Interesting Thread On SELOC About Crap CL Brakes
#1
Posted 14 April 2012 - 03:52 PM
Essentially lots of pads coming away from backing plates etc and not much positivity towards CL.
#2
Posted 14 April 2012 - 03:58 PM
Edited by fiveoclock, 14 April 2012 - 03:59 PM.
#3
Posted 14 April 2012 - 03:59 PM
#4
Posted 14 April 2012 - 04:06 PM
#5
Posted 14 April 2012 - 04:06 PM
#6
Posted 14 April 2012 - 04:16 PM
#7
Posted 14 April 2012 - 05:23 PM
I'm struggling a little with that concept. CL6s are a slightly different compound to CL5+. We would be very naive if we thought that 6s had a different manufacturing process, quality or fixing method to the backing plate.
It may be that the CL6s don't get as hot, or cool faster or a another which means they don't damage their backing plates. That won't be enough to temp me.
From that photo though it looks like its the compound that has broken up so 6's being a different compound is perhaps why they're ok. 6's have a lot more metal content than 5+'s so not really a slightly different compund.
Edited by fiveoclock, 14 April 2012 - 05:23 PM.
#8
Posted 14 April 2012 - 05:26 PM
Mine were worst than that when they fell apart at doni last year. Mine fell apart and caused the wheel to lock, when i removed them there was no pad left attached to the backing plate. They were the CL Rc5+
#9
Posted 14 April 2012 - 05:29 PM
#10
Posted 14 April 2012 - 05:31 PM
#11
Posted 14 April 2012 - 05:37 PM
Im sure mrsimba's fell apart or chipped bits off and they replaced them free of charge, his had been used on the road so it looks like CL except blame.
Heres my wanted thread when mine fell to pieces.
#12
Posted 14 April 2012 - 05:46 PM
#13
Posted 14 April 2012 - 05:54 PM
Should the warning label on CLs now read?:
Track use only
Indoor use only
Not for use with cars with handbrakes
A race check should be carried out before each usage.
QED.
Harsh braking is to be avoided
Brakepads failing is scary stuff really, especially as it could lock a wheel and spit you off the road/track. It seems like it's not an isolated incident, I won't be fitting them, that's for sure
#14
Posted 14 April 2012 - 06:05 PM
A race check should be carried out before each usage.
I'm sorry, but this is a fact yes...
and that's why none of this racing stuff would pass any road homologation tests
Although, don't get me wrong, I think too there's an "issue" exaggerating the phenomena of the softer RC5+
Edited by alanoo, 14 April 2012 - 06:07 PM.
#15
Posted 14 April 2012 - 06:09 PM
#16
Posted 14 April 2012 - 06:44 PM
#17
Posted 14 April 2012 - 06:45 PM
Edited by Crabash, 14 April 2012 - 06:55 PM.
#18
Posted 14 April 2012 - 07:14 PM
#19
Posted 14 April 2012 - 07:26 PM
Yep I had a set of CL5's 'pit' badly, and after only a few hundred road miles.
I sent Paul @ CL a photo and he sent me a replacement set FOC
The CL5's I had in before were perfect, the CL5's I've had since have been perfect, and the CL5's I've just put in the AP 4 pots are... Perfect!
I've used them very 'enthusiastically' and trust them literally with my life, If I didn't they would be changed straight away.
Why risk it ???
Loads have fell apart and that is sh** and should never happen to any pad under any use or circumstance.
Having seen the pics above why the hell would anyone still use them.
Well they may be ok and there is no alternative ,I dont think so.
Not for me.
#20
Posted 14 April 2012 - 07:31 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users