Make it handle

[theastronaut]

They would allow water to drain out easier, but also let water in easier. Drilled or slotted shoes would have the same effect without letting water in.
Posted via Mobile Device

[BMERDOC]

Originally Posted by theastronaut

They would allow water to drain out easier, but also let water in easier. Drilled or slotted shoes would have the same effect without letting water in.
Posted via Mobile Device

I think that as off topic as this is getting Rob would like us to think outside the box so I will expand on this by saying that I like your idea combined with my thoughts. Yes, drums hold water but they are not water magnets. They hold water when they are imersed or completely saturated. In normal rainy situations drums are not ENTIRELY bad. I could envision the crossdrilled/skeleton brakes with a shoe setup that is manufactured to either have slots across the face to direct gases/water toward the backing plate (think tire sipes) or seperate pucks on them as to induce the same kind of action. I could be wrong....

[jayman68]

Have you ever looked into cryogenic freezing the parts? (taking the parts to hundreds of degrees below 0). I read an article about the process being done on the brake parts, the result was cooller brakes after the same run.

http://www.frozenrotors.com/

http://www.metal-wear.com/index.html - they have a facility in Palo Alto, CA

[robnolimit]

Originally Posted by jayman68

Have you ever looked into cryogenic freezing the parts? (taking the parts to hundreds of degrees below 0). I read an article about the process being done on the brake parts, the result was cooller brakes after the same run.

http://www.frozenrotors.com/

http://www.metal-wear.com/index.html - they have a facility in Palo Alto, CA

YES. I have used this process many times. For those that haven't heard of this, Cryo, freezing to absolute zero, -273*K, (really cold) has an interesting affect. At Absolute zero, the electrons in molecules stop moving. So, at close to absolute zero, they start to even out the spacing of their orbits, respective to one another. As the temp comes back up, they keep the new spacing, not really stronger, but even strength down at the molecular level. This has a great effect on resisting cracks, and material failure. Brakes would heat and cool more evenly. We cryo'd big inch Harley motors, and ran three seasons on the lower end without a teardown (fuel bike) Where do I learn this stuff

[robnolimit]

Thanks DOC. When it comes to 'outside the box', I have some good advice for hot rodders and builders. Take the box, and carefully open it, cut the edges, and lay it out flat. Now, Use the cardboard to make a test-fit template for the parts/ideas that you have. Thats the only good use of 'the box'.

[BMERDOC]

So what is your opinion of a set of pumped up drum brakes Rob?

[robnolimit]

Originally Posted by BMERDOC

So what is your opinion of a set of pumped up drum brakes Rob?

A good drum will out brake a comparable disk the first time, but they get hot faster, and are harder to cool. We do some 'period' builds with the old stuff, big aluminum cased buick drums, and I am always shocked at how well they work.

[robnolimit]

BRAKE TESTING WAS A BLAST It was a long day, with a lot of laughs and fun. Special thanks to Jim, CJ, and Mike. First we had to learn how to use our new test equip. - I-phone lap timer/GPS/G-meter gadjet. We all started with the OE pads, and drove down to bed them in. This is also a pad we're used to driving on. We ran 5 laps on the 1.1 mile road coarse to learn the layout, checked over the vehicles, got started. The premium pads had the same outcome for all drivers. They felt good at first-After 2 or three laps, the heat cased them to fade. On the 70-0, the pads were not cool enough to grab hard. Next, it was Hawk's turn. A noticable improvement. Everybody liked them, they put up good road coarse times, and stayed for the stop tests. Baer's pads seamed to be very close to Hawk. The improvement in RC times may have been due to driver experience (could not test these on the JT, it needed a rest anyway) On to Wilwood BP-20. Lots of brakes. Now we had to learn how to drive. These pads slowed every up on the first two or three laps, then we got fast. Also, an improvement 70-0, We did hear them a bit, and noticed a little dusting, or it was El-Toro. Last up was Wilwood #A pads. ultra agressive. A new learning curve here, or a real driver is needed. None of us could get used to them on the RC, But, if you could modulate the pedal just right, 70-0 was great! Oh, noisy and dusty. So, at the end of the day, we all needed new tires (thank you so much BFG) and were tired of changing pads. W all dicided that the more agressive Wilwood pads would be great for competition, but may be too much for a driver. The Hawk, Bear, (or an equal) were worth the money), and none of us will run OE pads again.

