Upgrading Brakes?
10-07-2004, 03:56 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Queens , nYc
Posts: 25
Upgrading Brakes?
I am not very satisfied with the stock tC brakes. They feel like they're trying to stop too many pounds. I've been looking around and I don't know much about how or what exactly to upgrade. I know i probably need bigger rotors and better brake pads, but I can't seem to find anything available for the tC.
Any suggestions?
Any suggestions?
10-07-2004, 04:05 PM
#2
Senior Member
SL Member
Scion Evolution
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: www.scionevolution.org
Posts: 525
I own an xB and didn't want the expense of the big brake kit. So I bought a extra set of factory rotors had them crossed drilled, slotted and plated by Island Motorsports, replaced the factory brake lines with TRD stainless steel lines, replaced the brake pads with Poterfield carbon-kevlar brake pads, and flushed and refilled the brake system with NEO 610 brake fluid.
Way better braking and I am still using all the OEM parts as far as calipers and rotors. Definitely think this is a great alternative to going with the expense of a big brake kit
Way better braking and I am still using all the OEM parts as far as calipers and rotors. Definitely think this is a great alternative to going with the expense of a big brake kit
10-07-2004, 04:18 PM
#3
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 1,560
The braking parts are shared with the Celica. Some companies (like Stop-Tech) have a kit for the tC which might include tC specific clips or other minor parts that might be different. I believe any Celica GT-S kit will fit, but on some you might need to modify things very slightly.
Personally, I like the idea of the AEM kits that use the OEM caliper with a larger rotor. Also, look into getting some Hawk brake pads (the Celica GT-S application should be a direct fit.)
Personally, I like the idea of the AEM kits that use the OEM caliper with a larger rotor. Also, look into getting some Hawk brake pads (the Celica GT-S application should be a direct fit.)
10-07-2004, 04:29 PM
#4
Senior Member
SL Member
Team ScioNRG
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Acton, MA
Posts: 335
if you just want an increase in performance but dont need the heat capacity of fancy rotors or multipiston caliper, a system like the one aem offers is great. By increasing the raduis of the rotor, you instantly increase brake power (leverage ratios).
10-07-2004, 05:26 PM
#5
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 933
Originally Posted by Premier
I am not very satisfied with the stock tC brakes. They feel like they're trying to stop too many pounds. I've been looking around and I don't know much about how or what exactly to upgrade. I know i probably need bigger rotors and better brake pads, but I can't seem to find anything available for the tC.
Any suggestions?
Any suggestions?
1992 prelude i had brembo OEM sized rotors cd/sl with aem brake pads. they worked much better then stock. worked best in hard braking conditions. very little brake dust
1992 civic brembo oem sized cd/sl rotors with cheap brake pads. brake dust like crazy, and some minor noises from the brake pads. slightly better than stock.
aem big brake upgrade... hmm.. my friend have this in his civic. he said it wasnt too bad for the money.
imo, it wouldnt be worth the money if are not using the brakes for racing or as a show car. if you just want better braking for a daily driver, i would do what toy xbox did.
general info. when upgrading to larger diameter rotors, expect to lose power, even if the stock rotors weigh the same as the larger rotors.
10-07-2004, 06:58 PM
#6
Senior Member
SL Member
Scinergy
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Suwanee, GA
Posts: 185
Explain how larger rotors decrease wheel horsepower with all other things being equal (including weight). If weight is constant, rotational mass would be constant and it's not like the increase in rotor size forces an increase in wheel rpms like an increase in overall wheel/tire diameter does.
10-07-2004, 07:09 PM
#7
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 933
lets say you have a 10lbs disc the size 1 feet in diameter and you also have one that is 10lbs in 10 feet diameter. which one would you think would be harder to spin if you were spinning from the center? the loses horsepower to the wheels because, it will take more force to spin it because the weight of the rotors are further from the center of the hub. ask anyone that has ever did a big brake upgrade and they will tell you they have loss some power even though it is very little amount. it is still power loss.
10-07-2004, 07:13 PM
#8
Senior Member
SL Member
Scinergy
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Suwanee, GA
Posts: 185
That's true only on an initial basis because once the rotation has begun the disc will rotate itself with less effort as the momentum or rotational inertia is increased over that of the smaller disc.
