[Shotimes] Bad Brake Pads!

[Ron Porter]

The '96 598 Ford pads work quite well, I've used them at Road Atlanta on my
'99, then on the '95 at Summit Point. Oh yeah, also at Hallett after I
burned up a new set of cheap AZ Albany pads after two sessions!! Probably
will try the Porterfields next, but the PFs could be worth a shot.

FWIW, I could care less about pad dust. All else being equal (which it
hardly ever is), I would take the pad that dusts less, but that's low on my
priority list. Good stopping power, no squeaking, then a reasonable pad life
are #1-3 on my list. Since the car gets washed frequently enough anyway, I
see no difference in cleaning a little or a lot of pad dust.

Ron Porter

-----Original Message-----
From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net
[mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Leigh Smith
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 1:19 PM
To: Josh Salaets
Cc: James White; SHOtimes
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] Bad Brake Pads!


Josh;

Yes, the good Carbotech "F" pads are no longer made, and the Hawk
version of the compound is not cryo treated so the dust levels are much
more severe, it just isn't the same pad. The rest of their line is
nothing to rave about for our application. The Porterfield R4S is what
me and a few others are currently running. It is expensive ($80-90) but
carbon mettalic based, long lasting, quiet, fade free and almost dust
free. Seems like almost all the other alternative pads anyone has tried
come up way short in at least one of these major categories. These
should work well with any of the 3 front rotor sizes. The second best
alternative (based on list consensus, not personal opinion) seems to be
the stock Ford 96+ SHO pads when used with the larger 96 rotors, and the
larger matching 598 pad size. They might give up a little temperature /
fade resistance but it doesn't seem to even bother some guys who put
their car on the track. Performance Frictions are the bargain of the
litter, they work well and are cheaper, but dusty...

Yeah, I agree the brake info is getting a little dated now, what with
all the above changes. I think the data is about 3+ years old. The
survey was done in May '99.

Leigh


Josh Salaets wrote:
>>(IMHO) Forget carbotech.
>>
>>Go to Porterfield.
>>
>>The still offer a good street/race pad, whereas Carbotech only offers a
>
> fair
>
>>race pad.
>
>
> So you don't like Carbotech?  Any particular reason why - just curious, as
> the SHOtimes FAQ raves about them.  Anyone else out there like/dislike the
> Carbotechs?
>
> Maybe the SHOtimes FAQ should be updated - at least with the specs and
> reactions over the Porterfields, as they aren't even mentioned in the
brake
> pad discussion.  Come to think of it, I totally forgot about Porterfields!
>
> Josh Salaets
> 95 Taurus SHO (I SHO U)
> 85 Omni GLH-T (Yeah, it's fast.)
> Eugene, OR
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
_______________________________________________
Shotimes mailing list
Shotimes@autox.team.net
http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes