[s-cars] Re: S-CAR-List digest, Vol 1 #1925 - 11 msgs

[Larry C. Leung]

Also, note, if you have a stiffer suspension set-up, you have greater
rates of
weight transfer, so the rears will unload sooner than with a stock
set-up,
meaning more aggressive rear brakes will not have much real
effectiveness.
As for looks, I'd totally agree with Scott.

LL - NY


> From: QSHIPQ at aol.com
> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 08:16:46 EDT
> Subject: Re: [s-cars] Brake Pedal to the floor w/ ECS Stage II and
> Rear Slotted
> To: Keith.Maddock at TRW.COM, s-car-list at audifans.com,
>         cpayne at bconnected.com, richard at tanimuras.com
>
> Yup, I'm with you and Leigh on this Keith.  If you believe the audi
> SAE
> articles, the front heavy quattros weight shift under maximum
> braking of 80%f/20%r
> pretty much model wide (and in fact, the S car is one of the worst in
> this
> respect).  Which means that if you took a set of stock brakes, the
> front 2 brake
> are handling 3080lbs of load, and the rears are handling 720lbs of
> load.  The
> stock rears are plenty for that, especially if you consider that a
> wheel/tire
> upgrade (mit big reds) means even more weight shift forward.
>
> I say put the most agressive pad in the rear (especially the 4
> channel abs
> cars), and cad plate the rotor to keep the fins clean longer, and
> call it good.
> Rear BR may have you in the looks department, but certainly in terms
> of
> performance, I really doubt any better measures would result from
> what's already on
> the car.  IME with big rears on the type 44tq with locking diff, you
> get
> better rear life and "feel" because of the fixed caliper
> arrangement, but that's
> about it.
>
> No one will look better rolling down the road tho, Hap!
>
> Scott Justusson
>
>
>