Off an RX-8 forum by someone going under the name "Ms. Wiggles"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay,
For a rotating mass not experiencing translational movement, the kinetic energy of such object is:
Kr = 1/2 * Iw^2
where I is the moment of inertia and w is the angular velocity in radians per second. For a 15 inch (.381 meter) BIG rotor that has its mass distributed at outer rim of the rotor (excessive worstcase), it has an I of:
I = mr^2 = .036m
and has a angualar velocity of:
w = 2pi * v / (2pi * r) = 3.03v
where r here is the radius of the 26" diameter tire. Substituting back in to the earlier equation we have:
Kr= 1/2 *.036m * (3.03v)^2 = .331 mv^2
So if the dyno was say done at 0-100 KPH (0 - 27.8 m/s) and it takes 5 seconds and the rate of acceleration is fairly uniform (i.e. flat torque curve) and we are using rotors 10Kg heavier (i.e. 22lbs heavier!) than stock. Let's look at that final second of the dyno run.
At t = 4, v =22.4 so Kr = 1637 additional Joules per wheel
At t = 5, v=27.8 so Kr = 2588 additional Joules per wheel
So in that final second 950 joules (or 950 Watts = 950J/1s) are being stored in each wheel so that it would be about 2.5HP since only two wheels are spinning.
So in this ridiculous example where I am using big rotors that weigh 22lbs more than stock each with all the weight of the additional rotors is on the outer rim of the rotor, and the car is doing normal accleration on the dyno (i.e. the dyno is not to slowing it down to a near crawl), we get only a 2.5HP number.
Actual numbers I would guess to be less than .5HP for an actual performance rotor upgrade.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, a .5 HP loss is well worth the 30% decrease in stopping distance as it's more or less negligible.
Off an RX-8 forum by someone going under the name "Ms. Wiggles"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay,
For a rotating mass not experiencing translational movement, the kinetic energy of such object is:
Kr = 1/2 * Iw^2
where I is the moment of inertia and w is the angular velocity in radians per second. For a 15 inch (.381 meter) BIG rotor that has its mass distributed at outer rim of the rotor (excessive worstcase), it has an I of:
I = mr^2 = .036m
and has a angualar velocity of:
w = 2pi * v / (2pi * r) = 3.03v
where r here is the radius of the 26" diameter tire. Substituting back in to the earlier equation we have:
Kr= 1/2 *.036m * (3.03v)^2 = .331 mv^2
So if the dyno was say done at 0-100 KPH (0 - 27.8 m/s) and it takes 5 seconds and the rate of acceleration is fairly uniform (i.e. flat torque curve) and we are using rotors 10Kg heavier (i.e. 22lbs heavier!) than stock. Let's look at that final second of the dyno run.
At t = 4, v =22.4 so Kr = 1637 additional Joules per wheel
At t = 5, v=27.8 so Kr = 2588 additional Joules per wheel
So in that final second 950 joules (or 950 Watts = 950J/1s) are being stored in each wheel so that it would be about 2.5HP since only two wheels are spinning.
So in this ridiculous example where I am using big rotors that weigh 22lbs more than stock each with all the weight of the additional rotors is on the outer rim of the rotor, and the car is doing normal accleration on the dyno (i.e. the dyno is not to slowing it down to a near crawl), we get only a 2.5HP number.
Actual numbers I would guess to be less than .5HP for an actual performance rotor upgrade.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, a .5 HP loss is well worth the 30% decrease in stopping distance as it's more or less negligible.
10-07-2004, 07:23 PM
#9
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: VEGAS BABY!
Posts: 9,061
Originally Posted by simplespirit
For me, a .5 HP loss is well worth the 30% decrease in stopping distance as it's more or less negligible.
j/k
10-07-2004, 07:41 PM
#10
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 933
Originally Posted by simplespirit
That's true only on an initial basis because once the rotation has begun the disc will rotate itself with less effort as the momentum or rotational inertia is increased over that of the smaller disc.
