Not too long ago Andie Lin had posted some graphs of some of the more popular brake pads. I've searched and couldn't find the thread. Did anyone save a link? The graphics had things like torque curves, friction co-efficient and operating temps.

Unfortunately, this info isn't on the Cobalt web site, and it really should be!

 

Any questions?

 

Hopefully not a brake failure. I'm specifically looking for technical data comparing the Hawk HP+ and the Cobalt GT-Sport.

 

i IM'd him. i'm sure he'll reply.

btw..i used the cobalt gt sports this weekend at Watkins glen in the rain. they were inside nsx calipers on my prelude. rear are axis ultimates. all purchased from andie. WONDERFUL. thats all i gotta say. worked perfect for me even with my heavy car. rotors were brembo blanks in front and stock rear

jeff

 

Hehe...definitely not brake failure. :-) Just driver error in overdriving the car...it's in the shop right now and will be ready for the last race of the season at Daytona. Roger Foo will be flying in to co-drive the car for that race.

I'll post a link to the comparisoin graph later tonight when I get to working on the website, as I've been out of town for the past week on business.

Best regards,

Andie

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Shmeek &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I'm specifically looking for technical data comparing the Hawk HP+ and the Cobalt GT-Sport.</TD></TR></TABLE>
me too. if i remember correctly, they were close, but the cobalt compound performed little better. im lookin to try them next.

-spenc

 

Bump

Just a reminder on those graphs, Andie.

 

delete!!!


Modified by genxguy at 8:04 AM 10/25/2003

 

IMO, on the Cobalt chart the fade-critical temperature of the GT-Sports should be a lot farther from the Axxis Ultimate than it appears on that chart. I've tracked both and I felt the GT-Sports were WAY better.

 

That graph has always bothered me a good deal. It has no hard numbers, (in fact no numbers at all), discloses no testing methods or equipment, let alone who did the testing. This would be considered by many to be dishonest marketing.

Everyone looking at this graph should exercise common sense regarding the source of the graph and the lack of data to back it up. I personally wouldnt even use it as reference.

 

The graph has a explanation below. Did you read it? Coefficient of friction and temp. range info is availble on the Cobalt website (for Cobalt pads). Do you have an axe to grind with Andie or Cobalt? I know that there are certain people on here that seem to. Are you one of them? If not, I feel that I should point out that your post is inflammatory in that it questions a person's integrity.

 

a little "friction" never hurt anybody!

Mike-who's still enjoying the Carbotech pads Andie sold him.

 

Man, I'd really love to try out the GT-Sports, however, due to a shortage of pads, and sub-par customer service, I'm on the prowel for other pads.

Cliff Notes: I ordered Sept 30, set for ITR/Legend calipers. Received a phone call and they mentioned they were out of stock, and would make sure I had them in my hands 10/15, as HPDE was 10/18. I did not receive pads, or call, so I called on 10/17, as sometimes in the rural areas deliveries are a day late. Cobalt mentioned they were still on back order and some computer problem did not remind them to call me or ship them. I did the HPDE on Porterfield R4S which I had about 50% pad left on. Cobalt said they would call me back Monday to see what I wanted to do. No call, I haven't bothered to call. Sad too, as the ITS prelude I rode in while at the HPDE was equipped with Cobalt pads and I was looking forward to similar pads. Oh well. Any suggestions?

 

***Edited: I've put the past 3 posts together to save space***

********************

Evan,

Please read the note to customers/public on the side of the chart. This chart was never intended as a means of making a final decision on pad purchases. If you compare the length of each bar segment, you will find that they are quite accurate.

Testing protocol and data, specifically, are trade secrets and confidential information to which is only made available to Cobalt employees and shareholders who have signed 3 different non-disclosure agreements.

-Andie

********************

David,

I have looked up your order, which was placed before I had to go out of town for two weeks on business. We still have your order open, but have closed it on your request (I received your e-mail earlier today and traced it back to your original order). Unfortunately, we are currently backordered on the GT-Sport in the ITR fitment, due to high demand; production quirks should be resolved shortly. Likewise, I am still in the process of training our staff on how to properly and expeditiously handle similar situations, so that customers are, at the very least, aprised of their order status.

Certainly, please feel free to call us any time with your questions at 877.562.9237.

Regards,

Andie

********************

Jeremy,

Compared the length of each segment, and not the length of the combined CF and FT segments whel looking at different compounds listed on the chart. This may help.

