Rustling Crows

[QSHIPQ at aol.com]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Following this with tongue firmly in cheek, I'm confused, but not about
G60's.  I haven't had the failures alluded to wrt Big Reds with "thin" rotors
(again, let me state, I use only 993tt with 335x32mm rotors - but will
"service" whatever shows up).  I can state, that the G60 setup has more
failure potential and actual failures than any Big Red/2mm argument.  Ever
notice on the STOCK G60 pad from the dealer, how quickly you get the pad
indicator light vs actual pad.  Ever wonder why?

In terms of "risk" and it's management, maybe what would be more relevent to
this discussion (and maybe add credence to MW's posts, maybe punting it all),
would be for some enterprising chap to measure the same "critical" measures
MW did on Big Reds in relation to the G60 vs pad/piston/dust seal = failure.
It's my bet that "risk" and it's aversion applies more to what audi delivered
from the factory, than the 2mm we are nitting here.

Just a thought as I think about the number of times I've had to "pull and
plug" the pad wear indicator on various audis.

SJ


In a message dated 11/7/01 10:15:55 PM Central Standard Time,
fjamoroso at webtv.net writes:

BTW, the 996tt caliper is designed for a 330 x 34 rotor, and not a 32
rotor.

That being said, Movit offers TUV approved kits that run said 996tt
monobloc over the 993tt 322 x 32 rotor.

Besides, how can one opine about 2 mm of wear on the rotor without
taking into account pad wear? I'd understand if the pads were to the
backing plates, but still.

Frank at s-cars.org