Off an RX-8 forum by someone going under the name "Ms. Wiggles"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay,
For a rotating mass not experiencing translational movement, the kinetic energy of such object is:
Kr = 1/2 * Iw^2
where I is the moment of inertia and w is the angular velocity in radians per second. For a 15 inch (.381 meter) BIG rotor that has its mass distributed at outer rim of the rotor (excessive worstcase), it has an I of:
I = mr^2 = .036m
and has a angualar velocity of:
w = 2pi * v / (2pi * r) = 3.03v
where r here is the radius of the 26" diameter tire. Substituting back in to the earlier equation we have:
Kr= 1/2 *.036m * (3.03v)^2 = .331 mv^2
So if the dyno was say done at 0-100 KPH (0 - 27.8 m/s) and it takes 5 seconds and the rate of acceleration is fairly uniform (i.e. flat torque curve) and we are using rotors 10Kg heavier (i.e. 22lbs heavier!) than stock. Let's look at that final second of the dyno run.
At t = 4, v =22.4 so Kr = 1637 additional Joules per wheel
At t = 5, v=27.8 so Kr = 2588 additional Joules per wheel
So in that final second 950 joules (or 950 Watts = 950J/1s) are being stored in each wheel so that it would be about 2.5HP since only two wheels are spinning.
So in this ridiculous example where I am using big rotors that weigh 22lbs more than stock each with all the weight of the additional rotors is on the outer rim of the rotor, and the car is doing normal accleration on the dyno (i.e. the dyno is not to slowing it down to a near crawl), we get only a 2.5HP number.
Actual numbers I would guess to be less than .5HP for an actual performance rotor upgrade.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, a .5 HP loss is well worth the 30% decrease in stopping distance as it's more or less negligible.
Off an RX-8 forum by someone going under the name "Ms. Wiggles"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay,
For a rotating mass not experiencing translational movement, the kinetic energy of such object is:
Kr = 1/2 * Iw^2
where I is the moment of inertia and w is the angular velocity in radians per second. For a 15 inch (.381 meter) BIG rotor that has its mass distributed at outer rim of the rotor (excessive worstcase), it has an I of:
I = mr^2 = .036m
and has a angualar velocity of:
w = 2pi * v / (2pi * r) = 3.03v
where r here is the radius of the 26" diameter tire. Substituting back in to the earlier equation we have:
Kr= 1/2 *.036m * (3.03v)^2 = .331 mv^2
So if the dyno was say done at 0-100 KPH (0 - 27.8 m/s) and it takes 5 seconds and the rate of acceleration is fairly uniform (i.e. flat torque curve) and we are using rotors 10Kg heavier (i.e. 22lbs heavier!) than stock. Let's look at that final second of the dyno run.
At t = 4, v =22.4 so Kr = 1637 additional Joules per wheel
At t = 5, v=27.8 so Kr = 2588 additional Joules per wheel
So in that final second 950 joules (or 950 Watts = 950J/1s) are being stored in each wheel so that it would be about 2.5HP since only two wheels are spinning.
So in this ridiculous example where I am using big rotors that weigh 22lbs more than stock each with all the weight of the additional rotors is on the outer rim of the rotor, and the car is doing normal accleration on the dyno (i.e. the dyno is not to slowing it down to a near crawl), we get only a 2.5HP number.
Actual numbers I would guess to be less than .5HP for an actual performance rotor upgrade.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, a .5 HP loss is well worth the 30% decrease in stopping distance as it's more or less negligible.
10-07-2004, 07:55 PM
#11
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Navarre, FL
Posts: 2,170
Originally Posted by simplespirit
That's true only on an initial basis because once the rotation has begun the disc will rotate itself with less effort as the momentum or rotational inertia is increased over that of the smaller disc.
Off an RX-8 forum by someone going under the name "Ms. Wiggles"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay,
For a rotating mass not experiencing translational movement, the kinetic energy of such object is:
Kr = 1/2 * Iw^2
where I is the moment of inertia and w is the angular velocity in radians per second. For a 15 inch (.381 meter) BIG rotor that has its mass distributed at outer rim of the rotor (excessive worstcase), it has an I of:
I = mr^2 = .036m
and has a angualar velocity of:
w = 2pi * v / (2pi * r) = 3.03v
where r here is the radius of the 26" diameter tire. Substituting back in to the earlier equation we have:
Kr= 1/2 *.036m * (3.03v)^2 = .331 mv^2
So if the dyno was say done at 0-100 KPH (0 - 27.8 m/s) and it takes 5 seconds and the rate of acceleration is fairly uniform (i.e. flat torque curve) and we are using rotors 10Kg heavier (i.e. 22lbs heavier!) than stock. Let's look at that final second of the dyno run.
