Myth Busting: Crossdrilled Rotors

This forum is for Discussion on Suspension issues.
User avatar
Nd4SpdSe
Senior Member
Posts: 11212
Joined: May 25th, 2002, 2:01 am
Location: Québec City, Quebec, Canada
Contact:

Myth Busting: Crossdrilled Rotors

Post by Nd4SpdSe »

Taken from a sticky on Celicatech
Thanks to "But she looked 18 officer" from idforums.net for posting the information
(Taken from a sticky at Celicatech)
Since I know folks will be eventually asking about this I figured it
would be better to head off this disaster before it gets ugly. Here is
the response I made to a different forum a few months ago after
collecting some information:

===========
First, lets get some physics. Tell me how a heatsink with less mass will
cool better? You do realize that a brake rotor acts as a large heatsink
to transfer heat from the brake pads to the rotor. The heat generated
from pads has to go somewhere and so it transfers to the rotor and
caliper.

Porsche claims: "Discs are cross-drilled to enhance braking in the wet.
The brakes respond faster because the water vapour pressure that builds
up during braking can be released more easily."
They have said nothing about enhancing normal braking circumstances and
the larger diameter rotors probably make up for the lack of material
present in a smaller cross drilled rotor.

From Wilwood's website:

Q: Why are some rotors drilled or slotted?
A: Rotors are drilled to reduce rotating weight, an issue near and dear
to racers searching for ways to minimize unsprung weight. Drilling
diminishes a rotor's durability and cooling capacity.
Slots or grooves in rotor faces are partly a carryover from the days of
asbestos pads. Asbestos and other organic pads were prone to "glazing"
and the slots tended to help "scrape or de-glaze" them. Drilling and
slotting rotors has become popular in street applications for their pure
aesthetic value. Wilwood has a large selection of drilled and slotted
rotors for a wide range of applications
As for the Porsche rotors..
1) The holes are cast in giving a dense boundary layer-type crystalline
grain structure around the hole at the microscopic level as opposed to
drilling which cuts holes in the existing grain pattern leaving open
endgrains, etc, just begging for cracks.
2) The holes are only 1/2 the diameter of the holes in most drilled
rotors. This reduces the stress concentration factor due to hole
interaction which is a function (not linear) of hole diameters and the
distance between them.
3) Since the holes are only 1/2 as big they remove only 1/4 as much
surface area and mass from the rotor faces as a larger hole. This does a
couple of things:
It increases effective pad area compared with larger holes. The larger
the pad area the cooler they will run, all else being equal. If the same
amount of heat is generated over a larger surface area it will result in
a lower temperature for both surfaces.
It increases the mass the rotor has to absorb heat with. If the same
amount of heat is put into a rotor with a larger mass, it will result in
a lower temperature.
3) The holes are placed along the vanes, actually cutting into them
giving the vane a "half moon" cut along its width. You can see t]hat
here:
Image

This does a couple of things:
First, it greatly increases the surface area of the vanes which allows
the entire rotors to run cooler which helps prevent cracks by itself.

Second, it effectively stops cracking on that side of the hole which
makes it very difficult to get "hole to hole" cracks that go all the way
through the face rotor (you'll get tiny surface "spider cracks" on any
rotor, blank included if you look hard enough).

That's why Porsche rotors are the only "crossdrilled" rotors I would
ever consider putting on my car.

BTW, many of the above features are not present in older Porsche brakes.
The above is for "Big Reds" and newer.

This is quite different from the standard drilled rotors you get from
brembo/kvr/powerslot/"insert random ricer parts brand name here" brake
rotors.

