[Kevin_The_Clean1]

Originally Posted by chris719

Again, these pads may be awesome for this car, but one should expect some tradeoffs...

I could not agree with you more. I bough the the 2000 pads originally thinking they were close to the factory pads in terms of overall bite & CoF (coefficient of friction). But now I'm learning that the factory OEM / Brembo brake pads are a GG series. The iSweep 2000 pads on the other hand are not all that close. So I now have pads that dust 70% less than OEM (as apposed to the 1500 pads which dust 90% less). But, I have unknowingly / simultaneously given up some of the performance characteristics of those dusty as / super messy factory pads. And now I'm hearing the 1500 & 2000 pads "can't" be taken to a track. Where as the factory pads are occasional "track capable" units.

[Zirenz2006]

Originally Posted by CarsRFun!

Probably THE most hated issue. I had a talk with Bimmerworld
sales guy learning more. One of the key issues I'm learning about
is the MANY types of brake set ups that can be had on many of the
BMW vehicles. I had some Hawk ceramics picked out, but, after
talking to the "expert" there they were not correct for a base G87
M2. What he did say...first, most all employees there drive some
model of a BMW. MOST are street driven. What brand ceramic
brakes did they put on their BMW's?? DFC 5000. And I asked him
what is the feedback. He said they all liked them with no complaints,
for the quality of these "street designed" ceramics. What shocked me was how inexpensive they are.
I asked about that...he laughed. He said I know the old saying "if it's really inexpensive it must not be good quality."
Well, DFC buys in large bulk quantities thus keeping costs down.
And he said the brakes do what they say and what you expect of them.
IF all the employees didn't like them, you know they'd be switching them out....with their obvious discounts and the
fact they are easy to change.

So, I'm close to pulling the trigger on these. Front pads....$89.00.
Rears....$43.60. I know...there will be many who question the quality, etc. Just like i did. But, I also looked up the brake pads, the company, and all info I could find out there. It appears they are damn good street ceramic brakes. NOT for autocross or track at all, and they say that.

He said Hawk doesn't make ceramics for street driven G87 M2's, which I thought was strange. But, he said he expects them fairly soon.
With the relative ease of installing them and I didn't like them....not much invested. I'll find something else. 1. They might take them back....?? 2. They may just end up being just fine for running the streets.

And if they work out like I'm hoping they will, I'll consider it a WIN since the cost is so affordable.

I'd be curious to know your experiences with these. I just bought iSweep 2000's for my upcoming G87. The dust and noise with my G80 is unbearable.

[BroDoze]

Originally Posted by Kevin_The_Clean1

I could not agree with you more. I bough the the 2000 pads originally thinking they were close to the factory pads in terms of overall bite & CoF (coefficient of friction). But now I'm learning that the factory OEM / Brembo brake pads are a GG series. The iSweep 2000 pads on the other hand are not all that close. So I now have pads that dust 70% less than OEM (as apposed to the 1500 pads which dust 90% less). But, I have unknowingly / simultaneously given up some of the performance characteristics of those dusty as / super messy factory pads. And now I'm hearing the 1500 & 2000 pads "can't" be taken to a track. Where as the factory pads are occasional "track capable" units.

This is a real bummer. I’ve bought these pads based off of a wide range of personal reports and marketing slides / graphs stating the 2000s are stronger than stock in all areas, except track use. Period.
I get the no track part - THAT was supposed to be the trade off, not initial bite or street performance. The marketing states initial bite and street performance is stronger than stock, but the area you give up from the stock pads was super sustained high-temp track use. THAT was the compromise I agreed to when I bought.
Your story sounds completely different. So who’s right? There’s multiple threads full of other 2000 owners on different platforms that mostly state the pads are better/stronger than stock with same or better initial bite. How does somebody not know how to discern something like brakes? I can immediately gauge brake performance from one pad to another.
I’m confused. I don’t get the inconsistency. This should be a yes or no answer.
Are they installing the pads on old, worn rotors? Are some people performing some kind of break-in process and others aren’t? This can’t be this hard.
Is this something weird with the Gxx platform specifically and all the broad reports were… too broad? Is the 1500 actually the better pad for street?

