# Anyone running Porsche Boxster Brembo front caliper upgrade?!



## YPS (Feb 19, 2011)

Anyone running Porsche Boxster Brembo front caliper upgrade? Is that a big different compare with the stock one? Is this Brembo belongs to Boxster or Boxster S? Do I need to change the Boxster rotors also? Anything I should concern on this upgrade also? (Lots of questions here ) 

Thanks guys


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

You'll get a firmer pedal, MUCH easier pad change, braking force does not change much so bias stays fine.

Boxster, not Boxster S calipers.
Uses TT rotors, Boxster rotors will not fit.


----------



## DCMS371 (Jul 24, 2008)

YPS said:


> Anyone running Porsche Boxster Brembo front caliper upgrade? Is that a big different compare with the stock one? Is this Brembo belongs to Boxster or Boxster S? Do I need to change the Boxster rotors also? Anything I should concern on this upgrade also? (Lots of questions here )
> 
> Thanks guys


I think warranty225cpe is ... He posted a thread here about them.


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

From 2008: Boxster brake upgrade done


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

Late__Apex said:


> You'll get a firmer pedal, MUCH easier pad change, braking force does not change much.


 My braking feels MUCH better. maybe because mine were shot out. 

Just like a normal brake change except you need to bleed them afterwards. And you will need ECS mounting hardware. I suggest stainless lines while your at it. 
http://www.audifreaks.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2312


----------



## Murderface (Nov 13, 2006)

I am... 

...I'm also running the Porsche Boxster S car upgrade along with the front caliper upgrade :laugh:


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

Just did mine as well! However, be careful with a few of the installs posted on here regarding DIY's. One of them that I saw looked like the installer installed them wrong. Where you ask? 

Well, correctly orientating the pistons themselves. The larger piston should be the trailing piston with the smaller being at the "top" or leading edge on our applications. You can easily mistaking swap bridges to orient the calipers correctly and forget to do this. 

My setup added stainless lines at all four corners as well as Hawk HPS pads. Looking forward to some good road time as I only first tested the car out on the road the other day. 










Joe


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

RabbitGTDguy said:


> Just did mine as well! However, be careful with a few of the installs posted on here regarding DIY's. One of them that I saw looked like the installer installed them wrong. Where you ask?
> 
> Well, correctly orientating the pistons themselves. The larger piston out of the two should be at the top or leading edge in the direction of rotation. You can easily mistaking swap bridges to orient the calipers correctly and forget to do this.


 Correct, I was wondering if someone would mention this. Having the smaller piston first will lead to uneven pad wear. I'm about to put 996TT big reds on my 180Q.


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

20v master said:


> Correct, I was wondering if someone would mention this. Having the smaller piston first will lead to uneven pad wear. I'm about to put 996TT big reds on my 180Q.


 You guys have this backward. *the larger piston should be the trailing piston.* This is to offset the natural tendency for the front of the pad to wear faster.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Late__Apex said:


> You guys have this backward. *the larger piston should be the trailing piston.* This is to offset the natural tendency for the front of the pad to wear faster.


 You are correct, I said that backwards. Smaller piston is leading. I did have to switch the bridge hardlines and bleeders around on my Big Reds to get this orientation. Pressure is force over area. The smaller piston exerts more pressure on the pad to maintain even contact between pad area and disc. If it was backwards, the smaller piston would be exerting more pressure on the rear of the pad, leading to the uneven pad wear. Thanks for catching that. :thumbup:


----------



## Late__Apex (Dec 2, 2007)

20v master said:


> You are correct, I said that backwards. Smaller piston is leading. I did have to switch the bridge hardlines and bleeders around on my Big Reds to get this orientation. Pressure is force over area. The smaller piston exerts more pressure on the pad to maintain even contact between pad area and disc. If it was backwards, the smaller piston would be exerting more pressure on the rear of the pad, leading to the uneven pad wear. Thanks for catching that. :thumbup:


 I'm not sure you're on the right track in the explanation - I'm not a fluid engineer. I'd say the pressure is the hydraulic pressure of the brake line and the force is the pushing on the pad. Then, for a given brake line pressure, a larger area means larger force. 

I do know larger pistons exert more braking torque. My understanding of the staggered piston theory is that the trailing piston needs more force (generated by the larger piston) to overcome the extra heat, gas and other friction by-products created by the leading piston.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Late__Apex said:


> I'm not sure you're on the right track in the explanation - I'm not a fluid engineer. I'd say the pressure is the hydraulic pressure of the brake line and the force is the pushing on the pad. Then, for a given brake line pressure, a larger area means larger force.
> 
> I do know larger pistons exert more braking torque. My understanding of the staggered piston theory is that the trailing piston needs more force (generated by the larger piston) to overcome the extra heat, gas and other friction by-products created by the leading piston.


