# Ice Tech rotors - effective or marketing BS?



## womble (Sep 8, 2006)

At first glance, Ice Tech rotors seem like a good idea. Aluminium conducts heat much more effectively than steel, so sandwiching it into a rotor core seems to make sense.

However, looking at the rotors more carefully, _there doesn't seem to be anywhere for this heat to go_. The thermal coupling to the black carrier must be minimal- it's just attached via a bunch of bolts, so heat transfer into the carrier is highly unlikely. There's no additional surface area outside the braking surface to dissipate heat to the atmosphere.

The more I think about it, the less this looks like solid engineering and the more it looks like a marketing gimmick.

Has anyone got real world experience with these vs non "Ice Tech" rotors? Does heat even transfer into the carrier?


----------



## BaeckerX1 (Oct 19, 2007)

Get an Ice Tech rotor, do a really long downhill and make sure to brake often and hard. When you get to the bottom, touch the rotor. Let us know the results.


----------



## necro (Jan 23, 2004)

Being a cheap bastard I went out to purchase a 2012 xt brake set w ice tech rotors and ended up with a 2012 slx brake set with the older style one piece xt rotors. There's about a 50 dollar difference between a set of old style rotors and the newer ones. Close to double the price. Are the 2 piece brake rotors better? Probably. Would a carbon frame and a kashima coated fork with full xtr be better than my current rig? Probably. Is it enough to matter? Depends on your expendable income and how much desire you have to run a bling bike, but the answer is likely no.

I have a habit of tweaking rotors anyway, somehow.


----------



## jsilva (Jul 20, 2011)

Unless Shimano has posted test results or a 3rd party does a test, we'll probably never know  In the real world, even if you swapped rotors on the same bike and rode the same course there's no way to be sure you used your brakes entirely the same. There'd have to be a very large improvement to notice for sure, so if there's something like a 10% improvement you probably wouldn't notice unless you were keenly aware of when and how your brakes overheated. I guess. Maybe.

I'm personally inclined to think Shimano is not being entirely gimmicky (of course there will always be some of that), but how much improvement the rotors actually provide is the question.


----------



## natrat (Mar 20, 2008)

more importantly the 2 piece rotors don't warp so easy ice tech or not


----------



## necro (Jan 23, 2004)

natrat said:


> more importantly the 2 piece rotors don't warp so easy ice tech or not


Now, that would be a true improvement for me. I could care less about 5% better heat transfer, but if it was able to take more of a beating I would be interested. Why would a 2 piece rotor be less apt to warp?


----------



## rzozaya1969 (Nov 28, 2004)

necro said:


> Now, that would be a true improvement for me. I could care less about 5% better heat transfer, but if it was able to take more of a beating I would be interested. Why would a 2 piece rotor be less apt to warp?


I have other rotors (magura Venti) with are two piece. One is 8", the other is 6". It's very hard to warp the 6" (wich is in the back). The front one is a little easier, and it doesn't help that I remove the front wheel often to transport the bike. I think the two piece rotor can help, but it isn't warp-proof.

Regarding ICE, the idea is pretty good from my very limited armchair engineer understanding, but it really hard to say if you would notice it or not.


----------



## natrat (Mar 20, 2008)

rzozaya1969 said:


> I have other rotors (magura Venti) with are two piece.


 i have those also and it is way way better than the storm rotor as far as staying straight but omg is it heavy. That shimano is like 50 grams lighter so i may take a chance on it, i say take a chance because hopefully it will work with the magura caliper. Seems like clearances are different with different brands


----------



## jeffscott (May 10, 2006)

womble said:


> At first glance, Ice Tech rotors seem like a good idea. Aluminium conducts heat much more effectively than steel, so sandwiching it into a rotor core seems to make sense.
> 
> However, looking at the rotors more carefully, _there doesn't seem to be anywhere for this heat to go_. The thermal coupling to the black carrier must be minimal- it's just attached via a bunch of bolts, so heat transfer into the carrier is highly unlikely. There's no additional surface area outside the braking surface to dissipate heat to the atmosphere.
> 
> ...


see the fins on the brake pads..that is where the heat goes..

The al rotor just makes things a little lighter....


----------



## BaeckerX1 (Oct 19, 2007)

LOL thanks for the negative rep. Oh darn, that really hurts. I was just being funny. Get a sense of humor and come back to the internet. :lol:


----------



## BaeckerX1 (Oct 19, 2007)

jeffscott said:


> see the fins on the brake pads..that is where the heat goes..
> 
> The al rotor just makes things a little lighter....


They actually claim it's supposed to dissipate heat better. Whether that's true or not, remains to be seen. I think weight savings would be negligible. There's still 2 stainless steel outer plates. As was previously mentioned, the bonus in the 2 piece rotors is added rigidity which will make the rotor harder to bend/warp. However, they had this with the RT97, RT79 and RT76 rotors which were the same, but didn't have the aluminum core, so obviously Shimano believes something is there, or wants us to think there is.


----------



## 006_007 (Jan 12, 2004)

I am not entirely convinced the rotor material is the answer.... I find that for extended downhills, the amount of pad material / contact patch is king.

My lift assisted bike uses magura gustavs - which have a HUGE contact patch - almost 40% more then saints, and I NEVER have an issue with the brakes overheating/fading. I can make a set of Louises fade using the same rotors though (but the pad contact area is 50% less)

trade off is the gustavs are stupid heavy.......


----------



## cmdrpiffle (May 8, 2004)

FWIW:

I'm running XTR Race (front only) with an ancient Dirty Dog Rotor, and no cooling fins on the caliper.

Performance has been pretty phenom! On a very long and steep downhill on the road (sorry) I did notice some fade due to the heat.
Anyway, my point being the basic brake without fins or ICE rotors work very very well. For extended downhills, every little bit will help.

There was a thread where someone measured rotor temps on ICE tech vs standard steel, and the ICE techs were most definitely a lot cooler.

Sorry not to be able to add much more than an opinion, but I believe the ICE tech rotors most likely have some real validity. Oh, and the brakes themselves rawk !

Cheers


----------



## iamkaioken (Feb 6, 2008)

From what I gather, the idea is to move the heat from the surface of the rotors to the aluminum core thereby reducing the temperature of the braking surface. Granted, once that heat has been transferred it doesn't have anywhere to go so the effects will eventually be nullified.

Now, if the aluminum that was sandwiched was extended outward with fins cut in the outer edge, you'd be able to increase the surface area of the rotors and allow the heat to be transferred away from the braking surface and be dissipated into the atmosphere.

Thoughts?


----------



## balhoon (Sep 23, 2005)

I have old style 2008 XT 775 Brakes.

On long alpine descents (I live in french alps  ) the brakes were fading very quickly with Hayes V7 6 bolts rotors.
I've tried Shimano XT SM-RT 76 rotors 180 mms. Heat dissipation was better but I still had fading problems on long steep descents.

I bought the new XT SM-RT86M rode in Alpe D'Huez (the place for the Megavalanche race) for 6 days in very steep and long descents and didn't had any fading or other problems except pad wear .
I've used same organic pads and original Shimano mineral oil for all these tests.

For my use the new rotors work. They are a little lighter than SM-RT 76: 134g vs 153g


----------



## What&son (Jan 13, 2004)

I run an XTR Ice-Tech rotor on the rear (160mm). Its replacing an older xtr rotor (970) becouse it was getting play at the rivets that fix the steel surface to the carrier. It was already the second time had this happen.Always on the rear brake.Nothing else on the setup has changed besides the rear rotor. (xtr 960 calipers, 970 brake levers, goodridge hose and koolstop pads) The new Ice-t one is holding fine. No play at the rivets so far and better stopping too (they have a larger braking surface). Cooling better, I would say yes, since fadding is less noticeable than with the older ones on some really steep descents where I just have to grab the rear brake for way too long.


