Brakes Idea 1st Gen Most liked posts in thread: A possible different bigger brake idea and, Meth Injection and more

So I have my GP2 330 x 26 rotors installed with the Chevy Cobalt SS Brembo Calipers providing the friction. To work need to have at least 15" of inside the wheel diameter along with grinding 1/16" from the hub knuckles as the Cobalt's have a 4 7/8" center vs the MINI's 4 3/4". With my wheels I also had to go with 5 mm offsets.

The essentials are: Two SS Cobalt Calipers + $356, one caliper pin kit + $19, two rotors + $78, brake pads + $19 (Amazon had EBC Reds on sale), four caliper bolts + $10, two banjo bolts + $10, copper crush washers + $5, and caliper shims + $15 = $512.

The last picture is where I filed/ground out the existing hub knuckles .

 

This should also work for a Gen2. The Gen2 JCW pad would have 2 1/4" of pad surface on a 316x22 rotor where this option has a pad with 2 1/8" of pad surface on a 330x26 rotor. The heat mitigation should be better than both the Gen1 JCW/R56 and the Gen2 JCW.

I also made up some washers that have a tab to compensate for some of the material I filed out. If you look at the last picture in the above post you will notice that I did not enlarge the hole on a vertical axis but rather diagonally the pull the caliper back in so the pads were not right at the edge of the rotor.

Not a bad option for around $500.

 

When I was trying centering methods I did have the pins in ass backwards. Actually if you put the pins in from the front, it would be impossible to pull them out as they recede within the holes where when placing from the back somebody with a hammer and punch could push them back quite easily when the car was parked.

What are you going to be putting on?

 

I have a 2% overdrive already in place but with Jan's cam, injectors and tune along with a 421 header I am not pushing high boost values. The 17 should provide a nice kick and the meth will help keep the engine cooler.

And don't worry, I don't plan on using window washer . . . . . .

 

Even the famous Dave.0 would not be able to pull the pins out with a vise-grip as the head is recessed once you have them driven/set. You will see when you start detailing the inside/backside of the caliper . . . . . . .

 

And my money is on that he does . . . . .

I do the calipers and the wheel about once every two months.

 

Lots of really smart people here but:

1.) Yes 17 plus 2 is 19 but those values are associated with a standard S head that I do no have. The flow rate on the S is about 106 cfm where the JCW is about 126 cfm so IMO if one put the 17+2 on an S and on a JCW, the JCW boost value would be lower as there is more air going through the system.
2.) I also have a RMW Dominator Cam that is keeping valves open longer that allows more air through the system thereby reducing boost.
3.) With Meth Injection the intake temperatures are reduced.
4.) On the effect of smaller pulley sizes and increased revolutions for the AC compressor, the alternator and the water pump (through the supercharger), a similar effect is created when the rev limiter/redline is increased. If we use 9% as a increasing factor, at 3000 engine RPM the various parts driven by the belt will see 3270 rpm and at 6800 the result would be 7412. I do not track so therefore running at redline does not occur that much nor at a constant. I also think that there is a large safety factor engineered into the parts and the increased spin is not exceeding that value.

Now I need no help looking stupid as I can do that by myself everyday but what above is not logical? I have read where the ECU can only handle about 18 psi of boost but I am thinking that I will not be at that value with the head, the cam and a highflow cat.

 

The head flow rates are based upon Jan's data.

On the stress, I thought I read someplace where your redline was 8,000. I don't know about how the rest of your car is set up; you have an electric water pump, is your alternator pulley larger to compensate for the increased revs?

The biggest question is how are the components designed; average RPMs or Redline RPMs? I would think, and yes I may be falling on my face, the design is based on the Redline and not the average.

The best about all of this is that the subject was probably debated years ago and there is concrete evidence that merely needs to be found again. I can tell from reading 2003 posts that a 17% pulley was like Columbus sailing over the edge of the flat earth. All sorts of cavitation quotes from years back but it appears that has gone by the wayside.

 

Jan's big head is something like 185 cfm but even the JCW head flow is 18% better than the S.

If there is a major concern on the RPM and as the sweet spot is Max HP/Max Torque, the Redline could be decreased to compensate and the sweet spot is not touched,

 

From different web posts it appears the MINI is designed to rotate the supercharger at 2.06 times the engine speed, 6800 x 2.06 = 14,008. The 14,000 value is what all of the Eaton data I can find reflects, anything more than 14.000 is not there. I have read posts where somebody did some testing at 15,100.

First if Dave.0's ( I like to prod a Tiger) engine is redlined at 8k and if he has his foot hard on the peddle his supercharger with a stock pulley is turning 8000 x 2.06 = 16,480. So now the question come for most of us that were school prior to computers and in Vetsvette time prior to TV, does a 15% smaller pulley equate to 15% to be added to the 2.06 factor quoted earlier???? If it does than you could also apply the same reason to the JCW pulley that is around 11.8% smaller. This would mean the JCW supercharger is spinning at 6800 x 2.3 = 15,649,