 I'm not a fluid engineer, or fluid dynamicist, either, but the hydraulic pressure is seperate from the pressure exerted by the pistons on the pads, which is diferent than the pressure exerted by the pad on the disc. Force is mass time acceleration. All the pistons in the system act with the same force on the pad. Having a smaller piston first, puts more pressure on the leading edge of the pad, because as I said, pressure is force over area. Larger pistons giving more braking torque are usually a product of a larger caliper housing the larger pistons a further distance from the rotational axis of the brake disc/axle. For example, this is why a 12.3" TT setup has more braking torque than an 11.3" GTI setup, even though they share the same caliper. While the pistons in the caliper are the same size, the fact that it's acting on an inch larger disc and is doing so an inch further from the center is why there is more braking force/torque. The braking force is being applied further from the center of the disc, creating more of a moment to oppose the rotation of the disc. Again, all pistons are acting with the same force on the pad in a four piston caliper. That force is generated by the entire hydraulic brake system, specifically the master cylinder. Just because it's a bigger piston doesn't mean it has more force behind it in the brake line. The smaller piston gives more pressure on the leading edge of the pad compared to larger trailing piston, giving a nice hard clamp, followed by slightly less clamp on the pad to keep it evenly against the disc, resisting that outgassing you mentioned. If it were the other way around, you'd have the uneven wear we mentioned, with the front half of the pad lifting slightly because of the greater pressure on the trailing edge of the pad. Is anyone confused yet?  I hope that helps.


----------



## seth_3515 (Dec 26, 2008)

20v master said:


> I'm not a fluid engineer, or fluid dynamicist, either, but the hydraulic pressure is seperate from the pressure exerted by the pistons on the pads, which is diferent than the pressure exerted by the pad on the disc. Force is mass time acceleration. All the pistons in the system act with the same force on the pad. Having a smaller piston first, puts more pressure on the leading edge of the pad, because as I said, pressure is force over area. Larger pistons giving more braking torque are usually a product of a larger caliper housing the larger pistons a further distance from the rotational axis of the brake disc/axle. For example, this is why a 12.3" TT setup has more braking torque than an 11.3" GTI setup, even though they share the same caliper. While the pistons in the caliper are the same size, the fact that it's acting on an inch larger disc and is doing so an inch further from the center is why there is more braking force/torque. The braking force is being applied further from the center of the disc, creating more of a moment to oppose the rotation of the disc. Again, all pistons are acting with the same force on the pad in a four piston caliper. That force is generated by the entire hydraulic brake system, specifically the master cylinder. Just because it's a bigger piston doesn't mean it has more force behind it in the brake line. The smaller piston gives more pressure on the leading edge of the pad compared to larger trailing piston, giving a nice hard clamp, followed by slightly less clamp on the pad to keep it evenly against the disc, resisting that outgassing you mentioned. If it were the other way around, you'd have the uneven wear we mentioned, with the front half of the pad lifting slightly because of the greater pressure on the trailing edge of the pad. Is anyone confused yet?  I hope that helps.


 Just to add to "The braking force is being applied further from the center of the disc, creating more of a moment to oppose the rotation of the disc" it is because the larger disc allows a slower angular rotation speed compared to the smaller disc having a faster angular speed. When you apply the same pressure it takes far less energy to stop the object moving slower (large disc), than the object moving faster (small disc). 
Just wanted to clarify that part.. Everything else spot on :thumbup:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

seth_3515 said:


> it is because the larger disc allows a slower angular rotation speed compared to the smaller disc having a faster angular speed. When you apply the same pressure it takes far less energy to stop the object moving slower (large disc), than the object moving faster (small disc).


 Assuming the vehicle with small brakes and large brakes are travelling at the same speed, the angular velocity is going to be the same. I don't get what you are saying.


----------



## seth_3515 (Dec 26, 2008)

If you take two discs, one that is larger than the other and rotating at the same speed, the larger disc has a further angular distance to travel the further you get away from the center of rotation. Since they are rotating at the same speed they larger disc has a slower velocity thus requiring less force to stop the object in motion.. that better for you or is more clarification needed?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

seth_3515 said:


> If you take two discs, one that is larger than the other and rotating at the same speed, the larger disc has a further angular distance to travel the further you get away from the center of rotation. Since they are rotating at the same speed they larger disc has a slower velocity thus requiring less force to stop the object in motion.. that better for you or is more clarification needed?


