent is significantly upgraded. As you can imagine, the temps these see is much higher so the resin they use is much different than OEM.

- The friction material is obviously different and only uses OEM for shape and proper fit.

So, while I do see both sides to this, I can&#39;t see how it&#39;s cut and dry. Joe and David, would you be saying that the aftermarket bonding material used for these pads is &#39;free&#39; under the hardware rule? If only the friction material is free, then do you consider everything else to be taboo?

Like I said, I see the grey and have always considered the pad/bonding agent/backing plate to be one unit. Just trying to learn. I have always been of the mindset that any pad within a stock caliper on a stock rotor was the intent.
[/b]


WOAAAAA BIG DOG...Don&#39;t try to drag me into that shit stream.........My comments had nothing to do with backing plates as I believe the intent is to allow the pds to be installed into unmodified calipers. I do not believe that an aftermarket heatsink can be sold off as a factory antivibration device and the value of such a thing would be equal to the wiz-bang turbo intake generator (which i have dynoed BTW) Brake pads including the bcking plates are consumables and should be treated as such. All the other stuff is just more corn in the crap and it&#39;s my friend Davids way of existing. I do not believe it possible nor needed to make sure that the backing plate measures .001 thinkness of the factory part. I would how ever have a problem with a replacment plate made of titanium and half the thickness of OE so this would be one of those COA rulings on intent of the rule and the intent of the competitor to cheat them...Please re -read my previous post on the subject I offered help on how to cool and feel that we pick the car we pick even with the short comings...As soon as you try to fix the brakes on one model you have to fix the camshaft on another. That Andy was all I was saying.




Joe,

Ok, you feel that shims designed to assist in cooling/shielding should not be allowed. That&#39;s fine.

Would you have a problem with a wording change to permit a thicker shim to replace the OEM anti-squeal shim, on the non-piston side (i.e. outer pad) of the caliper to compensate for pad wear for single piston type calipers?
[/b]
Yes I would Greg, Again it is an allowance and again if you are wearing out the outer pad quicker then you are not addressing the problem....In the old days before we made trick cooling cans we ran a harder compound on the outside pad to resist the added heat from the rotor surface. On pinch calipers I spend a lot of time figuring out how to make the slides work and work correctly. The pressure on the out side can be made as high as the pressure on the inside if the slides work correctly....Key word is pressure then you need to figure out the heat. If the out side pad is seeing more heat you may need to run a harder pad out there to keep brakes on the car. Again Brakes are consumables and should be treated as such.

[ddewhurst]

Jeff, the answers are per my humble understanding of the rules/glossary. :D

***David, question -- if the words of the rule are to be read to mean that only the pad friction material is free,***

IMHU of rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Pad/Lining the answer to this part of the question is, YES.

***doesn&#39;t that mean that you can only use stock backing pads or their EXACT equivalents? ***

IMHU of rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Pad/Lining the answer to this part of the question is, YES provided you are talking of the metal carrier of the replaceable friction material.

***To take Andy&#39;s point to the extreme, are we reduced to sending stock backing plates to Carbotech, etc. to have our "free" material applied to them?***

IMHU of the rules anyone may use a backing plate that meets the specifications of rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph).



Greg, being that you wanted to be heard I&#39;ll provide my best questions to you & my understanding of the rules to suggest that ______________, you fill in the blank. :D

***Since the GCR says &#39;Brake Pads&#39; are free and isn&#39;t restricted to &#39;Pad Material&#39; and since &#39;free&#39; does mean &#39;anything goes&#39; by having the shims and pads bonded together,***

Oh golly my friend Greg you need to re-read rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Lining/Pad.

***When I ran IT, to meet the spirit of the rule, I used to glue thicker shims to the backs of my pads to accomplish this.***

I presume you are saying that you glued shims to the steel plate that the replaceable friction material is attached to. Now that you have re-read rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Lining/Pad I&#39;ll bet you have a new outlook at what you were doing during your IT days.

