Subject: [Tigers] Fw: Brake rotor min. thickness (2002)

From: Tom Witt via Tigers <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 14:04:02 -0700

I just wanted to reassure others (and Dan Williams) that the information I 
sited yesterday and authored by "Dan" was not Dan Williams.  Below is the 
2002 email that came through the Tigers AutoXteam.net Forum. It is a bit 
confusing in that someone named "Dan" is one of two brothers in an auto 
parts store??? quoted as saying .310 (YIKES! - mine) is the minimum 
thickness - and then another person also named "Dan" (presumed Fitzgerald) 
is stating a correction (.375) - that also seems up for debate.

Anyway, I spent some time searching/asking back then and these were the only 
numbers anyone ever returned with. For me at least those numbers became 
valid for someone willing to turn my rotors. That said, I agree that most 
times .060 is the maximum usually found (as I eluded to in yesterdays post). 
The original 2002 post is below forwarded (today) to the list along with the 
source data.  Tom Witt

-----Original Message----- 
From: Matthew Bouchelle
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 6:54 PM
To: Tiger Post
Subject: FW: Brake rotor min. thickness

I had a few folks ask me to get back with them if I found anything on the
rotors, therefore I'll post the answer.  Below is a definitive response from
Dan.  My new favorite parts store, owned by two brothers who are not on
computer and still have all sorts of catalogs for parts going back to the
60s looked up the rotors and told me the very technical answer, "book says
throw out at .310".  I have not researched the drums yet... actually, I
still haven't got them to let go of the hubs, but I'm in no rush.

Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan & Lori Fitzgerald [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 8:57 PM
To: Matthew Bouchelle
Subject: Re: Brake rotor min. thickness

Matt,

The new rotors are .500 inch and the minimum is .375 inch.  The data came
from a factory service bulletin.  Hope this helps.

Dan

Source data:

Status:  U
Importance: Normal
(Earthlink/Onemain SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 17Q28S3jQ3NZFlp0 for 
<[email-masked]>; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 18:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by teamfat2.dsl.aros.net 
(8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id g8E1rKk23570; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 19:53:20 -0600 
(MDT)
Received: by teamfat2.dsl.aros.net (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 13 Sep 2002 
19:52:49 -0600
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by teamfat2.dsl.aros.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) 
id g8E1qjW23505 for tigers-actors; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 19:52:45 -0600 (MDT)
From: "Matthew Bouchelle" <[email-masked]>
To: "Tiger Post" <[email-masked]>
Subject: FW: Brake rotor min. thickness
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 21:54:01 -0400

I had a few folks ask me to get back with them if I found anything on the
rotors, therefore I'll post the answer.  Below is a definitive response from
Dan.  My new favorite parts store, owned by two brothers who are not on
computer and still have all sorts of catalogs for parts going back to the
60s looked up the rotors and told me the very technical answer, "book says
throw out at .310".  I have not researched the drums yet... actually, I
still haven't got them to let go of the hubs, but I'm in no rush.

Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan & Lori Fitzgerald [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 8:57 PM
To: Matthew Bouchelle
Subject: Re: Brake rotor min. thickness

Matt,

The new rotors are .500 inch and the minimum is .375 inch.  The data came
from a factory service bulletin.  Hope this helps.

Dan 

_______________________________________________

[email-masked]

Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/tigers/[email-masked]