 If they are rotating at the same speed, the ANGULAR speed is the same. The distance traveled by the outer edge of the larger disc will be greater, but they are both turning at the same number of degrees per unit of time, or revolutions per unit of time. And as you say, the larger disc has further to travel (at it's outer edge), the instantaneous velocity will be higher there. The larger disc will definitely not have a slower velocity.


----------



## seth_3515 (Dec 26, 2008)

the larger radius of a disc the less force it will have the further you move away from the center of rotation. Force= mv^2/r so the larger the radius the less force it has, therefore it takes less force to stop the rotating disc...


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

I feel like an idiot with this again... I said it wrong as well...again. 

Late Apex...believe it was you that corrected me over on QW which prompted me to check mine in the first place... 

Here is how I had them laid out right before being ready to install... 

smaller piston is the leading piston and after double checking with the Brembo GT brake install manual...I knew it was correct as well. Otherwise...you'll chew the pads up quite quickly... 










I still stand correct about a few of the DIY's that are posted though. If you look at their install...the larger piston they have on the leading edge even though bridge lines are swapped appropriately, etc. 

If you look in this StopTech install guide for the Mini big brake upgrade...you'll see the same. Mini brakes sit in the same orientation as the Audi ones (front of rotor) vs. the porsche which is on the back side of the road facing the car. 

http://www.neuspeed.com/media/attachments/218_stoptech_mini_ins.pdf 

Sorry for the confusion. Glad mine are laid out correctly. 

Joe


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

seth_3515 said:


> the larger radius of a disc the less force it will have the further you move away from the center of rotation. Force= mv^2/r so the larger the radius the less force it has, therefore it takes less force to stop the rotating disc...


 You're thinking about it from the disc side instead of the caliper side. Saying it takes less energy to stop a larger disc is the same thing I said, that a caliper position further from the rotational axis will have more braking torque. We're saying the same thing, you're just saying it in an odd manor. The disc doesn't act on the caliper, it's the other way around.


----------



## Murderface (Nov 13, 2006)

You guys are right, you have to flip the bleeder lines around to get the piston orientation correct. 

This is how the brakes are configured on the Boxster...left side is the front of the car. On the TT the caliper is on the opposite side of the disc.


----------



## seth_3515 (Dec 26, 2008)

Yes it was from the perspective of the disc.. I said in the previous post that you had everything right but i was just clarifying the actual mechanics of your statement "to create more of a moment to oppose the rotation of the disc".. :screwy:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

seth_3515 said:


> Yes it was from the perspective of the disc.. I said in the previous post that you had everything right but i was just clarifying the actual mechanics of your statement "to create more of a moment to oppose the rotation of the disc".. :screwy:


 So you were repeating redundantly by rewording. The greater moment is what makes the brakes more effective, not the larger disc needing less energy to be stopped. Thanks.


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

You guys are arguing the wording of the same principle. Stop or you're just going to confuse members without engineering degrees instead of helping them understand what's actually happening .


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

madmax199 said:


> You guys are arguing the wording of the same principle. Stop or you're just going to confuse members without engineering degrees instead of helping them understand what's actually happening .


 I already did. Someone just felt the need to throw in another way or wording it that isn't any easier to understand. :thumbup:


----------



## seth_3515 (Dec 26, 2008)

To imply a greater time plies a different velocity, I explained in just a different way why the larger rotors are more efficient.. We are saying the same thing, I just said it differently to clarify for those that found that part murky.. I ready that and was confused by our reasoning. So I stated it in another way for those that may have not understood it.. My apologies


----------



## seth_3515 (Dec 26, 2008)

Greater time? well-- velocity= dx/dt 
The larger disc has further to travel within the same period of time (assuming they are traveling at the same rpm) therefore they do have a greater velocity... If they have a "greater moment" this implies they are not traveling at the same speed, and the large disc is traveling slower. 

speed= distance/time-- we know they are traveling at the same speed (measured by mph to make it simple) to even compare any results.. There is not a "greater moment" in time because this would affect the speed (which we know they will travel at the same speed as long as the wheels have the same radii as well. 

Force = mass times velocity squared/radius = therefore an object with that same mass and velocity but different radii will have different forces. We all know that if the rotating disc has less force, it will require less force to stop said object (improving efficiency) 

your explanation of a "greater moment" is theoretically wrong.. so i clarified it that is all..