Further proof of the uselessness of cross drilled rotors are found here:
http://www.teamscr.com/rotors.htm



Crossdrilling your rotors might look neat, but what is it really
doing for you? Well, unless your car is using brake pads from the 40’s
and 50’s, not a whole lot. Rotors were first ‘drilled’ because early
brake pad materials gave off gasses when heated to racing temperatures –
a process known as ‘gassing out’. These gasses then formed a thin layer
between the brake pad face and the rotor, acting as a lubricant and

effectively lowering the coefficient of friction. The holes were
implemented to give the gasses ‘somewhere to go’. It was an effective
solution, but today’s friction materials do not exhibit the same gassing
out phenomenon as the early pads.

For this reason, the holes have carried over more as a design feature
than a performance feature. Contrary to popular belief they don’t lower
temperatures (in fact, by removing weight from the rotor, the
temperatures can actually increase a little), they create stress risers
allowing the rotor to crack sooner, and make a mess of brake pads – sort
of like a cheese grater rubbing against them at every stop. (Want more
evidence? Look at NASCAR or F1. You would think that if drilling holes
in the rotor was the hot ticket, these teams would be doing it.)

The one glaring exception here is in the rare situation where the rotors
are so oversized (look at any performance motorcycle or lighter formula
car) that the rotors are drilled like Swiss cheese. While the issues of
stress risers and brake pad wear are still present, drilling is used to
reduce the mass of the parts in spite of these concerns. Remember –
nothing comes for free. If these teams switched to non-drilled rotors,
they would see lower operating temperatures and longer brake pad life –
at the expense of higher weight. It’s all about trade-offs.


From Stoptech

Which is better, slotted or drilled rotors?
StopTech provides rotors slotted, drilled or plain. For most performance
applications slotted is the preferred choice. Slotting helps wipe away
debris from between the pad and rotor as well as increasing the "bite"
characteristics of the pad. A drilled rotor provides the same type of
benefit, but is more susceptible to cracking under severe usage. Many
customers prefer the look of a drilled rotor and for street and
occasional light duty track use they will work fine. For more severe
applications, we recommend slotted rotors.


That almost sounds like an excuse to use cross drilled rotors, and for
your street car which probably is never driven on the track, the drilled
rotors are fine, but as Stoptech states, they will crack and are not
good for severe applications.

From Baer:

"What are the benefits to Crossdrilling, Slotting, and
Zinc-Washing my rotors?

In years past, crossdrilling and/or Slotting the rotor for racing
purposes was beneficial by providing a way to expel the gasses created
when the bonding agents employed to manufacture the pads...However, with
today’s race pad technology, ‘outgassing’ is no longer much of a
concern...Slotted surfaces are what Baer recommends for track only use.
Slotted only rotors are offered as an option for any of Baer’s
offerings."

Then from Grassroots Motorsports:
"Crossdrilling your rotors might look neat, but what is it really
doing for you? Well, unless your car is using brake pads from the '40s
and 50s, not a whole lot. Rotors were first drilled because early brake
pad materials gave off gasses when heated to racing temperatures, a
process known as "gassing out." ...It was an effective solution, but
today's friction materials do not exhibit the some gassing out
phenomenon as the early pads. Contrary to popular belief, they don't
lower temperatures. (In fact, by removing weight from the rotor, they
can actually cause temperatures to increase a little.) These holes
create stress risers that allow the rotor to crack sooner, and make a
mess of brake pads--sort of like a cheese grater rubbing against them at
every stop. Want more evidence? Look at NASCAR or F1. You would think
that if drilling holes in the rotor was the hot ticket, these teams
would be doing it...Slotting rotors, on the other hand, might be a
consideration if your sanctioning body allows for it. Cutting thin slots across the face of the rotor can actually help to clean the face of the
brake pads over time, helping to reduce the glazing often found during
high-speed use which can lower the coefficient of friction. While there
may still be a small concern over creating stress risers in the face of
the rotor, if the slots are shallow and cut properly, the trade-off
appears to be worth the risk. (Have you looked at a NASCAR rotor
lately?)

