View Poll Results: Which brake setup
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 135. You may not vote on this poll
which rotors/brake setup
06-11-2006, 05:52 AM
#41
the pistons are the same exact ones in the runner calipers and the tundra calipers (look at the pics. the castings are identical except the tundra ones are simply wider). the difference is that the tundra calipers allow the use of the thicker rotors (better heat sink) and the better tundra pads (more surface area on the rotor).
you MUST agree that w/ the same caliper pressure, an increase of ~20% in the contact area between the pad and rotor will lead to better braking performance.
that's a given and is obvious...
you MUST agree that w/ the same caliper pressure, an increase of ~20% in the contact area between the pad and rotor will lead to better braking performance.
that's a given and is obvious...
06-12-2006, 10:17 AM
#42
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bamachem
you MUST agree that w/ the same caliper pressure, an increase of ~20% in the contact area between the pad and rotor will lead to better braking performance.
06-12-2006, 10:27 AM
#43
know what? i really don't care what you think. i have my opinion and you have yours - let's just leave it at that. if you care to come to east tenn and do the test yourself or find someone who's swapped and is local to you, then you can never disprove my claims of "better braking performance". i'll never do a test because for one, i'm never swapping back to the old setup. also, now that i've personally felt the difference it makes, i'm biased! 
until then, you are -in my opinion - a misinformed and misguided soul who has never felt what a 4runner with tundra calipers/rotors/pads feels like under your right foot, and therefore, your opinion doesn't mean very much to me or anyone else on this board since you really don't offer a valid viewpoint for reference.
have a nice day!
until then, you are -in my opinion - a misinformed and misguided soul who has never felt what a 4runner with tundra calipers/rotors/pads feels like under your right foot, and therefore, your opinion doesn't mean very much to me or anyone else on this board since you really don't offer a valid viewpoint for reference.
have a nice day!
Last edited by bamachem; 06-12-2006 at 10:35 AM.
06-12-2006, 11:12 AM
#44
Registered User
wow heated debate.
lots of good info to be found in this thread
my .02 www.sleeoffroad.com has drilled and slotted rotors for $95 each and stainless lines for the taco at $99
lots of good info to be found in this thread
my .02 www.sleeoffroad.com has drilled and slotted rotors for $95 each and stainless lines for the taco at $99
06-13-2006, 03:20 PM
#45
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bamachem
know what? i really don't care what you think. i have my opinion and you have yours - let's just leave it at that. if you care to come to east tenn and do the test yourself or find someone who's swapped and is local to you, then you can never disprove my claims of "better braking performance". i'll never do a test because for one, i'm never swapping back to the old setup. also, now that i've personally felt the difference it makes, i'm biased!
until then, you are -in my opinion - a misinformed and misguided soul who has never felt what a 4runner with tundra calipers/rotors/pads feels like under your right foot, and therefore, your opinion doesn't mean very much to me or anyone else on this board since you really don't offer a valid viewpoint for reference.
have a nice day!
until then, you are -in my opinion - a misinformed and misguided soul who has never felt what a 4runner with tundra calipers/rotors/pads feels like under your right foot, and therefore, your opinion doesn't mean very much to me or anyone else on this board since you really don't offer a valid viewpoint for reference.
have a nice day!
All I asked was that you back your claims up with something more than "it's better because it's bigger and more expensive." You went from poor stock brakes to brand new "upgraded" parts and didn't expect a huge difference? Good call.
Hell, I went from brakes so bad in my Integra that I was using the ebrake to stop the car to a 12.2" Wilwood kit using 2-piece rotors and 2.5 lb. Billet Dynalite 4 piston calipers with full metallic pads. There definitely was difference in pedal feel and performance. But you know what? It only stopped about 8-12ft. shorter from 60 (~120 ft.) than the exact same car with good stock brakes and upgraded pads. But, I could do 60-0 about 25 times consistently, which is what happens on the track, not on the streets. You don't need anything to fancy to get to the grocery store.
You even admit that you're biased, so any claim you make is complete speculation to begin with. You got one guy that says you can quantify your claims mathematically, but I haven't seen it. What are you gonna tell me next, that George Bush is a respecatable leader? If you say so...
Tell you what, go find a deserted road/parking lot, set up 5 cones starting at 90 ft. and going in 10ft intervals and do 5 stops and see what the distance is. Do that, then I'll do the same with my truck, which has stock tires, stock mystery pads/shoes and rotors with 155K on them and we'll see what we get...
In the meantime, keep on preaching this upgrade as the the epitome of Toyota braking performance. Also, get defensive at anyone that tries to question its worth.
All I want is proof about your claim, so far, there is NONE.
06-13-2006, 03:32 PM
#46
Why? you don't get it. I'm happy. I like what I have. I don't need to prove it to you or anyone else. If others want to follow in my footsteps, then so be it. I'm not going to go quantify it for you. Sorry. Not interested in doing that and quite frankly, I don't have the time.
By the way, I think I have a pretty good reputation as knowing what I'm talking about (Engineer by degree, Mechanically Inclined Toyota Nut by chance). If you don't think so, then just ask around...
Now I'm done. Thanks for the entertainment...
By the way, I think I have a pretty good reputation as knowing what I'm talking about (Engineer by degree, Mechanically Inclined Toyota Nut by chance). If you don't think so, then just ask around...
Now I'm done. Thanks for the entertainment...
Last edited by bamachem; 06-14-2006 at 03:22 AM.