----------



## jhymel (May 27, 2009)

I found a couple of published tests when I was researching the XTR Trails. Here's one of them » Shimano - Ice Technologies XTR Benchmark Test - Sick Lines - mountain bike reviews, news, videos | Your comprehensive downhill and freeride mountain bike resource


----------



## Kyle2834 (May 4, 2007)

Two piece rotors for rotors that are harder to knock out of true.

Heatsinks fused to brake pads for cooling.

I like where things are going.


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

jhymel said:


> I found a couple of published tests when I was researching the XTR Trails. Here's one of them » Shimano - Ice Technologies XTR Benchmark Test - Sick Lines - mountain bike reviews, news, videos | Your comprehensive downhill and freeride mountain bike resource


I saw that one a couple months ago. One thing to note is that 1050W of braking power is a fairly moderate stop, it's not a hard stop at all. Take a 70kg rider & bike combo moving at 36km/h on level ground, then brake to a full stop in 3.5 seconds. That's an average power dissipation of 1000W assuming you use only the front brake. You can easily brake to a stop from that speed in under 2 seconds which doubles the power. Now take a bigger guy on a freeride bike braking hard from 50km/h on a downhill, it's quite possible to get well over 4000W of power being dissipated at the rotor.

It would be quite interesting to see how the various brakes hold up under full power braking in the 3000W-5000W range.


----------



## nikojan (Jun 18, 2011)

jsilva said:


> Unless Shimano has posted test results or a 3rd party does a test, we'll probably never know  In the real world, even if you swapped rotors on the same bike and rode the same course there's no way to be sure you used your brakes entirely the same. There'd have to be a very large improvement to notice for sure, so if there's something like a 10% improvement you probably wouldn't notice unless you were keenly aware of when and how your brakes overheated. I guess. Maybe.
> 
> I'm personally inclined to think Shimano is not being entirely gimmicky (of course there will always be some of that), but how much improvement the rotors actually provide is the question.


Build a 20m ramp angled at 45, set a start and end marker and run the test with the two different rotors...you know, if you have the carpentry skills and a lot of funds and time to waste... :thumbsup:


----------



## TigWorld (Feb 8, 2010)

The Ice Tech 6-bolt rotors are considerably heavier than the lightweight 1 piece stainless rotors lots of us run. For weight of a 160mm SM-RT86 (around 130g) you can run the next size up 180mm rotor in stainless (around 110g) and still save some weight (see here for some rotor weight comparisons) as well as saving some cash.

I wonder what the braking and anti-fade performance is when comparing a 160mm ice tech with a 180mm SS rotor?


----------



## gusvar (Sep 19, 2006)

iamkaioken said:


> From what I gather, the idea is to move the heat from the surface of the rotors to the aluminum core thereby reducing the temperature of the braking surface. Granted, once that heat has been transferred it doesn't have anywhere to go so the effects will eventually be nullified.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> So this guy is right about the heat having nowhere to go, if the breaking is repeated short duration however the Al core would be fractionally better ... but if your ridding those ****ers your better of with the thermal properties of steal .... another big issue here is how they are bonding them If there is any adheasive involved youll get a thermal barrier ... even with the capillary thermal bond I assume they are using the coupling to the core is going to be poor .... I would guess that you would get lower weight and better thermal properties from a single piece Al rotor with just the outter contact area sandwiched ... or better yet make some worked copper rotors with steel rim for hardness


----------



## Sugarfree13 (Apr 11, 2012)

This stuffs a joke man, I sometimes wonder if people actually listen to more than just what their bike shop tells them to get or what pinkbike, bike rumor, etc.. tells them to get lol HOPE is the only company I've ever seen to take concepts from the motorcycle world and make them work in the biking industry. I run the sawtooth floating rotors on my bike and couldn't be happier because they work like they're supposed to! Why? Oh maybe because it's been proven on passenger vehicles! lmao Their newest downhill rotors are actually vented like an automotive brake rotor as well as a floating setup. People don't know about this stuff though because of the big names claiming to "innovate" the industry, what a joke


----------



## peanutaxis (Aug 19, 2011)

womble said:


> At first glance, Ice Tech rotors seem like a good idea. Aluminium conducts heat much more effectively than steel, so sandwiching it into a rotor core seems to make sense.
> 
> However, looking at the rotors more carefully, _there doesn't seem to be anywhere for this heat to go_. The thermal coupling to the black carrier must be minimal- it's just attached via a bunch of bolts, so heat transfer into the carrier is highly unlikely. There's no additional surface area outside the braking surface to dissipate heat to the atmosphere.
> 
> ...