And then, let's check out what was said on the aforementioned Altima
thread (Long thread at altimas.net that was deleted by that server. it
is hosted http://corner-carvers.com/altimathread.php.html)


Here is how it works. The friction between the pad and rotor is
what causes you to stop. This friction converts your forward energy into
heat (remember Einstein: Energy is neither created nor destroyed, it is
converted). Now that heat is a bad thing. Yes it is bad for the rotors
but it is a lot worse for the pads. A warped rotor will still stop the
car - it will just feel like s---. Overheated pads however WILL NOT stop
the car. It is here where the rotors secondary responsibility comes in.
Its job now is to DISSIPATE the heat away from the pads and DISPERSE it
through itself. Notice that DISSIPATE and DISPERSE are interchangeable?
Once the heat is removed from the pad/surface area it is then removed.
Notice where the removal falls on the list of duties? That's right -
number 3. Here is the list again. Memorize it because I will be using it
a lot in this post:

#1 Maintains a coefficient of friction with the pad to slow the forward
inertia of the vehicle

#2 DISSIPATE the heat

#3 REMOVE the heat from the brake system

Let's look more in-depth at each step now shall we? No? Too bad assclown
we are doing it anyway.

#1 Maintains a coefficient of friction with the pad to slow the
forward inertia of the vehicle:
This one is pretty simple and self-explanatory. The rotor's surface is
where the pads contact and generate friction to slow the vehicle down.
Since it is this friction that causes the conversion of forward
acceleration into deceleration (negative acceleration if you want) you
ideally want as much as possible right? The more friction you have the
better your stopping will be. This is reason #1 why BIGGER brakes are
the best way to improve a vehicle's stopping ability. More surface area
on the pad and the rotor = more friction = better stopping. Does that
make sense Ace? Good. Let's move on.

#2 DISSIPATE The Heat:
Let's assume for a second that the vehicle in question is running with
Hawk (Seiji) (Seiji) (Seiji) Blue pads on it. The brand doesn't really matter but that is what I am using as my example. They have an operating range of 400 degrees to 1100 degrees. Once they exceed that 1100 degree mark they fade from overheating. The pad material gets too soft to work effectively - glazing occurs. This means that a layer of crude glass forms on the surface of the pad. As we all know glass is very smooth and very hard. It doesn't have a very high coefficient of friction. This is bad - especially when I am coming down the back straight at VIR at 125MPH. Lucky for us the rotor has a job to do here as well. The rotor, by way of thermal tranfer DISSIPATES the heat throughout itself. This
DISSIPATION lessens the amount of heat at the contact area because it is
diluted throughout the whole rotor. The bigger the rotor the better here
as well. The more metal it has the more metal the heat can be diluted
into. Make sense? This isn't rocket science here d00d.

#3 REMOVE the heat from the brake system:
Now comes your favorite part of the process. This is what you thought
DISSIPATION was. It is ok. I will allow you to be wrong. This is the
step where the rotor takes the heat it DISSIPATED from the pads and gets
rid of it for good. How does it do this? By radiating it to the surface
- either the faces or inside the veins. It is here where cool air
interacts with the hot metal to cool it off and remove the heat. Once
again there is a reoccuring theme of "the bigger the better" here. The
bigger the rotor, the more surface area it will have which means more
contact with the cooling air surrounding it. Got it? Good.
Now let's look at why cross-drilling is a bad idea.
First - as we have already established, cross-drilling was never done to
aid in cooling. Its purpose was to remove the worn away pad material so
that the surfaces remained clean. As we all know this doesn't have much
of a purpose nowadays.

Next - In terms of cooling: Yes - x-drilling does create more areas for
air to go through but remember - this is step 3 on the list of tasks.
Let's look at how this affects steps 1 and 2. The drilling of the rotor
removes material from the unit. This removal means less surface area for
generating surface friction as well as less material to accept the
DISSIPATED heat that was generated by the friction. Now because of this
I want to optimize step one and 2 since those are the immediate needs.
If it takes longer for the rotor to get rid of the heat it is ok. You
will have a straight at some point where you can rest the brakes and let
your cooling ducts do their job. My PRIMARY concern is making sure that
my car slows down at the end of the straight. This means that the rotor
needs to have as much surface as possible to generate as much friction
as possible and it needs to DISSIPATE the resulting heat AWAY from the
pads as quick as possible so they continue to work. In both cases
x-drilling does nothing to help the cause.

