Yes pads will make more a difference than rotors but having drilled/slotted rotors doesn't mean you can't tow.
It means you're at a greater risk for cracking your rotor.
Well, see that's a opinion. Not saying anything bad about the other brands, but stating Wilwood sucks by looking at them is not a very much of a case.
I'm stating Wilwood sucks because they don't design good brakes. There's a lot of technical reasons why that's the case, and most of them relate to complex, dynamic loading with thermal transitions added in. Not exactly something that's easy to have a conversation about on an internet forum... I can try to explain some of it if you're really interested, but it's probably a subject for another thread.
Alternatively, you can just look at what the pros use. None of them that I've ever seen use Wilwood.
So, what your saying is drilled/slotted rotors sell well. Umm I guess all your post is just one guys opinion. Because it seems cracked rotors is not that big of a problem.
Sure, they sell well because people mistakenly think they're some sort of huge improvement.
I said you sound like one with that comment. Didn't say you are one. READ!!!!
Vette parts over priced to begin with so I guess saving $200 means something when owning a Vette
I AM a cheap ass lol. If there's a better value out there, I'd rather have that.
Indeed they are, at least for some stuff. The "Vette Tax" as it's called. Some of the stuff though, like engine parts, are SUPER cheap because it's the LS motor. Like an entire cam swap can be done for like $800 with new springs, pushrods, etc.
Looks like cool vane design, but you can buy drilled Z06 rotors for $15 on rockauto right. Plus there's many under $100..
Yea, the same rotors that are prone to cracking all the time... It's a well documented issue on the Corvette forums. People HATE the OEM rotors.
Additionally, they have curved vanes, but the same rotor is used on the left as on the right. So consequently one is spinning the correct way and the other is spinning the wrong way, thus reducing the cooling on one side.
And my comparison was based on two rotors that are identical besides the slots. Comparing a high performance rotor with some crappy OEM ripoff isn't exactly apples to apples...
Well you quoted me, maybe you should have stated that in your first post?lol
Sorry, I didn't think you'd complain about me making myself clear on something lol...
Because you said right? Again your opinion.
Not because I said so lol. I gave plenty of reasons, i.e. things that are not my opinion and can be supported by facts.
"They offer no distinct advantage.
There's no additional cooling.
They offer no substantial improvement in bite with street brake pads, especially when compared to slotted rotors.
They're more expensive.
They break easier."
I believe I have made a strong case with supporting evidence for EACH of these points.
Then why do manufacturers keep putting them on cars?
Because people mistakenly think that they're better... Exactly as I said above.
I'm not sure if there's any data on this, but have the holes for air to pass through makes it possible. I doubt 100* or something but to me it would do something.
Yes and no.
As you know, the air from brake ducts goes on the inside of the rotor and out through the vanes. The spinning of the rotor contributes to that with the centrifugal force, same as a turbo. Having an exit hole perpendicular to the flow isn't going to effect it very much, especially as most of those holes are fairly small and quickly become caked up with brake dust.
The problem is that these holes tend to be cooled slightly faster by the air moving through the vanes because they have more exposed surface area. This creates cool spots and is part of the reason drilled rotors are prone to cracking. It's explained in that Essex article I posted.
No one ever claimed that. I understand pad compound designates that. But slots to keep the pads clean.
Keep the pads clean? From what exactly?
As I stated, unless you're using a SERIOUS race brake pad compound, you'll never create enough dust to cause any issues. People use semi race compounds with flat rotors all the time and don't have any issues with the dust.
Way back when brake pads produced a ton of gas several racing series started using drilled rotors to evacuate said gas. This is when you see drilled rotors in F1. Nowadays, that gas is a non issue, so evacuating it away from the brake rotor face is also a non issue, thus eliminating the needs and benefits of a drilled rotor.
Not always. Look at those Z06 rotors
See my point above.... Those rotors are TERRIBLE and not comparable to the rotors I linked. If you want to make a meaningful comparison, fine two rotors that are otherwise identical besides the drills or slots. I've yet to see a set where the drilled and/or slotted rotors are cheaper. I'd love to see you dig one up. I already posted evidence to support my statement.
That's a vague statement. lol Do you mean BRAKE? lol
No, I mean BREAK, as in to smash, split, or divide into parts violently; reduce to pieces or fragments:
Drilled rotors will always break easier than a solid rotor with all other things being constant. Period. There are no exceptions to this. This is science, not opinion. Those holes are stress risers, both for the physical force and for the thermal expansion and loading.
Same can be said for you. I would have a easier time agreeing with if I haven't ran drilled/slotted rotors for over 15 years with no problem.
You should now can be learned on the internet.
Again, using your personal experience as proof of an argument of a trend is an anecdotal logical fallacy. You're using "a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence."
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal