dino escobar:

Well said, I drive a 1984 Toyota Corolla, bought it in 1996 and still crusin dis baby, may dis year made her 16 yrs, I call her D white dove, served me very well and I love-vendor her up every 2yr. Proper and timely mAintainance is d key.

sultaan:

The '67 Impala? Or Mustang

omodapson:

Hmmm, I quite agree but what happens when the serviceable parts of such cars are no longer in production? How do you keep such cars running?

omodapson: I am wondering what the average life span of a car could be. From articles I have read on the internet, the average life of a car is put at around 15years or 200,000miles having considered adequate servicing. Although I have seen cars that have lasted longer than 30years in Nigeria but this usually comes at a very high price if you consider the economic factors.

So if the average life-span of a car is put at around 15years and we've got most cars coming into the country well over 15years, are we saying that the cars we buy from abroad are scraps? Btw most cars I see at junk/scrap yards (from documentaries only) in developed countries can still qualify as a 'neat' car in Nigeria.

So peeps, what do you think should be the average life span of an 'average' car. I used the word, 'average' because some cars are considered as CLASSICS.

Somorin#1:
I have a 1967 car here and my older Brother has a 1929 car.

mu2sa2: U can drive a car for as long as u want. I saw a very neat Mercedes coupe sport in south Africa in 2007 and d owner said its 1971 (yes,1971)edition. D bottom line is maintenance.I bought my car 8 years ago with d mileometre reading 308,000 and i am still using d car, a 1997 mazda 626 - just done the engine for d second time. D car is still neat & superbly reliable with xcellent fuel economy; i can drive it anywhere.I cant imagine myself selling d car - that will amount to betrayal, because d car has never let me down; if am tired with it i will probably giv it to somebody or keep it as a trophy.In Cuba there are 1940s cars on the road.To me a car has no life span, because when u change a part u ar actually renewing d car and having changed so many things in d car u ar actually not driving d car u bought so many years ago. Mark u 40 year old airplanes ar still flying.

Never a truer statement was made.

Lexusgs430: A car can last for as long as the owner wants it to. Adequate servicing and part replacements as @ when due, will increase the longevity of your car.

adyby: I think the only factor that could actually shorten the life of a car is rust. That I think is very difficult to manage.

Somorin#1:


That is the key to longevity. This maintenance culture is sorely lacking and why this thread will even be of usefulness.

The newest car on my fleet is a 98 E38, I also have a 92 W201.

In August I changed the brake pad (ceramic), brake disc (drilled and slotted), wheel bearings on the front wheel, so that system is ready for another 75-100kmi.

adyby: I think the only factor that could actually shorten the life of a car is rust. That I think is very difficult to manage.

Trac:

I couldn't help but comment (as it is a concern for safety): your cross and slotted rotors in combination will not last for 75,000 miles or kilometres. You periodically have to take the tyres out and inspect for cracks around the slots to avoid disc fracture. The rotor image you posted appears to be a standard rotor that was drilled and milled.

gasbi: mechanics-will-always-construct-something-for-you.

Ikenna351:

2005 model (aka big for nothing).'

Prove? http://www.carsurvey.org/reviews/toyota/camry/2005/

Ikenna

LasBonBoi:

You wanted to say 1 million Km I guess, not 1 million miles.
How much confidence should we have in info picked up from internet pages? Especially when they can be written by random people.
It may be true or false but it's very doubtful for a 2005 car to clock about 770,000 miles in 2011

Ikenna351:

Nigerians still fail no understand that the longer your engine remains hot, the longer the life span of the engine. Thats why cars that do frequent long distance would always have a longer engine lifespan, while cars that run constantly in the city will have a shorter life span (unless the engine remains on and hot the whole day).

Ikenna.

Somorin#1:


This is old Wives tale (cracking and disc fracture). We have the same set on the E36 race car that sees much more abuse than this E38 will ever see and it has been fine.