Camaro times: O.E. pads - RC=1.38, ST=128ft
Hawk - RC=1.31, ST=121ft
Baer - RC=1.28, ST=117ft
BP-20 - RC=1.24,** ST=118
#A - RC=1.27, ST=106**

Bullit times: O.E. pads - RC=1.41, ST=139ft
Hawk - RC=1.29, ST=134ft
Baer - RC=1.29, ST=133ft
BP-20 RC=1.26**, ST=126ft
#A - RC=1.31, ST=111ft**

J.T. O.E.pads - RC=1.58, ST=165ft
Hawk - RC=1.49, ST=147ft
Baer - RC=1.47, ST=145ft
PB-20 - RC=1.41**, ST=137ft**
#A - RC=1.44, ST=1.52ft

[robnolimit]

Note: was it scientific? - NO. Does it prove anything? A little. Are we experts? - NO. The J.T. posted the biggest overall gains, which is a good sign for the average truck lover. We learned the none of us are good enough drivers to take full advantage of the most agressive pads. We also learned without a doubt, that a good set of pads is worth the extra $$$. And, that a day with friends at an abandend airfield is way better than actually working.

[67cheby]

cool info thanks for sharing !!

[Grimee]

Rob ,Sounds like a fun day also very informative , thanks for taking the time and sharing your findings I have always wondered if the more expensive pads performed better. Not trying to change the subject but I am curious what your thoughts are on front suspension. Do Camaros and Corvettes have a design advantage over the trucks when it comes to the basic geometry ? if so do you know what the differences are ? Are the differences in the spindle design or the upper and lower control arm mounting points ? or all of the above ? is it possible to obtain the same geometry using truck components ? just curious

[robnolimit]

Originally Posted by Grimee

Rob ,Sounds like a fun day also very informative , thanks for taking the time and sharing your findings I have always wondered if the more expensive pads performed better. Not trying to change the subject but I am curious what your thoughts are on front suspension. Do Camaros and Corvettes have a design advantage over the trucks when it comes to the basic geometry ? if so do you know what the differences are ? Are the differences in the spindle design or the upper and lower control arm mounting points ? or all of the above ? is it possible to obtain the same geometry using truck components ? just curious

Thanks, Hey, how's you'r new project coming, any picts? The biggest advantages has to be weight. Not total weight, but where it is. Height of the CG, and ft/rr balance. Corvette stuff works great, in a 'vette. One problem with the 'vette stuff is the rack placement, which is relatively high. So, in a non-'vette, the motor must be raised to clear (motor sits behing the rack in a 'vette) Any gain in suspension performance was lost in raising the motor, and CG. A-arms are pretty simple, 3 pivit points, 2 chassis and one ball joint. Spindles are also kind of basic. Height, ball joint to ball joint, pin height, pin inclination, and steering arm location. (also brake mounts) It is the location of al the pivit points and components that makes the diffence. Trucks sat up, and have a higher roll center than most cars, so they don't tip over. This high RC makes them 'push' if drivin hard into a corner. The specs of a C-10 spindle, and an Impalla spindle are almost the same, brake mounts are different, but the C-10 spindle is 8 lbs heavier (truck) It is possible to move the truck parts around and make them work well, ask Hotchkis and Mike Hickman, they've finally got the Big Orange C-10 working well. Track width is also an issue when swapping. C-10's are WIDE. Looks like our new p/u will have a 64" track. (gen II Camaro is 61) . Hunt down a copy of "Supension Geometry Pro" and try plugging in some numbers.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by robnolimit

....Corvette stuff works great, in a 'vette. One problem with the 'vette stuff is the rack placement, which is relatively high. So, in a non-'vette, the motor must be raised to clear (motor sits behing the rack in a 'vette) Any gain in suspension performance was lost in raising the motor, and CG.

Ok, Vette stuff works great in a Vette & does not perform the same if swapped into a C10. That being said, it should still work better vs. the truck stuff & would shed some front end weight??? Yes, no?

[Ackattack]

Which model of Hawk pads were you using?

[robnolimit]

We used the HPS pads, very street friendly and only about 50 bucks a set. The HP pro is more suited for autocross and track days, but we thought that they were not a good comparion for our tests.

[PBFAB.COM]

I don't want to step on any toes jumping into a thread that another vendor started... but I do have a little input on the Vette stuff. There are going to be a lot of variables, but the there can be some major performance gains if configured properly. A C4 conversion can be configured so that it only raises the motor 1.5" from stock, but lowers the entire truck a good 6-7 inches from stock. It can also achieve a roll center height of 4.725" and get a nasty 9.09 degrees of caster. The unsprung weight savings is also a big plus.

If configured properly, the vette components can perform extremely well on a truck.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by porterbuilt

I don't want to step on any toes jumping into a thread that another vendor started... but I do have a little input on the Vette stuff. There are going to be a lot of variables, but the there can be some major performance gains if configured properly. A C4 conversion can be configured so that it only raises the motor 1.5" from stock, but lowers the entire truck a good 6-7 inches from stock. It can also achieve a roll center height of 4.725" and get a nasty 9.09 degrees of caster. The unsprung weight savings is also a big plus.