06-13-2006, 05:33 PM
#47
Contributing Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: tyler tx
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i am going to do the tundra upgrade soon, did or would you suggest replacing the brake lines, i have 33" tires and my stockers are not doing the trick anymore. also has anyone had a problem with the abs activating under normal stoping conditions? thanks
06-14-2006, 06:27 AM
#49
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
midget, please dont post in my thread.
Why are you so eager to bash someones mod? Any improvement in stopping power is better than none at all. Also, bamachem has an excellent reputation on this board.
You on the other hand...not so much.
Look at his Tundra/OME setup...many people bought this setup purely based on word. I did, and I dont regret it at all.
pretty sure that test wouldnt show much...considering hes got bigger tires and a lot more weight than you.
If hes satisified and thinks/knows it stops better, thats enough for him....and quite frankly, enough for me. So please, if you dont have anything worth reading, please dont post in this thread....you are cluttering it up.
Why are you so eager to bash someones mod? Any improvement in stopping power is better than none at all. Also, bamachem has an excellent reputation on this board.
You on the other hand...not so much.
Look at his Tundra/OME setup...many people bought this setup purely based on word. I did, and I dont regret it at all.
Tell you what, go find a deserted road/parking lot, set up 5 cones starting at 90 ft. and going in 10ft intervals and do 5 stops and see what the distance is. Do that, then I'll do the same with my truck, which has stock tires, stock mystery pads/shoes and rotors with 155K on them and we'll see what we get...
If hes satisified and thinks/knows it stops better, thats enough for him....and quite frankly, enough for me. So please, if you dont have anything worth reading, please dont post in this thread....you are cluttering it up.
Last edited by Localmotion; 06-14-2006 at 06:43 AM.
06-14-2006, 06:38 AM
#50
Contributing Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 940
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by uberhahn
Well, at least you guys are keeping the discussion technical. Just don't let it get to a level such as Discoweb.org.
uberhahn
uberhahn
To me, I'm glad midget posted. He provided some solid evidence. From it all I think we can gather that if you are still stock everything, the tundra upgrade might be excessive, but as bamachem states, a lot of us are running with added weight from ARB's, to larger tires, etc. or towing a lot and the tundra upgrade might be needed for us.
Last edited by unr.frosh; 06-14-2006 at 07:55 AM.
06-14-2006, 10:31 AM
#51
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Localmotion
Look at his Tundra/OME setup...many people bought this setup purely based on word. I did, and I dont regret it at all.
Originally Posted by Localmotion
pretty sure that test wouldnt show much...considering hes got bigger tires and a lot more weight than you.
Originally Posted by Localmotion
If hes satisified and thinks/knows it stops better, thats enough for him....and quite frankly, enough for me. So please, if you dont have anything worth reading, please dont post in this thread....you are cluttering it up.
The Tundra brake "mod" does NOTHING to decrease stopping distance or increase brake longevity.
Originally Posted by unr.frosh
To me, I'm glad midget posted. He provided some solid evidence. From it all I think we can gather that if you are still stock everything, the tundra upgrade might be excessive, but as bamachem states, a lot of us are running with added weight from ARB's, to larger tires, etc. or towing a lot and the tundra upgrade might be needed for us.
I have said that this mod is great if you tow constantly, but that's about all you'd need it for. The 4Runner's brakes are definitely overkill for this truck. We're lucky to have fixed calipers and a large diameter rotor from the factory. Rear discs is all you'd need for better braking performance.
You guys have to keep in mind that these brakes are for vehicles that weigh 800-2000lbs. more than a 4Runner and have 50 more horsepower to boot. Of course they need a more substantial brake setup. We don't.
Unless you're running 35"+ tires (in which case you'd want a larger diameter rotor first), then you don't need any brake mods aside from good pads, decent rotors and ultra high quality fluid.
06-14-2006, 10:44 AM
#52
Contributing Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: tyler tx
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Midget96
OK, a suspension is a little different then brakes. It's either going to give you lift or it's not. The results are clearly visible. Way to bring up a relevant arguement.
It would prove everything. Large tires can be a huge advantage in terms or braking. They take the contact patch and stretch it out, giving more surface area to actually stop the vehicle. If this brake mod is all it's cracked up to be, then I'm sure no one would be this apprehensive about proving it.
So based upon your logic, if he found that putting canola oil in the crankcase made the engine run better, you wouldn't question it? EXACTLY the same circumstances... And I will continue to post in this thread until some actual facts are shown. If you choose to ignore any real evidence against this mod, so be it. DON"T READ IT, which is clearly what you've done already.
The Tundra brake "mod" does NOTHING to decrease stopping distance or increase brake longevity.
My truck runs on stock tires, but I do have the OEM Tundra/Land Cruiser lift and a heavy TJM T-15, so the center of gravity has shifted even more to the front, burdening the front brakes even more. It still stops better than nearly any other stock vehicle I've ever driven.
I have said that this mod is great if you tow constantly, but that's about all you'd need it for. The 4Runner's brakes are definitely overkill for this truck. We're lucky to have fixed calipers and a large diameter rotor from the factory. Rear discs is all you'd need for better braking performance.
You guys have to keep in mind that these brakes are for vehicles that weigh 800-2000lbs. more than a 4Runner and have 50 more horsepower to boot. Of course they need a more substantial brake setup. We don't.
Unless you're running 35"+ tires (in which case you'd want a larger diameter rotor first), then you don't need any brake mods aside from good pads, decent rotors and ultra high quality fluid.
