: time to do some maintenance i have a week off of work!



your maker
07-20-11, 09:22 PM
can someone let me know where is the best place to buy wires for the V, it is lightly moded. should i go with stock wires?

i do have NGK plugs ready to go in.

also brake pads which ones and where from?

last thing is the rear diff oil. looks like everyone is using just mobli1

thanks guys

wcryan
07-20-11, 09:31 PM
msd wires, Hawk HP+ front, Hawk HPS rear

kevm14
07-20-11, 09:52 PM
I keep seeing this. I've seen it on other forums, as well. Why do people run staggered pad installations? You WILL change the brake bias from stock, to something not stock, across the entire temperature spectrum. Do you really want to assume that you've changed it for the better?

darkman
07-20-11, 10:16 PM
I keep seeing this. I've seen it on other forums, as well. Why do people run staggered pad installations? You WILL change the brake bias from stock, to something not stock, across the entire temperature spectrum. Do you really want to assume that you've changed it for the better?


I am doomed to having a staggered pad installation because I could not get a set of Hawk HP+ rear pads to stop squealing on my two-piece rear rotors. And I am not talking about a light squeal just before coming to a stop, I am talking about 100+ decibel squeal as soon as I got on the brakes (unless I hammered them.) I bedded them, chamfered them, and padded the back of them - nothing even got the squeal to lessen. On the other hand, my front HP+ pads, also on two-piece rotors, are absolutely silent.

So I am running HP+ up front and the Brembos on the rear. I understand the theoretical problem that could cause, but I really do not notice any issue other than it won't stop quite as quick. And even that may be psychological.

darkman
07-20-11, 10:24 PM
can someone let me know where is the best place to buy wires for the V, it is lightly moded. should i go with stock wires?

i do have NGK plugs ready to go in.

also brake pads which ones and where from?

last thing is the rear diff oil. looks like everyone is using just mobli1

thanks guys

Stock wires and stock brake pads are not bad choices. Luke at Lindsay gives us a discount. On the differential fluid, I still use the GM stuff because I have an inventory, but I think Amsoil Severe Gear is the best alternative. I buy my Amsoil products through C66 Racing - a long time supporter of this forum.

kevm14
07-21-11, 10:30 AM
I would recommend stock wires, stock plugs (I see you already bought) and stock pads. I know we get frustrated with some of the stock driveline stuff, but that doesn't mean every piece of OE gear on these cars is bad. In fact, the stock wires, plugs and pads are all very good.

By the way, HP+ and stock are MUCH closer than HPS and HP+.

rand49er
07-21-11, 10:59 AM
... On the differential fluid, I still use the GM stuff because I have an inventory, but I think Amsoil Severe Gear is the best alternative. I buy my Amsoil products through C66 Racing - a long time supporter of this forum.^^^ Yeah that.

Dom, you are taking August 19th off and taking the tunnel, aren't you? :sneaky:

darkman
07-21-11, 11:19 AM
By the way, HP+ and stock are MUCH closer than HPS and HP+.

I agree.

repenttokyo
07-21-11, 11:22 AM
I keep seeing this. I've seen it on other forums, as well. Why do people run staggered pad installations? You WILL change the brake bias from stock, to something not stock, across the entire temperature spectrum. Do you really want to assume that you've changed it for the better?

all of my cars run staggered pads, even my track car.

kevm14
07-21-11, 12:51 PM
Why? The reason I keep hearing is because "the front does more of the braking" so you put a more aggressive pad up front. This sounds logical, until you realize that this has been engineered into the braking system by the OEM. So unless you shifted your brake bias to the front, I don't understand the purpose. Unless it's one of those track "common sense" things that no one questions, because everything works out ok so why argue? I'm not good at the "not argue" part if there isn't a sound engineering explanation. You are of course free to do anything you want on your car, but I am of course free to question it when it's recommended publicly. And it's nothing personal. More of a pet peeve.

http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/wp_rearbrake_upgrades.shtml
http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/wp_brakebiasandperformance.shtml

I WILL concede that if you are running track tires, you will need less rear bias under heavy braking. In that case, running a notch less aggressive rear pad makes sense to attempt to maintain the stock bias. On the other hand, stock bias tends to be forward-biased. So maybe you DON'T want to maintain the stock bias (by switching to a less aggressive rear pad). In other words, you might have a better optimized system to run the same F and R pads, which was kind of my entire point.

