Great "how it's made" video. However: "That kind of power on wheels requires light weight, and cast iron is very heavy. It would also wear out too quickly, due to the intense heat friction generates when you brake a car with such a powerful engine." 1. More power does NOT require light weight. More power tends to shrug off excess weight. Lighter weight discs would be a benefit on any car of any power since it makes more efficient use of power and requires less brake friction to slow the wheel rotation. 2. I guarantee that our Honda minivan, at a very meager 250-ish hp, generates more heat during braking than any Porsche. Because it weighs more - plain and simple. And it does so on cast iron discs. How do we not die on a daily basis? Let that sink in. The expensive ceramic disc has a very appropriate and good home sitting on Porsche axles, and I think the tech is way-bad-cool. But more power does NOT require light weight, and powerful engines do not, in and of themselves, cause more braking friction. The benefits of a ceramic disc are more about how the car is likely to be driven than anything else.
2 is completely incorrect for the reason i doubt your 260hp honda mini van is shredding the Nürburgring at 150+ miles an hour and then braking so hard that you're disks start to glow like some porches do otherwise yes they would generate more heat Secondly- they're not meaning that they're lighter because the more powerful engines couldn't handle the extra weight its all about shaving seconds off lap time and trust me every pound counts it also reduces unsprung weight helping the wheels regain contact with the road over bumps Last thing no you would ever "need" carbon-ceramic disks on a town car be it a porch or lamborghini etc but if you plan on using it as a track vehicle yes you're going to want ceramics or you'll have some major fade
@kaddynips368 - You mentioned reducing unstrung weight as "helping the wheels regain contact with the road over bumps", and I'd agree that regaining contact is important in a turn, but not so much in a straight. Another benefit of reducing unsprung weight is that each bump would slow you down less. Think of a tire rolling on a level-&-smooth road, except for a one-inch bump. In this simplified scenario, Momentum (which is a "vector") is split into two components, one of which is "up & down momentum" and the other is "the remainder momentum still moving straight ahead" but at a slower speed. On a car, the shock absorber absorbs the up-&-down movement, and the engine accelerates the car back to the original speed, if desired by the driver. The reduction in unstrung weight means that the car is slowed less than if there were a higher amount of unstrung weight. So, the bumpier the road, the higher the benefit of reduced unstrung weight, not to mention marginally better handling, which might mean the difference between staying planted on the road, and sliding off the road because your turn was "too tight" to handle the slightly higher wheel-momentum, whose vector (pointing straight ahead) was undeterred by the grip of your tires, and the wishes of the overzealous driver. Also, you overlooked the fact that, when driving up a long mountain road, every mini-van accumulates a lot of potential energy that converts to velocity on the downward slopes. Brake fade can become deadly even at low speeds. Finally, there's long been advertisements for the shortest "stopping distances" required for coming to a halt from 60 mph. My 1980 Honda Prelude was advertised as requiring only 100 feet, compared to 125 feet, for other "normal" cars. Anyone can calculate the amount of heat-generated from stopping my Prelude from 60 mph, which doesn't depend on the distance required. But, just remember this: If you double the speed, then the amount of heat generated would be 4-times as much, and if you triple the speed, the heat generated would be 9-times as much, because kinetic energy = (1/2)(m)(v^2). And that's only partially why the distance required to stop a car from 150 miles per hour is so much longer than from 50 mph, or 75 mph, even without any brake fade at all. Good heat exhaust from your brakes can be a huge factor. Have fun on the Nürburgring, but try to keep in mind your super-car's inherent limitations, and the physics involved in every turn and slope. It's no fun, otherwise.
![[ไฮไลต์] แบดมินตันชาย วิว กุลวุฒิ (ไทย) vs LEE Zii Jia (มาเลเซีย) รอบรองชนะเลิศ | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mvBiEAqlssw/mqdefault.jpg)
excellent video very informative ... thx
Complicated process but nice video... 😎
Thanks mate!
awesome video
thumbs up great vid
Cool. But what's the catchy music playing in background during the video, please let me to know! :(
10000 us dollars per rotor! They better be perfect lol
how to calculate pressure in compacting process?
