REFLECTOR: Matco vs Cleveland

Scott Derrick scott at tnstaafl.net
Sun Jan 15 12:48:19 CST 2006


Wasn't Matco going to have a new larger(thicker) disk available as an 
upgrade??

I thought I remember one of the list members testing it a while back..

Scott

Pat Shea wrote:

>The two main factors when evaluating overall braking
>performance are braking power and braking capacity.
>Yes, I made those term up.
>
>More braking power provides greater deceleration and
>the ability to hold the plane still at a higher power
>setting during run-up. Braking power comes from the
>caliper design (torque rating, poad area, etc) and the
>coefficient of friction between the pads and disc.
>
>Braking capacity is the amount of kinetic energy the
>brakes can absorb before they fade out. Because
>Velocities (especially XL's) are relatively fast and
>heavy, this is of far greater concern to us than
>braking power - just ask Rob Johnson. The primary
>determination of braking capacity is the mass of the
>brake disc. Metallic pads are supposed to work better
>at higher temps so they also slightly improve
>capacity.  
>
>Upgrading the Matco's results in more braking power,
>but no real improvement to the braking capacity. I've
>done this upgrade on my XLRG and it increased my
>braking power by about 30-40%. This enables me to keep
>the wheels from rolling up to about 75% power during
>run-up. Certainly an improvement, but no big deal in
>my mind. On landing, I never used the full braking
>power on my original Matco's as it seemed a little
>abusive to pilot/plane. 
>
>Here are the design specs for the standard Matco
>brakes (from matcomfg.com): 
>
>The WHLW600 is designed for the following standards:
>Static Capacity 1860 LBS 
>Load Limit 5580 LBS 
>Maximum Accelerate/Stop Kinetic Energy 337932 ft-lb 
>Torque Rating (@450 PSI) 4473 in-lb 
>
>Here are the design specs for the upgraded Matco
>brakes:
>
>The WHLW600XT is designed for the following standards:
>Static Capacity 1860 LBS 
>Load Limit 5580 LBS 
>Maximum Accelerate/Stop Kinetic Energy 337932 ft-lb 
>Torque Rating (@450 PSI) 6441 in-lb 
>
>Does anyone know the design specs for the Cleveland
>brakes used on the Velocity? That would make for an
>easy comparison.
>
>Pat 
>
>--- Chuck Jensen <cjensen at dts9000.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Kurt,
>>
>>You seem to have captured the essence of the
>>situation.  I had Matcos on
>>an XLRG 300 and I can say that the conversion to
>>Clevelands was
>>absolutely the right move but it gets consistently
>>reported that the
>>Matcos are more than adequate for the 173 Elite. 
>>200-300 extra pounds
>>at another 5-7kts make all the difference in braking
>>demand.  Now, if
>>you intend to visit a lot of short fields that are
>>high-and-hot, then
>>you might reconsider, but since you already have the
>>Matcos, it doesn't
>>strike me as important that you convert to the
>>Clevelands.  Others may
>>have higher quality opinions to share.
>>
>> 
>>
>>Chuck Jensen
>>    
>>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
>http://mail.yahoo.com 
>_______________________________________________
>To change your email address, visit http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
>Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
>user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
>Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
>Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>
>
>
>  
>


More information about the Reflector mailing list