Re: metalmaster brakes (archive)

The "worst pads in the world" I don't agree with. Everything you choose is a compromise.....unsure what I will choose in the once it comes time to change them.

http://www.eskimo.com/~dalus/bmw/all/brakes/all_brake_pad_summary.html

Don't know how you would find no difference from stock pads, especially stopping from high speeds when they haven't been heated up yet, plus it wasn't clear to me, but if you only installed them on the rear you will never notice a difference since very little braking comes from the rear, MOST of the braking is on the front that's why the rear pads often last twice as long or more.
Funny, all of the people who have tried them seem to find no difference in braking over stock.

The main negative is they chew up rotors faster and should not be used on the track since some have said they have had problems with them.

I also didn't see any difference over stock when I installed them in the rear.

There is a major difference between stock and Metalmasters when it comes to brake dust.

This is for John Bergen and anyone else inquiring about metalmaster brake pads. They are the WORST.Brakes are for stopping, dust is irrelevant except that most good brakes make dust with the exception of some racing brake pads which are no good for the street and they make sparks. My experience has been that really good brakes make dust, so what. M3 brakes are some of the best and one of the reasons is the factory pads. I used metalmaster once, didn't make any dust, didn't wear out, but didn't stop either. The article in European car mag was Oct. 96 and they tested the pads on VW's and Ferrodo, I probably spelled this wrong were among the best, but not sure if you can get them for M3. Also metalmasters fared the worst in the test.

Follow Ups:

[ Follow Ups ] [ E36 M3 Message Board ] [ Msg. Board FAQ ]

Questions, comments, or problems, please visit the Roadfly help desk.