You are completely correct this is all marketing ********. There is absolutely nowhere for the heat to go except back into the steel layers. The only exception I can find - which may well have appeared since this thread was started - are the RT99 rotors. These have redeemed themselves because the aluminium layer extends inward to become cooling fins. But they only come in centrelock...so, no thanks.

But also, how many times have you been screaming down a hill and had brake fade because your brakes got so hot? Exactly. It only happened to me once because I was basically downhilling on an XC bike with 140mm rotors and old Avids.
And if you this happens to you, then you just need larger diameter discs or better brakes, because no one has overheated 203mm rotors or descent quality pads on a trail. Ever.


----------



## natrat (Mar 20, 2008)

i have no idea about heat dissipation but the shimano composition creates a softer metal. I struggled with all kinds of noise and vibration and glazing problems with standard rotors for years until i put an icetech on the front. Yes it it comes out of true way easier but that just requires a lighter touch to straighten. I am impressed.


----------



## Guest (May 21, 2016)

If you're looking for better performance and lower noise I think carbon fiber discs are the answer. There's a reason that aircraft and race cars use carbon fiber rotors (and the matching pad material) and it's not good looks. They don't/can't warp, they dissipate heat better and they stop faster.


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

peanutaxis said:


> You are completely correct this is all marketing ********. There is absolutely nowhere for the heat to go except back into the steel layers. The only exception I can find - which may well have appeared since this thread was started - are the RT99 rotors. These have redeemed themselves because the aluminium layer extends inward to become cooling fins. But they only come in centrelock...so, no thanks.


Actually, you're wrong. I own the RT67 and RT81 rotors which are exactly the same except the latter has the aluminum sandwich construction. If I drag the brakes down a hill, the aluminum carrier piece on the RT67 stays cool, heat barely conducts from the friction ring into the carrier. On the RT81 Ice-tech rotors, the aluminum carrier is scorching hot at the end of the same hill, there's a ton of heat transfer from the disc surface to the rest of the rotor.



> But also, how many times have you been screaming down a hill and had brake fade because your brakes got so hot? Exactly. It only happened to me once because I was basically downhilling on an XC bike with 140mm rotors and old Avids.
> And if you this happens to you, then you just need larger diameter discs or better brakes, because no one has overheated 203mm rotors or descent quality pads on a trail. Ever.


You probably live in a place that's as flat as the one I live in. But there's these things called mountains, that people ride mountain bikes on. Those folks can and do toast 203mm rotors & pads.


----------



## peanutaxis (Aug 19, 2011)

aerius said:


> Actually, you're wrong. I own the RT67 and RT81 rotors which are exactly the same except the latter has the aluminum sandwich construction. If I drag the brakes down a hill, the aluminum carrier piece on the RT67 stays cool, heat barely conducts from the friction ring into the carrier. On the RT81 Ice-tech rotors, the aluminum carrier is scorching hot at the end of the same hill, there's a ton of heat transfer from the disc surface to the rest of the rotor.


Don't get me wrong, I do believe that this would make a small difference. I'd love to see a fair test done. But I maintain that the difference would be tiny compared to just upping your rotor size a little. But then, you only need to do this if you are experiencing brake fade from heat. And you'd only experience that if you are doing downhill on tiny rotors with old/pathetic brakes. Basically, ice tech is not needed unless you're doing something stupid. And so it is marketing BS.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

I loved my RT81's, they performed better for me than the replacement rotors, they just wore quickly.
I'll be getting another set.