***I was satisfied that I met the rule.***

IMHU of the IT & Production car brake pad rules when you were bonding shims during your IT days you were illegal & if your doing the same with your G Production car you continue to be illegal. :D

[Andy Bettencourt]

WOAAAAA BIG DOG...Don&#39;t try to drag me into that shit stream.........My comments had nothing to do with backing plates as I believe the intent is to allow the pds to be installed into unmodified calipers. I do not believe that an aftermarket heatsink can be sold off as a factory antivibration device and the value of such a thing would be equal to the wiz-bang turbo intake generator (which i have dynoed BTW) Brake pads including the bcking plates are consumables and should be treated as such. All the other stuff is just more corn in the crap and it&#39;s my friend Davids way of existing. I do not believe it possible nor needed to make sure that the backing plate measures .001 thinkness of the factory part. I would how ever have a problem with a replacment plate made of titanium and half the thickness of OE so this would be one of those COA rulings on intent of the rule and the intent of the competitor to cheat them...Please re -read my previous post on the subject I offered help on how to cool and feel that we pick the car we pick even with the short comings...As soon as you try to fix the brakes on one model you have to fix the camshaft on another. That Andy was all I was saying.


[/b]

No ill-intent here. I just read one of your previous posts as saying you thought any of this was illegal. My question then becomes - would you require the backing plate (what the friction material is bonded to) to be of OEM spec? What if someone came out with a pad that was bonded to a material like copper? Would you consider this illegal?

[Joe Harlan]

Jeff, the answers are per my humble understanding of the rules/glossary. :D

***David, question -- if the words of the rule are to be read to mean that only the pad friction material is free,***

IMHU of rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Pad/Lining the answer to this part of the question is, YES.

***doesn&#39;t that mean that you can only use stock backing pads or their EXACT equivalents? ***

IMHU of rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Pad/Lining the answer to this part of the question is, YES provided you are talking of the metal carrier of the replaceable friction material.

***To take Andy&#39;s point to the extreme, are we reduced to sending stock backing plates to Carbotech, etc. to have our "free" material applied to them?***

IMHU of the rules anyone may use a backing plate that meets the specifications of rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph).
Greg, being that you wanted to be heard I&#39;ll provide my best questions to you & my understanding of the rules to suggest that ______________, you fill in the blank. :D

***Since the GCR says &#39;Brake Pads&#39; are free and isn&#39;t restricted to &#39;Pad Material&#39; and since &#39;free&#39; does mean &#39;anything goes&#39; by having the shims and pads bonded together,***

Oh golly my friend Greg you need to re-read rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Lining/Pad.

***When I ran IT, to meet the spirit of the rule, I used to glue thicker shims to the backs of my pads to accomplish this.***

I presume you are saying that you glued shims to the steel plate that the replaceable friction material is attached to. Now that you have re-read rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Lining/Pad I&#39;ll bet you have a new outlook at what you were doing during your IT days.

***I was satisfied that I met the rule.***

IMHU of the IT & Production car brake pad rules when you were bonding shims during your IT days you were illegal & if your doing the same with your G Production car you continue to be illegal. :D
[/b]

Sorry David my friend you are picking the corn out of the crap pile again.....:) If there was an actual advantage to any of those things then it may be an issue but the reality is that most of what is being done has no more effect than making the driver feel good about something. David my friend this is one of those place where you would better use your time going after something important...




No ill-intent here. I just read one of your previous posts as saying you thought any of this was illegal. My question then becomes - would you require the backing plate (what the friction material is bonded to) to be of OEM spec? What if someone came out with a pad that was bonded to a material like copper? Would you consider this illegal?
[/b]

Andy, I would say a backing plate made of an alternate material would be illegal under the current writing of the rules. I would also say if thats all your beating me with then I better go to work on fixing my driving skills. Seriously as I said to David picking the corn man. I want people to play by the rules but why should we be dicking up this little stuff while the big shit gets a pass. I would much rather put up a bond to look at a camshaft than to ever look and the backing plate dimensions on a brake pad..........

[ddewhurst]

***David, would you be saying that the aftermarket bonding material used for these pads is &#39;free&#39; under the hardware rule? If only the friction material is free, then do you consider everything else to be taboo?***

Andy, I have presented the brake lining/pad rules & the glossary definition & have no intent of opening up any new doors for you to play in another room. :D

***All the other stuff is just more corn in the crap and it&#39;s my friend Davids way of existing.***

Joe, if en ya can&#39;t handle the rules find a new game with NEW friends & new rules. :D I play by the rules when I chose to get involved on this site. As you mature yer getting more different as the days go by.

