Audi R8 Forums banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am asking cause in a few magazines R8 gets a 60-0 braking in 115ft, where the new M3 got 100ft at the same test. I also saw magazines doing the 60-0 for the R8 at 103ft. The 911T gets also about 100ft. The new 135i gets 109ft.

Is it more like 115ft, or 103ft? And why is the M3 better? I suppose any car can lock the wheels, the power in the brakes is enough for that even in a Honda Civic, so it has to be about something else: tires, chassis? Are the tires in the M3 better than? Or is just cause the front tires are wider in the M3 (245) than in the R8(235). Why is Audi letting this slide? The brakes are extremelly important in a car, especially when it's considered an supercar/exotic.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,085 Posts
I don't get it - the r8's brakes are excellent, certainly far better than the bmw m6 or e46 m3 I had before it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,085 Posts
I don't think I'll be losing sleep over 3ft - the r8's brakes are excellent on the road which is what matters to me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,085 Posts
plus if you're really concerned you could always wait and spec the ceramic brakes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
I wouldn't lose sleep over this - variability across tests will be mainly down to the condition of tyres. Braking from 60 as near as dammit as a 997TT should be good enough - Porsche always has braking licked (and is one of the pluses of the 911's weight distribution). Previous BM's, including the M3 CSL, sucked - glad to see they have got it right for once! FWIW, I also remember reading that BMW supplied some M3 press cars for track use with track spec pads (Pagid RS15's IIRC).

Most people throw money at uprating brakes for no good reason. The main good reason for upgrading is repeatability - and especially under track conditions. Then almost every issue with braking is down to managing heat within the system - which is the interplay of pad size and material, calliper size, disk size and material, fluid and cooling. The more a system is track specced, the less road friendly (and less safe) it is.

I would be astonished if the R8's brakes are anything other than awesome for road use, OK for light track use, and a little under-cooked for hard track use. That is the setup 99% of owners want 99% of the time.

I'll let you know when I get mine (August), and have it out on track :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
146 Posts
They will be incredible for track work - the thermal capacity is phenomenal -

Just do not use the soft, quiet, short-wearing OEM pads --- 2.5 days and they ARE DONE -
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
718 Posts
Hi Pampas,

Personally, I am not bothered that the M3 or 911 might stop a few feet quicker. I echo RANDOMBLOKES view.

The brakes are excellent.

I have given it close to the ultimate test. Whilst doing a track day for a magazine, I had mine on a straight going for top speed. Since there is a wall at the end of the straight this resulted in heavy braking at the end of the run. I braked heavily on several occassions from 165 and 170 mph, bring the car to a stop.

I can assure you that the braking abilities are exceptional, there is nothing inferior or lacking about them !!!!! I have standard brakes and they work well hot or cold.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
146 Posts
A ONE STOP TEST means next to zip - how can said car stand up to LAPS?
Hard LAPS?

Thermal capacity, good overall design, and appropriate pads.

P.S. Hear that BMW fitted their test cars with Pagids for magazine tests? :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
P.S. Hear that BMW fitted their test cars with Pagids for magazine tests? :rolleyes:
Appreciate you expertise and active paricipation on brakes topics but aren't you hard selling a little too much?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
146 Posts
Nope. Just stating the facts.

I think it's ridiculous that they fit performance pads for magazine tests.
Certainly doesn't represent what the consumer buys -
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
I am asking cause in a few magazines R8 gets a 60-0 braking in 115ft, where the new M3 got 100ft at the same test. I also saw magazines doing the 60-0 for the R8 at 103ft. The 911T gets also about 100ft. The new 135i gets 109ft.

Is it more like 115ft, or 103ft? And why is the M3 better? I suppose any car can lock the wheels, the power in the brakes is enough for that even in a Honda Civic, so it has to be about something else: tires, chassis? Are the tires in the M3 better than? Or is just cause the front tires are wider in the M3 (245) than in the R8(235). Why is Audi letting this slide? The brakes are extremelly important in a car, especially when it's considered an supercar/exotic.
Not the best place to start, or STOP as the case may be, a 'relative' discussion of brakes, BFWIW the August, '08 issue of Car & Driver has an article on "... the difference between a good set of brakes and an inferior one ..." tiled The Power to Stop. The editors have taken 11 different cars that they have attempted to catagorize into 3 "types", i.e. (1) mainstream sedans; (2) luxury SUV; and (3) performance cars,put through a series of 100 to 0 mph panic stops and come up with some kind of 'relative' assessment of brake worthyness. **

Unfortunately IMO the article isn't really able to account for OEM equipment variables such as brake pad &/or brake fluid &/or tire varriations, but ..... it's a discusion starting point in any event.

