Hey guys, I was just wondering if anyone knows of the 60-0 braking distance of the 2nd gen tC? I've seen different reviews with different numbers and was wondering which one is right? I've read on one that its 124ft and another saying its 139ft. I'm asking because I'm thinking of getting the TRD brake kit but if there isn't much difference in braking distance, I might as well save the money for some TRD rims.

 

 

come on, it would have taken you less time to type up a 3 digit number than get this pic posted

 

No point in spending money on a TRD BBK unless you're planning to track the car, which in that case a good set of pads and rotors will be cheaper and you shouldn't have any issues.

 

Hey Russian geniASS, you’ve just proven to the world that you have no idea of how brakes work, that you are not a brake engineer and probably that you don’t even have a technical background at all. One of the first things that people do to their cars here is put on wider wheels and tires (with grippier tires) which will overwhelm the brakes in no time if driven a little spiritedly or on a mountain road. Search and you will learn...already discussed here.

 

You're right, I am not a brake engineer. Does that even exist? Pretty sure that just breaks down to basic mechanical engineering and heat transfer.

I guess after driving my tC on mountain roads, autox, etc, and previous vehicles that weight a lot more than the tC I have yet to cook factory brakes with the exception of correct pads, I have no experience.

I now see why I was warned away from this forum, everyone is an engineer. If it were that easy I wouldn't go to school for it.

 

I’m sure the engineers at Brembo, StopTech, etc. would be offended by your statement.

 

Brakes appear deceivingly simple at first glance, but delve into the actual design and a significantly more complex problem emerges. Mass times acceleration (negative numbers in this case) will equate to about 1000-HP to 1200-HP in braking power! Not chicken $h!t.

 

Mass x acceleration does not include rotational mass that is given by the weight of the wheels and other rotating components in the drivetrain. Increasing clamping force on a slightly larger surface area will help but not yield significant gains. This is why when a BBK is installed, the rotor circumference is increased significantly.

Also don't forget that suspension and tires play a large roll in braking distance.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by russiankid

Mass x acceleration does not include rotational mass that is given by the weight of the wheels and other rotating components in the drivetrain.

Yes it does! I didn’t say partial mass… Finish your engineering degree, then we’ll talk. You’re talking about un-sprung mass (include rotational here) in the wrong place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by russiankid

Increasing clamping force on a slightly larger surface area will help but not yield significant gains.

And you are wrong again! Where in the friction force equation does area come in? The equation is “mu” (friction coefficient) times “n” (normal force) [for brakes we will take the surface area of the pistons times the hydraulic pressure] equals “f”. No area…

Quote:

Originally Posted by russiankid

This is why when a BBK is installed, the rotor circumference is increased significantly.

Wrong again! If you actually run the numbers, an OEM replacement BBK does NOT increase the braking torque at all. That is why you can install them with the stock rear brakes and not upset the braking balance of your car.

Quote:

Originally Posted by russiankid

Also don't forget that suspension and tires play a large roll in braking distance.

That’s what I’ve said here…

 

Welcome to scionlife russiankid....

 

^^ You've been initiated now!

 

I’ve scratch built several race cars in my time, one of them being an F-1 car. I know an awful lot about car’s chassis and suspensions. Not just the fabrication of, but design of too. If you go telling us wrong technical information, I’m ruthless. I’ll be rude, crude and uncalled for…I take it personally because a lot of people think that because they have built something, that that qualifies them to be an engineer. And I find that insulting! Next time ask us, we’ll probably tell you.

 

I know and understand what you are saying but I think your missing the point I am making. I am not the smartest nor the dumbest person in this subject. I am well aware how brakes function, how a larger circumference equated with more eventually distributed hydraulic clamping force reacts better than a force acting in a single location on a smaller circumference disk. If you have built track cars before you should know that increasing hydraulic pressure is not only the caliper setup but the master cylinder.

I am always open to learn but don't insult me. What most people on this forum have planned for their cars, stock brakes will be fine. Maybe I keep getting lucky with good pads, but I don't have any problems stopping.