EDIT:

***Sorry David my friend you are picking the corn out of the crap pile again.....***

Joe, a rule is a rule is a rule & the time for picking corn is when there is minimal corn in the small crap pile. I tell ya what, when I get my Spec Miata complete I&#39;m going to learn how to write a protest paper & get some poor sole with an illegal Spec Miata roll cage. I can see the who ever response before I write the protest paper, Vexatious Protest. Why, because there are MANY illegal Spec Miat & ITA Miata roll cages & rather than laying a hardship on the illegal roll cages they will make a rule change to make legal the illegal roll cages the same as they did with the Spherical bearing. :D

Now back to your point Joe, when was the last time you viewed someone protest ANYTHING of an IT car? I understand what your saying about the non win factor but as I said rules are well you know the finish of that sentence. :D

[Joe Harlan]

***David, would you be saying that the aftermarket bonding material used for these pads is &#39;free&#39; under the hardware rule? If only the friction material is free, then do you consider everything else to be taboo?***

Andy, I have presented the brake lining/pad rules & the glossary definition & have no intent of opening up any new doors for you to play in another room. :D

***All the other stuff is just more corn in the crap and it&#39;s my friend Davids way of existing.***

Joe, if en ya can&#39;t handle the rules find a new game with NEW friends & new rules. :D I play by the rules when I chose to get involved on this site. As you mature yer getting more different as the days go by.
[/b]

Sorry David you can see it how you want but you are not buildling and running 20 to 25 races a year....There is way important crap to deal with than this. You by spending time pickig at these old scabs only waste the important time these guys could spend fixing real rules that are real problems. Right now over this stupid f&#39;in thread there is a group of techi&#39;s and stewards and region officails thinking...."will we be having pad protests at the ARRC this year.....WHAT A WASTE OF TIME...............................So you can say what you want about me old friend but the fact is that this is the shortbus car club of america and non of us will ever see the same words written in black and white so you really need to get over it....If I see Jeff show up with a set of brembo&#39;s on his TR we are going to hand paper but if want to run little metal maxipads with wings because it makes him feel good then BFD he is the one thats missing out on real brake information. The thread has degraded to the same level as the SM thread so i&#39;ll be signing off now...If somebody wants real cooling help and information i am around other places.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Don&#39;t read too much into these internet discussions. It&#39;s all conceptual thinking. Legal or not, it&#39;s bench racing. What people will protetst is not at issue here. I personally decide if I think the driver has an illegal item that makes him faster. Missing washer bottles do not win you races but when push comes to shove, not having them is illegal.

I have always considered the pad/plate to be a single unit. I still do. I bet that is the intent as well but unless we get an official ruling, nobody will ever know.

[Greg Gauper]

Joe,

I don&#39;t have an issue with wearing the outer pad unevenly. The shim I was specifically refering to has absolutely nothing to do with heat. I&#39;m addressing an issue caused purely by caliper flex under static conditions. I can take brand spanking new calipers with brand new guide pins and put brand new pads at ambient temperature and I will get an optimum brake pedal. If I do nothing else but swap out the new pads and install used pads, I will have a softer brake pedal due to increased caliper flex because less of the guide pin is now engaged in the caliper. Heat has nothing to do with it. You can feel the effect under cool status conditions. A worn pad will cause increased flex. The tapered wearing is a result of the flex (the pads literally rock in caliper as they wear. Hell, just watch an older Honda caliper when you pump the pedal sometime, the calipers flex like crazy. Install a shim in the outer pad to push the piston back the same amount as a new pad would and voila, instant brake pedal, almost like new. The only other possible solution to correct this issue would be to install thicker or longer guide pins (not legal since you are modifying the calipers) or to modify the bushings to reduce the clearence (also not legal for the same reason). That leaves unrestricted barke pads.

I agree that if I were having dynamic pedal issues due to heat related caliper flex/tapered wearing, that your solution of different compounds for each side would be effective. You can also achieve the same effect by grinding some pad material off of the leading edge.

Yes I know pads are consumables (as are rotors). I have no problem tossing a set of $20 rotors after 1-2 races, but tossing away a set of $200 pads after one session with 90% pad left is crazy.

David,

I do not believe I am torturing the pad rules. Prior to posting, I reread the rule. It states "Brake Pads.......are UNRESTRICTED". To me, unrestricted does in fact mean "no restrictions".

