Quote:
Originally Posted by FCobra94
Ugh, here goes...
|
Geez...I give up. You started this by stating "wrong", then you stated "how does your work qualify me to make such statements". I am simply attempting to counter your statements and enlighten you.
In order to have a true scientific test comparison one has to define the constituents of the ceramic composition. However, most mfg will not disclose due to their IPs. A ceramic pad can have 0-100% Al2O3 fibers, the rest of the constituents can be:
1. Binders.
2. Abrasive materials (other than Al2O3 fibers).
3. Performance materials to enhance braking and lubricants to help with temperature.
4. Fillers.
5. Structural materials to maintain shape.
So, please understand it cannot be a ceramic pad if there is 0% Al2O3 fibers. Would it be correct to call a pad "ceramic" if there is only 20% Al2O3 fibers? As mentioned previously some mfg substitute clay for ceramic fibers but still call them ceramic pads. I believe, the last report I have read, 40% of auto mfg use ceramic pads on their cars. The question is; what %wt is present regarding Al2O3 fibers ? Keep in mind some are probably not true ceramic pads, or might contain less than 20%.Thus, I maintain my position; 1) ceramic pads will wear steel rotors at a higher rate than non-ceramic pads (based on science = coefficient of friction + hardness). Dont get me wrong...I am not 100% against ceramic pads, one just has to be aware of the fact the wear rate will be faster on your rotors. I believe the OEM pads are fine if you are not tracking your car.
FYI...you can copy whatever report you can find via Google b/c there are many available.
BTW...I did not say "Outperform"...I said "wear faster or at a higher rate".
Thanks for the entertainment.