Did you actually read the first article? It states that the stopping distances of the 350Z with and without the Brembo BBK are almost identical. That basically disproves everything that you have said thus far.

 

i said my piece and was going to leave it, but will retort to you post

1. yes, but more to the point - did you? i'll use the following to illustrate my points

in reference to the 350z that went from stock to the aftermarket set up
and this little titbit of info that also reinforces what i have always said

to summarise what i have always said (and illustrated in my test) - there is an improvement to be gained by installing the bbk and then a further improvement to be gained by putting decent rubber on.

at the end of the day, i've been quite happy with the bbk upgrade that has was tailored and set up for the specifically RA - guess it's not for everyone but each to their own

 

How are you reaching that conclusion based on the data? The data shows that the BBK helps with cooling but makes little to no significant difference in terms of first time stopping distance. The factory track model had a best stopping distance of 114.3 feet from 60 MPH compared to the 113,112 and 111 ft of the modified cars. Even with a full front and rear brake upgrade, the car only stopped 3 feet faster. That's not significant, that represents a 3% difference. Even if we go to the far extreme, the factory track model stopped from 100 MPH in 328 ft while the modified cars achieved this in 326 ft. Wow, a 2 ft difference from 100 MPH, again not a significant change. That represents a less than 1% improvement. The data directly contradicts the claim you are trying to make.
The test shows that there is no significant improvement to be gained by installing a BBK if the reason for doing it is stopping distance under street driving conditions.

 

Holy crap, that table just blew my mind. I guess I must have missed the part where the $2,000 Brembo big brake option decreased total stopping distance by a whopping 2 feet (which is as Amby stated less than a 5% difference AT MOST). But yeah, what a difference.

What I did find interesting is the thermal effect that larger rotors have. The differences in heat between the various brake setups are astronomical. That, in my mind, justifies the expense, if and only if you intend to use them for Auto-X, etc.

 

I can't beleive there is still debate going on over this after someone has actually done real world testing. Granted there is not scientific evidence on what part (or parts) of the BBK made the most difference, but the fact is that it did make a difference.

Wow, the table states 60 - 0 difference (over standard setup) only had a max 5 foot better stopping distance. Not a great deal, BUT if that extra 5 feet is the difference between writing my car off or not, OR EVEN WORSE running someone over and potentially killing them, then money well spent IMO.

We can all argue till we're black and blue, at the end of the day (regardless of actual measurements), the BBK does make a slight improvement in braking over the standard brakes. Weather this is enough for you to justify shelling our the cash for it or not IS ENTIRELY YOUR DECISION!!!!!! Some people like the slightly increased safety factor, others don't really care. It's your decision, but please stop trying to say they make no difference at all, when Billyboy's test proved it did on his car, and all the data you are posting also confirms there is a slight benefit.

Again, weather or not this benefit is enough for you to justify the BBK upgrade or not is your choice. If you don't like it, then DON'T get it. If you do like it, then DO get it.

 

How do we know it made a difference when there is no scientific evidence to support it? This is the equivalent of someone installing a muffler and claiming they did rigorous testing by racing their friend's cars. If they have no dyno to support their claims, it's not an accepted fact.
5 ft is not statistically significant, do you understand that concept? You can get a greater than 5 ft difference with slight changes in reaction time, asphalt conditions, tire conditions, tire pressures, etc., it is not proof of anything. There will always be a certain degree of variability in any experiment, hence why people spend so much time and money doing statistical analyzes on their results. 5 feet is absolutely nothing to rave about and means nothing.
To further expand this point, imagine this situation.
You're trying to decide whether the coin you have is authentic or whether it's been designed by a very crafty person for the purposes of swindling people out of their money. You decide to flip the coin 100 times. After doing this, you get heads 55 times and tails 45 times. Is this proof that the coin has been tampered with? No, while probability states that you have a 50:50 chance each time, it rarely works out to a perfect 50:50.
If you honestly think that spending thousands of dollars to come up 5 feet shorter, which isn't significant at all, is worth it, you have far too much money and not enough sense.
Yes it is ultimately your decision but don't try to rationalize it in the name of better stopping distances when the data goes directly against that assertion.

 

Yes yes AMBY. Now you're debating the evidence YOU'VE POSTED!!!!!

Look at the table. ALL distances are BEST STOPPING DISTANCES not AVERAGE STOPPING DIFFERENCES. At BEST in their tests the MAXIMUM stopping difference was 5ft. I agree, not a great deal, but alot can happen in 5ft.