It would prove everything. Large tires can be a huge advantage in terms or braking. They take the contact patch and stretch it out, giving more surface area to actually stop the vehicle. If this brake mod is all it's cracked up to be, then I'm sure no one would be this apprehensive about proving it.
So based upon your logic, if he found that putting canola oil in the crankcase made the engine run better, you wouldn't question it? EXACTLY the same circumstances... And I will continue to post in this thread until some actual facts are shown. If you choose to ignore any real evidence against this mod, so be it. DON"T READ IT, which is clearly what you've done already.
The Tundra brake "mod" does NOTHING to decrease stopping distance or increase brake longevity.
My truck runs on stock tires, but I do have the OEM Tundra/Land Cruiser lift and a heavy TJM T-15, so the center of gravity has shifted even more to the front, burdening the front brakes even more. It still stops better than nearly any other stock vehicle I've ever driven.
I have said that this mod is great if you tow constantly, but that's about all you'd need it for. The 4Runner's brakes are definitely overkill for this truck. We're lucky to have fixed calipers and a large diameter rotor from the factory. Rear discs is all you'd need for better braking performance.
You guys have to keep in mind that these brakes are for vehicles that weigh 800-2000lbs. more than a 4Runner and have 50 more horsepower to boot. Of course they need a more substantial brake setup. We don't.
Unless you're running 35"+ tires (in which case you'd want a larger diameter rotor first), then you don't need any brake mods aside from good pads, decent rotors and ultra high quality fluid.
Last edited by TX-BLKRUNNER; 06-14-2006 at 11:14 AM.
06-14-2006, 11:08 AM
#53
It's called ROTATIONAL INERTIA. It's all about the mass of the rotating object and the radius where that mass is centered about the axis of rotation. That has MUCH more to do with braking and acceleration than adding weight to the vehicle.
I have 33x12.50's that weigh over 70# each on the 16X8 wheels. You don't. Stock wheels/tires are just over half that, and the radius of mass for that weight is significantly larger for the larger tires/wheels. We're not talking about ABS systems or skidding to a stop here either (only thing where contact patches would come into play).
Go do your homework on how rotational inertia affects braking (I'll give you a hint - every pound gained in tire/wheel weight SIGNIFICANTLY decreases your stopping ability), then come back and apologize...
Larger, Heavier Wheels w/ an Greater Overall Diameter CANNOT be compared to STOCK wheels/tires.
They're simply NOT the same and Newton's Second Law proves that.
Do you agree that it takes more "effort" for a truck w/ large wheels/tires to accelerate than one with stock wheels/tires? It's a BIG difference. That's the SOLE reason why most people regear - to regain some of that lost performance. Why would Physics justify a regear to apply acceleration in a forward motion, but Physics would IGNORE deceleration? It's the same principle behind both. Too bad you're not smart enough to see that!
Acceleration is Acceleration. The only difference in the engine working to move the truck faster and the brakes working to slow it down is the direction of the accelerational forces. That's it. If it takes more to get it rolling, then it WILL take more to get it stopped. That's simple High School Physics, whether you understand and agree with it or not.
I have 33x12.50's that weigh over 70# each on the 16X8 wheels. You don't. Stock wheels/tires are just over half that, and the radius of mass for that weight is significantly larger for the larger tires/wheels. We're not talking about ABS systems or skidding to a stop here either (only thing where contact patches would come into play).
Go do your homework on how rotational inertia affects braking (I'll give you a hint - every pound gained in tire/wheel weight SIGNIFICANTLY decreases your stopping ability), then come back and apologize...
Larger, Heavier Wheels w/ an Greater Overall Diameter CANNOT be compared to STOCK wheels/tires.
They're simply NOT the same and Newton's Second Law proves that.
Do you agree that it takes more "effort" for a truck w/ large wheels/tires to accelerate than one with stock wheels/tires? It's a BIG difference. That's the SOLE reason why most people regear - to regain some of that lost performance. Why would Physics justify a regear to apply acceleration in a forward motion, but Physics would IGNORE deceleration? It's the same principle behind both. Too bad you're not smart enough to see that!
Acceleration is Acceleration. The only difference in the engine working to move the truck faster and the brakes working to slow it down is the direction of the accelerational forces. That's it. If it takes more to get it rolling, then it WILL take more to get it stopped. That's simple High School Physics, whether you understand and agree with it or not.
Originally Posted by http://sportrider.com/features/146_0402_motorcycle_wheel_comparison/moment_inertia.html
...Moment of Inertia is important for two reasons. First, a wheel with a lower MoI requires less force to spin up at a certain rotational acceleration, and this can even be seen on an inertia-type dyno, which will read more horsepower for a given bike with a rear wheel that has a lower MoI. ...
Last edited by bamachem; 06-14-2006 at 11:40 AM.
06-14-2006, 01:29 PM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TX-BLKRUNNER
i'm sorry but this does not make much sence, you state that unless you tow alot that this upgrade would not be bennificial, so would the the tundra upgrade not last MUCH longer if you were not towing somthing, and would you not DECREASE your stoping distance if you were not towing somthing and only had to stop the weight of your own vehicle?
However, this doesn't mean these brakes will stop you faster otherwise. It doesn't matter how thick your rotor is; the diameter is not changing, nor is the clamping force. All you get is more heat capacity, and unless you road race your truck or tow a huge boat through the mountains every weekend, it's completely unnecessary.
