Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 60

Thread: Alternate 240Z rear brakes...?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    6

    Default Alternate 240Z rear brakes...?

    For discussion:

    I posted this request to the comp Board, Ref Letter #279:

    Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2009 11:17 AM
    To: Club Racing Board

    Subject: Request for competition change - ITCS

    Gentlemen,

    Respectfully request your consideration of the attached
    change to the ITCS. Reference (2009) GCR, page 349.

    This request is being made due to NLA (No Longer Available)
    status of the rear brake drums for these vehicles. Reference the
    following from one of the primary suppliers of Nissan and Nissan Comp
    parts in the US:

    (Inserted link to Nissan Comp website where Datsun rear brake drums are shown as NLA)

    What I requested was:

    "Alternate Brakes are allowed (R) 258 or 269 Solid Disc and calipers from 280-ZX."

    For all of the Datsun's with drum rear brakes.

    This was the Comp Board's answer:

    2.
    ITS – #279 Request for alternate rear brake assembly

    This request is not within the IT philosophy.

    For Reference, this is what was historically allowed for the Old Calais/Achieve/Pontiac Grand Am:

    "Alternate rear bearing, flange, and disc brakes from (General Motors) Saturn are allowed. 16" wheel not allowed"

    Does anyone know the history of this change that allowed the Olds/Pontiac's to change from rear drums to disc brakes?

    I honestly felt that there would be no competitive advantage to this, only that the rear drums are out of production and that with the use of a stock Maxima rear bracket, the 280ZX discs fit the 240/260/280Z's.

    Appreciate any comments and other viewpoints. What philosophy did this not follow? How was this different from the Olds allowable alternate?

    Thanks!

    A.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,717

    Default

    If you search you may find the latest thread that brought the reason for this exception up. If I remember correctly it was less than 8 months ago. This exception followed the cars from Showroom Stock, where it was given. I'm sure it was a safety issue related to the rear bearings more than switching from drums to discs.
    STU BMW Z3 2.5liter

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    I've been arguing for eliminating that GM exception for EVER, seems like. There should be no spec line exceptions. Anything that makes things easier provides a competitive advantage. I'd argue that the fact that you requested it is proof prima facie that it's an advantage. You wouldn't ask for it if it wasn't.

    K

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    The drums are still available. Now, I know that Brembo quit making the aluminum drum, but the steel one is available from numerous aftermarket suppliers, or at least it was last October when I checked.

    We had the drums NLA discussion a few months back but I'm too lazy to dredge it up again.

    Bottom line is that you can get drums that work (maybe not optimal, they weigh 11 lbs versus 6 lbs for the ally), and a change is against the core IT philosophy.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,252

    Default

    I'm on the ITAC; we recommended to the CRB that they turn down this request. The reasons are:

    1. Ron Earp is a racing buddy of mine; I work on and drive his 260z, and I also know several Z racers very well (Steve Parrish, David Spillman, Jay Miller, Mike Mackaman, etc.). The drums are still available, you can occasionally find an alum one on ebay etc. Steel drums are still available at your local parts counter. Plus, i think there is some discussion about having new ally ones machined.

    2. IT class philosophy -- perhaps the strongest one we have -- is that we don't make line item exceptions for IT cars for parts that are NLA, or unsafe, etc. You choose your car and the warts that go with it (and I'm certainly in that boat with an ITS TR8). At some point, some cars naturally age out of IT due to lack of parts (I think RX2/3 rear brake parts are totally gone). At that point, you go vintage or build a newer IT car (I have a 300zx sitting in a shed waiting for the day the 8 can't run anymore).

    3. As Kirk indicated that exception for the Calais/etc. is an anamoly. I'm not sure why it is there and it frankly should be removed. It is the ONLY exception like that and totallly contrary to class philosophy.
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4