What is the rating on the G8x is2000s? Should say right on the side of the pad. I can run downstairs and check. What is the rating on the is15000s? Those ratings may clue us in to something.

[r33_RGSport]

Originally Posted by BroDoze

This is a real bummer. I’ve bought these pads based off of a wide range of personal reports and marketing slides / graphs stating the 2000s are stronger than stock in all areas, except track use. Period.
I get the no track part - THAT was supposed to be the trade off, not initial bite or street performance. The marketing states initial bite and street performance is stronger than stock, but the area you give up from the stock pads was super sustained high-temp track use. THAT was the compromise I agreed to when I bought.
Your story sounds completely different. So who’s right? There’s multiple threads full of other 2000 owners on different platforms that mostly state the pads are better/stronger than stock with same or better initial bite. How does somebody not know how to discern something like brakes? I can immediately gauge brake performance from one pad to another.
I’m confused. I don’t get the inconsistency. This should be a yes or no answer.
Are they installing the pads on old, worn rotors? Are some people performing some kind of break-in process and others aren’t? This can’t be this hard.
Is this something weird with the Gxx platform specifically and all the broad reports were… too broad? Is the 1500 actually the better pad for street?

What is the rating on the G8x is2000s? Should say right on the side of the pad. I can run downstairs and check. What is the rating on the is15000s? Those ratings may clue us in to something.

Feedback from each of end users are not the same.
Many are on old rotors. But I have a lot of local owners that changed from less than 100 miles on the rotors and their feedback has been consistent.

For rating wise, this is iSweep’s compound graph.
It may not be right on the OEM compound since each car manufacturers uses different compound.

[M2 CCO]

Originally Posted by BroDoze

This is a real bummer. I’ve bought these pads based off of a wide range of personal reports and marketing slides / graphs stating the 2000s are stronger than stock in all areas, except track use. Period.
I get the no track part - THAT was supposed to be the trade off, not initial bite or street performance. The marketing states initial bite and street performance is stronger than stock, but the area you give up from the stock pads was super sustained high-temp track use. THAT was the compromise I agreed to when I bought.
Your story sounds completely different. So who’s right? There’s multiple threads full of other 2000 owners on different platforms that mostly state the pads are better/stronger than stock with same or better initial bite. How does somebody not know how to discern something like brakes? I can immediately gauge brake performance from one pad to another.
I’m confused. I don’t get the inconsistency. This should be a yes or no answer.
Are they installing the pads on old, worn rotors? Are some people performing some kind of break-in process and others aren’t? This can’t be this hard.
Is this something weird with the Gxx platform specifically and all the broad reports were… too broad? Is the 1500 actually the better pad for street?

What is the rating on the G8x is2000s? Should say right on the side of the pad. I can run downstairs and check. What is the rating on the is15000s? Those ratings may clue us in to something.

I hear you, but in the court of public opinion, there are no absolutes! Make the best decision you can with the data provided and go have fun with the car! At least that’s my approach!

[LAGWAGN]

I'm surprised there are no Dragy comparisons between OEM and 1500/2000.

Should be receiving my 1500's tomorrow. I'm okay with sacrificing a bit of performance (which is already very good), but still a little concerned they won't respond when I REALLY need them to.

[LAGWAGN]

Good point. Thanks.

[BroDoze]

Originally Posted by r33_RGSport

Feedback from each of end users are not the same.
Many are on old rotors. But I have a lot of local owners that changed from less than 100 miles on the rotors and their feedback has been consistent.

For rating wise, this is iSweep’s compound graph.
It may not be right on the OEM compound since each car manufacturers uses different compound.

Thanks for this, and please don't get me wrong here, not trying to stir up any kind of shit - there's obviously TONs of satisfied/thrilled owners, right here on this site.
Yes, I think this graph is a very generalized graph that could be misleading (potentially) based on a specific car brand's OEM pads (that black line may be much higher for a G8x car, for example). We would have to see graphs and testing done specifically on the G8x series of pads and the manu is probably not going to do all of that insane testing.

I just looked at my IS2000 pads new in the clear wrapper still, and did not see any ratings printed on them anywhere like other pads.