I urge you to read this to truly understand how even a REAL big brake kit doesn't really shorten your stopping distance to begin with:
Toyota/Stoptech Big Brake Kit Comparison
Originally Posted by bamachem
It's called ROTATIONAL INERTIA. It's all about the mass of the rotating object and the radius where that mass is centered about the axis of rotation. That has MUCH more to do with braking and acceleration than adding weight to the vehicle.
I have 33x12.50's that weigh over 70# each on the 16X8 wheels. You don't. Stock wheels/tires are just over half that, and the radius of mass for that weight is significantly larger for the larger tires/wheels. We're not talking about ABS systems or skidding to a stop here either (only thing where contact patches would come into play).
Go do your homework on how rotational inertia affects braking (I'll give you a hint - every pound gained in tire/wheel weight SIGNIFICANTLY decreases your stopping ability), then come back and apologize...
Larger, Heavier Wheels w/ an Greater Overall Diameter CANNOT be compared to STOCK wheels/tires.
They're simply NOT the same and Newton's Second Law proves that.
Do you agree that it takes more "effort" for a truck w/ large wheels/tires to accelerate than one with stock wheels/tires? It's a BIG difference. That's the SOLE reason why most people regear - to regain some of that lost performance. Why would Physics justify a regear to apply acceleration in a forward motion, but Physics would IGNORE deceleration? It's the same principle behind both. Too bad you're not smart enough to see that!
Acceleration is Acceleration. The only difference in the engine working to move the truck faster and the brakes working to slow it down is the direction of the accelerational forces. That's it. If it takes more to get it rolling, then it WILL take more to get it stopped. That's simple High School Physics, whether you understand and agree with it or not.
I have 33x12.50's that weigh over 70# each on the 16X8 wheels. You don't. Stock wheels/tires are just over half that, and the radius of mass for that weight is significantly larger for the larger tires/wheels. We're not talking about ABS systems or skidding to a stop here either (only thing where contact patches would come into play).
Go do your homework on how rotational inertia affects braking (I'll give you a hint - every pound gained in tire/wheel weight SIGNIFICANTLY decreases your stopping ability), then come back and apologize...
Larger, Heavier Wheels w/ an Greater Overall Diameter CANNOT be compared to STOCK wheels/tires.
They're simply NOT the same and Newton's Second Law proves that.
Do you agree that it takes more "effort" for a truck w/ large wheels/tires to accelerate than one with stock wheels/tires? It's a BIG difference. That's the SOLE reason why most people regear - to regain some of that lost performance. Why would Physics justify a regear to apply acceleration in a forward motion, but Physics would IGNORE deceleration? It's the same principle behind both. Too bad you're not smart enough to see that!
Acceleration is Acceleration. The only difference in the engine working to move the truck faster and the brakes working to slow it down is the direction of the accelerational forces. That's it. If it takes more to get it rolling, then it WILL take more to get it stopped. That's simple High School Physics, whether you understand and agree with it or not.
For the record, your MT/Rs weigh about 64 lbs., my Michelins weigh about 42 lbs.. Wheels are around 25-30lbs. Where you get this idea that your combo weighs twice as much. It weighs maybe 25% more...
You've provided yet another arguement that has NO BEARING on the question at hand. I have no clue what you're trying to prove by stating that the rotating mass of a 90 lb. wheel/tire combo has more inertia than a 70 lb. wheel/tire combo. We can all see that. Your brake upgrade doesn't remedy the fact that you may be experiencing longer stopping distances due to a larger tire. The rotor diameter stays the same with the Tundra caliper, so you gain none of the additional brake torque you'd need to slow the truck faster. It's pretty clear, and whether you believe it or not, you're longer and narrower contact patch does help you when compared to my shorter and thicker contact patch.
Rudimentary example:
If you put a 45RPM record on a turntable, and use your finger to apply pressure to the the outer edge of it, it stops quickly.
If you put a 33RPM record on the turntable, and use your finger to apply pressure to the outer edge of where the 45RPM record would be, it would be much harder to stop it.
Same goes with brakes. You need to have the caliper applying pressure as far from the center of the wheel as possible to increase it's torque as you go to a larger outer diameter tire. Exactly what the Tundra upgrade doesn't address
Regearing has nothing to do with braking. I cannot see how you found that relationship. You regear to reduce the amount of work the engine has to do to turn the drive axles a given amount to correct the reduced gear ration from larger diameter tires. It doesn't matter what you regear, the diff or the transmission (you lose mechanical advantage anyway), the goal is to allow the engine to do the same amount of work it did with the larger tires as it did with smaller ones. Physics doesn't ignore deceleration, but it certainly doesn't apply to it the same way it does to acceleration. Braking is not the same as accelerating in a vehicle. You're using completely different methods to accomplish each, both with their faults and efficiency issues. It's much easier to make a vehicle go faster than it is to make it stop quicker. I really can't see the relevance here, sorry. Sounds more like you're describing parasitic power loss to me...
I never said anywhere that it didn't take more effort to stop a vehicle with heavier rolling stock. It does. I know this first hand; I had a '96 Ram with 35x12.50s that needed an anchor to slow down (however, it used a single piston sliding caliper and smaller rotor than the 4Runner and weighed upwards of 4800 lbs.). I did say that since your contact patch is so wide and your tires much softer that it would be somewhat of an advantage to you. And it is. But you really can't do much better than the factory 4runner brakes in terms of slowing the truck while still fitting a 16" wheel.
This brake upgrade is not slowing you bigger tires down any faster than the stock brakes. If you went to a bigger rotor, then you MIGHT see some stopping distance reduction, but a 12.5" rotor is pretty damn big to fit behind a 16" wheel to start with.