-Andie


Modified by cobalt at 2:32 PM 10/24/2003

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by civicrr &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Do you have an axe to grind with Andie or Cobalt? I know that there are certain people on here that seem to. Are you one of them? If not, I feel that I should point out that your post is inflammatory in that it questions a person's integrity. </TD></TR></TABLE>

You haven't bought any ocean front property in Arizona from seemlingly reputable, ethical, and beaming with integrity individuals, have you?

I agree with elgorey. The first thing I thought when I saw the chart was the complete lack of temp range and CoF. I have no idea if the chart has a "curved" scale to make the above average products look just that much better. The chart is nothing but colorful, eye catching promotionalism and like it says in the small print-don't rely on the information within the chart.

I have no vested interest in Cobalt or any other pad at the moment (I am changing vehicles) but do maintain an interest in existing and new products that I may use in the future.

Rick

 

As you will find, all product manufacturers publish their own specifications for their respective products. Cobalt's website has detailed information on all of our products, from temperature ranges, to coefficient of friction, to the actual torque curve, relating temperature, friction level, and vehicle speed. Ferodo and Hawk also both publish numbers for their own products, as do other companies. If you take the time to research these numbers from the various companies, you will see that they are well reflected in the graph that some people seem to have an issue with.

Cobalt was built upon superior product quality and knowledge, industry-leading customer service (which we continually strive to improve based on customer comments and suggestions), and most importantly, honesty. If I make the statement that the Cobalt spec(VR) is 500F more fade free than the Hawk Blue 9012, and 300F more fade free than the Carbotech Panther XP while also have a much flatter torque curve that lends itself to a very direct pedal pressure to braking torque relationship, then these are statements of fact.

What I have found is that individuals who are publically vocal in terms of making either explicit of implied negative statements with regards to one company or the other, while lending their support to another company and its products...that these individuals have never used/tried the products from the company they are detracting from, and in most cases, are also among the most uninformed participants in a public forum, such as here on Honda-Tech.com.

That being said, product selection on the part of the public should be based on an individual's own assessment of product performance -- this is a matter of personal preference.

-Andie

 

I agree with Evan that I've always found this chart of dubious value. I thought it was such a great took when I first found it, until I realized that it says absolutely nothing. With no scale and an unmarked axis, there is not a single inference that can or should be drawn from that graph. To say it is not a final decision is an understatement -- but as for the lines being accurate: as to what? from where? in what range?

Significantly, the reply that the methodology and resulting data are trade secrets and confidential makes me think a lot less of the chart and its origins. Formula and research are secrets. But if you are going to run a comparison test -- and that's what this purports to be -- you owe the public a statement of methodology and results data.

A company telling me "buy our products because our tests say they're the best" that will tell me neither how those tests were undertaken nor what the results were (aside from pretty colored lines) is not a company I trust. If you are going to go through the effort, don't hide the results... unless you've got something to hide. At least before I knew this was subject to a confidentiality agreement, I could pass it off as fluff. The fact that a legal agreement was drawn around the data makes it a bit more ominous.

not in the brake pad wars; just stating a logical point.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by civicrr &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The graph has a explanation below. Did you read it? Coefficient of friction and temp. range info is availble on the Cobalt website (for Cobalt pads). Do you have an axe to grind with Andie or Cobalt? I know that there are certain people on here that seem to. Are you one of them? If not, I feel that I should point out that your post is inflammatory in that it questions a person's integrity. </TD></TR></TABLE>

I did in fact read it, and "small print" means little to nothing when the intent of the diagram is clear. I have no axe to grind with cobalt, in fact have spoken with him several times, I was a GT-Sport tester, and have used other cobalt pad compounds. I have no involving interest for or against Cobalt , unlike you, who lists Cobalt as a sponsor and thus are obvious bias. My comment was in no way inflammatory. As someone who is both educated and expereienced in business practices I believe that graph to be dishonest.

Whether or not it the graph was meant to influence final pad purchases is irrelevant. The graph tries to objectively show the performance of brake pads with no numbers , figures, or tests to back up these claims.

A quote from this thread shows exactly what I am talking about
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Lo-Buck EF &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">me too. if i remember correctly, they were close, but the cobalt compound performed little better. im lookin to try them next.</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

LET'S ALL JUST SAY NO TO WAR....BRAKE WAR IN THIS CASE!

