The latest rules change to allow brass bushings really strikes me as strange. You don’t NEED brass bushings to get even wear out of the ATE calipers. If you replace your rubber bushings, and keep them lubbed with anti-seize regularly, then your brakes will wear just fine. The brass bushings require regular maintenance too, and you’re introducing a potential advantage by using them…I don’t see how this is in keeping with the spec philosophy…not to mention it will cost more money.
Racer X, care to chime in?
Why brass bushings?
I was surprised also, because now it will make me want to change my girling calipers for the ATE ones like on my e30 M3 …
Victor Hall wrote:
I wonder if this ‘equalizes’ a current advantage for Girlings rather than create a new advanatage for ATEs?
Girlings are better as the rules are now. They have a solid guide design from the factory. If I had a rare car with front ATE’s I would install Girlings most likely.
Either way I have pretty even wear with fresh stock guides as well.
Rob Keehner wrote:
[quote]Girlings are better as the rules are now. They have a solid guide design from the factory. If I had a rare car with front ATE’s I would install Girlings most likely.
Either way I have pretty even wear with fresh stock guides as well.[/quote]
Rob thanks for the clarification, I have a set sitting in my garage (came as spare calipers with the car). If there 's no major difference I’ll just stick with my girlings, since I’d have to rebuild my ATE’s and buy the bushings.
You might want to check with Carter on this. I believe from a previous discussion on this issue that you need to run what came on your car. This might be hard to tell because they may have been changed out before you bought it.
For clarification, I believe the brass bushings arose from several racers suggesting that they would reduce cost due to better wear of brake pads. I see Vic’s point, but if that is the case then, those that choose to run the brass would incur an added cost with no performance advantage.
Ed
Ed,
I’m not sure about the performance advantage - they’re may be one - I’m not convinced either way. I’d love to see some data back to back.
Regardless, if the bushings are made legal, then I HAVE to get them … just to keep up with the Jones’ - know what I mean? Same as when spacers showed up on one car, they spread like wildfire.
-Vic
Guys you’re getting mired down in too much techno-mumbo-jumbo.
I can’t recall which is which, so I’ll stick my head under the car later today so that mine is a technically correct post.
I have had the rear caliper cock over a a 10-15 degree angle because of slop in the old rubber guides. This ain’t no street car any more… I ‘ve seen the same happen on other cars’ rear brakes.
I see this change in the same nature as a short-shifter…not altogher needed, but nice to have if you’re having rear (or fromt?) problems with the brakes cocking to the side.
Performance advantage to a short shifter??Same for the brass bushing. I’m certain (again from the perspective of sideways brake pads) there is safety logic behind the allowance.
Regards, Robert Patton
I have been one of the proponents of the brass bushings for the following reasons:
- I never get even pad wear and regularly throw away pads that are down to the backing plate on one end but have a considerable amount pad material on the other. I would gladly pay the modest price for even pad wear and am certain that they would pay for themselves over just a few weekends.
- Once we had brake failure during an enduro because the uneven pad wear had torqued the caliper to the point that the barkes completely failed.
So for both cost and safety I am all for the solid bushings.
I have tried both…Girlings with NEW hardware and ATE’s with the brass bushings, I do not believe there is any advantage…but having even pad wear. The ATE’s seem to be developing slop in the bushings…hmm…I also have run wilwood superlite 3’s…oh wait that was on the Biodiesel…
If anyone wants them, I have some of the ATE calipers.
Al