I honestly don't know what else to write. Seems like you simply look past everything I've posted and skirt every fallacy I've pointed out with the Tundra "upgrade". That, and you continue to belittle me and all the information I posted.
Last edited by Midget96; 06-14-2006 at 01:37 PM.
06-14-2006, 02:54 PM
#55
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its where the rubber meets the road
Wow!
Interesting reads in these last few posts. While I agree that the Tundra upgrade may not improve your stopping distance one iota; it certainly does help to combat warped rotors that 4-Runners are notorious for and reduce pedal effort with its slightly larger pad surface.
Any decrease in stopping distance perceived is a mis-perception. Maybe even people inaccurately translating less pedal effort into shorter stopping distance.
What will affect your overall stopping distance is a lot more than just your brake package.
There are things such as the footprint of your tires; the upgrade will not change that. Larger tires will require more pedal effort.
There is also the weight of the vehicle; the upgrade will not change that.
Your shocks can affect your stopping distance because if you have significant drop in the front of your vehicle, you are reducing the friction of the rear tires on the road. More physics at work but there is no need to get into the full scientific explination.
The only difference I can measure with the Tundra brake upgrade is pedal effort. The effort is a lot less but my stopping distance is the same. I added the Goodridge G-Stop Stainless Steel Lines and took a little less effort of the pedal compared to stock.
If I wanted to reduce my stopping distance then a higher friction tire with more grip (e.g. Slicks) would probably be the best setup because there is the most surface area of rubber on the road. God help me if the tires were to lock up or get a few drops of water on them.
Interesting reads in these last few posts. While I agree that the Tundra upgrade may not improve your stopping distance one iota; it certainly does help to combat warped rotors that 4-Runners are notorious for and reduce pedal effort with its slightly larger pad surface.
Any decrease in stopping distance perceived is a mis-perception. Maybe even people inaccurately translating less pedal effort into shorter stopping distance.
What will affect your overall stopping distance is a lot more than just your brake package.
There are things such as the footprint of your tires; the upgrade will not change that. Larger tires will require more pedal effort.
There is also the weight of the vehicle; the upgrade will not change that.
Your shocks can affect your stopping distance because if you have significant drop in the front of your vehicle, you are reducing the friction of the rear tires on the road. More physics at work but there is no need to get into the full scientific explination.
The only difference I can measure with the Tundra brake upgrade is pedal effort. The effort is a lot less but my stopping distance is the same. I added the Goodridge G-Stop Stainless Steel Lines and took a little less effort of the pedal compared to stock.
If I wanted to reduce my stopping distance then a higher friction tire with more grip (e.g. Slicks) would probably be the best setup because there is the most surface area of rubber on the road. God help me if the tires were to lock up or get a few drops of water on them.
Last edited by DoubleZero4x4; 06-14-2006 at 02:59 PM.
06-14-2006, 05:31 PM
#57
Contributing Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Socal
Posts: 1,963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have a fancy degree that deals w/ numbers nor do I understand a lot of what I've just read but here's what I do know after the Tundra upgrade:
1. I stop faster;
2. I feel much more confident that I can stop faster;
BTW, I don't have anything to support this but this post.
My analysis is definitely seat-of-the-pants but I know that it took me forever to stop w/ my old setup. So much more that I constantly ended up past the white line at a stop light. It didn't matter how much I tried to push the pedal harder, this was my reality. Were my old brakes bad, yes. Did they need replacing, yes. Did I "upgrade" to the Tundra rotors and calipers, yes. Am I much happier now, HELL YEAH!!!!
Anyone reading this and considering the upgrade, listen to people that have done this and are happy with it. I haven't read about one person that's done this and wasn't happy.
1. I stop faster;
2. I feel much more confident that I can stop faster;
BTW, I don't have anything to support this but this post.
My analysis is definitely seat-of-the-pants but I know that it took me forever to stop w/ my old setup. So much more that I constantly ended up past the white line at a stop light. It didn't matter how much I tried to push the pedal harder, this was my reality. Were my old brakes bad, yes. Did they need replacing, yes. Did I "upgrade" to the Tundra rotors and calipers, yes. Am I much happier now, HELL YEAH!!!!
Anyone reading this and considering the upgrade, listen to people that have done this and are happy with it. I haven't read about one person that's done this and wasn't happy.
ditto. do it, and you'll love the difference in "feel"...
06-14-2006, 06:08 PM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bamachem
yup. ignore physics and newton's second law. that's a good one.
Car 'A' that weighs 3000lbs will stop in a shorter distance than car 'B' that weighs the same but has a different configuration of tires, or a different suspension setup because there are different variables now introduced into the equation.
ABS is a good example of this: Car manufacturers have learned that when a tires is held at a resistance point just before lockup it will stop better than a car that locks up because grip with the road is maintained. Once debris is introduced from a 4 wheel locked skid (i.e. the small rubber particles that are ripped from tires in a locked skid), stopping distances increased.
Tire Size on different vehicles is another example. The wider tire did not evolve to make a car look good. Scientists know that more surface area will provide greater traction to the road and resist a greater number forces applied to it than a narrow tire. If you don't believe me, put some tires from a Volkswagon Beetle on a 4Runner and tell me what that does to your stopping distance.
I also was pointing out that the Tundra brake upgrade requires less pedal effort because the surface area of the brake pads is larger, thus providing more surface area of pad to stop the same weight vehicle with the same amount of force applied to it.