Now let's talk about strength - and how x-drilled rotors lack it. This
one is simple. Explain again just how drilling away material/structure
from a CAST product DOES NOT weaken it? Since you are obviously a man of great knowledge and experience surely you have seen what can happen to a x-drilled rotor on track right? Yes it can happen to a non-drilled rotor as well but the odds are in your favor when pimpin' bling-bling drilled y0! Since you are also an expert on thermodynamics why not explain to the group what happens to a cast iron molecule when it is overheated. I will give you a little hint - the covalence bonds weaken. These bonds are what hold the molecules together boys and girls. You do the math - it adds up to fractures.

So why don't race teams use them if they are so much better?
Consistency? Hmmmm . . . no. I am gonna go with the real reason her
chodeboy. It is because of several factors actually. They are as follows
but in no particular order:
- Less usable surface area for generating friction
- Less material to DISSIPATE the heat away from the pads
- Less reliable and they are a safety risk because of fatigue and stress
resulting from the reduced material

And what are the benefits? Removal of particulate matter and enhanced
heat removal. I gotta tell ya - it is a tough choice but I think I am
going to stick with the safe, reliable, effective-for-my-stopping needs
solution Tex.

Thank you, please drive through.

======================

So basically, buy them if you think they look cool, but not if you think
this will be an acceptable performance upgrade.
1992 Mazda Mx-3 GSR - 2.5L KLZE : Award Winning Show Car & Race Car ['02-'09] (Retired)
2004 Mazda RX-8 GT - Renesis Wankel : LS3 Coils, BHR Mid-Pipe + Falken RT-615K 245/40r18
2011 Mazda Mazda2 GS - 1.5L Manual : Yozora Edition (1 of 500)
2003 Nissan Xterra SE - 4x4 Supercharged : 2" Body Lift, 4" Suspension Lift & 33" MTR Kevlar
2001 Nissan Frontier SE - The Frontrailer : Expedition/Off-Road Trailer Project
User avatar
atlantamx3
Supporting Member
Posts: 2888
Joined: June 2nd, 2001, 2:01 am
Location: Kennesaw, Ga, USA
Contact:

Post by atlantamx3 »

Great article... :D
~Perry
Please visit
http://www.mx3-atlanta.com
Image
Gro Harlem
Senior Member
Posts: 3391
Joined: November 30th, 2001, 2:01 am
Location: Stuttgart, Deutschland
Contact:

Post by Gro Harlem »

pwnd.....somthing i learned is "crossdrilled doesn't reduce heat"

i already first-hand knew how crappy x-drilleds were. I still need to take pics of my old ones and pads, but that cheese-grating comparison is pretty much dead on...had HUGE grooves in the rotors & pads, lots of chips near the holes of rotor material, the list goes on.

they are for aesthetics only............so if you want to pay 2-4 times more to have holes drilled in your rotors, so be it.

me personally likes the way the car braks now that i have new brembo blanks & new pads :) it ownz0rs
Noble Green Metallic 93' GS Hybrid, 91' 1.8 323
DONATE TO MX-3.COM
slowmx3
Regular Member
Posts: 161
Joined: August 19th, 2005, 1:40 am

Post by slowmx3 »

i've been telling people that for a while now... but nobody ever beleives me.
1992 mx-3, a couple mods, i'm still a n00b
---Don't try and church your car up, MX-3's aren't fast---
User avatar
Casino
Regular Member
Posts: 779
Joined: April 20th, 2002, 2:01 am
Location: Sudbury Ontario Canada / windsor

Post by Casino »

so true yet people dont seem to understand !

less surface area = better cooling ? :? lol

IMO if you want better braking performance make a duct so air hits your brakes and cools them down

the best way to cool brakes is with a couple cool down laps when you at the track 8)
http://www.realtimeperformance.ca

03 miata, formally bottle fed 96 DOHC
bigtime
Regular Member
Posts: 77
Joined: April 1st, 2005, 9:00 am
Location: Perth - Western Australia

Post by bigtime »

do you guys think slotted are a good upgrade ?