----------



## Crossmaxx (Dec 2, 2008)

Forster said:


> If you're looking for better performance and lower noise I think carbon fiber discs are the answer. There's a reason that aircraft and race cars use carbon fiber rotors (and the matching pad material) and it's not good looks. They don't/can't warp, they dissipate heat better and they stop faster.


Well, the temperature that they operate at is also significantly higher than what MTB brakes normally run at.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2016)

Crossmaxx said:


> Well, the temperature that they operate at is also significantly higher than what MTB brakes normally run at.


 Doesn't invalidate the argument that they perform better (no warping/squealing, faster stops, etc.)


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Forster said:


> Doesn't invalidate the argument that they perform better (no warping/squealing, faster stops, etc.)


And until they're up to temp?


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Just put some Ice Tech rotors on my gravel bike today. They aren't even bed in yet and I can feel a difference for the better compared to the one piece rotors they are replacing. They are just the XT RT86 6 bolt so they really aren't anymore costly than a one piece and they look a lot better...so why not. As long as the performance isn't worse, which it isn't I'll stay with them.


----------



## Cleared2land (Aug 31, 2012)

I like it when an old thread rises from the abyss and brings on some new thoughts. Some think differently, but I think it's pretty cool.


----------



## CrozCountry (Mar 18, 2011)

The aluminum carrier shinamos don't wrap as easily and stay true for longer. That by itself is worth it. Work less (on the bike), ride more.


----------



## TracksFromHell (Jul 9, 2014)

Forster said:


> If you're looking for better performance and lower noise I think carbon fiber discs are the answer. There's a reason that aircraft and race cars use carbon fiber rotors (and the matching pad material) and it's not good looks. They don't/can't warp, they dissipate heat better and they stop faster.


Did you read the Carbon brake rotor thread here?


----------



## Cleared2land (Aug 31, 2012)

Forster said:


> If you're looking for better performance and lower noise I think carbon fiber discs are the answer. There's a reason that aircraft and race cars use carbon fiber rotors (and the matching pad material) and it's not good looks. They don't/can't warp, they dissipate heat better and they stop faster.





TracksFromHell said:


> Did you read the Carbon brake rotor thread here?


At this point in time, given what technology and product that are currently available, I'm not a proponent of carbon fiber rotors for mountain bikes. I do have experience with aircraft use of carbon brake rotors and they are not free of noise and frequency issues. Not even close. Noise and carbon brake rotors have frequently been considered a synonymous thought.

Carbon rotors inherently need some heat before they begin to shine. Perhaps DH would meet this prerequisite. Otherwise, I question their performance applicability to mountain biking or like applications.

I'm not aware of warping related issues, but I have seen cracking and fracture related issues.


----------



## syphen (Aug 22, 2015)

Cleared2land said:


> At this point in time, given what technology and product that are currently available, I'm not a proponent of carbon fiber rotors for mountain bikes. I do have experience with aircraft use of carbon brake rotors and they are not free of noise and frequency issues. Not even close. Noise and carbon brake rotors have frequently been considered a synonymous thought.
> 
> Carbon rotors inherently need some heat before they begin to shine. Perhaps DH would meet this prerequisite. Otherwise, I question their performance applicability to mountain biking or like applications.
> 
> I'm not aware of warping related issues, but I have seen cracking and fracture related issues.


Carbon rotors also don't work in the rain. Anyone who follows motorcycle racing will know that in cold or wet weather, the Carbon rotors come off and Steel rotors go back on.


----------



## Cleared2land (Aug 31, 2012)

syphen said:


> Carbon rotors also don't work in the rain. Anyone who follows motorcycle racing will know that in cold or wet weather, the Carbon rotors come off and Steel rotors go back on.


Fact that in certain racing motorcycle racing (specifically road racing that I'm aware of) situations, carbon rotors are replaced with metal rotors during rain events.

However, stating that they do not work in the rain is somewhat misleading and incorrect. They do work when wet, but at a reduced performance level below what would be expected of them in a high stakes, high performance event. In this case of a rain related event, the weight of metal over carbon yields a disproportional braking advantage.