At t = 4, v =22.4 so Kr = 1637 additional Joules per wheel
At t = 5, v=27.8 so Kr = 2588 additional Joules per wheel
So in that final second 950 joules (or 950 Watts = 950J/1s) are being stored in each wheel so that it would be about 2.5HP since only two wheels are spinning.
So in this ridiculous example where I am using big rotors that weigh 22lbs more than stock each with all the weight of the additional rotors is on the outer rim of the rotor, and the car is doing normal accleration on the dyno (i.e. the dyno is not to slowing it down to a near crawl), we get only a 2.5HP number.
Actual numbers I would guess to be less than .5HP for an actual performance rotor upgrade.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, a .5 HP loss is well worth the 30% decrease in stopping distance as it's more or less negligible.
Off an RX-8 forum by someone going under the name "Ms. Wiggles"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay,
For a rotating mass not experiencing translational movement, the kinetic energy of such object is:
Kr = 1/2 * Iw^2
where I is the moment of inertia and w is the angular velocity in radians per second. For a 15 inch (.381 meter) BIG rotor that has its mass distributed at outer rim of the rotor (excessive worstcase), it has an I of:
I = mr^2 = .036m
and has a angualar velocity of:
w = 2pi * v / (2pi * r) = 3.03v
where r here is the radius of the 26" diameter tire. Substituting back in to the earlier equation we have:
Kr= 1/2 *.036m * (3.03v)^2 = .331 mv^2
So if the dyno was say done at 0-100 KPH (0 - 27.8 m/s) and it takes 5 seconds and the rate of acceleration is fairly uniform (i.e. flat torque curve) and we are using rotors 10Kg heavier (i.e. 22lbs heavier!) than stock. Let's look at that final second of the dyno run.
At t = 4, v =22.4 so Kr = 1637 additional Joules per wheel
At t = 5, v=27.8 so Kr = 2588 additional Joules per wheel
So in that final second 950 joules (or 950 Watts = 950J/1s) are being stored in each wheel so that it would be about 2.5HP since only two wheels are spinning.
So in this ridiculous example where I am using big rotors that weigh 22lbs more than stock each with all the weight of the additional rotors is on the outer rim of the rotor, and the car is doing normal accleration on the dyno (i.e. the dyno is not to slowing it down to a near crawl), we get only a 2.5HP number.
Actual numbers I would guess to be less than .5HP for an actual performance rotor upgrade.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, a .5 HP loss is well worth the 30% decrease in stopping distance as it's more or less negligible.
10-09-2004, 06:13 PM
#13
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Queens , nYc
Posts: 25
Alright, I've been looking around for Celica GT-S brakes since only Stop-Tech has a kit for the tC and its like $1700.
Brembo offers Front slotted and Rear slotted rotors for the 00-04 year GT-S
http://www.buybrakes.com/brembo/brembo-sm.html
They also offer a Sport High Performance Braking System (which comes in Drilled):
http://www.buybrakes.com/brembo/sport-toyota.html
The Brembo Sport Cross Drilled Brake Rotors would cost $473
The Brembo Sport Slotted Brake Rotors would cost $338
They don't seem to offer brake pads for the Celica though? Whats up with that...
Power Slot has purchased the AEM Big Brake Kit product line (http://www.aempower.com/product_brake.asp)
http://www.buybrakes.com/powerslot/toyota.html
All 4 Slotted rotors would cost $341
Supposedly they work best with Hawk Brake Pads
http://www.buybrakes.com/hawk/toyota.html
All of this is assuming that the Celica GT-S brakes would work on the tC, does it really?
What do you guys think?
Brembo offers Front slotted and Rear slotted rotors for the 00-04 year GT-S
http://www.buybrakes.com/brembo/brembo-sm.html
They also offer a Sport High Performance Braking System (which comes in Drilled):
http://www.buybrakes.com/brembo/sport-toyota.html
The Brembo Sport Cross Drilled Brake Rotors would cost $473
The Brembo Sport Slotted Brake Rotors would cost $338
They don't seem to offer brake pads for the Celica though? Whats up with that...