Worrying about different car magazine 60-0 stoping distances varriations of 3-4 or even 10 feet or more without any idea or control for things such as tire type, pressures, weather conditions at the time, possible tarmac differences or even something as simple as whether the car's brakes have ever been properly bedded to the rotors is magnitudes of illusory bench racing well beyond the more typical focus on 0 to 60 & 1/4tr mile accelleration feats of daring do. Not worth much effort.

Based soley on personal experience to date, the R8's got a pretty phenominal set of binders right out of the box. Other than Porsche, I've not come across anything else that's been able to do both street (low temp range) and moderate to heavy track on stock pads and fluid as well as the R8 has so far. That said, the car goes into the dealership to have a new set of OEM pads put in, and the originals pulled to take a look to see what effect a couple of track days have had on them, and for consideration of perhaps picking up a set of higher temperature pads for HPDE use ~ Pagid seems to be the only available choice at the moment AFAIK; CarboTech may also be working on something, but I don't have any confirmation they've got a pad or pads on the shelf as yet. Just as a possible data point for others, the brakes developed a low speed (10-0 mph) occasional squeal about 3 to 4 days after the track event. I'm speculating that one or more of the pads may have gotten hot enough during the course of the HPDE event to have developed a hard spot or two that may be the cause of the low speed squeal. The brakes don't squeal on firm stops, just on those low speed, trailing off the brake roll ups.

Last, but not least if anyone has any insight as to the type, nature or Audi OEM brake compound supplier, I for one would be interested in knowing that information. I've always been leary in changing pads from track to street compounds and back of running into cross compound contamination and attendant adhession problems with the rotors. I don't know if trying to stay within the same family of brake compound manufacture reduces the chances of this happening; or if there are definate no-no's vis-a-vis one manufacture's product poison to anothers. I would like to avoid or at least reduce my chances of ever going through brake sudder / rotor "warpage" issues as a result of incompatible pad compounds.

Cheers,

** ADDED: Perhaps of most interest in the C&D article is in the Performance Car Category, they included two Porsche 911's (997 variant), one with and one without Carbon Ceramic brakes "... The Corvette and two Porsche 911s performed very well ..... We grew wery of trying to get their brakes to fade. All three cars survived more than 35 back-to-back stops from 100mph without decrease in performance. That feat is .. amazing when one considers the relatively brief 20-second interval between stops. The 911 with PCCB ...performed about the same as the other 911 and the Vette. The average stopping distances of the two 911s were within a foot of each other (305 fet), not surprising since both cars were wearing the same tires. The Corvette averaged 326 feet. The conclusion: PCCB buyers enjoy a 37 pound weight savings, but not necessarily more robust brakes. ....."
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
146 Posts
Good points.
Brakes and race cars/Porsche have virtually been my life for the past 10 years, so you have some accuracy here -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1) What affects braking distance the most? Tires.

2) What matters most with regards to brake design? Appropriate thermal capacity - this includes pads.

3) Typically changing from OEM to Pagids is not a problem.
We do it all the time with Porsches with ZERO problems, nada, not one.

4) What matter most is how do the brakes stand up *over time*, ie laps.

Is the thermal capacity of the calipers, rotors, and pads enough?
Do the caliper seals scorch? Do the pads last 2 track days? Do the rotors not dissipate enogh heat?

The R8 rotors and calipers and first rate, 100% up to the task.
The Oem soft pads are gone after 2 - 2.5 hard track days.

Folks, hard to sound objective here, but the weak link are the soft OEM pads - they need to be soft for street use and little noise - but ARE NOT track worthy.

Same exact story has proven itself on the Porsche 996/997 GT3, guaranteed.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top