My rotors will be fine and there's no safety concern here. Have you personally had a set of rotors that cracked on any of your cars? I am looking for you own "personal" experience and not some web blog.

On my cars I rotate my tires at every other oil change (the synthetics @ every 10kmi and the dinos @ 5kmi), during that service I check not just my braking system but my suspension system too and underneath the car. It's just part of my maintenance culture.

Trac:

Old wives tale indeed. Give scientific explanations and not what your opinions are. So far, what you've said doesn't hold up laws of physics/mechanics and the principles of materials and fatigue cycle.

This will be kept simple and relatively short and start from the obvious.

When "whatever" is used to tap the disc, the region of contact is fatigued. What fatigue? Fretting fatigue! This is the damage that occurs where tangential motion (in this case, whatever the tapping tool is) and the other body of contact are under compressive load: in this situation, one of the components must be subjected to bulk loading (the rotor). The result thereafter is potential tangential cracks or cracks at the areas of contact. One single crack initiation is enough to render the whole thing useless. The discs might survive the torment at this point but has been compromised.

At this point, you should be concerned about fatigue which is the process where repeated loading cause failure even when the norminal stresses are below the material yield strength. For the character and nature of use of the brakes [all kinds of braking plus antilocks (motion of the rotor is a combination of rotation and translation)], "galling" can occur later during its lifecycle. In other words, it lacks the strength of material to do the appropriate job for the entire duration it is suppose to.

If there are cracks already established, they may not be on the surface and if they are, you will not be able to see them visually except the damage has progressively worsened. It'll be worse when it is in the material compound. For the surface inspection, you will need a dye-penetrant with a black light. If it is sub-surface, you will need to do a radiographic or ultrasonic testing. You are to repeat such "quality control" at periodic intervals when used in a passenger vehicle. It is just a bad product design. Other areas of concern is heat and energy translation at every of those cross-drilled contact.

To reflect on the product you displayed, visually it doesn't look right. It is also a disc that will rust. It appears as though an ordinary rotor was taken and then cross-drilling and slotting was done. A proper design and build will be cast and not drilled. This way, there is absolutely no high-cycle-fatigue in any point of the material and durability is assured for the entire duration of the lifecycle of the brake rotor. This is justification for the high price mark on it.

To answer your question, I have in one of my cars full sport rotors with no structural compromises and it is not cross-drilled. It's been 4 years and not up to 20,000 and the only complaint I have is that the outer sidewalls of the front tyres are worn. The brakes, suspension and tyres were all replaced at the same time. I rarely drive it but the difference is clear from OEM as you can feel the bite as you are behind the wheel due to its coefficient of friction between the braking surfaces. I won't have to worry about cracking because of its manufactured processes plus it is of a reputable brand.

You are going to have to explain better than stating you rotate your tyres and your oil change every 5000/10,000km. Your BMW application means nothing to me because you never tested the discs to see how it is holding up. I have conveyed to you fundamentally in mechanical engineering principles why Fretting, Wöhler's Fatigue and Mechanics of Materials is not old wives tale. This also is one of the few areas wrong (heat and thermo was suppressed) with a cross-drilled rotor.

Somorin#1:


And the proof I asked you to submit?

I have shown you my proof. This car specifically plus 3 others previously as well as another car that is an award winning SCCA dedicated track auto cross and road race car.

I read a lot of words but you offered no real proof.

It's nothing personal my Brother but I am not the average person that is swayed by old wives tale. All I am asking you for is your own personal proof. Again, have you had a disc fracture on one of your cars before? You don't. Simply because you hav enever seen a disc fracture and you're doing nothing but humping outdated data garnered from the internet around. You don't know the manufacturer of my discs, you know know the reasearch that I did before buying them, you don't know from whom I got the reccomendations from.