I've never liked drilled because I think it makes the rotor weaker & with them sometimes getting very hot..... well uhh ohh !!!
User avatar
Casino
Regular Member
Posts: 779
Joined: April 20th, 2002, 2:01 am
Location: Sudbury Ontario Canada / windsor

Post by Casino »

they will eat your pads, its the same idea as the cross drilled
http://www.realtimeperformance.ca

03 miata, formally bottle fed 96 DOHC
User avatar
Shades
Regular Member
Posts: 944
Joined: February 7th, 2002, 2:01 am
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Contact:

Post by Shades »

For normal street use blanks are preferred.

Slotted are more for your performance (track) use as they wipe the glazing off the pads, and yes you'll go thru more pads faster but you won't have to replace your cracked (cross-drilled) rotors.
Image
JoN - Ex-Automotive Machinist Journeyman/Refrigeration Mechanic Apprentice
1996 Mazda MX-3 RS - Creek Blue Mica

RACING BP fully built with Twin Scroll GT3071R TURBO @ +30psi - Specs and Pictures

"Do it ONCE, do it RIGHT!"
User avatar
mitmaks
Senior Member
Posts: 8704
Joined: September 10th, 2001, 2:01 am
antispam: ~SPAM*SUX~
Location: Spokane, WA
Contact:

Post by mitmaks »

good read
Magnum s/s lines, strut bars, carbon fiber bezel, indiglow gauge, Sony Xplod, inverted c/f hood, SRD lower tie bar '93 GS SE '95 Cobra SVT #2722 '68 Charger R/T 440
http://www.cardomain.com/id/mitmaks
Image
User avatar
jschrauwen
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6052
Joined: September 27th, 2003, 2:01 am
Location: Frankford, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Post by jschrauwen »

I don't think I'll be dissuaded yet from installing my CAD plated Magnum CD rotors. I've had great success with my CD Brembo's on my bike for 16 years, of course propper pad choice is necessary. And seeing a fairly new Porsche pull up beside me yesterday with his oem CD Brembo's, I'd say it's fairly safe to say that I'm not doing myself a disservice. German engineering tends to focus on function rather than fashion. Time will tell in my case though.
'92 GS-ZE - sold, '95 GS - sold, '02 Protege LX - Daughter, '00 Audi A4 2.8 QTip, Ducati TT2
Image
90 JDM RHD 300ZX TT - 572.1 RWHP | 590.0 RWTQ | 21 PSI | Pump gas
User avatar
ManoWar
Regular Member
Posts: 149
Joined: April 14th, 2005, 1:26 am
Location: Ajax Ontario

Post by ManoWar »

dont mean to be flamed over here but don't the holes on the rotors actually channel air through, thus cooling the adjacent area.

If drilled rotors where garbage, then why do all the motorcycles have them?

I warped 2 sets of rotors on the track before i got my brembo's cross drilled. They are working like a charm now. Granted that brembo's steel is of much better quality that that pos mazda.


EDIT: Lol sorry about that now i see that this post is 2 years old!
User avatar
SuperK
Supporting Member
Posts: 3774
Joined: July 27th, 2006, 8:09 pm
Location: Chattanooga, TN

Post by SuperK »

While this is solely my OPINION on the matter, yes, I do agree cross drilled REMOVE heat better than blanks. Article does, as well.

*WARNING* -----ENTERING OPINIONATED AREA----- *WARNING*

OK, lets reword the structure just a bit. Say the rotors' main objective is to get cool. the pads heat the rotors up, air cools them down.