Is my stopping distance better? Of course not. Like I said before - that would require more surface area contact with the road. (Maybe a belt sander style configuration for my truck would increase my contact surface area
For Example: When I apply x lbs of pedal effort - my vehicle stops in a shorter distance than x lbs of pedal effort on stock brakes.
At full downforce on the pedal my truck stops in the same distance is it did before the Tundra upgrade. ABS and my tires see to that.
Originally Posted by ebelen1
I don't have a fancy degree that deals w/ numbers nor do I understand a lot of what I've just read but here's what I do know after the Tundra upgrade:
1. I stop faster;
2. I feel much more confident that I can stop faster;:
1. I stop faster;
2. I feel much more confident that I can stop faster;:
Last edited by DoubleZero4x4; 06-14-2006 at 06:45 PM.
06-14-2006, 06:47 PM
#60
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by Midget96
OK, I still don't see the relevance of this brake mod. From what I've read, the service bulletin spec'd a different caliper and pad to fix the problem the much larger Seqouia and Tundra were having. Just so we know, here are some very basic, baseline weights of all these vehicles:
4Runner: ~3800 lbs.
A limited is almost 4000lbs baseline and this assumes an empty vehicle with no mods whatsoever (no heavy bumpers, air compressors, highlift jacks, roof racks, tools, stereos, undercarriage armor, suspension mods, larger tires/rims, etc) which can easily push a 4runner near the 4500lb mark of a Tundra extra cab
Tundra Ext. Cab: ~4500 lbs.
Seqouia: ~5300 lbs.
The Tundra and Sequoia are much heavier, have much more power and could tow much more than a 4Runner. Do they need more substantial brakes? Yes.
So 4runners can't tow and they don't need good brakes? ....yeah ok
Now, given that all these vehicles rolled off the production line with basically the same brake systems (~12.5" rotor, similar iron 4pot calipers, etc.), then of course you'll have brake problems in a vehicle that weighs up to 2500 lbs. than the 4Runner. And given that Toyota was responsible enough to issue a TSB for a brake issue that any other manufacturer would write off as owner misuse or normal wear and tear, it seems that a slightly larger caliper and pad have rectified the problem.
Um, no, Toyota clearly undersized the brakes when they initially designed the trucks and later issued the TSB to correct it to keep all the brewing class action lawsuits at bay. They don't go issuing TSBs cause they want to be nice guys about it.
Furthermore, given Toyota's reputation for quality, especially in the brake department, it seems they are very capable of matching brakes to car weight and application. I can think of the many Toyotas with great brakes, the Celica GT and GT-Four, Altezza, MRS/"new" Celica GTS and various models of the Supra. The only car that has a real brake system issue was the early Mk. I MR2s and obviously the mega SUV and Tundra. If there was a problem among the majority of 4Runners with the brakes, it would have been addressed years ago. But I suppose you'd stick the bigger tire argument here...
I would remind you Toyota has not been building fullsize trucks or SUVs for very long and Toyota is not perfect, they do make mistakes too. The brake issue in 4runners was not nearly as pronounced as it was in the Tundra since the mismatch was not nearly as bad but as vehicle weight increases or when towing you better believe it's an issue.
As far as rotors go, I'll concede that there are a few ultra-low end bi-metal rotors out there, but the vast majority of quality rotors are basic cast iron. I don't understand how you think Brembo rotors are built to better tolerances than an Autozone rotor (have you had a rotor that didn't fit?), but I assure you there is no measurable difference in composition or design. How hard is it to copy an OEM rotor and market them for mass production. If the companies that were making these "inferior" rotors sucked so bad, why are they still in business? Most are rebadged and less expensive Brembo rotors to begin with. Bottomline- Brembo rotors aren't the golden goose you make them out to be. The drilled rotors aren't cast that way, the slots aren't chamfered for a certain reason. If the extra expense makes you feel better, fine, but many others have already realized that a $35 auto-parts store plain rotor works just as well.
I am not a fan of drilled and slotted rotors either, we are just talking about using rotors of better quality (interpret that as you will, I'm not here to give you a materials science class). Working as a mechanic I saw alot of good generic rotors and a few horrible ones and it even would vary from one application to another. Brembo has proven to work very well on these trucks, which is an undisputable fact.
As far as the "warping" issue, I will also admit there is a way to warp these rotors, and it has NOTHING to do with using the brakes. Improper torque on the lugs with these trucks has got to be the culprit. I have never seen such an odd combo of lug centric and hub centric properties on the same wheel. Would it not be plausible to say that a rotor could be skewed by torquing the lugs on one side to 85 lbs. and the other to 65 lbs.? Given that the lug contacts the rotor directly, this is very likely. If you ever take you're vehicle in for repair, keep in mind that most of the time, they just zap the lugs (an every other bolt) on with an impact gun, sometimes with a torque stick if you're lucky. I gurantee this wide spread "warped" rotor issue stems more from the combonation of Toyota's wheel attachment design and improper torquing of the lugs.
Dead wrong....improper torquing of the lugs can cause warping, but there is no way on god's green earth that is THE reason for every single person seeing warped rotors. In fact I would bet that would only account for a small handful of the cases of warped rotors seen on these trucks. These rotors are warping from excessive heat buildup, plain and simple (that's what killed my rotors both times.......no one but me touches my truck and yes, the wheels are/were torqued properly).