It doesn&#39;t say pad material. It specifically states brake pads. So there is no restriction on the compound, bonding material, or backing plate, all of which make up the brake pad. I can make the backing plate as thick or as thin as I want. I can use solid backing plates, or I can use plates that have large holes to assist in the bonding of the material (like OEM pads), I try to avoid the latter since I have found the holes tend to weaken the backen plates and they are more prone to bending. My current pad manufacturer builds my unrestricted pads out out solid unrestricted material (actually it&#39;s mild steel) with a slightly thicker backing plate to help resist bending. There is no restriction on how the material is bonded i.e. rivets, special bonding agent, both, etc. The pads can have the leading edge of the pad material ground down to minimize tapered wear like some OEM BMW pads, or they can have a flat unrestricted profile. The pads can have a slot milled across the center (like the OEM pads) to provide a &#39;degassing&#39; groove&#39; or they can be solid to increase the surface area.

Since pads are unrestricted in their construction (material, bonding agent and method, plate thickness) there is also no restriction as to how they are constructed, or who for that matter makes them. If I bond/rivet/weld a thicker shim to the back of the pad, the shim is now part of the unrestricted pad assembly.

I do agree that the cooling shims that extend outside of the caliper (discussed above) are a grey area, and have conceded that they are probably not legal, if for no other reasn that they are seperate item from the unrestricted pad and extend beyond the caliper. I personally have no problem with that design but obviously others do.

[ddewhurst]

Greg, I gave you ALL the information you needed relative to "Brake Pads" & you still have not understood the definition of a "Beake Pad".

I repeat please re-read the following.

***Oh golly my friend Greg you need to re-read rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Lining/Pad.***

If you have read this ^ info & continue to believe the steel carrier of the replaceable friction material is included within the glossary definition of "Brake Pad" somethings missing that I can&#39;t help you with. :D

Or ask Vern what the GCR glossary definition of a "Brake Pad " is. It don&#39;t include the steel carrier of the replaceable friction material my friend. :D

Andy, we don&#39;t use INTENT when writting paper, we use the words of the written rule. :023:

[Joe Harlan]

Greg, I gave you ALL the information you needed relative to "Brake Pads" & you still have not understood the definition of a "Beake Pad".

I repeat please re-read the following.

***Oh golly my friend Greg you need to re-read rule 9.1.3.C. (third paragraph) rule 9.1.3.D.6.a. & the glossary definition of Brake Lining/Pad.***

If you have read this ^ info & continue to believe the steel carrier of the replaceable friction material is included within the glossary definition of "Brake Pad" somethings missing that I can&#39;t help you with. :D

Or ask Vern what the GCR glossary definition of a "Brake Pad " is. It don&#39;t include the steel carrier of the replaceable friction material my friend. :D

Andy, we don&#39;t use INTENT when writting paper, we use the words of the written rule. :023:
[/b]
Brake Lining/Pad - Replaceable friction material which accomplishes braking action by making rubbing contact with the brake drum or rotor.

David , you have completely lost all of you common sense sir you are arguing from the dumbest f&#39;in position I have ever seen.. Now explain how the average competitor is going to reline his/her own material. The word replaceable is the key to the whole sentence...The replaceable part of the PAD is complete with backing place which then becomes un restricted. Adding a non stock shim or heatsink is truely not legal. As much as I hate to say it the backing plate could fall under the replacable part of the pad. I believe I would win that argument in stating that the backing plate is the second stage of my two stage friction material....:) Metal to Metal still meets your beloved definition my friend......

[shwah]

Normally we see tortured rule interpretations justifying allowances, not restrictions.

When I go buy replacement friction material for my Volkswagen, from the dealer, parts store, junk yard or race pad shop, it comes attached to a backing plate that is not an exact duplicate of the original unit.

I think what I just read suggests that I need to send some original stock pads to Hawk and have them tool up the line to make a set of brake pads for me. :023:

[edit] didn&#39;t see Joe&#39;s post before I made mine

[Andy Bettencourt]

Brake Lining/Pad - Replaceable friction material which accomplishes braking action by making rubbing contact with the brake drum or rotor.