Andie is to be expected to promote his product.

Andie's satisfied customers are to be expected to promote his product.

Scott, who uses the same pads that RTR uses, which aren't Cobalt, is satisfied with them, hasn't done back to back testing, isn't going to do back to back testing anytime soon, doesn't believe back to back testing right now would reveal a dramatic difference, and would rather spend his time working on other problems untill I'm going so much faster that I have braking problems all over again...then maybe I'll try Cobalt, or Pagid, or PFC-01.

 

what exactly is the big stink here? that graph gives a visual representation of the general characteristics of the different pad types and compounds. nowhere does it say "this pad is the best pad" or "this pad is better then this competitors pad". all it does is give the general idea that the cobalt gt-r spec(vr) pad works to a higher temperature and has a higher CoF then the cobalt it-r spec(c) or carbotech HPS. true, it doesn't say _how_ the results were obtained. it doesn't have to. the charts purpose isn't to convince someone what pads to buy rather give the buyer a quick reference tool about the general differences behind the different pads. someone looking for an all out race pad on a 3100lb wrx won't be happy with wasting their time looking at Axxis Ultimates.

nate-has zero affiliation with cobalt and in fact just bought some carbotech bobcats

 

Part of the stink is that the chart is a marketing document with a selective competitive sample.

The other part of the stink is that people expect transparency and disclosure when there's no possibility of it.

The thing about brake pads, as I see it, is that there will be, for a reasonable sample of competitive pads, differences in their Temp / Mu curves. Some will have higher or lower initial bite. Some will be flatter, others will fall off faster.

Between your contact patches and your foot are only the Mu curve and your physical control over your foot. A representative, and fairly narrow, band of pad performance will be masked by other factors, making it a waste of time to look for big chunks of time between a VR and an HT-10 for example.

Most of us wind up working our way up thru a brands range as our needs increase. Some make a brand change during this progression and attribute performance increases to that change - somewhat erroneously.

The best manufacturers products are roughly comparable. That leaves it to personal preference, the first step of which is often random. All that matters is that you get what you're expecting when you push the pedal.

And no matter what, life is usually better with a fresh set of whatever it is that you're running.

Scott, who probably over-acted in that last post. It's just silly to fight over some of this stuff...not that that isn't fun sometimes of course.

 

Ahh, the brake pad mystery. I too consider the chart on Andie's site to be virtually useless since there is no back up data for it that is available to the viewer. A graph useful in comparing things has axes and units and is linear or logarithmic, based on data measured in reliable, repeatable ways, under similar conditions. The graph in question proves nothing. It is a marketing tool. If the source of the data becomes available, then it becomes useful.

I bought a set of front and rear pads (Spec VR and ITR) from Andie for my ITR and wore them out completely. I have also used Hawk Blues and Carbotech Panther + and even tried some EBC Reds recently. Contrary to what Andie told me, his Spec VR pads were no better than Hawk Blues, and I am ordering Hawk Blues or their higher temp range model next. Andie's pads were easier on the rotors (throw-away parts for me and much cheaper than the pads in any case) but I preferred the braking feel of the Blues. Tires seem to limit my braking the most, and not pads. I need more cooling and will be installing NSX calipers and the 28 mm thick GS rotors shortly. Andie's pads were good, but not just the miracle solution. If I had more money, then aluminum hats with floating rotors and multi-piston aluminum calipers would be going on, but then I would be short of money for things that would really make me go faster. More power to weight down the straight. I just don't spend that many seconds on the brake pedal, but I sure do spend a lot of time with the gas pedal on the floor waiting for the end of the straight to come. Just floor the throttle exiting turn 1 at the Glen and don't brake until you get to the bus stop after barreling up the esses to the main straight at full throttle. Like 25 seconds on full throttle and 3 seconds on the brakes. If I can drop straight time by 10 percent or brake time by 10 percent, I'll take the 2.5 seconds and forget about the 0.3 seconds. More bhp/ton please!

 

Am I biased? You could say so. I am indeed a grateful reciepient of sponsorship. In my dealings with Andie, before I was sponsored, he has been nothing but honest. He has contined to be so. Would I question those who basically state that my sponsor is dishonest? Yes. Would I defend a sponsor when I considered them wrong? No. My integrity isn't for sale. Please don't imply that it is.