Futhermore, as most people with this Tundra brake mod have upgraded to aftermarket wheels requiring a hub centric ring (and not lugcentric lugs), that would alleviate most of the warping issue, resulting in an inaccurate remedy. Just something to consider...
See above.
I cannot find the piston sizes of any of the calipers in question, so claims of increased clamping pressure are null unless you have:
-bigger pistons in the calipers AND a bigger master cylinder
-smaller pistons in the calipers AND the stock master cylinder
You can't just magically increase the brake pressure at the caliper with larger diameter caliper pistons. That would lower, seeing as how more volume to fill and the same pressure equate to less force. I will agree that the new Tundra caliper is undoubtedly more robust and capable, but piston size is the ultimate factor in brake pressure, not arbitrary pad sizes (which would help a bit).
There are quite a few forces at work such as brake line pressure (master cyl, stiffer lines, etc), total caliper piston area, pad surface area, pad material (Cf), rotor material (Cf), system heat transfer, tire contact patch area, Tire friction (Cf), etc. It depends on where the bottleneck in the system is, so an increase in any of the above may yield improved braking. It is far more than just the 2 factors you mentioned above.
As far as cost, ~$200 is quite a bit of expense just to run a thicker rotor and bigger pad. I don't understand why this is thought as the ultimate solution to this problem, but I suppose that because it's the new thing to do, it must be the greatest.
More useless dribble.
I would be happy to put my revamped stock system up against this upgraded system w/OEM wheels ANY TIME. Not only will the braking distances be the same +/- 5-10ft., but so will the repeatability with both setups.
Most aftermarket brake kits (Brembo included) for powerful sports cars have rotors about the same size as the 4Runner. F1 cars from the 1980's used iron rotors and off-the-shelf Brembo Indy calipers that fit under 13" and 14" wheels. Semi's still use drums at every axle. Motorcycles use rotors as thin as a cracker. You don't need much to stop a car, you need a lot more to make it fast. A 1990-1999 300ZXTT weighed almost as much as a 4Runner (3600 lbs.), had far more power and came with smaller diameter (11") and thinner rotors (~.8") than the 4Runner did.
Seems like you are reaching quite a bit......Are we talking about sports cars, motorcycles or trucks here? It's is obvious if you have a truck, you don't use it like one (towing, etc) where the importance is in brake robustness not just shorter stopping distances. The 300ZXTT is yet another apples to oranges comparison. We go back to Newton's 2nd law here....F=MA where A= acceleration in reverse (aka deceleration) assuming all things are the same, but they are not in the cases you mention above.
I still don't understand why you guys think we need upgraded brakes on this truck. Simple maintenance and common sense could go a long way to getting tons of miles out of stock parts. We don't drive race cars, and unless you tow a boat every weekend, then I don't see any plausible reaon for the Tundra upgrade.
I think I am done trying to explain why someone would want to make a vehicle more capable by performing upgrades or mods to various aspects of a truck. If you don't get it at this point, it is really not worth me trying to explain it to you.
Good Big Brake Comparison Article
Thanks for the great article on Toyota matrix brakes.
4Runner: ~3800 lbs.
A limited is almost 4000lbs baseline and this assumes an empty vehicle with no mods whatsoever (no heavy bumpers, air compressors, highlift jacks, roof racks, tools, stereos, undercarriage armor, suspension mods, larger tires/rims, etc) which can easily push a 4runner near the 4500lb mark of a Tundra extra cab
Tundra Ext. Cab: ~4500 lbs.
Seqouia: ~5300 lbs.
The Tundra and Sequoia are much heavier, have much more power and could tow much more than a 4Runner. Do they need more substantial brakes? Yes.
So 4runners can't tow and they don't need good brakes? ....yeah ok
Now, given that all these vehicles rolled off the production line with basically the same brake systems (~12.5" rotor, similar iron 4pot calipers, etc.), then of course you'll have brake problems in a vehicle that weighs up to 2500 lbs. than the 4Runner. And given that Toyota was responsible enough to issue a TSB for a brake issue that any other manufacturer would write off as owner misuse or normal wear and tear, it seems that a slightly larger caliper and pad have rectified the problem.
Um, no, Toyota clearly undersized the brakes when they initially designed the trucks and later issued the TSB to correct it to keep all the brewing class action lawsuits at bay. They don't go issuing TSBs cause they want to be nice guys about it.
Furthermore, given Toyota's reputation for quality, especially in the brake department, it seems they are very capable of matching brakes to car weight and application. I can think of the many Toyotas with great brakes, the Celica GT and GT-Four, Altezza, MRS/"new" Celica GTS and various models of the Supra. The only car that has a real brake system issue was the early Mk. I MR2s and obviously the mega SUV and Tundra. If there was a problem among the majority of 4Runners with the brakes, it would have been addressed years ago. But I suppose you'd stick the bigger tire argument here...
I would remind you Toyota has not been building fullsize trucks or SUVs for very long and Toyota is not perfect, they do make mistakes too. The brake issue in 4runners was not nearly as pronounced as it was in the Tundra since the mismatch was not nearly as bad but as vehicle weight increases or when towing you better believe it's an issue.
As far as rotors go, I'll concede that there are a few ultra-low end bi-metal rotors out there, but the vast majority of quality rotors are basic cast iron. I don't understand how you think Brembo rotors are built to better tolerances than an Autozone rotor (have you had a rotor that didn't fit?), but I assure you there is no measurable difference in composition or design. How hard is it to copy an OEM rotor and market them for mass production. If the companies that were making these "inferior" rotors sucked so bad, why are they still in business? Most are rebadged and less expensive Brembo rotors to begin with. Bottomline- Brembo rotors aren't the golden goose you make them out to be. The drilled rotors aren't cast that way, the slots aren't chamfered for a certain reason. If the extra expense makes you feel better, fine, but many others have already realized that a $35 auto-parts store plain rotor works just as well.