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

seth_3515 said:


> The larger disc has further to travel within the same period of time (assuming they are traveling at the same rpm) therefore they do have a greater velocity... If they have a "greater moment" this implies they are not traveling at the same speed, and the large disc is traveling slower.
> 
> your explanation of a "greater moment" is theoretically wrong.. so i clarified it that is all..


 I'm just going to say this as nicely as possible. Since you don't understand how to quote, and there are some big spelling errors as well as gaps in your theory) I can't really follow what you're saying. First you say the larger disc has a greater velocity, which it does. Then you say it's travelling slower. So which is it? If I was theoretically wrong, you would be correcting, which you aren't, instead of clarifying. Your desire to be "right" is outweighing the inaccuracy of what you are saying. I'm not going to reply any more because everything I said was spot on, and you're just arguing without proving anything (not to mention it doesn't seem like you understand what a moment is). :beer:


----------



## BremboGuy (Mar 7, 2006)

Question... 

How much are you guys paying to build this upgrade? 

Calipers + Pads + Brackets + Braided lines + TT 225 discs = $????


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 16, 2008)

i love my porche brakes


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

i paid 400 american dollars for the calipers adapters and stainless lines


----------



## nkgneto (Dec 4, 2004)

I was emailing these guys to make the MK4 R32 crowd a two piece rotor, they have plenty options for you TT guys.

Two-piece rotor (Open Slot) 312x25 

One Piece Brake Rotor (Slot) - TT FRONT 99-05

Brake Rotor (Slot) - TT (QUATTRO W/VENTED REAR)

Rear non quattro 232x9mm

Weight Difference RB two piece rotor Wt=14.3 lbs vs RB One pc stock rotor Wt=17.3 lbs


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

nkgneto said:


> I was emailing these guys to make the MK4 R32 crowd a two piece rotor, they have plenty options for you TT guys.
> 
> Two-piece rotor (Open Slot) 312x25
> One Piece Brake Rotor (Slot) - TT FRONT 99-05
> ...


^?!?! $720 for a pair of 2 piece rotors? Get the funk outta here! That's absurd! Ecs makes a good 2 piece for MUCH less.


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

Murderface said:


> I am...
> 
> ...I'm also running the Porsche Boxster S car upgrade along with the front caliper upgrade :laugh:


Filip I don't think its an upgrade if its stock on your car:laugh::laugh::laugh:


----------



## speed51133! (Aug 5, 2002)

warranty225cpe said:


> ^?!?! $720 for a pair of 2 piece rotors? Get the funk outta here! That's absurd! Ecs makes a good 2 piece for MUCH less.


http://www.ecstuning.com/Audi-TT_MKI-Quattro-225HP/Braking/ECS_OE_2_Piece/

650 actually. thats 70 less, not exactly MUCH LESS to warrant a flame.


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

speed51133! said:


> http://www.ecstuning.com/Audi-TT_MKI-Quattro-225HP/Braking/ECS_OE_2_Piece/
> 
> 650 actually. thats 70 less, not exactly MUCH LESS to warrant a flame.


LOl, i actually noticed that after i posted. And i wasnt intending to "flame" anyone.


----------



## nkgneto (Dec 4, 2004)

speed51133! said:


> http://www.ecstuning.com/Audi-TT_MKI-Quattro-225HP/Braking/ECS_OE_2_Piece/
> 
> 650 actually. thats 70 less, not exactly MUCH LESS to warrant a flame.





warranty225cpe said:


> LOl, i actually noticed that after i posted. And i wasnt intending to "flame" anyone.


Thanks! but Click here! actually cheaper than ECS right now! :heart::wave:


----------



## warranty225cpe (Dec 3, 2008)

nkgneto said:


> Thanks! but Click here! actually cheaper than ECS right now! :heart::wave:


Nice!


----------



## nkgneto (Dec 4, 2004)

*This setup is going to be made for all MK4 Jetta, GTI, R32 & MK1 Audi TT*



racingbrake said:


> In response to some disappointment in the cancellation of stock two piece project for MK4 R32 and also as an alternative to Porsche caliper multi-source kits, we like to offer a brake kit for MK4 using RB 4 piston calipers and 330x32 two piece rotors.
> 
> 
> This kit will fit both GTi and R32 plus some Audi models.
> ...


Info and pricing here (some has been omitted.)

It should look like this:


----------