I like the Cobalt pads better than the H brand & P brand products that I have used before. They 'felt' better to me. I don't claim to be an engineer. I don't have much more than a laymans understanding of the numbers. I know what feels better to me. The graph represents, to me, a very basic snapshot. I believe that is all it is supose to be.

Perhaps we just approach things in a different way.

BTW, prior to being a fireman, I went to business school (econ major). I was the sales manager and buyer in a retail bicycle store for more than 10 years. We did gross sales in excess of 1/2 million - remember this is over 7 years ago. I too know a little about business.

 

In reading the many opinions and thoughts contained in this thread, it occurs to me that the basis for many disagreements here is the identification of what is of marketing value and what is of real-world use value. Marketing is an essential part of business -- it makes potential end-users/customers aware of your company and products, and also informs them on a very basic level of comaprable products. I do not feel that the information on this graph, which has not been updated for several months, and which is not a primary marketing tool that we use (we have never distributed this graph as part of our marketing program), is inaccurate or deceiving in any way whatsoever. My personal and professional integrity is what Cobalt was built upon, and my reputation for being nothing short of open and honest is well known in many circles, from among customers to colleagues, and even to Cobalt's competitors. Likewise, the performance of Cobalt's products are well-tested and documented, and likewise affirmed by test results at the professional motorsports level.

I am not in the business of telling people that Cobalt's products are the best on the market, period -- this would be pure, biased opinion. Rather, I am in the business of telling people which products will work the best for their intended use based on our in-house and field-based test data and experience, whether it be a Cobalt manufactured product, or a competitor's product. This being said, one will find that Cobalt does not manufacture products for all vehicles, nor do we try to be everything to everyone...we choose to focus on those applications and areas of motorsports where we have a definitive knoweldge advantage over our competitors, and to design products which exceed the performance of existing products in those specific markets.

I believe in full disclosure, but public dissemination of information which could be used by our competitor's to benefit themselves, and in some cases, place us at a disadvantage, is just poor business practice.

I encourage all performance-oriented drivers to do their research online, or consult trusted parties, and as time and budgets permit, test various products, and decide for themselves what works best for them, period. Cobalt has a well-known and well-earned reputation for providing our customers with the information necessary to make an informed decision, far beyond the "it's a great brake pad" or "our compound is the best and/or better than xyz-product"...these are matters of opinions.

Examples of usage, such as Roger Foo's decision to switch from Ferodo to Cobalt, and Michael Mcdowell's decision to switch from Performance Friction to Ferodo, and then to switch to Cobalt for the championship race of the season at the Petit Lemans (Pro Formula Mazda), is proof enough of the merits of Cobalt's products. In Michael McDowell's case, we spent a considerable amount of time reviewing vehicle telemetry to confirm that there was an advantage of his using the Cobalt spec(VR), versus the Ferodo 4003 and DS3000, measuring data including longitudinal G's, shock travel rate, rotor and pad temperatures, throttle application points, etc...and the data confirmed a distinct advantage.

Regarding sponsorship and sponsored drivers, it is my personal policy that drivers/teams who seek sponsorship must achieve an advantage from using our products, and be able to document those advantages. Cobalt declines nearly 90% of all sponsorship requests at the amateur and professional motorsports levels; those who are looking for free or heavily discounted products as the basis of sponsorship need not apply.

Lastly, as all of our customers and the general public know, and which some people might take the time to consider and think about, comparison graphs and other marketing "tools" don't sell brake pad compounds, per se...proving superior product knowledge and performance do, and this is what fuels Cobalt's operations. The accuracy of any relative comparison graph we currently have or may produce in the future is based on my own personal integrity, which I know has a very high rating in absolute terms.

-Andie

 

Mike,

Did I miss something?

I don't see anybody implying anything here. It never occured to me that anyone had questioned your integrity. I'm just being "a little" critical about some marketing materials.

My only point about the chart itself is based on the fact that the competitors models stop short of their counterparts in the Cobalt line - ie: where are the HT10's and up?

That makes IT a biased document. Nothing wrong with that. Only an idiot expects a manufacturer to pimp their stuff straight.

Andie isn't dishonest - by the standards of commerce as I understand them. He's typical. In fact he may even be better than typical. His product may have a margin of superiority - I don't know. But it's likely a difference and not a distinction.

Scott, who thinks that if you were to add up all the benefits people try to sell you, you ought to be going at least 3 seconds faster a lap than you actually would...eh? I buy into less and less as time goes by.