I am not a fan of drilled and slotted rotors either, we are just talking about using rotors of better quality (interpret that as you will, I'm not here to give you a materials science class). Working as a mechanic I saw alot of good generic rotors and a few horrible ones and it even would vary from one application to another. Brembo has proven to work very well on these trucks, which is an undisputable fact.
As far as the "warping" issue, I will also admit there is a way to warp these rotors, and it has NOTHING to do with using the brakes. Improper torque on the lugs with these trucks has got to be the culprit. I have never seen such an odd combo of lug centric and hub centric properties on the same wheel. Would it not be plausible to say that a rotor could be skewed by torquing the lugs on one side to 85 lbs. and the other to 65 lbs.? Given that the lug contacts the rotor directly, this is very likely. If you ever take you're vehicle in for repair, keep in mind that most of the time, they just zap the lugs (an every other bolt) on with an impact gun, sometimes with a torque stick if you're lucky. I gurantee this wide spread "warped" rotor issue stems more from the combonation of Toyota's wheel attachment design and improper torquing of the lugs.
Dead wrong....improper torquing of the lugs can cause warping, but there is no way on god's green earth that is THE reason for every single person seeing warped rotors. In fact I would bet that would only account for a small handful of the cases of warped rotors seen on these trucks. These rotors are warping from excessive heat buildup, plain and simple (that's what killed my rotors both times.......no one but me touches my truck and yes, the wheels are/were torqued properly).
Futhermore, as most people with this Tundra brake mod have upgraded to aftermarket wheels requiring a hub centric ring (and not lugcentric lugs), that would alleviate most of the warping issue, resulting in an inaccurate remedy. Just something to consider...
See above.
I cannot find the piston sizes of any of the calipers in question, so claims of increased clamping pressure are null unless you have:
-bigger pistons in the calipers AND a bigger master cylinder
-smaller pistons in the calipers AND the stock master cylinder
You can't just magically increase the brake pressure at the caliper with larger diameter caliper pistons. That would lower, seeing as how more volume to fill and the same pressure equate to less force. I will agree that the new Tundra caliper is undoubtedly more robust and capable, but piston size is the ultimate factor in brake pressure, not arbitrary pad sizes (which would help a bit).
There are quite a few forces at work such as brake line pressure (master cyl, stiffer lines, etc), total caliper piston area, pad surface area, pad material (Cf), rotor material (Cf), system heat transfer, tire contact patch area, Tire friction (Cf), etc. It depends on where the bottleneck in the system is, so an increase in any of the above may yield improved braking. It is far more than just the 2 factors you mentioned above.
As far as cost, ~$200 is quite a bit of expense just to run a thicker rotor and bigger pad. I don't understand why this is thought as the ultimate solution to this problem, but I suppose that because it's the new thing to do, it must be the greatest.
More useless dribble.
I would be happy to put my revamped stock system up against this upgraded system w/OEM wheels ANY TIME. Not only will the braking distances be the same +/- 5-10ft., but so will the repeatability with both setups.
Most aftermarket brake kits (Brembo included) for powerful sports cars have rotors about the same size as the 4Runner. F1 cars from the 1980's used iron rotors and off-the-shelf Brembo Indy calipers that fit under 13" and 14" wheels. Semi's still use drums at every axle. Motorcycles use rotors as thin as a cracker. You don't need much to stop a car, you need a lot more to make it fast. A 1990-1999 300ZXTT weighed almost as much as a 4Runner (3600 lbs.), had far more power and came with smaller diameter (11") and thinner rotors (~.8") than the 4Runner did.
Seems like you are reaching quite a bit......Are we talking about sports cars, motorcycles or trucks here? It's is obvious if you have a truck, you don't use it like one (towing, etc) where the importance is in brake robustness not just shorter stopping distances. The 300ZXTT is yet another apples to oranges comparison. We go back to Newton's 2nd law here....F=MA where A= acceleration in reverse (aka deceleration) assuming all things are the same, but they are not in the cases you mention above.
I still don't understand why you guys think we need upgraded brakes on this truck. Simple maintenance and common sense could go a long way to getting tons of miles out of stock parts. We don't drive race cars, and unless you tow a boat every weekend, then I don't see any plausible reaon for the Tundra upgrade.
I think I am done trying to explain why someone would want to make a vehicle more capable by performing upgrades or mods to various aspects of a truck. If you don't get it at this point, it is really not worth me trying to explain it to you.
Good Big Brake Comparison Article
Thanks for the great article on Toyota matrix brakes.
There are so many erroneous statements you've made above and I still don't know where you are getting your facts? Are you an engineer? Have you worked as a professional mechanic? Did you design cars for a living? .....or did you just read this stuff in another sports car forum and suddenly wake up an expert on truck braking systems?
Midget96, I hate to be argumentative, but you are posting absolutely horrible advice for people to follow and god forbid someone actually takes your stuff seriously. You are certainly entitled to your own opinion, but I am not going to sit here and argue about the vailidity of brake upgrades with someone who even if proven wrong would likely refuse to admit it.
Last edited by MTL_4runner; 06-15-2006 at 05:05 AM.