JD03Cobra
07-21-11, 02:11 PM
I am doomed to having a staggered pad installation because I could not get a set of Hawk HP+ rear pads to stop squealing on my two-piece rear rotors. And I am not talking about a light squeal just before coming to a stop, I am talking about 100+ decibel squeal as soon as I got on the brakes (unless I hammered them.) I bedded them, chamfered them, and padded the back of them - nothing even got the squeal to lessen. On the other hand, my front HP+ pads, also on two-piece rotors, are absolutely silent.


I had the exact same problem...maybe not quite as loud. Finally stopped after 10k miles of wear.

repenttokyo
07-22-11, 01:52 PM
Why? The reason I keep hearing is because "the front does more of the braking" so you put a more aggressive pad up front. This sounds logical, until you realize that this has been engineered into the braking system by the OEM. So unless you shifted your brake bias to the front, I don't understand the purpose. Unless it's one of those track "common sense" things that no one questions, because everything works out ok so why argue? I'm not good at the "not argue" part if there isn't a sound engineering explanation. You are of course free to do anything you want on your car, but I am of course free to question it when it's recommended publicly. And it's nothing personal. More of a pet peeve.

http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/wp_rearbrake_upgrades.shtml
http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/wp_brakebiasandperformance.shtml

I WILL concede that if you are running track tires, you will need less rear bias under heavy braking. In that case, running a notch less aggressive rear pad makes sense to attempt to maintain the stock bias. On the other hand, stock bias tends to be forward-biased. So maybe you DON'T want to maintain the stock bias (by switching to a less aggressive rear pad). In other words, you might have a better optimized system to run the same F and R pads, which was kind of my entire point.

it's been engineered to a point, but there's no denying that front pads get eaten up a lot faster than rear pads, even in daily driving. if you pull pads from the front of even a light car like my miata after a day at the track and compare the fronts to the rears, even with more aggressive fronts the wear is substantially more. it's simple physics: weight transfer under braking puts more mass on the front of the car. if front brakes weren't more important, then why are front rotors always so much bigger than rear rotors? why can you still get cars with front discs and rear drums, but never cars with four-wheel drums? it's because the front brakes have to work harder to stop the car than the rear brakes.

i think the error in your assumption might be that the OEM system is the best possible brake design, when its actually based on a complex interaction between cost, parts availability and restrictions inherent in the overall vehicle design.

kevm14
07-22-11, 04:34 PM
The rear brakes on our cars are actually 0.4 inches larger in diameter. They are more narrow, have smaller calipers, and have a larger inner swept area radius, though.

I think the best way to do it would be to measure the actual rotor temp after a few laps and choose your pads based on that. But you'd STILL also want to make sure bias is correct. Going with the same F and R setup, plus stickier track tires, will create a little more rear bias than factory at high temps, which is usually the correct direction.

repenttokyo
07-22-11, 04:40 PM
on my track car I actually backed off the bite on the rear brakes, and run less aggressive pads, too.

one thing to remember about brake pads - installing a more aggressive compound on the front, which does up to 75 percent of the braking on your car, is more about dealing with heat than it is increasing stopping power on a track. "Better" brake pads are often much better at resisting fade, and it's far more important for front brake pads to be fade-resistant than rear pads, as they encounter higher temps.

kevm14
07-22-11, 10:44 PM
It would be interesting to see brake temps. The rear has no cooling ducts.

All I was saying is that stock bias tends to be a little forward of ideal. So if you end up transferring more weight to the front under heavy braking, than stock (because of track tires), then, yes, you need less brake force at the rear to match the decreased traction of that axle. But since stock is front biased (according to Stoptech, in general, not because I know for sure that our cars are, though it's very likely), you may want to maintain the rear brake force, not reduce it.

