The rears were okay but all four front pads required filing in order to get them to fit.

Did not take much filing, but just a real pain in the *** after spending funds to buy them! You would think they (HAWK) could have done a better job!

Major

 

Say, is that your Magnum RT in your sig photo? I picked up a 2005 Chrysler 300C a few months ago for my wife and we just love it! I just put a StopTech front big brake kit on it and will be installing the rear kit in a few days. I'm running a set of stock Magnum RT wheels on my 300C, because they show off the brakes better and, despite being the same dimensions, are about 3 pounds lighter than the 300C wheels.

 

Its our Magnum, but its just an SXT Its lowered with eibachs and riding on 20" zenettis.

btw, I have had to file down 13 out of 16 hawk pads I've installed on the brembos.

 

I thought that was a bit odd, so I pulled a few Hawk pads off the shelf and measured them. The backing plates are pretty consistant at about 120.4mm wide.

Hawk HPS Backing plate:


The problem is the Friction Materials Standards Institute (FMSI) Handbook lists the 350Z Track Model front pads as 119.6mm wide.

FMSI pad drawing of 350Z Track Model front pads:


So clearly, Hawk is not meeting the requirements of the FMSI and is manufacturing the 350Z front pad backing plates about 3/4 of a millimeter too wide.

I'll feed this back into my supply channel and see if I can get a response from Hawk. If the majority of you are having to file the backing plates to make the pads fit, that's simply unacceptable.

 

DZeckhausen,
That would be great, I tried dealing with Tire Rack but thier response was not very supportive.

You would think their marketing & QC folks would know about this by now!

Thanks Agian!

Major

 

I had to file mine down too.

 

I have a working relationship with Tire Rack and will call today and make sure they know about this too. I don't expect a response from Hawk right away, so please be patient.

If I were to take a guess as to why this happened, I would presume that Hawk consolidated part numbers with another pad that was close in size (e.g., the WRX STi) and built a pad in between their sizes. Just a guess, but it's probably more likely than Hawk misreading the FMSI databook.

 

Just another data point for you Dave, my front HP+ bought from TireRack were too wide also. The rear HP+ are too short causing the pad to clank to the rear when I reverse, and then clank forward the next time I brake.

 

^^
x2

 

This is disappointing. I just bought Hawk HPS pads and was going to install them this weekend. I'm not sure it's even worth it given all fitment issues people are having with these pads. Should I take them back and exchange them for a different brand??

 

In spite of the size issue, these pads are better than stock in regards to dust and noise. If you have a vise and file, I would say take the time to make them fit. If not, I'm not sure of a good alternative. Maybe someone else has some recommendations.

 

That's good information. Thank you. I'll take some measurements of the rear pads in my inventory and post them. I'll also post the FMSI shape requirements and see if there's a discrepency.

I'm told that Hawk is looking into the issue.

 

It's not as bad as it sounds Zman. I have an angle grinder that made quick work of fitting the pads but a hand file would get the job done too. You only have to take off about 1/32" on each end.

 

I just installed my Hawk HPS pads this weekend. I did not have any fitment issues. The front pads needed a little coaxing into the caliper with a rubber mallet, but other than that the pads and shims went on fine. I put a little CRC Disc Brake Quiet between the back of the pad and the shim and there is no brake noise. The pads work great!!