Njir, koyo ngene og sepi lohh...
Great "how it's made" video.
However:
"That kind of power on wheels requires light weight, and cast iron is very heavy. It would also wear out too quickly, due to the intense heat friction generates when you brake a car with such a powerful engine."
1. More power does NOT require light weight. More power tends to shrug off excess weight. Lighter weight discs would be a benefit on any car of any power since it makes more efficient use of power and requires less brake friction to slow the wheel rotation.
2. I guarantee that our Honda minivan, at a very meager 250-ish hp, generates more heat during braking than any Porsche. Because it weighs more - plain and simple. And it does so on cast iron discs. How do we not die on a daily basis? Let that sink in.
The expensive ceramic disc has a very appropriate and good home sitting on Porsche axles, and I think the tech is way-bad-cool. But more power does NOT require light weight, and powerful engines do not, in and of themselves, cause more braking friction. The benefits of a ceramic disc are more about how the car is likely to be driven than anything else.
+Andrew Short Yup that part was pretty f'cked up.
I guess speed plays a part too, which the engine does have impact on
2 is completely incorrect for the reason i doubt your 260hp honda mini van is shredding the Nürburgring at 150+ miles an hour and then braking so hard that you're disks start to glow like some porches do otherwise yes they would generate more heat
Secondly- they're not meaning that they're lighter because the more powerful engines couldn't handle the extra weight its all about shaving seconds off lap time and trust me every pound counts it also reduces unsprung weight helping the wheels regain contact with the road over bumps
Last thing no you would ever "need" carbon-ceramic disks on a town car be it a porch or lamborghini etc but if you plan on using it as a track vehicle yes you're going to want ceramics or you'll have some major fade
@kaddynips368 - You mentioned reducing unstrung weight as "helping the wheels regain contact with the road over bumps", and I'd agree that regaining contact is important in a turn, but not so much in a straight. Another benefit of reducing unsprung weight is that each bump would slow you down less. Think of a tire rolling on a level-&-smooth road, except for a one-inch bump. In this simplified scenario, Momentum (which is a "vector") is split into two components, one of which is "up & down momentum" and the other is "the remainder momentum still moving straight ahead" but at a slower speed.
On a car, the shock absorber absorbs the up-&-down movement, and the engine accelerates the car back to the original speed, if desired by the driver. The reduction in unstrung weight means that the car is slowed less than if there were a higher amount of unstrung weight. So, the bumpier the road, the higher the benefit of reduced unstrung weight, not to mention marginally better handling, which might mean the difference between staying planted on the road, and sliding off the road because your turn was "too tight" to handle the slightly higher wheel-momentum, whose vector (pointing straight ahead) was undeterred by the grip of your tires, and the wishes of the overzealous driver.
Also, you overlooked the fact that, when driving up a long mountain road, every mini-van accumulates a lot of potential energy that converts to velocity on the downward slopes. Brake fade can become deadly even at low speeds.
Finally, there's long been advertisements for the shortest "stopping distances" required for coming to a halt from 60 mph. My 1980 Honda Prelude was advertised as requiring only 100 feet, compared to 125 feet, for other "normal" cars. Anyone can calculate the amount of heat-generated from stopping my Prelude from 60 mph, which doesn't depend on the distance required. But, just remember this: If you double the speed, then the amount of heat generated would be 4-times as much, and if you triple the speed, the heat generated would be 9-times as much, because kinetic energy = (1/2)(m)(v^2). And that's only partially why the distance required to stop a car from 150 miles per hour is so much longer than from 50 mph, or 75 mph, even without any brake fade at all. Good heat exhaust from your brakes can be a huge factor.
Have fun on the Nürburgring, but try to keep in mind your super-car's inherent limitations, and the physics involved in every turn and slope. It's no fun, otherwise.
Cheap