----------



## TracksFromHell (Jul 9, 2014)

Did any of you read the Carbon brake rotor thread(s) here?


Perhaps that is a good place to start.


----------



## Cleared2land (Aug 31, 2012)

TracksFromHell said:


> Did any of you read the Carbon brake rotor thread(s) here?
> 
> 
> Perhaps that is a good place to start.


There have been several threads on MTBR that have incorporated that subject. Why not provide a link since this is your second mention with no citing.


----------



## TracksFromHell (Jul 9, 2014)

Cleared2land said:


> There have been several threads on MTBR that have incorporated that subject. Why not provide a link since this is your second mention with no citing.


Advanced search shows thread titles only for a forum. There are only 666 posts here so it should be a fast read:
http://forums.mtbr.com/brake-time/carbon-brake-rotors-823378.html

Mr.Magura has some extra special input there. And also lots of users from the Kickstarter chimed in. There is even a video of a user BBQ'ing bacon using a carbon rotor.


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

Cleared2land said:


> Fact that in certain racing motorcycle racing (specifically road racing that I'm aware of) situations, carbon rotors are replaced with metal rotors during rain events.
> 
> However, stating that they do not work in the rain is somewhat misleading and incorrect. They do work when wet, but at a reduced performance level below what would be expected of them in a high stakes, high performance event. In this case of a rain related event, the weight of metal over carbon yields a disproportional braking advantage.


I have no idea how they work on bikes or motorcycles, but on the 737-900's with carbon brakes, there is no degradation associated with any kind of environmental conditions. They work great, as far as I can tell and we have no problems with them. My airline is retrofitting all steel brakes to carbon. They heat up a little faster than steel brakes, but they cool off faster as well, so there is a small differential issue with what we call "Max Quick Turn Limit". Also, they wear differently. They wear as a factor of number of brake applications more than steel brakes which wear (more) as a function of energy absorbed. Unlike "Cleared2land", I've never had or heard of issues with chatter or noise...at least on the aircraft I fly.


----------



## TracksFromHell (Jul 9, 2014)

MSU Alum said:


> I have no idea how they work on bikes or motorcycles, but on the 737-900's with carbon brakes, there is no degradation associated with any kind of environmental conditions. They work great, as far as I can tell and we have no problems with them. My airline is retrofitting all steel brakes to carbon. They heat up a little faster than steel brakes, but they cool off faster as well, so there is a small differential issue with what we call "Max Quick Turn Limit". Also, they wear differently. They wear as a factor of number of brake applications more than steel brakes which wear (more) as a function of energy absorbed. Unlike "Cleared2land", I've never had or heard of issues with chatter or noise...at least on the aircraft I fly.


I suggest reading the "Carbon Brake rotors" thread. See previous post for link. Ah, what the heck, here it is: http://forums.mtbr.com/brake-time/carbon-brake-rotors-823378.html


----------



## MSU Alum (Aug 8, 2009)

TracksFromHell said:


> I suggest reading the "Carbon Brake rotors" thread. See previous post for link. Ah, what the heck, here it is: http://forums.mtbr.com/brake-time/carbon-brake-rotors-823378.html


Don't need to. Don't care. Just responding to the non-bike related carbon brake comments.


----------



## azimiut (Feb 21, 2014)

nothing in cycling would see this much abuse, but we ran 2 piece steel rotors with aluminum hats. only issue we ever had with the carbon rotors is that if they chip, get new ones. expensive and less effective at lower speeds and temp. once up to temp they work. we would go through a set of pads and rotors each event weekend.










only issue I would see with a rotor with a steel aluminum sandwich would be different expansion rates making it warp faster.


----------



## TracksFromHell (Jul 9, 2014)

azimiut said:


> nothing in cycling would see this much abuse, but we ran 2 piece steel rotors with aluminum hats. only issue we ever had with the carbon rotors is that if they chip, get new ones. expensive and less effective at lower speeds and temp. once up to temp they work. we would go through a set of pads and rotors each event weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


From what I have heard (hearsay) Ice Tech is the real deal. But they do bend with crashes/impacts a little easier, and they also don't bend back as well.