    Default

    JeffYoung, thanks for sharing the insights on the logic behind this decision. I have been a long time follower of the IT forum and now think it’s time to give some feedback. Having run an ITS 240Z since 1997, about a year ago I noticed the standard aluminum rear drum was no longer available. While true you can find the steel version, there is a performance difference. As mentioned earlier there is an almost 50% weight penalty in rotating mass and the steel drums offer less heat dissipation (steel vs aluminum and cooling fins). Since I have experienced a rear shoe delaminating more than once, I will wait until some other fool runs the steel drums at Blackhawk (brake hawk) or Road America before I risk my fait at one of those venues with steel drums. If anyone has experience with the steel drum configuration at one of these tracks (and can run 1:22 at Blackhawk) please respond. Since we now have a known performance change running the 240Z without the available aluminum drums, what will be done to resolve this issue? Seems that acotyk has a point. Can someone explain the performance advantage of acotyk’s recommendation? Most of the braking (energy to heat transfer) is done by the front of the car and on all the Z cars this is done with a 2 piston caliper on a solid disk rotor up front. By the way using old parts like ebay aluminum drums is one of the reasons for a pedal to the floor failure that I had over the years and should be avoided at all cost.

    As for the GM issue with the Olds/GA if JeffYoung’s comments are correct, than a safety issue as mentioned by Z3_GoCar does not make sense. If I recall correctly, the rule that allowed these GM cars to not only change from rear drum to disk but the bearings as well came long after their ITS classification. The argument here is simple, there is already precedence set to allow drum to disk conversions in ITS. I will be posting a notice to the comp board to either revoke the GM disk as stated in their reply to acotyk or to allow the drum to disk swap for the Z car or any other drum brake car. The board needs to be consistent on this “core philosophy” and in this case there is no sing of it.

    Thank you acotyk for bringing up this issue.

    JeffYoung or any of you other Z drivers, if you know of someone making the aluminum drums please post. By the way doesn’t a custom machined part by a non-oem type manufacturer for brake parts go against the “core philosophy”? Seems like a vintage concept.

    If you were a lawyer, you could retire on arguing for/against inconsistent decisions by a governing body!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    3,682

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by LLoughman View Post
    Seems that acotyk has a point. Can someone explain the performance advantage of acotyk’s recommendation?
    The ITAC and/or CRB doesn't have to explain the performance advantage of acotyk's recommendation. As I'm sure you are aware the GCR reads:
    "To maintain the stock basis of Improved Touring.....No interchange of parts between assemblies is permitted, and all parts of an assembly shall be as originally produced for that assembly"
    Their answer is pretty well spelled out in the introductory rules for Improved Touring.

    Unfortunately the rear drums being no longer available forces the Z driver to make some choices. Race the car with available steel drums and accept the lower performance, or quit racing the car in Improved Touring.

    I'll be cutting some holes in my backing plates and getting some air on those shoes and drums. I don't have rear brake ducting right now and race fine with the ally drums. I bet I can race fine with the steel drums using ducting.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    IT.com "First Loser" Greensboro, NC USA
    Posts
    8,607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LLoughman View Post
    ... If you were a lawyer, you could retire on arguing for/against inconsistent decisions by a governing body!
    LMAO. Jeff's a lawyer.

    ...I will be posting a notice to the comp board to either revoke the GM disk as stated in their reply to acotyk or to allow the drum to disk swap for the Z car or any other drum brake car. ...
    Please DO ask that the GM exception be removed. It got poked into the ITCS long before recent efforts to be consistent on this and other issues, so it's time has come and gone.

    EDIT - a little more history on the ITCS... The entire IT category suffered from a wicked case of benign neglect between its inception in the mid '80s and about 10 years ago. A lot of things have been fixed since then but this rear brake exception isn't one.

    K

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Tijeras, NM
    Posts
    579

    Default

    I suspect the drums are cast iron, not steel. Using iron instead of aluminum is not a safety issue. Sure it will run hotter, but iron will take it where aluminum will not. Aluminum is very rarely used in brakes, and for good reason.

    If you really want to talk safety I move we ban the stock drums.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,252

    Default

    L --

    No problem on the info. I wish more detail was listed with the decisions in Fastrack.

    I run steel drums (came stock so I have to) on the TR8 and I delaminate shoes and burn up wheel cylinders occasionally. I have on the list of things to do (as does Ron) to run ducting to the rear brakes. We have a very brake intensive track here (CMP -- I'll put it up against any track in the US for being hard on brakes) and we survive.

    So, I think there are ways around this other than allowing alternate rear brakes. As you can see, the one time this was done (incorrectly) for the Olds, it opened a can of worms that could really do damage to the core philosophy of IT. It is critical, in my view, that we toe the line and not allow "safety" or "NLA" issues to cause us to allow alternate parts. If we start with that, THAT is the path to production and/or AS, etc.