As I said, if you don't want it, THEN DON'T F**KING GET IT!!!!!!!!!!!!! If others want to get it, THEN IT'S THEIR RIGHT AND THEIR CHOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What the hell are you talking about? I looked at the data again and the 5 feet is between the bone stock, performance 350Z and the modified 350Z, which had better tires on it. You mean to tell me that tires make a difference? Say it isn't so . The difference between the base car and the modified car with the same tires was 3.5 feet, the difference between the track model and the same modified car was 2 feet, neither is significant as they represent a 2-3% variation. If you look at the stops from 100 MPH, the maximum difference is 7.6 ft or 2%, again not significant. Hell, the difference between the track model and the modified car is only 2 ft, whether it be from 60 MPH or 100 MPH, which is not significant.
If you look at the other link, the results are even worse. The stock car actually outperforms the modified setup or is extremely close, within a few feet.
Sure it is their choice but don't try to rationalize it as a way of improving braking when it's not.

 

Please tell me where I said the better tyres make no difference???????? WTF.

What it comes down to is:

1. BBK vs Standard brakes with standard tyres= Slight improvement
2. BBK with better tyres vs BBK with standard tyres = Slight improvement again
3. BBK with better tyres vs standard brakes with standard tyres= Much better improvement

So, are BBK better than stock? Yes.
Are they a massive improvement over stock? No.
Will they stop you faster than stock (weather it be 1ft or 100ft)? Yes.
Are they value for money? No.
Should you get them if you have no intention of tuning your car? No.
Should you get them if you have no intention of puting your car on a track? No.
Should you get them if you tune your car? Your choce.
Should you get them if you track your car? Probably.
Should you give a rats *** if you get them and someone doesn't agree with you for doing so? NO.
If you want them and have the spare cash to get them, should you get them? YOUR DECISION.

 

I do not know how many more times I can see this without having a dim view of humanity. The data does not support what you are saying, in fact there is no data to support your ascertain that a BBK makes any significant difference to braking distance. What has been proven is that tires do.
Once again, if you want a BBK, go for it but don't try to rationalize it as an attempt to lower on street stopping distance.

 

Do you have any evidence of similar testing being done ON A RALLIART?????

Basically all you keep referring to is tests done on other cars. I'm sure a BBK on a Porsche 911 will give even less improvement than it did on the 350z, but that doesn't mean that all cars perform the same, or that all braking performances are the same.

The most relevent thing in this thread is Billyboy's tests ON A RALLIART. Even though he didn't provide measurements for his findings, he did say that his braking tests were all done:

- On the same car
- On the same road
- With the same weather condidtions
- From the same point
- Multiple times to confirm findings

Basically, unless you can provide evidence from testing ON A RALLIART, all of what you're saying really holds less merit than what Billyboy has said.

So please, enlighten us with tests ON A RALLIART to support what you are saying about braking upgrades ON A RALLIART.

 

I don't see any tests being done on a Ralliart period . So far all we have is one person's qualitative analysis, no numbers, no nothing. Moreover, do you honestly think that fundamental braking physics changes car to car? I guess we should just abandon all the laws in favor of case by case testing with all individual cars under all weather conditions, on all roads, from all different points . Man, Newton is going to be pissed.

 

No fundamental physics does not change, braking performance DOES change car - car. Otherwise you're trying to tell me that your car brakes from 60 - 0 as fast as a F1 car????

I say again, please provide data from tests done ON A RALLIART!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you can't, then why attempt to disprove Billyboy.........

 

****, this is getting ridiculous. When did I say "braking performance"? I explicitly stated, braking physics. That is what you are arguing against. Did you not learn anything from the links I've provided here and in other threads? In two separate tests on two separate cars under two separate conditions, a BBK did not make a significant difference in braking performance. This is due to fundamental braking physics. The limiting factor is almost always the tires. If you can engage the ABS, indicating you are locking up the tires, you are exceeding the braking torque that the tires can handle, thus increasing the amount of torque the brakes can generate is useless. This is why the two tests I provided had the results they did.

 

I agree, this is getting ridiculous. I'm still not seeing any data from a Ralliart to hold up your argument.

What I'm saying is that whilst a BBK may not make a massive difference on a 350z, how do you know that it won't stop you 60 - 0 10ft quicker (or 1ft quicker) on a Ralliart? You don't.........

Hopefully someone can give you measurements next time they test the braking difference, but for now, all we have to go on is the results of someones testing without the measurements to back it up. At least they were able to test it which is more than I can say for others.