What's your ZIP Code?


1. Gibbo205 - Round disc, drilled only - UK
2. Unhingd - Standard Suncut disc, drilled slots - US 20904
3. F-Type-Type - Round disc, drilled slots - Denmark 2820
4. zmoothg - Standard Suncut disc, drilled slots- US 94103
5. IronMike - Round or Std. Suncut (undecided), drilled slots - US 92627
6. Chawumba - Round Disc, drilled only (or 2nd choice drilled slots) - US 90803
7. Vettegood - Round Disc, Drilled Slots - US 85086
8. Dremorg - Round Disc, Drilled Slots - US ?????
9.
10.

1. Round disc, drilled only (2)
2. Round disc, drilled slots (3 or 4)
3. Standard suncut disc, drilled slots (3 or 2)

 

Aha, interesting - I never considered that might be the case but makes sense.

Looks like the rears are considerably thinner disks too @ 25.9mm vs the fronts @35.8mm if the spec I saw is accurate.

 

+1. Just measured them. I came up with 37mm front, 26mm rear with slide caliper.

 

OK. I'm in.

9. lizzardo - Std. Suncut, slotted only, (2nd choice drilled slots) - US 94526

I'll second Lance's comment about slotted. I moved to slotted on my previous car and did not notice any increase in pad wear. I didn't notice any increase in bite either, but I also changed pad compound, so both observations should be taken in light of that.

 

Not to create more work, but after getting input from my son, we'll join the suncut crowd. May also be interested in replacement discs. Thanks for taking point on this for the USA Unhinged, and to the OP for finding this great option.

 

Henceforth, 'Suncut' to be referred to as 'Ruffcut'!

 

Here to (hopefully not) create additional confusion are Wortec's recommendations:


I had already settled on his recommended option before he offered it.

Here's where it now stands:



1. Gibbo205 - Plain disc, drilled only - UK
2. Unhingd - Low Profile Suncut disc, thermal slots - US 20904
3. F-Type-Type - Plain disc, thermal slots - Denmark 2820
4. zmoothg - Low Profile Suncut disc, thermal slots- US 94103
5. IronMike - Plain or Low Profile Suncut (undecided), thermal slots - US 92627
6. Chawumba - Low Profile Suncut Disc, thermal slots - US 90803
7. Vettegood - Plain Disc, Thermal Slots - US 85086
8. Dremorg - Plain Disc, thermal Slots - US ?????
9. lizzardo - Low Profile Suncut, slotted only, (2nd choice thermal slots) - US 94526
10.

1. Plain disc, drilled only (1)
2. Plain disc, thermal slots (3 or 4)
3. Low Profile Suncut disc, thermal slots (4 or 3)
4. Low Profile Suncut disc, slots only (1) (option 3 would be a second choice)


Let us know if you have changed your mind on your selected options based on Paul's description above). I will re-tabulate and see where we're at.


Here are the official terms:

plain disc
low profile suncut disc
aggressive suncut disc
slots only
drilled only
thermal slots (drilled slots)


We will try to keep within 3 configurations, but given that we now have more than the minimum five buyers, Paul might be open to allowing up to 4 options.

 

Is the "low-profile suncut" compatible with OEM Calipers and Porterfield pads? I realize some of the pictures here are from other makes and model vehicles, but they appear a lot thinner than the pads for OEM setup.

 

You dont have to spend $2500 for drilled and slotted rotors. If your just changing them for looks there are companies in the states that make them.

 

True but they are generally the original rotors and have just being drilled/slotted and as such weight savings are minimal or none existent.

The main reason for this is to get the weight savings of ceramics.

 

OEM calipers and Porterfields will work well with the rotors that will be built for us.

+1.

 

All OEM Jag rotors across all models are the same - minimum "legal" width is 2 mm less than new width. The only exception is the CCM brakes.

 

If I'm the only one that wants slots but not thermal slots, thermal slots are just fine by me.

 

 

I get that, but for someone thats just doing it for looks does the weight savings really make a difference. I can see making it lighter for the track but for driving on the street it seems like a waste, but its your money.

 

That was certainly the case when I responded, but I'm sure you're aware of that :/

Many are likely doing this for reasons of aesthetics, but reducing unsprung weight is never a bad thing. The suspension can do its job better. If you can reduce rotational inertia too, not just static weight, you'd even see better acceleration. I don't think we'll see much difference with these in that respect though, since the weight reduction is primarily close to the rotational axis.

 

Thats what I thought, other than them looking cool there really is no benifit to the average driver.

 

The rotational mass is far less an issue than the unsprung weight. Reducing that weight allows the suspension to react to the surface much more quickly in the vertical plane, reducing the reliance on tire deflection to absorb the shock.


I suspect it results in a huge benefit for the average driver. Reducing the unsprung weight by 5kg at each corner should significantly smooth and quiet the ride over rough/irregular surfaces.

 

 

That part - cumulative effect of removing 100 lbs of unsprung weight with forged wheels and calipers (25 lbs per corner) has to be of noticeable benefit. My goal is to get my 3850 lbs "sports car" to 3650 lbs, so it can compete with my 4 door sports car M3 around corners. Can't hurt acceleration either, right?