tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Tigers] Front rotor thickness

To: <spmdr@juno.com>
Subject: Re: [Tigers] Front rotor thickness
From: Ron Fraser via Tigers <tigers@autox.team.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 18:07:31 -0400
Cc: tigers@Autox.Team.Net
Delivered-to: mharc@autox.team.net
Delivered-to: tigers@autox.team.net
Importance: Normal
Thread-index: AdDvJch5h+v+VmTtR/SgvoFtCLv0PQADCMgg 0.0.0000 definitions=2015-09-14_05:2015-09-14,2015-09-14,1970-01-01 signatures=0 suspectscore=4 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1508030000 definitions=main-1509140291
DW
        Thanks for your input and for clearing up that point.  I too think
.375" is on the thin side.

Many of today's rotors specify around 1 mm or about .040" from max
thickness; that would be .460" for the Tiger's rotor.
.460" thickness seems a bit conservative to me.

I have a Clymer Publication Service Manual for a 71 Datsun 510.
I believe the 510 had a similar size rotor as the Tiger, I'm going from
memory so I could be wrong.
Datsun Service Manual states .331" as the minimum thickness for the rotors.

.331" thickness seems too extreme to me.  

We need to find a happy point between .460" and .331".

>From a drivers point of view the rotors are too thin if they warp or crack
from the heat during braking.
May we never reach that point.  Be kind to your thinning rotors.

It would be extremely helpful if someone found some factory information or
at least better information about this.
It would be nice to reduce the confusion.

Ron Fraser



-----Original Message-----
From: Tigers [mailto:tigers-bounces@autox.team.net] On Behalf Of spmdr---
via Tigers
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 4:11 PM
To: tigers@autox.team.net
Subject: [Tigers] Front rotor thickness


BTW, I did not state the minimum rotor thickness number.

I have never seen a ROOTES FACTORY dimension for the minimum.

As far as I know, IF the rotor needed turning, it was recommended to replace
it.

That being said, it is common for OTHER rotors of the same thickness
(1/2") to have a minimum thickness around  .440 ...I think..??

(.....if I could remember things, I would REALLY be dangerous...)

...or ONLY around .060 (or some metric number close) off, max.

.375 IS TOO thin IMHO.....THAT I DO remember.

YOUR thickness may very....

DW

____________________________________________________________
Want to place your ad here?
Advertise on United Online
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/55f71b6746eba1b67482dst01vuc
_______________________________________________

tigers@autox.team.net

Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/rfraser@bluefrog.com




-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.6086 / Virus Database: 4419/10638 - Release Date: 09/14/15

_______________________________________________

tigers@autox.team.net

Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/mharc@autox.team.net


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>