    If you write a request to have the Olds rear brake/hub allowance rescinded, I will support that 100%.

    If you have any other questions, let me know, and thanks again for the polite and considered post. It is appreciated.

    Jeff

    Quote Originally Posted by LLoughman View Post
    JeffYoung, thanks for sharing the insights on the logic behind this decision. I have been a long time follower of the IT forum and now think it’s time to give some feedback. Having run an ITS 240Z since 1997, about a year ago I noticed the standard aluminum rear drum was no longer available. While true you can find the steel version, there is a performance difference. As mentioned earlier there is an almost 50% weight penalty in rotating mass and the steel drums offer less heat dissipation (steel vs aluminum and cooling fins). Since I have experienced a rear shoe delaminating more than once, I will wait until some other fool runs the steel drums at Blackhawk (brake hawk) or Road America before I risk my fait at one of those venues with steel drums. If anyone has experience with the steel drum configuration at one of these tracks (and can run 1:22 at Blackhawk) please respond. Since we now have a known performance change running the 240Z without the available aluminum drums, what will be done to resolve this issue? Seems that acotyk has a point. Can someone explain the performance advantage of acotyk’s recommendation? Most of the braking (energy to heat transfer) is done by the front of the car and on all the Z cars this is done with a 2 piston caliper on a solid disk rotor up front. By the way using old parts like ebay aluminum drums is one of the reasons for a pedal to the floor failure that I had over the years and should be avoided at all cost.

    As for the GM issue with the Olds/GA if JeffYoung’s comments are correct, than a safety issue as mentioned by Z3_GoCar does not make sense. If I recall correctly, the rule that allowed these GM cars to not only change from rear drum to disk but the bearings as well came long after their ITS classification. The argument here is simple, there is already precedence set to allow drum to disk conversions in ITS. I will be posting a notice to the comp board to either revoke the GM disk as stated in their reply to acotyk or to allow the drum to disk swap for the Z car or any other drum brake car. The board needs to be consistent on this “core philosophy” and in this case there is no sing of it.

    Thank you acotyk for bringing up this issue.

    JeffYoung or any of you other Z drivers, if you know of someone making the aluminum drums please post. By the way doesn’t a custom machined part by a non-oem type manufacturer for brake parts go against the “core philosophy”? Seems like a vintage concept.

    If you were a lawyer, you could retire on arguing for/against inconsistent decisions by a governing body!
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    734

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LLoughman View Post
    While true you can find the steel version, there is a performance difference. As mentioned earlier there is an almost 50% weight penalty in rotating mass and the steel drums offer less heat dissipation (steel vs aluminum and cooling fins). Since I have experienced a rear shoe delaminating more than once,
    OK, so steel drums are bad b/c of less heat dissipation. Nevermind that I'm sure you could have custom shoes whipped up that would work at the higher heat but I follow your train of thought.

    Most of the braking (energy to heat transfer) is done by the front of the car
    Uhhhh... so how much heat can the rear be making?

    Christian, who races a car with rear drums and will beat the "horses for courses" drum some other time.
    Christian in FL | Something white with Honda on the valve cover...
    FASTtech Limited- DL1, Schroth, & Recaro Goodness
    LTB Motorsports- The Cheapest Place for Momo
    TrackSpeed Motorsports- OMP, Racetech, & Driver Gear

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Colchester, CT, USA
    Posts
    2,120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LLoughman View Post
    I will be posting a notice to the comp board to either revoke the GM disk as stated in their reply to acotyk

    Man, that's REALLY gonna piss off all those Achieva racers............




    .
    Jeff L

    ITA Miata



    2010 NARRC Champion

    2007 NERRC Championship, 2nd place
    2008 NARRC Championship, 2nd place
    2009 NARRC Championship, 2nd place

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    3,682

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by GKR_17 View Post
    I suspect the drums are cast iron, not steel. Using iron instead of aluminum is not a safety issue. Sure it will run hotter, but iron will take it where aluminum will not. Aluminum is very rarely used in brakes, and for good reason.

    If you really want to talk safety I move we ban the stock drums.
    Yep, I think you're right on the cast iron. Been awhile since I looked though.