Let's say their cool-down process is their "Regeneration" process
And their heat buildup capacity is their heat "storage"

Rotors on a car are thick. They have a high amount of mass. They also have more mass to stop. This means:
A. The more mass, the more heat is required to stop.
B. Thicker rotors means their heat "storage" is higher. That sudden influx of massive heat has somewhere to go
C. Since the rotors have more mass and also store more heat, it's "regeneration" process is slower and a larger scale.

Now take a motorcycle for example. Completely exposed to the environment, better air flow. their regeneration process is faster
pads aren't placing NEAR as much friction on the rotors, so naturally their operating temperature and their heat storage can be much lower than a car's.
Also, since rotor's are much thinner, they are able to remove heat from the rotors much faster, similar to how a heatsink works, again. Thinner fins, better heat transfer.

So now we have
A. Less mass to stop, lower base temperature on the rotors.
B. Thinners rotors, heat storage is much lower, but yields a higher regeneration.
C. Smaller scale regeneration process means the rotors can complete their jobs quickly.

So I would personally conclude if you cross drilled a motorcycle rotor, the regeneration cycle and the storage cycle run close to the same pace, wher as the storage cycle on a car HAS to be MUCH larger than the regeneration cycle.

Whereas a car needs to store the heat, then rid of it in another instance, like the article said, during that nice straightaway that's coming up.


And I'm glad you revived this old thread, it WAS a very good read, one that is worth reading again, haha! I've not read it before.
Whisper
Regular Member
Posts: 946
Joined: April 13th, 2007, 12:34 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Whisper »

ManoWar wrote:dont mean to be flamed over here but don't the holes on the rotors actually channel air through, thus cooling the adjacent area.
Given the direction the rotor is spinning, most of the air actually skips over the holes, and very little gets into the holes. The fins on the vented rotors actually do a much better job of cooling the rotors, because they suck the air in.
wytbishop
Senior Member
Posts: 5554
Joined: August 25th, 2004, 2:01 am
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Post by wytbishop »

It's late, so I may have been harsh here, but SuperK, your post makes almost no sense at all. I have taken the time to write this not to flame you, but to try to clear this up...as you seem to have misunderstood.
SuperK wrote:While this is solely my OPINION on the matter, yes, I do agree cross drilled REMOVE heat better than blanks. Article does, as well.
The artical states quite clearly, and correctly, several times, that crossdrilling reduces the surface area in contact with the pads and reduces the mass of the rotors, which both in turn reduce it's ability to remove heat from the pads.