Now explain how the average competitor is going to reline his/her own material. The word replaceable is the key to the whole sentence...The replaceable part of the PAD is complete with backing place which then becomes un restricted. [/b]

:happy204:

[Joe Harlan]

:happy204:
[/b]


Haha thanks Andy, even a blind dog can find food if you stick it under his nose.... :D

[lateapex911]

IF the backing plate were NOT considered to be part of the "Brake pad" that is puprported to be ( by some) in the GCR definition, then we have a large percentage of cars racing with illegal parts, because, as stated above, when someone goes to the store to buy a set of replacement pads for their car, they don&#39;t get the same thing every time. The backing plate is thicker, or thinnner, with holes, or without holes, with larger registration tabs, or with tiny registration tabs, etc, etc, etc. I&#39;ve seen many sets for the same car and wondered, "Jeez, these look different,", but lo and behold they fit, and worked fine.

IF the rule is for the friction material ONLY, and NOT the pad, how will we be legal? How will a protest be written? Where can we find the factory documentation of what the REAL backing plate is SUPPOSED to be? And what if the car came from the factory with several manufacturers parts, but only one is documented? (IF we could even find THAT documentation?)

I suggest that perhaps the definition was written without thought as to the backing plate, as it&#39;s integral in the scheme of things. If anything, the glossary definition might need some fine tuning.

I think if we were to take the position that the pad material is free, but the backing plate is not, we&#39;re going to be wasting a lot of time and drawing a line thats impossible to be on the legal side of....

[tom91ita]

i am so goofed. my current pads are glued to solid backing plates instead of riveted to backing plates like the OEM.

or wait, were the OEM ones glued and the original cheater pads riveted? shoot, now you&#39;ve got me all mixed up to if i&#39;m cheating now or was cheating then.

cmon guys, it&#39;s June. we should be racing. this thread looks more like late March. :dead_horse:

i&#39;m gonna go work on my flux capacitor and get back to the future.

[evanwebb]

I have mulled this over for awhile and my position has evolved somewhat. My version of common sense parses this issue thusly: when I go to either the dealer or to Auto Zone and I buy "brake pads", they consist of a pad material bonded/riveted to some kind of backing plate. The GCR says the "brake pads" are "unrestricted". Hence, I think that the materials involved, and the size and shape or thickness, of the brake pad are all open to do whatever you want. Technically, the thickness has to be free by definition or else the second you start to wear down a stock pad it isn&#39;t legal anymore since the thickness differs from stock. Extra shims are not legal since it&#39;s a separate part from the pad. However, if the shim is bonded to the pad, then it&#39;s part of the pad. But why bother with shims? Just get Hawk or Porterfield to make some brake pads for you that have their friction material bonded to a 6Al-4V titanium backing plate. It seems completely legal to me.

I think there should probably be a wording clarification to say that the stock "outline" of the brake pad must be maintained to prevent the little winged heat radiator thingies from being used, but as the rules are currently written I would think that if they were bonded to the padthen they would be legal.

I still think the recirculator is illegal in spirit, but maybe not according to the strict wording of the rule...

[Knestis]

http://www.sillyape.org/trash/nerds.jpg

NERDS!

:lol:

[ddewhurst]

Opps ;)

[ddewhurst]

This response is to my friend Joe & a couple Yuks that are hanging in his camp.

***David , you have completely lost all of you common sense sir you are arguing from the dumbest f&#39;in position I have ever seen..***

No Joe I don&#39;t believe I have & we are each entitled to an understanding of the rules per the written rule. No if&#39;s, coulds or intents.

***Brake Lining/Pad - Replaceable friction material which accomplishes braking action by making rubbing contact with the brake drum or rotor.***

You show great capability to copy ^ the rule. Using your common sense Joe are there any word/words that define anything other than "replaceable friction material" ? Don&#39;t go near your lack of common sense steel on steel nonsense.

***Now explain how the average competitor is going to reline his/her own material.***

First Joe, I am an average competitor & I have sent Porterfield shoes with worn out friction material & had the lining of my choice installed.

Second Joe, I have a close friend that has been running the family business for 30 years that manfactures & sells new & remanufactured friction material brake & clutch stuff. They do bonding & riveting..............

***The word replaceable is the key to the whole sentence...The replaceable part of the PAD is complete with backing place which then becomes un restricted.***

Joe, that ^ is your missguided understanding of the GCR glosssary definition. As stated above no where in the definition is the word backing plate included in the definition.

***As much as I hate to say it the backing plate could fall under the replacable part of the pad.***

Joe, now were getting to the meat of the entire discussion. BUT, your word COULD in the above sentence is just like all the if&#39;s & intents in the world & they don&#39;t count. The words BACKING PLATE are NOT used within the GCR glossary definition of "Brake Pad".