Power Slot has purchased the AEM Big Brake Kit product line (http://www.aempower.com/product_brake.asp)
http://www.buybrakes.com/powerslot/toyota.html
All 4 Slotted rotors would cost $341
Supposedly they work best with Hawk Brake Pads
http://www.buybrakes.com/hawk/toyota.html
All of this is assuming that the Celica GT-S brakes would work on the tC, does it really?
What do you guys think?
10-09-2004, 06:50 PM
#16
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Newark, DE
Posts: 1,560
Slotted and drilled rotors don't improve braking distances. Larger diameter rotors, different pad compounds and bigger pads/calipers do. Unless you're racing (or if you just want the brakes for looks) there's no reason to get slotted and/or drilled rotors. In fact, many race teams use solid vented rotors beacause the advantages of the drilled or slotted rotors don't outweigh the disadvantages.
10-10-2004, 11:24 PM
#17
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Queens , nYc
Posts: 25
Slotted and drilled rotors don't improve braking distances. Larger diameter rotors, different pad compounds and bigger pads/calipers do.
I was looking at bigger rotors made by PowerSlot, but they say: All Power Slot Plus brake kits require the use of larger diameter wheels. Doesn't that mean changing the rims and tires?
Note: I'm pretty sure the tC and GT-S brakes are interchangeable
The tC's Rotor Size (D X T) mm (in.) is 275 x 25 (10.83 x 0.98 ) in the front and 269 x 9 (10.59 x 0.35) in the rear with a Wheel Cylinder Diameter mm (in.) of 57.22 (2.25) in the front and 34.93 (1.38 ) in the rear.
The GT-S has rotors that are 10.82" in the front and 10.58" in the rear (these are the only numbers I could find about the GT-S's dimensions and they were from PowerSlot).
10-11-2004, 01:34 PM
#18
Member
SL Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 77
i had a celica gt-s before i got my tC and i had installed TRD brake pads on it and they worked great with a minimal amount of brake dust compared to other brands of pads...
btw: there are many companies that make pads for the gt-s including EBC, axxis, trd, stop-tech, hawk, etc.
i am gonna purchase a front and rear set of trd brake pads that were made for the gt-s and see if they fit my tC....i will post a review and install pics when i get them...
btw: there are many companies that make pads for the gt-s including EBC, axxis, trd, stop-tech, hawk, etc.
i am gonna purchase a front and rear set of trd brake pads that were made for the gt-s and see if they fit my tC....i will post a review and install pics when i get them...
10-11-2004, 02:52 PM
#19
Member
SL Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 92
I have S.S. brake lines on my Supras and on both my motorcycles.
I callled http://www.techna-fit.com who makes all my lines including the S.S .clutch hoses for me. ( (310) 212-5051) and they told a few months ago that they would have a set made for our tC''s. ( I found them to have the best prices)
My question is: What are the steps for bleeding our brakes with the 'anti-lock' system?
Is there a manual or directions for this? I have a mini-vac but when i did my brakes my Bonneville SSEi I ruined the anti-lock brake system.
Does anyone have a service manual for our cars?
I callled http://www.techna-fit.com who makes all my lines including the S.S .clutch hoses for me. ( (310) 212-5051) and they told a few months ago that they would have a set made for our tC''s. ( I found them to have the best prices)
My question is: What are the steps for bleeding our brakes with the 'anti-lock' system?
Is there a manual or directions for this? I have a mini-vac but when i did my brakes my Bonneville SSEi I ruined the anti-lock brake system.
Does anyone have a service manual for our cars?
10-12-2004, 06:14 PM
#20
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Queens , nYc
Posts: 25
Ok I talked to RaceTechnologies.com (biggest Brembo distributor in U.S. I was told) and the lady told me the GT-S specs, if the tC meets these numbers it will fit:
Disk Diameter 275mm
Minimum Thickness 23mm
Overall Height 49mm
Center Hole Diameter 55mm
Anyone know where I can get these numbers for the tC? I can't find them.
Disk Diameter 275mm
Minimum Thickness 23mm
Overall Height 49mm
Center Hole Diameter 55mm
Anyone know where I can get these numbers for the tC? I can't find them.