If configured properly, the vette components can perform extremely well on a truck.

Well.... you already know what I have . I was kind of just curious about where that line of 'diminishing returns' starts when guys start swapping parts vs the C10 stuff.

[robnolimit]

Nate us correct. - No thread jacking issues - the more the merrier. I encourage all the input. I have to agree with Nate on the performance gains. Would it be better if it had a magic 'Z' rack so you could drop the motor? - sure. But there is no such thing. Remember that everything we do is a trade-off.

[Grimee]

Thanks for the input everyone ,As for the new project we are pulling it into the shop early next week right next to the Tahoe ( still waiting to get on the dyno at Whipple) I will post some pics so you can see what a pile of crap we started with thats the reason for all the questions. I am starting with a clean slate and plan on a full chassis build so I want to explore all my options before I get in to deep . I plan on using the same rocker arm rear suspension I have on the tahoe ,Robs familiar with it . I also plan on setting the motor back at least 4 inches so i thought the steering clearance issues would be minimal . here is another question on frame rail design I want to keep weight to a minimum so what do you guys think is the strongest yet lightest way to go? I do plan on a cage with engine hoop and rear kickers . Oh yeah this is a 70 blazer and will be a roadster when finished .Thanks for the help

[robnolimit]

Originally Posted by Grimee

Thanks for the input everyone ,As for the new project we are pulling it into the shop early next week right next to the Tahoe ( still waiting to get on the dyno at Whipple) I will post some pics so you can see what a pile of crap we started with thats the reason for all the questions. I am starting with a clean slate and plan on a full chassis build so I want to explore all my options before I get in to deep . I plan on using the same rocker arm rear suspension I have on the tahoe ,Robs familiar with it . I also plan on setting the motor back at least 4 inches so i thought the steering clearance issues would be minimal . here is another question on frame rail design I want to keep weight to a minimum so what do you guys think is the strongest yet lightest way to go? I do plan on a cage with engine hoop and rear kickers . Oh yeah this is a 70 blazer and will be a roadster when finished .Thanks for the help

Kurt, it seems like you got bit at Optima. Sorry to tell you, - there is no cure.

[Grimee]

Originally Posted by robnolimit

Kurt, it seems like you got bit at Optima. Sorry to tell you, - there is no cure.

Your right Rob I did get bit but it was long before our invite to the Optima ,this project has been in the works for a while and now that we are getting close to finishing the tahoe its time to get moving, It will be nice to have something that I can run at all the events and not be limited by year plus it will be cool to build something without the normal expectations we deal with at the shop everyday

[hgs_notes]

Originally Posted by Grimee

I will post some pics so you can see what a pile of crap we started with thats the reason for all the questions. I am starting with a clean slate and plan on a full chassis build so I want to explore all my options before I get in to deep . I plan on using the same rocker arm rear suspension I have on the tahoe ,Robs familiar with it . I also plan on setting the motor back at least 4 inches so i thought the steering clearance issues would be minimal . here is another question on frame rail design I want to keep weight to a minimum so what do you guys think is the strongest yet lightest way to go? I do plan on a cage with engine hoop and rear kickers . Oh yeah this is a 70 blazer and will be a roadster when finished .Thanks for the help

Can't answer the question on the frame rails, but would love to see you have a build thread for this truck.

[Grimee]

Originally Posted by hgs_notes

Can't answer the question on the frame rails, but would love to see you have a build thread for this truck.

I was thinking about a build thread if its something people would like to see. Also EVERYONE needs to know I am not a professional chassis builder and should not assume any thing I do is either safe or sane . I was hoping if I start a build thread that you guys will keep me in check

[jayman68]

Originally Posted by Grimee

I was thinking about a build thread if its something people would like to see. Also EVERYONE needs to know I am not a professional chassis builder and should not assume any thing I do is either safe or sane . I was hoping if I start a build thread that you guys will keep me in check

Go for it we'll watch!

[hgs_notes]

Originally Posted by Grimee

I was thinking about a build thread if its something people would like to see. Also EVERYONE needs to know I am not a professional chassis builder and should not assume any thing I do is either safe or sane . I was hoping if I start a build thread that you guys will keep me in check

Have you seen the build threads? There are like 3 people who would be considered pro chassis builders. The rest of us are just throwing spagetti at the fridge to see if it sticks. It's all about sharing ideas, good and sometimes bad. he feedback helps in both keeping us in check and motivation to continue. Go for it.