IF I were to buy your definition (& I DON&#39;T) that the backing plate is an intergral part of the GCR glossary definition of brake pad then the backing plate would also be unrestricted & one could use ANY material they chose for the backing plate material........................ Shall I copy & attach the thermal conductivity of a large list of materials so that one may choose the material with the least conductivity? Joe, on this subject you need to remember that when you talk the talk you need to be able to walk the walk.

***Adding a non stock shim or heatsink is truely not legal.***

Joe, I agree that adding a non stock shim is illegal. BUT, I believe your common sense really really wants to be careful using the word heat sink.

Joe, with YOUR understanding of the rule & as you have stated one may use an unrestricted material for the backing plate therefore YOU & the YUKS are home free.

Jeff, this statement below is not said sarcastically, it&#39;s said using other peoples understanding of the brake pad rule. We are now back to your first post that opened this thread & according to Joe & a few others rule understanding you MAY use any material for your backing plate. You need not mess around with shims or other stuff to keep the heat from transfering to your caliper/caliper piston/brake fluid.

[Joe Harlan]

Dave you prove my point......The fact is you need more FIBER in your daily diet.....That will fix the issue you have with not understanding the SCCA langauge. Forget all the shit you use to stop yourself from getting a car done and get out there and race. BUY OE pads if you like and protest everyone in the house and you will get the answer short of that my friend I will continuw to sell and use HAWK pads that fit into my stock caliper and are covered by the FMSI book for fitment.

[ddewhurst]

***I just type like a pompous ass!***

Ok, I&#39;ll buy that. :D I know your better than some of the stuff you type.

***http://www.saveclubracing.com***

Have you saved club racing yet Joe?

Joe, with reference to the race cars there are two parts to racing. The journey (building) & the event (racing). I enjoy both parts. ;) There is a 3rd part to racing BUT someone told me we can&#39;t talk about Topeka. <_<

[lateapex911]

David, if i read your post correctly, you are stating that the friction material is distinct from the backing plate, and the material is free, but the backing plate is not. Is that correct?

You also state that you have sent (or could) pads out for reapplication of friction material onto the stock backing plate. Thats a known option, as some compaies provide that service with their material.

Now, the question I have is, how do you know that the backing plate you send is the exact correct one?

What if...it has a large registration tab...and others available for the same car do not. Since that extra material could sink more heat, (yes, we&#39;re splitting hairs here, but thats what this thread has become), would you then chose the smaller plates? Or? See the issue? How do we know what stock really is, since so many pads don&#39;t match each other.

And...........where do we draw the line???

[Joe Harlan]

***I just type like a pompous ass!***

Ok, I&#39;ll buy that. :D I know your better than some of the stuff you type.

***http://www.saveclubracing.com***

Have you saved club racing yet Joe?

Joe, with reference to the race cars there are two parts to racing. The journey (building) & the event (racing). I enjoy both parts. ;) There is a 3rd part to racing BUT someone told me we can&#39;t talk about Topeka. <_<
[/b]

Sounds like a fine peyote dream.......:) Clearly Dave you are loosing the argument when you go to all the outside stuff....;( Oh and the third thing....yep a really good time but table dances cost more than a set of tires by the time the night is over...

[Chris Wire]

(yes, we&#39;re splitting hairs here, but thats what this thread has become)
[/b]

Where&#39;s the &#39;monkey-throwing-shit-bombs&#39; smiley? THAT&#39;S what this thread has become!

1. I think the language in the GCR glossary needs clarification.
2. I think Dave should write some paper on illegal brake backing plates.
3. I think the stewards will disallow the protest (shortly after making cuckoo-cuckoo-cuckoo noises).
4. I think Dave should appeal the ruling to the COA.
5. I think the COA will uphold the steward&#39;s decision, refunding Dave&#39;s money less the amount held by SCCA for a well-founded protest.
6. We will then have an official ruling on whether or not backing plates are INDEED part of the defined &#39;brake pad&#39;. Which is where the majority of us are already.

or.....

7. We can just go race some fricken&#39; cars around the track all weekend and have some fun! :)

[ddewhurst]

Joe, clear the table of ALL the BS & answer the following question with a YES or a NO.

Is it correct that you believe that the replaceable friction material may be secured to a backing plate of unrestricted material ?