SuperK wrote:OK, lets reword the structure just a bit. Say the rotors' main objective is to get cool. the pads heat the rotors up, air cools them down.
Vast over simplification of the complex idea presented by the author of the quoted post...but I'll go with it to make my point.
SuperK wrote: Rotors on a car are thick. They have a high amount of mass. They also have more mass to stop. This means:
A. The more mass, the more heat is required to stop.
B. Thicker rotors means their heat "storage" is higher. That sudden influx of massive heat has somewhere to go
C. Since the rotors have more mass and also store more heat, it's "regeneration" process is slower and a larger scale.
A. your suggestion that the mass of the car's rotor, in comparison to the cars total mass, is significant in any way is well, wrong. The heat generated by the braking system is in response to opposition to the kinetic energy of the entire car. One rotor which is maybe 2lbs heavier than another rotor, contributes negligebly to both the mass of the vehicle and the heat generated by it's brakes.
B. yes a larger mass object has a greater ability to absorb heat. I'm not sure what your trying to say in the second part of that point, but crossdrilling would not offer the rotor any greater ability to shed that heat.
C. yes the larger rotor absorbs more heat from the pads. Crossdrilling effectively reduces the surface area of the rotor in contact with the pads and the air and makes the rotor less massive, both reducing it's ability to absorb and shed the heat.
SuperK wrote: Now take a motorcycle for example. Completely exposed to the environment, better air flow. their regeneration process is faster
pads aren't placing NEAR as much friction on the rotors, so naturally their operating temperature and their heat storage can be much lower than a car's.
Yes a motorcycle's brakes are more exposed to the atmosphere and this is taken advantage of by manufacturers. Yes a motorcycle's braking system has less kinetic enrgy to convert to heat as a result of the overall lower mass of a motorcycle compared to a car. This has nothing to do with the size of the bike's rotor compared to the car's. Yes the bike could get away with less massive rotors as it will never generate as much heat as a car.
SuperK wrote: Also, since rotor's are much thinner, they are able to remove heat from the rotors much faster, similar to how a heatsink works, again. Thinner fins, better heat transfer.
No. Efficiency of thermal heat transfer betweeen the rotor and pad is almost solely affected by the area of contact between the objects not by the thickness of the material to which it is being transferred. Thinner rotors do not remove heat from the pads faster, but they will become heat saturated faster due to their smaller mass. They may be able to shed it to the atmoshpere faster. This has more to do with the greater exposure to the atmosphere than the thickness of the disk.
SuperK wrote: So now we have
A. Less mass to stop, lower base temperature on the rotors.
B. Thinners rotors, heat storage is much lower, but yields a higher regeneration.
C. Smaller scale regeneration process means the rotors can complete their jobs quickly.
A. yes but not because the rotors are less massive, because the bike is less massive.
B. yes less heat energy is being absorbed and subsequently shed by a motorcycle's rotors, but only because less heat is being generated due to the motorcycle's overall lower mass.
C. see A....and B.
SuperK wrote: So I would personally conclude if you cross drilled a motorcycle rotor, the regeneration cycle and the storage cycle run close to the same pace, wher as the storage cycle on a car HAS to be MUCH larger than the regeneration cycle.
You'd be wrong...the optimum braking performance, in any vehicle, would be achieved when every Joule of heat energy generated by the friction between the pad and rotor was efficiently and totally absorbed by the rotor and then radiated to the atmosphere before that portion of the rotor came in contact with the pads again. This is clearly not possible, on any vehicle, so braking systems are designed so that the rotor, under maximum braking, can absorb and radiate away enough heat energy to keep the overall system below the maximum operating temperature of the pads.

It is always true that a more massive object has a high capacity to absorb energy. It is always true that contact area is the greatest factor in the efficiency of thermal transfer from pad to rotor. In the case of thermal transfer from rotor to air the mechanism is more complex as it involves radiation and convection as well, however contact area plays largely and it's reduction is always detrimental. It is always true that putting holes in the rotor reduces it's contact area with both the pads and the air.

I'm not trying to be a prick here SuperK, but it's clear from your post that you don't understand the physics of this issue. Crossdrilling the rotors of any braking system only ever accomplishes 3 things. It makes them less massive. It reduces their effective surface area with the air and their contact surface area with the pad. It makes them look cool.

The first 2 are detrimental to braking performance, on a mathmatical level, in all cases. PERIOD. The upside of the third often outweighs the downside of the first 2 but will never improve braking...in terms of physics anyway.
94' RS/GS/MS/CF Monster Turbo...coming soon.
93' GS SE, the Black Beast, the former love of my life...soon to be gutted and crushed.
94' GS, black on black, now in several small pieces...and one large crushed piece.
2007 Mazda3 GT Sport --- super fun
2004 Honda RC51 --- Lost forever to some theavin' bastard
My Worklog
My feedback thread
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
User avatar
Mooneggs
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6128
Joined: August 10th, 2005, 10:08 pm
antispam: ~SPAM*SUX~
Location: Hillsboro, OR
Contact:

Post by Mooneggs »

I've read everything and I agree... however why do I see so many cross drilled rotors on newer upscale cars? do they all have the same process as Porsche?
Post Reply

Return to “Suspension/Brakes/Wheels/Tires”