Trac:

I'm sorry to burst your bubble but none of what I posted is from the internet (neither did I google anything). I have an intellectual understanding of automotive engineering and manufacturing and I originally intended to work in the automotive/aerospace sector but the economy did not make it possible. Professionally, I design mechanical elements and stress calculations/analysis for a living. Saying engineering laws or phenomena as outdated is a joke. Till you explain otherwise, you have no basis to debunk what I have stated in regards to the principles of materials science and mechanics. There're still other areas of flaws that I did not discuss upon. Realistically, cross-drilling rotors is an obsolete technology and nobody uses asbestos or gas-relief pads anymore.

No engineer would approve of this - not just in rotor application but in any kind of structural design with crack initiation(s); not even a student in an engineering discipline. There is more to what goes behind the production phase than what you see. If you don't see what's wrong in this process and the consequential effects later, much can't be done and your research is incomplete.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUanInZmAWI
Take this to the career section of NL and "propose" it to the practicing engineers.


I don't play with brakes neither do I have to experience a potential or catastrophic failure to learn a lesson and post it to the world. There is a reason why NO manufacturer fits this in their production vehicles.


The brand you bought, I know. Since you pushed it, I will disclose it. I have attached images as well.

The rotors you have are called "Powerstop." The part number:
Front: EBR421XPR and Rear: EBR422XPR.

The company has no experience or affiliation with racing of any kind - not even a single sponsor. They have no pedigree. It is based in Illinois and they make rotors (drilled and slotted) for most vehicles (including American trucks and Kia Rio). The rotors are relatively inexpensive and eBay is loaded with it with sellers wanting a sale. Overall, the product documentation is extremely shallow (both sellers and company). Much isn't spoken about philosophy, design, materials and stringent manufacturing procedures that yields the manifested outputs. Plant location…

If I am wrong, the burden is on you to tell me. I will acknowledge.


It's not my place to tell you how to spend your money neither did I intend anywhere to devalue . My concern was safety. Also, it will not last 75-10,000km (as you erroneously posted). To neglect the extra caution for what is questionable (and in your view, controversial) is what I find disturbing.
At this point, I won't continue with this discussion. The original purpose of the thread will be derailed from its intention. If you disprove me on the product and part number, I will acknowledge but will not respond.

Siena: Somorin, I will say Trac is right. I haven't run slotted rotors in any of my cars, however I have run two sets of drilled ones.

I ran both sets in a 1995 Audi Coupe S2, and both showed cracks around the drilled holes, they appeared as a fine spider-web network, barely visible at first, growing larger until the cracks interlocked. The first set was manufactured by Zimmerman, the second by Brembo, a well respected name in the automotive braking sector.

I build cars to be driven hard, and beat the hell out of them, both on the street and track. So braking and suspension safety are very important to me. When steel, either cast or forged is drilled, it becomes a weak point. Not an issue on a stator, but on a rotor that's subject to several heating and cooling cycles as well as friction, it's not considered ideal. Lots of Motorsport teams have reverted to solid rotors for this very reason. Sudden cooling of a red-hot rotor (yes, they can glow red if the automobile's driven in anger) can cause it to shatter if drilled. A scenario such as this is if the rotor's really hot, then the automobile's driven through water.

Steel in any application where heat or fatigue's an issue will generally crack from an edge, not the middle. Drill this same steel, and you've multiplied the point of fracture. So let's say 35 holes, each hole has the potential to crack from their respective "edges", with each hole potentially having 4 cracks or more.

100,000 miles represents an average of 10 years worth of driving, which is a hell of a long time to retain pads and rotors in any automobile, even if it's driven by a careful granny. If they're not worn below their specified limits, they'll still need replacement. Little use brings its own set of issues - corrosion, pitting etc.

sultaan: Guess I won't be seeing any more of this on a ZR1
or Lexus

Siena: ...
Have I used your rotors, and had them crack? No.

Siena: And Somorin, this isn't ranting and raving, as you so succinctly put it. It's expressing scientific fact; we're all here to share opinions, which I believe is what a Discussion Board is all about.