Jake, as I have stated IMHU of the "Brake Pad" written rule/written glossary the replaceable friction material is unrestricted. The backing plate today SHALL be steel. The backing plate that I send for a new pad will be one that I had procured through a normal parts outlet store & I&#39;ll let Chris protest my backing plate because he seems to have his pantys all wound up over a brake pad protest. I never said a dam thing about protesting anyones brakes.

[Joe Harlan]

Joe, clear the table of ALL the BS & answer the following question with a YES or a NO.

Is it correct that you believe that the replaceable friction material may be secured to a backing plate of unrestricted material ?
Jake, as I have stated IMHU of the "Brake Pad" written rule/written glossary the replaceable friction material is unrestricted. The backing plate today SHALL be steel. The backing plate that I send for a new pad will be one that I had procured through a normal parts outlet store & I&#39;ll let Chris protest my backing plate because he seems to have his pantys all wound up over a brake pad protest. I never said a dam thing about protesting anyones brakes.
[/b]



Brake Lining/Pad - Replaceable friction material which accomplishes braking action by making rubbing contact with the brake drum or rotor.[/b]

David, All Bullshit aside. If the definition only said lining then I might buy you argument but it sayd PAD and buy automotive standards the pad is the complete brake part as delivered from the factory. The PAD is BTW the replaceable portion in a disk brake assembly. The Lining in years past was actually what you replaced on the shoe BTW and most shops and certified techs were able to do that in house. When I got my master tech cert you had to at least know the process on relining and arcing shoes to get your brake badge. So sir not only can I talk the talk but I have been certified to walk the walk. If this protest were brought to my it would be handled with the following rule:


It is expected that protests shall be reasonable, logical, and based on sound evidence, thus well-founded. A well-founded protest shall further be defined as one upon which reasonable men or women may differ. A protest may be well-founded even if not upheld.

A. Forfeiture of Protest FeeIf a protest is judged to be not well-founded, the protest fee shall be forfeited.

B. Vexatious or Bad Faith Protests
A protestor who has acted in bad faith or in a vexatious manner may be penalized by the SOM.

In my court you would be subject to what is colored in red. We can agree that if I build backing plates with wings to fit the stock hole that I have made a legal part perform an illegal function and it would be my bad.

Oh and to answer your y or n question the answer is yes....and I don&#39;t like it but the fact is if I want to stop on titanium after I go through the HT10 compound it would be legal.No rule can stop me from using metal to stop my car even if it isn&#39;t as good as carbon....:)

It&#39;s been fun ladies but I have a race car to prep so I can actually get some track time this year...:)

[ddewhurst]

***Oh and to answer your y or n question the answer is yes....***

Joe, you just said all you needed to say.............. :wacko:

Ok folks per Joe & HIS court you may all use an unrestricted material for your backing plate. :biggrinsanta: just gave you a gift.

Nuff on this subject for me.

[Chris Wire]

I&#39;ll let Chris protest my backing plate because he seems to have his pantys all wound up over a brake pad protest. I never said a dam thing about protesting anyones brakes.
[/b]

No panties in a wad here, Dave, I&#39;m goin&#39; COMMANDO!!! :cavallo:

And if you recall, I told Jeff earlier to go ahead and run the shims because he wouldn&#39;t have to worry about any action out of me over them, so your characterization of the condition of my panties is false.

It&#39;s pretty clear that there are only two things that are going to change your mind, and they are a correction/clarification of definition in the GCR glossary and a COA ruling on appeal of a protest. So you can sit around and wait for a definition change, or you can write paper, let it run through the process, and get a binding result that way. Take your pick.

Or, you and Joe can sling crap back and forth until someone gets bored enough to go out to the shop and actually work on the race car, that someone being me. I&#39;m out.

[cchandler]

Brake cooling ducts are allowed. Heat sinks - errr not really. To say that "my car&#39;s brakes won&#39;t make it thru a race" is not a valid excuse for what may, or may not, be an illegal modification. Seems to me that the problem is not the brakes themselves or cooling - it is the driver&#39;s failure to properly manage the brakes that are available. If a car&#39;s weakness is its brakes, perhaps the driver needs to modify their driving technique to still have brakes at the end of the race. Obviously, all cars have strengths and weaknesses. Properly managing the car&#39;s assets is most rewarding.

[Greg Amy]

http://www.sillyape.org/trash/nerds.jpg

NERDS!
[/b]
Werd.