As for carbon for bikes ... read the Carbon Brake Rotors thread.
All the good nuggets are in that thread - all 600+ posts about people's bad luck with them.

The carbon bike rotors depend on Sic embedded for stopping, not the same method as car rotors. But see that thread for all the caveats.
I have some stupid C/Sic rotors up for grabs if anyone wants to experiment with them.


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

MSU Alum said:


> I have no idea how they work on bikes or motorcycles, but on the 737-900's with carbon brakes, there is no degradation associated with any kind of environmental conditions.


And that's totally relevant, because mtb with speed of 50km/h and weight of 80kg (with rider included) is totally comparable to 60.000kg plane landing at what 300km/h? 
PS: Why would "they cool off faster" matter with plane? You probably don't do several stopping and accelerating in short time, or do your planes land differently then those I have been flying with?


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2016)

primoz said:


> PS: Why would "they cool off faster" matter with plane? You probably don't do several stopping and accelerating in short time, or do your planes land differently then those I have been flying with?


 Need to keep them from heating the tires after landing and during taxi. Can't speak for the 737, but the 707 had a 5 mile limit on taxi before you had to let the wheels cool and if you were taxing back after an aborted takeoff, you had to let them cool first. It's actually pretty easy to blow aircraft tires it you get brakes too hot, not sure it's ever happened with carbon rotors, but it did with steel.


----------



## Cleared2land (Aug 31, 2012)

Ok, this airplane stuff is a bit off-topic, but the digression is remaining on brakes and rotors...

Two videos here, both carbon brake rotors. The first video is the simulated brake testing of an Airbus 380 during a simulated overweight landing and resulting brake fire.

The second video is an actual Airbus 340 performing rejected take-off (probably at max gross weight) with maximum brake effort. The resulting brake fire blows the tires. Actually, the tires on most aircraft do not actually explode from the heat. Aircraft wheels have fuse plugs designed to melt at a prescribed temp and release all tire pressure to avoid the danger of a tire explosion. The result of this fuse plug blowing is almost like an explosion (as you will see from the video) from the high tire pressure release without the rubber shrapnel.


----------



## ExPrezes (Aug 4, 2016)

Hi guys. Although I'm reading mtbr for years, that's my first post about those Ice-Techs, since I'm stuck with strange phenomenon: 
I bought SM-RT86-M to use with my ST-M766, and brake pads (original Shimano, metalic) are... clicking loudly, sometimes when rotor spins freely and pads are just touching it, and when I start braking, the sound gets louder and more annoying than squeal. Semi-metalic and resin have the same, but bit more quiet.
I've looked everywhere I could - both pads and rotors' surfaces are perfectly ok, nothing touches brake elements. It seems that pads are "clicking" on edges of relatively large vent holes in rotor... Anyone still riding ancient brakes from past decade, and having similar issue?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Do you have any other rotors to try?

One of my brakes needed spacing out a mm as it was touching the alloy carrier of the rotor.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

got em on both bikes and I only buy the best


Sent with Tapatalk


----------



## ExPrezes (Aug 4, 2016)

NordieBoy, 
Yep, I had regular SM-RT56, but for unknown reason those were for resin pads only, and I use metallic ones, so the concert they were giving on long descents was unbelievable - still, no other unwanted sounds during normal ride / mild braking. I thought I replace them with Ice-techs. I will buy today standard Shimano rotor for metallic, and we will see how it goes...


----------



## MVK Explores (May 12, 2016)

Cleared2land said:


> Ok, this airplane stuff is a bit off-topic, but the digression is remaining on brakes and rotors...


Well dang! Thanks for the links that was great to see.


----------



## philreske8614 (Apr 25, 2016)

Didnt read through but I run hope M4's with ice tech rotors and they are amazing. Broke some spokes over the weekend and put my back up wheelset on with hope sawtooth rotors and the amount of stopping power isn't even compareble 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