But actually, this is really more about running HP+ in the front and HPS in the back. From what I've read, the HPS is inferior when cold AND when hot (easier on rotors and doesn't dust, or squeak so that's the trade-off), so you'd logically shift way too much brake force to the front axle. Electronic brake force distribution may handle some of this under heavy ABS, but it's always better for the system to be pretty close hydraulically. And that could end up overheating the HPS pads. Running all track pads, but subtly mixing up heat/friction characteristics is not really the same as HP+ and HPS. So I didn't mean to give that impression.

repenttokyo
07-22-11, 10:48 PM
heat resistance is more important than brake bias, in my opinion, when evaluating brake pads. to me, a "better" pad is the one that bites on lap 15 like it did on lap 2. front pads need to fade more than rear pads, because of the heat generated. running a more aggressive pad on the front is not folk wisdom, it's physics in action.

kevm14
07-22-11, 11:00 PM
Right, and if you aren't in the ABS, then it would be exactly as you said. But I did find it interesting that adding a big front brake kit can lengthen stopping distance:
http://www.stoptech.com/tech_info/wp_brakebiasandperformance.shtml

It's not exactly the same, but it's very similar. With pads that work very well when hot, you have more brake torque on the front. Remember, too, that a pad compound that DOES work when hot, will also be capable of turning kinetic energy into heat at a MUCH higher pace than some pads that just glazed over. So those more aggressive pads can create the heat you installed them to combat. I just like things to be optimized, even if I never reach the limit of traction of the front tires.

Like I said, I'd be very curious about temps. Even with 75% braking by the front on track tires during the heaviest braking (on stock suspension, so it dives like stock), I think the rear might be warmer than you think. Or I'm wrong. I'd be curious to see. What I do know is that if the stock Brembo pads have the same compound front and rear, and the stock setup is a little front biased (to add a safety-related conservatism), then ESPECIALLY if you were tracking with stock-type tires and stock suspension (everything would weight transfer like stock) then it would follow that the same F and R pad compound would give you stock-like performance. And I'd also ASSUME that doesn't mean smoking front rotors and sort-of-warm rear rotors. But there is a saying about assumptions...so I could be wrong here. I'd also be pretty disappointed. "Stock" sounds unimpressive, but it's a pretty damn nice setup, if you ask me. I wouldn't just assume it's compromise-city under there.

repenttokyo
07-22-11, 11:06 PM
my track car actually doesn't have ABS.

i don't follow your statement that putting more aggressive pads front and rear would give you stock-like performance. are you talking about all cars in general or just the Cadillac? you lost me there.

also, have you ever driven on the track and experienced brake fade? i think there's a disconnect between what we are each talking about. i didn't change the pads on my track car so that it would necessarily stop "better" than stock, although it does. I changed the pads on my track car so that I could drive it at 9/10ths for more than one lap before brake fade completely eliminated my ability to stop.

with pads that work well when hot, you have a guarantee that you will be able to predictably use braking zones across a greater number of laps. that's very important.

kevm14
07-22-11, 11:22 PM
Stock like bias, meaning slightly frontward. That's what I meant by performance.

I just think if you now have an ability to pound the brakes longer, the rears are, necessarily, also taking more of a beating, and you'd want to upgrade them for the same reason, even if the FRONTS are what drove you to the upgrade. To be clear, I don't disagree about your choice to upgrade the fronts! But since you can be on the brakes harder, for longer, the rears are now heating up more than they were before you had to let the FRONTS cool. Admittedly, rear fade on 25% of heavy braking isn't nearly as concerning as front fade. Hopefully that made sense.

repenttokyo
07-22-11, 11:25 PM
Stock like bias, meaning slightly frontward. That's what I meant by performance.

I just think if you now have an ability to pound the brakes longer, the rears are, necessarily, also taking more of a beating, and you'd want to upgrade them for the same reason, even if the FRONTS are what drove you to the upgrade. To be clear, I don't disagree about your choice to upgrade the fronts! But since you can be on the brakes harder, for longer, the rears are now heating up more than they were before you had to let the FRONTS cool. Admittedly, rear fade on 25% of heavy braking isn't nearly as concerning as front fade. Hopefully that made sense.

if the fronts are seeing 75 percent of the heat, and the rears are seeing 25 percent, it is not as important to upgrade the rears. i upgrade the rears on my track car, but not to the same degree, because I don't need as much fade/heat resistance.

i'm not using brake pads to affect my brake bias. it's for heat management and predictable braking.

kevm14
07-22-11, 11:30 PM
But upgrading the fronts allows you to use the brake pedal harder, more often, and longer. Which means the rears are now running warmer with a front pad upgrade. Which means you'd want to treat them to the same upgrade so everything is still even (in terms of temps). If the rears are actually being run above their recommended temp range, you could actually end up increasing front pad life if you also upgrade the rears in kind. Which brings it back to brake bias, incidentally.