    Now on the "ally drums" I'm pretty sure that is an ally drum, with fins cast in it, with a steel insert. Carbotechs can handle the heat and I was just talking with those guys a few weeks ago and they have a compound for shoes that can handle even more heat than the previous versions.

    I'm not a Z historian but are these ally legal in the first place??? My 260Z shop manual doesn't show drawings of finned drums, but of round drums with no fins. Were the fins added by NIMSO for performance reasons and were they listed as an alternative part number by Datsun/Nissan?

    I'm with you though. I'd like to ban the blasted things for selfish "don't want to ever work on a drum brake again" reasons, but I am logical enough to know that isn't something to pursue. Funny how one of my prime motivators for getting a new IT car is to get something that doesn't have drum brakes and carbs.
    Last edited by Ron Earp; 01-24-2010 at 09:54 PM.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    rutherfordton,NC,28139
    Posts
    254

    Default finned drums.....

    Every 240 I've ever pulled apart, had fins.......

    Now I have seen 3 vented rotors as well....vented rotor caps that is.....

    Didn't realize the olds came with drums.... I Need a letter penned Jeff...

    David
    30 year old ITS car

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Tijeras, NM
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Earp View Post
    I'm with you though. I'd like to ban the blasted things for selfish "don't want to ever work on a drum brake again" reasons, but I am logical enough to know that isn't something to pursue.
    I was really kidding, but was trying to say that if safety is the arguement then make them run the iron drums. I vote a big no to the disc swap. Not sure how to handle the Olds, I'd rather it get pulled than be a precident further creep.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,252

    Default

    Somebody send a letter in....we need to get that Olds exception deleted.
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JLawton View Post
    Man, that's REALLY gonna piss off all those Achieva racers............




    .
    And the Calais drivers. BTW, this was a carryover from the late SS days, not an IT "derived" rule.
    Last edited by John Herman; 01-25-2010 at 02:18 AM.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Wandering the USA
    Posts
    1,341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Herman View Post
    And the Calais drivers.
    So when are you going to dust that thing off and drive it?
    Marty Doane
    ITS RX-7 #13 (sold)
    2016 Winnebago Journey (home)

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Rocket City, Alabama
    Posts
    607

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Earp View Post
    Yep, I think you're right on the cast iron. Been awhile since I looked though.

    Now on the "ally drums" I'm pretty sure that is an ally drum, with fins cast in it, with a steel insert. ................

    I'm not a Z historian but are these ally legal in the first place??? My 260Z shop manual doesn't show drawings of finned drums, but of round drums with no fins. Were the fins added by NIMSO for performance reasons and were they listed as an alternative part number by Datsun/Nissan?

    ...............
    They were all finned Ron. Aluminum drum with steel insert. They can be re-sleeved if you will. Not cheap but it can be done. I think JohnC at Betamotorsports was looking into that for one of his customers. Also, the new aftermarket's are cast and are without fins.

    My drum backing plates are vented and there was evidence of a rear ducting system being attached to the rear control arms at one time. One of the previous owners of my car ran it in enduros on the west coast.

    While I agree it would be nice to do away with the drums, as a Z racer I wll argue that it is against the class philosophy and an allowance should not be made. Like Jeff, I have another Z waiting in the wings that actually has discs all the way around

    BTW, I will try to get a picture or two up for the Nissan fans. I have a buddy that has a Nissan IMSA GTP in his shop. Pretty neat car.....
    Paul Ballance
    Tennessee Valley Region (yeah it's in Alabama)
    ITS '72
    1972 240Z
    "Experience is what you get when you're expecting something else." unknown

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, FL
    Posts
    354

    Default

    "My drum backing plates are vented and there was evidence of a rear ducting system being attached to the rear control arms at one time. One of the previous owners of my car ran it in enduros on the west coast."



    It was always my understanding that the cast drums were preferred on z's for enduros anyways. I don't know from personal experience, and have no idea if it's true, but the internet lore was always use the alloy drums for auto-x and sprint races, and the cast for the long races because they dealt with extended periods at high temp better.
    Chris Carey

    Central Florida Region
    ITS/Vintage Datsun 240Z

    Favorite tool to remove undercoating---- A curb!

    "Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car and oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car.
    Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall, torque is how far you take the wall with you."

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •