Yes, the same inertia. I think you possibly may be reading into it a bit too much.
I think what he means is when you put a V8 in a car -vs- a 2.5l engine, you have much more of a tendency to "drive". Not necessarily more aggressive, but probably much faster accelerations and quicker stops, more frequently.
In a small engine car, I let others leave me at a light, coast up to red lights with light braking stops. Generally just driving much more leisurely. Put me behind the wheel of a larger engine / sportier car, and I am a different driver all together Much more aggressive in acceleration, cornering, lane changing and in braking... What Pontiac calls "Excitement!"
Originally posted by TXOPIE: John...You forgot SCARIER driver!
Actually, it pretty much balances out in my case I think. In a sports car, I am much more attentive and "at one" with the road in that mindset. In a slower car I have the tendency to wrest one hand on the wheel and drive much more laid back.
Originally posted by JohnWPB: Yes, the same inertia. I think you possibly may be reading into it a bit too much.
I think what he means is when you put a V8 in a car -vs- a 2.5l engine, you have much more of a tendency to "drive". Not necessarily more aggressive, but probably much faster accelerations and quicker stops, more frequently.
In a small engine car, I let others leave me at a light, coast up to red lights with light braking stops. Generally just driving much more leisurely. Put me behind the wheel of a larger engine / sportier car, and I am a different driver all together Much more aggressive in acceleration, cornering, lane changing and in braking... What Pontiac calls "Excitement!"
I drive pretty much the same no matter what I'm in, truck, sedan, or sports car. The only time I drive slower than normal is in heavy traffic or when necessary due to towing, open cargo, etc…
There are 2.5L engines that make more power than 6.0L V8s, so displacement is a poor comparison for how one drives a car. The only reason the F-body and Corvette of the same era had larger brakes, was due to mass, not power.
I'm not saying one shouldn't upgrade the braking system if they're driving in a manner that requires it, or road racing. But when someone tells you that you need to have giant brakes simply because you swapped to a V8, it's total . There are plenty of ways to solve braking problems (primarily fade) as a result of more aggressive driving. Switching to larger wheels/rotors/calipers is the easy way out and is 90% for style anyway, and not braking (because nobody wants stylish 18" wheels with tiny 9.5" brake rotors). Outside of the desire to have big brakes fill up your big wheels for style, buying big wheels and 13" brakes is not a requirement when upgrading the power output of the car, and should be a last resort to solving braking issues. There are other upgrades, and slightly larger rotors that will fit under stock wheels, that can keep the F/R balance in braking much closer to what it should be in the Fiero.
Originally posted by dobey: There are 2.5L engines that make more power than 6.0L V8s, so displacement is a poor comparison for how one drives a car.
Oh come on already..... REALLY? Are people just looking just to find something to argue about? I think everyone else read between the lines there and figured out what was being implied.
So. let me correct what I said about if someone had a "bigger engine"..... If someone had an "engine with significantly more horse power or weight".
I drive pretty much the same no matter what I'm in, truck, sedan, or sports car. The only time I drive slower than normal is in heavy traffic or when necessary due to towing, open cargo, etc…
There are 2.5L engines that make more power than 6.0L V8s, so displacement is a poor comparison for how one drives a car. The only reason the F-body and Corvette of the same era had larger brakes, was due to mass, not power.
I'm not saying one shouldn't upgrade the braking system if they're driving in a manner that requires it, or road racing. But when someone tells you that you need to have giant brakes simply because you swapped to a V8, it's total . .
Okay I said I was done with this thread, but in the interest of safety I have to comment on this...
I suggest you re-evaluate your driving techniques. Driving the same regardless of the type of vehicle is dangerous. Do I drive the same in my 30 foot motorhome as my motorcycle? That would be ridiculous. The Motorhome is lucky if it gets above 60 mph and still needs a lot of runway to stop. The motorcycle can stop on a dime if it needs to, but only in emergencies unless I want to end up as a hood ornament.
In other words you need to drive according to the conditions AND according to what you are driving. Otherwise please stay away from me on the road.
Originally posted by jscott1: Driving the same regardless of the type of vehicle is dangerous. ......... you need to drive according to the conditions AND according to what you are driving. Otherwise please stay away from me on the road.
Originally posted by jscott1: Okay I said I was done with this thread, but in the interest of safety I have to comment on this...
I suggest you re-evaluate your driving techniques. Driving the same regardless of the type of vehicle is dangerous. Do I drive the same in my 30 foot motorhome as my motorcycle? That would be ridiculous. The Motorhome is lucky if it gets above 60 mph and still needs a lot of runway to stop. The motorcycle can stop on a dime if it needs to, but only in emergencies unless I want to end up as a hood ornament.
In other words you need to drive according to the conditions AND according to what you are driving. Otherwise please stay away from me on the road.
Wow. You really took that way too literally. "Pretty much" means exactly that, and not "exactly." Obviously it is impossible for one to drive a 30 foot RV in the same manner as one rides a motorcycle. The physics simply do not allow it. And motorcycles are ridden, not driven.
But just because a Corvette has 400+ HP doesn't mean I'm going to drive it like a pure race car, nor does a Fiero GT only having 135-140 HP mean I'm going to drive it like grandma taking the Sunday drive to church. For any standard passenger vehicle, I'm going to drive it with roughly the same amount of acceleration off the line, and at the same speeds on the road. Like I said in the post you were replying to, things like towing, RVs, moving vans, etc… would obviously be exceptions. But I'm not going to drive a 6000 lbs truck/suv 10 MPH under the speed limit while everyone else is going 10 MPH over, just because it's a 6000 lbs truck instead of a 3000 lbs car.
I drive perfectly safe and reasonable. Why you immediately assumed I would be driving everything like a pissed off teenager, I don't know. I don't drive RVs though, so whatever.
Originally posted by JohnWPB: Oh come on already..... REALLY? Are people just looking just to find something to argue about? I think everyone else read between the lines there and figured out what was being implied.
So. let me correct what I said about if someone had a "bigger engine"..... If someone had an "engine with significantly more horse power or weight".
Why must every time someone seeks to be explicit about things on this forum, that it is somehow viewed as arguing? Being explicit is good, especially for things like this, as there is very little context, and this isn't a local pub where people can infer meaning from body language, vocal stress patterns, etc… It's plain text on the Internet. Being explicit helps future passers by who come upon the thread, to understand better why something is true or not. And this repeated sentiment that one must upgrade their brakes because they are making more power, is just nonsense. It pretty much only gets repeated to people who are putting V8s in Fieros (OMG such power, must have big brakes), and almost never is suggested to people installing a turbo or N20 on a 2.8, or swapping in a 4 cylinder or V6, even when it makes twice as much power as the stock 2.8. I do find it ironic that you are complaining about this, and then agree with jscott jumping in to accuse me of somehow driving horribly unsafe and reading too much into what I said, and you stated you'd be the one to drive more aggressively, in vehicles that have more power.
That said, again, horsepower has nothing to do with inertia, or acceleration. What determines acceleration are gear ratios, tire size, and torque curve. Changing those does not change how much inertia the car has at any given speed. The only thing that changes is how fast you will reach that speed. Bigger brakes do nothing to help you there. Rather, they add rotating mass at the wheels, which causes a reduction in how fast you will reach that speed, and ironically means you are more likely to need them as they store more kinetic energy than smaller brake rotors would. And I stand by what I said, that the repeating the of you need to upgrade your brakes when upgrading the engine does not make it true. You need to upgrade your brakes, if you need to upgrade your brakes. Upgrading the engine shouldn't lead you to driving more aggressively on public roads. If you autocross, road race, etc… then you should probably upgrade your brakes, regardless of whether your engine is stock or not. And I mean general upgrades, not big rotors. If you want big rotors to fill out a set of more open wheels that are larger in diameter than stock, then fine, install big rotors, but don't act like it's because they are necessary because your car makes more power than stock. They are for style, and even less of a necessity when you've got larger tires with a larger contact patch creating more friction which reduces effort at the brakes.
Originally posted by dobey: horsepower has nothing to do with inertia, or acceleration. What determines acceleration are gear ratios, tire size, and torque curve.
Modifying the brake system is a touchy subject for many complex reasons, the main one is that nobody goes through full documentation and testing data that shows the result of the modification/s. It is an area were one should do an extensive amount of reading quality publications by trusted sources, before doing any changes. The only exception would be if you know someone you trust, that has done specific changes and is very pleased with the results.
Most of us know that the Fiero is touchy in the rear end, if it get's out a little too far, it can be a real handful to correct. Many people have destroyed their cars for this exact reason, so any changes to the brake system must give better or equal performance compared to factory parts under all conditions. The '84 thru '87 Model Years can benefit the most (if bump steer is also corrected a bit - along with brake change), while the '88 can be improved.
No change over factory parts is "required", however if you've modified the car to improve performance (higher top speed/better cornering), then correct modifications the the brake system will also yield improvements. However this must not be taken lightly, and any changes should be tested in a safe area, before exposing the car to traffic. The key here is to know the limitations of the car and drive it accordingly, no matter if it's stock or modified.
Why must every time someone seeks to be explicit about things on this forum, that it is somehow viewed as arguing? Being explicit is good, especially for things like this, as there is very little context, and this isn't a local pub where people can infer meaning from body language, vocal stress patterns, etc… It's plain text on the Internet. Being explicit helps future passers by who come upon the thread, to understand better why something is true or not. And this repeated sentiment that one must upgrade their brakes because they are making more power, is just nonsense.
Okay sorry if I overreacted to your comment...
And I think any discussion that causes one to think is a good discussion.
I don't think one "must" upgrade their brakes when doing an engine upgrade. But I think a brake upgrade on any 84-87 Fiero is a good thing. Should it be done haphazardly? Of course not. I'm not a mechanic, and I don't have a shop so when I work on my own brakes it makes me a bit nervous, but it's not rocket science. Pretty much anything you do to the Fiero brakes will make them better. Can you screw them up? Absolutely. Can you make them better? Usually.
I think that for the average non-professional, given more horsepower they will more quickly get themselves into a situation where they need more brakes to be safe. I mean in any driving situation you normally have three evasive maneuvers: steer, accelerate and brake. A stock Fiero really only can do the first really well. An engine upgrade gives you the second. Why not do the brake upgrade and have all three?
Originally posted by jscott1: I don't think one "must" upgrade their brakes when doing an engine upgrade. But I think a brake upgrade on any 84-87 Fiero is a good thing. Should it be done haphazardly? Of course not. I'm not a mechanic, and I don't have a shop so when I work on my own brakes it makes me a bit nervous, but it's not rocket science. Pretty much anything you do to the Fiero brakes will make them better. Can you screw them up? Absolutely. Can you make them better? Usually.
I think that for the average non-professional, given more horsepower they will more quickly get themselves into a situation where they need more brakes to be safe. I mean in any driving situation you normally have three evasive maneuvers: steer, accelerate and brake. A stock Fiero really only can do the first really well. An engine upgrade gives you the second. Why not do the brake upgrade and have all three?
I've had to do all three of those things plenty of times, in a Fiero. I've never had a problem with any of them at normal traffic speeds on public roads. The steering is just as bad as the brakes and acceleration though. It's an average 80s car with average 80s equipment. To say that one should upgrade them on the Fiero, because they are average 80s equipment, then one should say that any car from the 80s should get the same upgrades, whether it's a Fiero, Grand Prix, or a Corvette. At some point you might as well just say "buy a car made within the last 10 years" though, because to fix all the problems on the Fiero, you need to design new suspension, new cradle, and new front crossmember, because those are problematic as well. There are only so many 88 Fieros and suspension remaining from the ones that were crushed, to go around, and even the 88 isn't perfect.
I don't disagree that upgrades for the Fiero may be good (I have plenty planned for my car of course), but the idea that 13" rotors and Corvette calipers, with a stock master cylinder, proportioning valve, and brake booster (or even with the S-10 booster) is going to make the brakes be right, is something I just find absurd. Like California Kid said, such things really need to be properly tested, and not just haphazardly thrown together with the expectation of superior performance just because you've now got big rotors and more piston contact surface with the pads.
I've had to do all three of those things plenty of times, in a Fiero. I've never had a problem with any of them at normal traffic speeds on public roads. The steering is just as bad as the brakes and acceleration though. It's an average 80s car with average 80s equipment. To say that one should upgrade them on the Fiero, because they are average 80s equipment, then one should say that any car from the 80s should get the same upgrades, whether it's a Fiero, Grand Prix, or a Corvette. At some point you might as well just say "buy a car made within the last 10 years" though, because to fix all the problems on the Fiero, you need to design new suspension, new cradle, and new front crossmember, because those are problematic as well. There are only so many 88 Fieros and suspension remaining from the ones that were crushed, to go around, and even the 88 isn't perfect.
Sadly I agree that with crappy 80s underpinnings a Fiero is never going to steer, accelerate or brake as well as your average 21st century grocery getter. That is one reason that I drive my Fieros for recreation and not as daily transportation. In Houston, I have a close call nearly every single say where I have to take evasive action to avoid a collision. With a Fiero and it's 80s attributes and lack of 10 airbags it's just not worth getting killed.
Originally posted by jscott1: Sadly I agree that with crappy 80s underpinnings a Fiero is never going to steer, accelerate or brake as well as your average 21st century grocery getter. That is one reason that I drive my Fieros for recreation and not as daily transportation. In Houston, I have a close call nearly every single say where I have to take evasive action to avoid a collision. With a Fiero and it's 80s attributes and lack of 10 airbags it's just not worth getting killed.
Probably won't get killed in the Fiero, but it probably would get totalled out by insurance, sadly. I don't plan to drive my Fiero daily when I get it done, but that's part of the reason I plan to upgrade the steering and brake system (all of it, not just rotor diameter), along with the engine swap.
But anyway, this thread is just about the brakes. I'm hoping I'll be able to use the Matrix/Vibe/Celica/etc… brakes and hubs, as they fit under the stock 15" wheels on my GT, and I'd like to keep those, at least while I can still get tires for them.
Sadly I agree that with crappy 80s underpinnings a Fiero is never going to steer, accelerate or brake as well as your average 21st century grocery getter.
I'm going to disagree with this. I have a 21st century grocery getter. A 2009 Kia Spectra. Handles decent. At my previous job, the driveway was a mini roadcourse, about a half mile long. I think that the CEO was responsible for this. He drove a Porsche Turbo. Anyway, one day I took the Kia on a spirited drive down this driveway, and came away thinking, "Hey, this thing handles pretty decently. Probably equal to my Fiero." The next day, I repeated the exercise with my Formula, and tried to match the speeds I did with my Kia. The Formula EASILY maintained the same speeds with plenty of margin in grip. I could have gone significantly quicker, but not safely (one blind corner, and one blind hill). My Formula steers and grips WAY better than my 2009 grocery getter. And after reading this thread, I think I must have the only stock Fiero on Earth with good brakes. My brakes are easy to lock, or modulate at lockup. I would rate them equal to or better than any other non-ABS system I've driven.
I'm going to disagree with this. I have a 21st century grocery getter. A 2009 Kia Spectra. Handles decent. At my previous job, the driveway was a mini roadcourse, about a half mile long. I think that the CEO was responsible for this. He drove a Porsche Turbo. Anyway, one day I took the Kia on a spirited drive down this driveway, and came away thinking, "Hey, this thing handles pretty decently. Probably equal to my Fiero." The next day, I repeated the exercise with my Formula, and tried to match the speeds I did with my Kia. The Formula EASILY maintained the same speeds with plenty of margin in grip. I could have gone significantly quicker, but not safely (one blind corner, and one blind hill). My Formula steers and grips WAY better than my 2009 grocery getter. And after reading this thread, I think I must have the only stock Fiero on Earth with good brakes. My brakes are easy to lock, or modulate at lockup. I would rate them equal to or better than any other non-ABS system I've driven.
Personally I'd never want any of my tires to lock up under any circumstances, a rolling tire has more braking efficiency than one that is locked. Lots of bad things can happen if you are locking up tires.
Personally I'd never want any of my tires to lock up under any circumstances, a rolling tire has more braking efficiency than one that is locked. Lots of bad things can happen if you are locking up tires.
Which is why you learn to MODULATE your braking. And having brakes that are easily modulated is a big help. You can't threshold brake if your brake system won't get you to lockup.
Which is why you learn to MODULATE your braking. And having brakes that are easily modulated is a big help. You can't threshold brake if your brake system won't get you to lockup.
I understand what threshold braking is, but nearly all (if any) here on the Forum are not Professional Race Drivers. Secondly, it's a technique that requires a hell of a lot of practice, and consistently driving that way, so that reactions are not reduced, or lost. I'm not saying you can't do it, but I wouldn't recommend that practice to anyone with a Fiero unless I knew them extremely well. The numbers of Forum people that take their car to a road course "regularly" isn't even worth mentioning.
The zinger line you need to Pay Attention to is this:
Because available friction at a given moment depends on many factors including road surface material, temperature, tire rubber compound and wear, threshold braking is difficult to consistently achieve during normal driving.
[This message has been edited by California Kid (edited 02-16-2015).]
Originally posted by Formula Owner: Which is why you learn to MODULATE your braking. And having brakes that are easily modulated is a big help. You can't threshold brake if your brake system won't get you to lockup.
So install an ABS module and program it to modulate appropriately for whatever other components in the brake system one has?
I did a search for vented Fiero brakes and found a beautiful complete 4 wheel system that even had an emergency brake and promised consistent stops from 60 mph in under 110 ft. The only catch was the price of $1699
I did a search for vented Fiero brakes and found a beautiful complete 4 wheel system that even had an emergency brake and promised consistent stops from 60 mph in under 110 ft. The only catch was the price of $1699
That's a deal. If you want a Brembo Slotted Big Brake kit for your GT-R, it'll run you $7291.
Back in the mid-90's, I had a 90 5.0 Mustang, which had 4-lug wheels and rear drums. I looked into upgrading to 5 lug wheels and 4 wheel disks. About $2500. The stock brakes worked fine, so long as I didn't push them to fading.
Now you see why people are using rotors, calipers and boosters from the junkyard or discount store.
I'm not saying one shouldn't upgrade the braking system if they're driving in a manner that requires it, or road racing. But when someone tells you that you need to have giant brakes simply because you swapped to a V8, it's total . .
LMAO!! You know what you are right. Hell, you should REMOVE the brakes entirely. Guarantee you wont have brake fade then!
This forum has devolved into a place where the members argue for the sake of arguing. Its now a matter of I am right, you are wrong and if you disagree then you are stupid. Don't upgrade the brakes if you do a v8 swap. Don't upgrade the brakes if you add way more power. Matters not to me. Darwinism is real. It will sort itself out one way or another.
Originally posted by BV MotorSports: LMAO!! You know what you are right. Hell, you should REMOVE the brakes entirely. Guarantee you wont have brake fade then!
This forum has devolved into a place where the members argue for the sake of arguing. Its now a matter of I am right, you are wrong and if you disagree then you are stupid. Don't upgrade the brakes if you do a v8 swap. Don't upgrade the brakes if you add way more power. Matters not to me. Darwinism is real. It will sort itself out one way or another.
Wow. So now you're just going equate not wasting money on 13" rotors and 18" wheels because one put a V8 in a Fiero, to just removing the brakes all together?
Do you not understand physics at all? It has nothing to do with me or you being right or wrong. Physics is physics, and doesn't change because you have an opinion one way or the other.
Or you're saying that having more power automatically makes you drive like an idiot? Because if so, then you're probably already driving like an idiot, and should upgrade the brakes anyway, with the stock motor.
The only one "arguing" about this really, is you, because instead of discussing the facts, you've relegated to making nonsensical insults to assert that you are right, and everyone else is wrong for disagreeing with you.
Here's a simple physics lesson for you:
Momentum = mass * velocity
As long as mass and velocity stay the same, or within the range for which the stock brake system was designed and built to operate in, your car will stop exactly the same, regardless of how much peak power or torque the engine makes. It's very simple, really. Then of course there's force:
Force = mass * acceleration
Now, having more peak power does not necessarily mean you will accelerate faster. Having more torque, increased throttle response, and an inability to control acceleration to maintain the same amount of acceleration one had with the stock engine, may result in the necessity of greater force to stop the vehicle in an emergency. In such a case one may need improved brake system, but that does not necessarily mean significantly larger rotors and pads. It does mean, that you should probably stop driving like an idiot, though.
I'm not the one complaining about locking my brakes. I'm just fine with the way they work as they are.
I wasn't saying you should do it. You suggested that people need to practice threshold braking though, and the only way most people are going to consistently do proper threshold braking, or even properly modulated braking, is through ABS. That's pretty much exactly why it was created and made standard on production vehicles.
If you're going to invoke physics, you should invoke the correct physics. Momentum isn't what you're concerned with. Kinetic energy is. KE = m*V^2. That's velocity squared. Lets say there is a corner that must be entered at 40mph. Braking from 90 to 40 dissipates about half the KE as braking from 120 to 40. Your brakes convert KE to heat. So, dissipating twice the KE will generate twice the heat. If your brakes are up to that, fine. But it's very possible that a significant bump in HP could overwhelm your brakes. Admittedly, the speeds in my example are too fast for the street, but they're quite in the realm of possibility for the track.
quote
Originally posted by dobey:
I wasn't saying you should do it. You suggested that people need to practice threshold braking though, and the only way most people are going to consistently do proper threshold braking, or even properly modulated braking, is through ABS. That's pretty much exactly why it was created and made standard on production vehicles.
No. ABS was developed so that safe, hard, controlled stops could be made by everyone. It was for safety. There was no concern of aiding drivers in learning threshold braking. If anything, ABS is the enemy of threshold braking. Prior to ABS, many people (like me) learned this skill. Now, nobody but race drivers need this skill. And even if you DO know how to threshold brake, it's almost impossible to do so in an emergency. In my last panic stop, I locked my brakes. Turned out to help me when the police examined the skid marks.
If you're going to invoke physics, you should invoke the correct physics. Momentum isn't what you're concerned with. Kinetic energy is. KE = m*V^2. That's velocity squared. Lets say there is a corner that must be entered at 40mph. Braking from 90 to 40 dissipates about half the KE as braking from 120 to 40. Your brakes convert KE to heat. So, dissipating twice the KE will generate twice the heat. If your brakes are up to that, fine. But it's very possible that a significant bump in HP could overwhelm your brakes. Admittedly, the speeds in my example are too fast for the street, but they're quite in the realm of possibility for the track.
No. ABS was developed so that safe, hard, controlled stops could be made by everyone. It was for safety. There was no concern of aiding drivers in learning threshold braking. If anything, ABS is the enemy of threshold braking. Prior to ABS, many people (like me) learned this skill. Now, nobody but race drivers need this skill. And even if you DO know how to threshold brake, it's almost impossible to do so in an emergency. In my last panic stop, I locked my brakes. Turned out to help me when the police examined the skid marks.
Exactly. If you're going to the track, you likely need to upgrade the brakes anyway. velocity is velocity and mass is mass. As I said, if you're going the same speed, with the same mass, then your momentum (nor your kinetic energy) are going to change. If you start driving faster because you have more power, then if you're on the street, you need to slow down. If you're on the track, it may be necessary to upgrade the brakes. If you're going faster because you spent a month at the gym and lost 20 lbs, you may also need to upgrade the brakes, or likewise if you've gained 20 lbs after Thanksgiving. If your tire diameter changes, you may accelerate faster, and you might need upgraded brakes. If you change transmissions, you might accelerate faster or be able to drive faster in a certain gear, so you might need to upgrade the brakes. If you have a tail wind, you might need to upgrade the brakes. If you're going to start talking about kinetic energy though, you then also need to account for the storage of kinetic energy in rotating mass, such as wheels and brake rotors, because it may also overcome the brakes.
And exactly again. ABS was developed for safety, because the majority of people didn't (and don't) consistently practice properly modulated or threshold braking, which meant they locked up the brakes more times than they should, and accidents resulted. It's because a majority of people don't know how to drive. They automatically hit the brakes when they hit a patch of water or ice and start to feel the car slip, so ABS and other technologies were developed to combat poor drivers and act as a preventative measure. Anyway, for most people, it would be an upgrade to the brake system and allow proper modulation where they otherwise would not be doing it manually.
Wow. So now you're just going equate not wasting money on 13" rotors and 18" wheels because one put a V8 in a Fiero, to just removing the brakes all together?
Do you not understand physics at all? It has nothing to do with me or you being right or wrong. Physics is physics, and doesn't change because you have an opinion one way or the other.
Or you're saying that having more power automatically makes you drive like an idiot? Because if so, then you're probably already driving like an idiot, and should upgrade the brakes anyway, with the stock motor.
The only one "arguing" about this really, is you, because instead of discussing the facts, you've relegated to making nonsensical insults to assert that you are right, and everyone else is wrong for disagreeing with you.
Here's a simple physics lesson for you:
Momentum = mass * velocity
As long as mass and velocity stay the same, or within the range for which the stock brake system was designed and built to operate in, your car will stop exactly the same, regardless of how much peak power or torque the engine makes. It's very simple, really. Then of course there's force:
Force = mass * acceleration
Now, having more peak power does not necessarily mean you will accelerate faster. Having more torque, increased throttle response, and an inability to control acceleration to maintain the same amount of acceleration one had with the stock engine, may result in the necessity of greater force to stop the vehicle in an emergency. In such a case one may need improved brake system, but that does not necessarily mean significantly larger rotors and pads. It does mean, that you should probably stop driving like an idiot, though.
Oh wow I had it all wrong! Not. You can say what you will. Your opinion is only valid to you. I have always believed in a systematic approach when upgrading a car. I believe everything should be proportional. If you add power, add an equal amount of additional brakes/suspension/safety. Then learn how to properly use the additional performance. Whats the point of having a 140hp car making 600hp if you aren't going to use it? I dunno, maybe someone wants to flaunt a dyno sheet on a forum? I use my cars. I explore their potential often. Maybe you should stop making wild assumptions and claiming I am driving like an "idiot". I bet I am in the top percentage of this forum for track time. I lapped the Nurburgring 7/4/2004. Did I need good brakes then? Sorry bud, I am not a car show kind of guy. I am a driver, not a poser.
[This message has been edited by BV MotorSports (edited 02-16-2015).]
Originally posted by BV MotorSports: Oh wow I had it all wrong! Not. You can say what you will. Your opinion is only valid to you. I have always believed in a systematic approach when upgrading a car. I believe everything should be proportional. If you add power, add an equal amount of additional brakes/suspension/safety. Then learn how to properly use the additional performance. Whats the point of having a 140hp car making 600hp if you aren't going to use it? I dunno, maybe someone wants to flaunt a dyno sheet on a forum? I use my cars. I explore their potential often. Maybe you should stop making wild assumptions and claiming I am driving like an "idiot". I bet I am in the top percentage of this forum for track time. I lapped the Nurburgring 7/4/2004. Did I need good brakes then? Sorry bud, I am not a car show kind of guy. I am a driver, not a poser.
Good for you. But again, power != brake requirement. You can say what you will. Your opinion is only valid to you.
Did I ever say you don't need good brakes? All I said was that the common myth of you must get big brakes when you get more power is just that… a myth. In the total amount of time any engine in a street legal car spends running, it sees peak HP less than 1% of the time. So yeah, what good is having 600 HP ever? You practically never use it. I guess from your point of view, every car with 600 HP must have a roll cage and a full race suspension too?
Upgrades to brakes, suspension, steering, and whatever else are dependent on the use of a vehicle, not the amount of power it has. But upgrades are not necessarily the solution to a problem (which is what this thread was originally about). There are very few production vehicles which are suited to go from a dealership to the track, without modification.
Upgrade things for the right reasons, in the right way, not because people are dumb and say things like You putting a V8 in that tiny car? Better upgrade the brakes too, because OMG power. And don't lie to yourself and everyone else about why you did some mod.
And regarding Nurburgring, you need a lot more than just good brakes there, if you really want to drive it in a proper race. It's opened up all the time with people taking random street cars (Ford F150, Honda CRV, BMW Z4, etc…) on the track for a lap or two. A lot of people wreck, and a lot of people don't. Saying you made a lap there is a cool tick on the bucket list, but whatever. Actual full track cars have problems on it plenty. People take their street cars onto the track and then get overly aggressive without knowing the limits of their cars and lose control, all the time, though. Bigger brakes wouldn't necessarily help them, and for most of the ones I've seen crashing on YouTube, they look like they are mostly stock anyway, and not high HP power added builds.
You are truly delusional. The amount of blanket statements and biased drivel spewing from your mouth is, quite frankly, astonishing.
/thread.
You're absolutely right. Everything you say is true. You haven't made any blanket statements or biased commentary at all. No assumptions whatsoever from you. And I typed all those words with my tongue too, so you're totally right on that count as well.
Plus I'm totally glad you ended the thread. I never thought it would end. Having people discussing the physical and technical aspects of upgrading parts of a car on a forum about that car is just an atrocity that should never see the light of day.
I'm going to disagree with this. I have a 21st century grocery getter. A 2009 Kia Spectra. Handles decent. At my previous job, the driveway was a mini roadcourse, about a half mile long. I think that the CEO was responsible for this. He drove a Porsche Turbo. Anyway, one day I took the Kia on a spirited drive down this driveway, and came away thinking, "Hey, this thing handles pretty decently. Probably equal to my Fiero." The next day, I repeated the exercise with my Formula, and tried to match the speeds I did with my Kia. The Formula EASILY maintained the same speeds with plenty of margin in grip. I could have gone significantly quicker, but not safely (one blind corner, and one blind hill). My Formula steers and grips WAY better than my 2009 grocery getter. And after reading this thread, I think I must have the only stock Fiero on Earth with good brakes. My brakes are easy to lock, or modulate at lockup. I would rate them equal to or better than any other non-ABS system I've driven.
I'll agree on the acceleration part, though.
I will agree with you that an 88 with fresh components does handle well, likely better than most grocery getters. I was earlier thinking of the 84-87 with it's humble chevette underpinnings and worn out components. But having said that I don't know that I've ever driven a Fiero with a totally refreshed suspension. I know this is a brake thread, but I hope Rodney comes out with that 88 all rubber kit. I know there is some clunkiness in my 88 that needs to be tightened up a bit.
The thing with grocery getters is that they are at least consistent and for the most part do not have worn components. My grocery getter is a 2007 Chevy Aveo and no doubt my 88 GT can out handle it, but the Chevy after 120,000 miles doesn't clunk over pot holes, doesn't pull a muscle in my back trying to park it and doesn't make a deafening rumble when I accelerate, (ok I like the rumble of the Fiero).
In other words the Fiero will always be rough around the edges compared to a new car. Partly because the new car is new, but even as 21st century cars age, I don't think they will ever be as rough around the edges as a Fiero. To bring it back to brakes, my Aveo doesn't have ABS, but in a panic stop I would bet it would stop with less effort than a stock Fiero. Maybe not, but it inspires a tad bit more confidence because of the lower pedal effort.
And one good thing about this thread...reminds me of the good ole days on PFF when there was a lot of activity and threads worth reading.
I will agree with you that an 88 with fresh components does handle well, likely better than most grocery getters. I was earlier thinking of the 84-87 with it's humble chevette underpinnings and worn out components. But having said that I don't know that I've ever driven a Fiero with a totally refreshed suspension. I know this is a brake thread, but I hope Rodney comes out with that 88 all rubber kit. I know there is some clunkiness in my 88 that needs to be tightened up a bit.
My Formula looks like crap, with the clearcoat and paint peeling. But my steering and suspension have been fully refreshed. Rubber bushings in the front control arms, poly (the only option) everywhere else. The last part of that refresh, the sway bar end link bushings, came after the comparison to my Kia, and they made a huge difference. On the twisty roads around here, I now have more grip than I can use. If I corner at max speed, my exit speeds exceed my visibility. I.e. I'm going too fast to stop in the distance I can see, and my brakes are working perfectly. The parts ARE available to tighten up your suspension.
quote
Originally posted by jscott1: The thing with grocery getters is that they are at least consistent and for the most part do not have worn components. My grocery getter is a 2007 Chevy Aveo and no doubt my 88 GT can out handle it, but the Chevy after 120,000 miles doesn't clunk over pot holes, doesn't pull a muscle in my back trying to park it and doesn't make a deafening rumble when I accelerate, (ok I like the rumble of the Fiero).
In other words the Fiero will always be rough around the edges compared to a new car. Partly because the new car is new, but even as 21st century cars age, I don't think they will ever be as rough around the edges as a Fiero. To bring it back to brakes, my Aveo doesn't have ABS, but in a panic stop I would bet it would stop with less effort than a stock Fiero. Maybe not, but it inspires a tad bit more confidence because of the lower pedal effort.
And one good thing about this thread...reminds me of the good ole days on PFF when there was a lot of activity and threads worth reading.
Yes, my Fiero is rough around the edges. I kinda like that. It's tight, and doesn't clunk (like it used to) over bumps. However, most sports cars are rough around the edges. 911's are rough too, as are Corvettes. My Formula compares favorably to those two. I'd say that mine has a better ride than either a 911 or Vette. Back to brakes, mine now have about the same pedal effort as my Kia. I have Wagner Thermoquiet pads. Recently, I took my Formula out for an errand (to get a new battery) for the first time in months (due to the dead battery). After sitting for that long outside, the brakes were ok, but not great. At the end of the errand, I did a few hard stops from 70ish mph. After about the 4th hard stop, the brakes "woke up", and became MUCH better. I questioned whether this was due to some temperature sensitivity of these pads. But that wasn't the case. 8 days later, I was able to get it out on the road again, and the brakes were still great, even at the first pedal application. I think that the hard stops must have removed a glazing, or possibly completed the bedding process. Whatever happened, the pedal effort now is the lowest it's ever been, it stops great, and has great feel, even at the first pedal application at the end of my driveway.
Originally posted by dobey: It's an average 80s car with average 80s equipment. To say that one should upgrade them on the Fiero, because they are average 80s equipment, then one should say that any car from the 80s should get the same upgrades, whether it's a Fiero, Grand Prix, or a Corvette.
But that's not really true. Out of the 50 or 60 cars I've owned, *most* have been from the '80s. I like the '80s. It's part of my attraction to the Fiero. But compared to any of my Saabs, BMWs, Volvos, Mercedes, and even to a large degree my Merkurs (which have underwhelming brakes), the stock Fiero brakes were not good. I have not owned many '80s domestics because, quite frankly, they're mostly terrible cars up to and including in the brake department. The Fiero's brakes were not awful, but while I never really felt compelled to do anything with Saab or BMW brakes (though I have) I knew pretty early on the Fiero's brakes had to go. I'm sure it was far less to do with actual stopping ability than pedal feel, but as has been discussed pedal feel is important. Especially in the Fiero, which I felt was way too eager in back. Getting reliable, quick reductions in speed was just not possible. For remarkable little money, that has been addressed.
quote
Originally posted by jscott1: Sadly I agree that with crappy 80s underpinnings a Fiero is never going to steer, accelerate or brake as well as your average 21st century grocery getter. That is one reason that I drive my Fieros for recreation and not as daily transportation. In Houston, I have a close call nearly every single say where I have to take evasive action to avoid a collision. With a Fiero and it's 80s attributes and lack of 10 airbags it's just not worth getting killed.
They can be made as good as any grocery getter - at least until you get to the "not dying" part. I haven't spent a great deal on my Fiero - probably about two grand, half of which is in the wheels & tires - but I have gotten superlative results. I do drive my Fiero very regularly - in comes in spurts, but I'll drive it 3-4 days a week for weeks on end before I switch to some other car, and it was important to me - as it always is when driving an older car - that its age not hinder me from participating in traffic to the highest degree possible. For my comfort, that means that I always want to be sure it can out-grip and out-brake most stuff on the road. Mine certainly does and it really wasn't all that hard to get there. Does it have the same manners as my friend's RX8 or 135i? No, of course not, but it certainly doesn't feel antiquated either. I tend to drive it very aggressively - it sounds great and fits everywhere - and since the upgrades I've not once felt like I'm pushing it too hard. I've had more than one exciting trip up to Lake Tahoe (100 miles up two-lane mountain roads) and it's never had a problem keeping up with much nicer cars. Usually they can ditch me in the big uphill straights, but I always catch them in the corners. Bump steer is a problem, but nothing I can't handle and I really don't mind the extra feedback. I've been driving my Saab with the power steering pump disconnected for four years - I'm well versed in strong-arming the wheel.
quote
Originally posted by olejoedad: Would it be silly to upgrade the brakes, but not do a drivetrain swap?
I always put money into brakes and suspension before even considering power upgrades, especially on old cars. My XR4Ti ran around for years with big brakes and expensive suspension making the same stock 175hp it rolled out of the factory with. I probably put three grand into that stuff before a single engine mod. While my Fiero technically has an engine swap, it's just a 3.4pr so hardly some massive powerhouse. I'm very happy with it stopping and turning far better than it goes. It's the same formula that makes Miatas so much fun, and I get the added bonus of a V6 burbling through a Flowmaster just inches from my head. I can drive the Fiero at 10/10ths all the time and never worry about keeping it under control. It just doesn't make enough power to get me into too much trouble. It's not a bad feeling.
[This message has been edited by thesameguy (edited 02-17-2015).]
Much more aggressive in acceleration, cornering, lane changing and in braking... What Pontiac calls "Excitement!" 
. There are plenty of ways to solve braking problems (primarily fade) as a result of more aggressive driving. Switching to larger wheels/rotors/calipers is the easy way out and is 90% for style anyway, and not braking (because nobody wants stylish 18" wheels with tiny 9.5" brake rotors). Outside of the desire to have big brakes fill up your big wheels for style, buying big wheels and 13" brakes is not a requirement when upgrading the power output of the car, and should be a last resort to solving braking issues. There are other upgrades, and slightly larger rotors that will fit under stock wheels, that can keep the F/R balance in braking much closer to what it should be in the Fiero.