[evanwebb]

By the way, a shim is not really a heat "sink". A heat sink is some thing you can put a significant amount of heat into for storage. A shim is way too small to store much heat, and besides you can&#39;t get around the laws of thermaodynamics and whatever heat you put into the sink has to come back out again anyway, so you are right back where you started, needing to manage the heat.

In the context of talking about a shim between the brake pad and the piston to block heat going into the piston (and hence caliper and fluid), well that would actually be an "insulator", and you want the shim to have very low thermal conductivity. You may be creating a "pad fade" situation or overheated rotor where previously you did not have one since (assuming that the insulator actually works) now all the heat is staying in the pad and rotor.

If you are talking about the big winged shim then you are attempting to use the shim as a heat pipe and a radiator. In that case you want the shim to have low thermal conductivity to the piston but high conductivity to the radiator area, so the shim should probably be some kind of laminated construction...

Not discussing legality here, just some relevant engineering ideas... :-)


Who says you need backing plates anyway? I&#39;ll bet there&#39;s a metal-matrix composite material where the entire pad would be consumable... The trick would be getting the coefficient of friction you want... Does anyone know if the pads in the F1-style carbon-carbon brakes have backing plates?

[Scooter]

OMG I can&#39;t believe I just read all that crap and nobody seemed to mention the most relevant part about the heat-sink dealies.

Those backing plates are for noise or spacing or whatever. They don&#39;t dissipate heat in their stock form. The rules clearly state that you can&#39;t make something do something other than its intended purpose no matter what.

There never was a heat-sink there. You can&#39;t add one. Just like I can&#39;t add a giant wing onto my rear-view mirror just because mirrors are "free".

You can take it out. (Assuming it&#39;s part of the brake pad.) You can change it, you can make it as expensive as you want. As long as it serves its intended purpose. Which is NOT cooling the brakes.

[JeffYoung]

Respect your opinion, but you are missing the point. Brake pads are unrestricted. The argument -- and I agree it is just an argument - is that anything you can shove in the caliper hole is therefore unrestricted.

The prohibited function argument doesn&#39;t fly because of the clear "it says you can" when it comes to brake pads.

[seckerich]

Damn--I just spent all that time prepping for Barber and now I have to get out the belt sander and some super glue. :blink: I sure hope it dries on those stock backing plates before I leave. 5 pages of mental masturbation was a little fun to read tonight--thanks. :eclipsee_steering:

[JeffYoung]

Glad to be of service! So to speak....

See you down there Steve.

[seckerich]

It&#39;s also fun to know that Kirk is chewing his fingers off to keep from getting in this one. :D See you at Barber.

[ddewhurst]

***It&#39;s also fun to know that Kirk is chewing his fingers off to keep from getting in this one.***

Come on K. lets have your understanding of what a brake pad is........... That NERDS stuff don&#39;t cut it. ;) Your understanding of the rules/glossary is just that. I ain&#39;t doing any more on this subject because I can live ok with my understanding of the rules/glossary. :o

I did talk with one of the arguers of the brake pad topic at the Sprints & being that he didn&#39;t bring up the topic I left it alone. :D

[Renaultfool]

Back in the day I used Velvitouch linings on my Pinto. I believe that I had them made by Rochester Brake and Clutch in Rochester NY. The attachment method for the metalic pad material to the steel backing plate was TIG welding. I guess they were full metalic.

OK, Free Tip #1.
Most brake pad tapered wear is because the pad backing plates have not been deburred. The steel backing plate to which the friction material is attached is usually a stamping. If you look closely at a stamping there is a rounded side, the side the die struck, and a sharp side. You should take a file and take the sharp edges off the area of the pad backing plate where it transfers the torque to the caliper bracket.
The caliper it&#39;s self does not usually take this torque and transfer it through the caliper sliding pins or whatever other attachment method your car uses. Brake torque would shear off most guide pins if you think about it.
Generally somewhere the pad backing plate rests on the caliper bracket. Under brake actuation the loaded end of the pad digs in and does not slide. The other end is free, so it moves in, so most of your wear in a taper situation will be on the leading edge of the pad. Draw a line on your rotor and turn it as it would turn under normal use and the edge of the pad the line hits first is the leading edge and will wear the most if this is your problem.

Renault uses a phenolic piston, so no heat transfer, no problem. NAPA premium pads, Castrol LMA fluid changed sometime in the past three or four years, no brake fade, great brakes. Viva la France!