Do you know the rating on the G87 IS1500 and IS2000 pads?

FF? GG? FG? etc? The above poster said the OEM G87s were GG? That's a fairly common rating for modern OEM pads. Even Hondas have GG OEM pads.

https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/di...des-explained/

And again, we all know everything is a compromise. How could it not be? What the IS2000s promised were stock or better performance (bite, power) on the street or "Sports" - NOT racing. I knew I'd be giving up the ability to track with the IS2000s and I'm fine with that compromise. If/when I track I'd buy dedicated track pads, as even the OEMs probably aren't the best decision for track. Losing street performance, in any way, is a different story.

[r33_RGSport]

Originally Posted by BroDoze

Thanks for this, and please don't get me wrong here, not trying to stir up any kind of shit - there's obviously TONs of satisfied/thrilled owners, right here on this site.
Yes, I think this graph is a very generalized graph that could be misleading (potentially) based on a specific car brand's OEM pads (that black line may be much higher for a G8x car, for example). We would have to see graphs and testing done specifically on the G8x series of pads and the manu is probably not going to do all of that insane testing.

I just looked at my IS2000 pads new in the clear wrapper still, and did not see any ratings printed on them anywhere like other pads.

Do you know the rating on the G87 IS1500 and IS2000 pads?

FF? GG? FG? etc? The above poster said the OEM G87s were GG? That's a fairly common rating for modern OEM pads. Even Hondas have GG OEM pads.

https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/di...des-explained/

And again, we all know everything is a compromise. How could it not be? What the IS2000s promised were stock or better performance (bite, power) on the street or "Sports" - NOT racing. I knew I'd be giving up the ability to track with the IS2000s and I'm fine with that compromise. If/when I track I'd buy dedicated track pads, as even the OEMs probably aren't the best decision for track. Losing street performance, in any way, is a different story.

Don't worry, I don't think of your post like that.
More information is better than vague or no information.

Here is a screenshot from iSweep's website. Based on this, the rating would be as follow:
IS1500 - FE
IS2000 - FF

[BroDoze]

^^ Thanks for posting that info r33_RGSport !

[chris719]

Originally Posted by BroDoze

FF? GG? FG? etc? The above poster said the OEM G87s were GG? That's a fairly common rating for modern OEM pads. Even Hondas have GG OEM pads.

I would caution that the DOT friction rating is not always representative of what you'll experience. For example, I have used Raybestos EHT pads on my old Mazda and they are GG rated but somehow have less initial bite than the stock pads which were FF.

[White340XDriveInCt]

Just had the iSweep 1500 installed today and I took back roads home and covered some varied terrain, lots of medium-speed then quick stops, trail braking, etc., and NOT A PEEP from these pads! Only been about 50 miles but I'd say the feel is definitely good and the lack of noise is GREAT!!!

[CarsRFun!]

Originally Posted by Zirenz2006

I'd be curious to know your experiences with these. I just bought iSweep 2000's for my upcoming G87. The dust and noise with my G80 is unbearable.

I will post exactly what I think of them. Once I get my car...LOL! Still shows at the San Louis Potosi plant waiting for trans. to the port.
Grrrrr!

My dealer has no problem swapping out to any pad I want as the car
is being prepped and other things I want are done. CF rear trunk spoiler, mirror caps (replacing factory.) Swapping out tires. At home I will install the Zunsport 5 piece screens...just received. Fast service from Mach V Motorsports in Virginia. Also, I'm ordering the M Motorsports CF door sill plates. They look nice.

Car will be buff waxed and paint correction IF needed first. By dealer.
They have all the pros for whatever you need done.

Hopefully in early July I can report on the brake pads.

[Kevin_The_Clean1]

Originally Posted by r33_RGSport

Feedback from each of end users are not the same.
Many are on old rotors. But I have a lot of local owners that changed from less than 100 miles on the rotors and their feedback has been consistent.

For rating wise, this is iSweep’s compound graph.
It may not be right on the OEM compound since each car manufacturers uses different compound.

This is exactly what we've been discussing. The factory / OEM / Brembo pad isn't accurately being displayed with the correct CoF level as the Brembo factory GG stamping indicates. Therefore, this throws off all the other graphs a touch since the OEM pad reference point needs to be adjusted / shifted.