And my point with brake bias is you'd be adding front bias, beyond that which was already presumably designed into the car, which is undesirable if you are locking up the fronts. If you are not, then you can ignore that portion of my argument.

I would also concede that if you are satisfied with your threshold braking performance AND your brake pad wear characteristics, I guess most of what I say would be purely academic. But that doesn't mean they couldn't be improved.

repenttokyo
07-23-11, 12:03 AM
But upgrading the fronts allows you to use the brake pedal harder, more often, and longer. Which means the rears are now running warmer with a front pad upgrade. Which means you'd want to treat them to the same upgrade so everything is still even (in terms of temps). If the rears are actually being run above their recommended temp range, you could actually end up increasing front pad life if you also upgrade the rears in kind. Which brings it back to brake bias, incidentally.

And my point with brake bias is you'd be adding front bias, beyond that which was already presumably designed into the car, which is undesirable if you are locking up the fronts. If you are not, then you can ignore that portion of my argument.

I would also concede that if you are satisfied with your threshold braking performance AND your brake pad wear characteristics, I guess most of what I say would be purely academic. But that doesn't mean they couldn't be improved.

i never lock the brakes on the track unless i've made a mistake....and the rears don't need the same upgrade as they are not running the same temps as the front, nor are they operating above their recommended temp range. they need a pad that matches their operating temperature, just as the fronts need one that matches theirs. and these temps are not the same.....there's no "evening out" to do here, because the pads are not doing the same work.

kevm14
07-23-11, 12:07 AM
Agreed, front and rear temps are probably not the same, and front is probably higher. But rear temps will elevate when you upgrade the fronts. I know this because you said fade kept you back and after the upgrade, you can push harder, longer. As the brake pedal operates the front AND rears simultaneously, that means the rears also run hotter now. Which means they MAY end up operating out of their temp zone. Like I said, this is pretty much academic at this point. I'm sure you're happy with your car's performance.

repenttokyo
07-23-11, 12:10 AM
Agreed, front and rear temps are probably not the same, and front is probably higher. But rear temps will elevate when you upgrade the fronts. I know this because you said fade kept you back and after the upgrade, you can push harder, longer. As the brake pedal operates the front AND rears simultaneously, that means the rears also run hotter now. Which means they MAY end up operating out of their temp zone. Like I said, this is pretty much academic at this point. I'm sure you're happy with your car's performance.

i understand what you are saying, but the rears are upgraded too on my car, just not to the same level as the fronts, because the temps are not the same at all.

if i was a professional competitor, then yes, I would probably have the best possible pads for each situation and track I was on and the budget to determine what those would be, front and rear. But practically, for the lapping that I do - which is not in my Cadillac - the fronts work harder than the rears, heat up faster, and do most of the stopping, and therefore require a better compound.

your maker
07-23-11, 03:57 PM
ok guys i need to know which wires set i should go with. two of my old stock wires broke on me trying to pull them from the plug

which set the firecore from Gfoce

magnacore 8.5 wires from

or these http://www.abcdirectautoparts.com/autoparts-products.php?make=Cadillac&model=CTS+V

or order stock OEM ones

CancerJCC
07-24-11, 09:03 AM
I'm running stock.

kevm14
07-24-11, 09:17 AM
My wires are stock/original at 106k. Are you sure you even need wires? They aren't required as part of a tuneup. I also pulled the stock plugs and replaced them with stock at around 100k. They looked fine, too.

your maker
07-24-11, 09:56 AM
ya i need wires as they broke trying to pull them from the plug

kevm14
07-24-11, 01:05 PM
Yeah I pulled one of my wires partially through the boot and was able to get it back inline. Nothing actually "broke" per se. So yeah I guess you need new wires. I'd go with stock unless they're like twice the price of a good aftermarket set.

your maker
07-25-11, 12:48 AM
well for the same money i can get the firecore form Gforce so looks like those are the winners. i do believe darkman has those on his

your maker
07-25-11, 01:09 AM
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/ACC-9070/Application/?query=Year%7c2006%7cMake%7cCADILLAC%7cModel%7cCTS&prefilter=1

i just found these anyone run these?

your maker
07-25-11, 01:12 AM
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/TAY-79206/?rtype=10

maybe these are better???

darkman
07-25-11, 08:22 AM
http://shop.gforce1320.com/category.sc?categoryId=14