I was under the impression that the 2000 pads I bought were very close if not better then stock. Only to find out they don't do as good as I though once they get a little toasty on very light / very occasional track days. With this being said & all things considered, I knew there would be a slight trade off (as others have mentioned) for a moderate reduction in overall dust.

However, which iSweep pad is the closet to the GG rated factory pads... ? When you originally began marketing these nice pads (which we appreciate you importing here) the info I gathered seemed like the 2000 was the most ideal & comprable to the factory units.

[r33_RGSport]

Originally Posted by Kevin_The_Clean1

This is exactly what we've been discussing. The factory / OEM / Brembo pad isn't accurately being displayed with the correct CoF level as the Brembo factory GG stamping indicates. Therefore, this throws off all the other graphs a touch since the OEM pad reference point needs to be adjusted / shifted.

I was under the impression that the 2000 pads I bought were very close if not better then stock. Only to find out they don't do as good as I though once they get a little toasty on very light / very occasional track days. With this being said & all things considered, I knew there would be a slight trade off (as others have mentioned) for a moderate reduction in overall dust.

However, which iSweep pad is the closet to the GG rated factory pads... ? When you originally began marketing these nice pads (which we appreciate you importing here) the info I gathered seemed like the 2000 was the most ideal & comprable to the factory units.

I don’t know which OEM pads that iSweep used for that graph, that’s why I have said the OEM graph that on it is a generic one.

I believe GG rated would be IS3500 and IS4000. They do squeal and dust like stock, but better heat resistant and initial bite than stock.

I never market IS1500 or IS2000 to be same or better than stock in overall.
I may gives short answer that it is similar and better initial bite than stock, but I always annotated that they are still a street pad, not a track pad.

Also, I am type of guy that never trust marketing information or data until I tried it.
Tell you the truth, I have never read through the detail specs or graph.
I just slap it on, gave it a run and test.

[LAGWAGN]

Hope it's okay to post this here. Installed the pads today, only to snap one of the 13mm retaining bolts on the rear calipers (very last bolt of the job).

Does anyone know if the linked bolt below is the correct one? And what the proper torque spec is?

https://www.getbmwparts.com/oem-part...bC1sNi1nYXM%3D

[GregW / Oregon]

I believe they are 12mm. 130 Nm rear, 95 front. I couldn’t get that much torque on the rears working on the ground. They recommended replacing the bolts, which I did not do.

Edit - NM, looking at wrong bolt.

[aerobod]

Part #34-20-6-850-560 is only an M8 bolt. Standard maximum dry thread torque on that size assuming class 8.8 should be no more than 30Nm, unless it is a stretch bolt.

[LAGWAGN]

Originally Posted by aerobod

Part #34-20-6-850-560 is only an M8 bolt. Standard maximum dry thread torque on that size assuming class 8.8 should be no more than 30Nm, unless it is a stretch bolt.

Thanks. I was pretty sure I had the wrench set at 25. Guess I need to double check next time…

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by LAGWAGN

Thanks. I was pretty sure I had the wrench set at 25. Guess I need to double check next time…

Watch that it is set to Nm and not lbft if it is a multi-scale wrench. I always doublecheck my multi-scale torque wrench electronic display to ensure I’m using the right units, especially after my son has borrowed it and not set it back to Nm.

The other issue is that if they are stretch bolts, re-using them will cause failure at a lower torque. I don’t have access to the ISTA that may specify a jointing torque followed by an angle for proper tightening.

[Digital2code]

Originally Posted by Digitalprty

The rear Isweep 1500 pads do not have shims, like the stock ones do. Are they supposed to be installed without them?

Hi,

I just received my isweep1500 pads for g82 and rear has no shims same as yours in the photo, did you have a chance to figure out how the install process go’s any help would be appreciated.

Thank you.

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by Digital2code

Hi,

I just received my isweep1500 pads for g82 and rear has no shims same as yours in the photo, did you have a chance to figure out how the install process go’s any help would be appreciated.

Thank you.

Rear install video as I posted in #99:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hva0-gY8qGA