Sometimes, a little too much of a good thing can mean disaster. In this case, it’s the amount of copper found in the Brembo-sourced brake pads used in the current Chevrolet Camaro SS and ZL1, as well as 1LE-equipped models.

Starting in January of 2021, any car with brake pads that contain “more than 5% of copper” will not be …

Read the rest of the story

That's a fun one. IIRC there's a Jeep model that can't be sold in Connecticut because it has too many forward-facing lights from the factory.

Anyone know if this is going to impact aftermarket pads?

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

I would bet money on that happening if it isn't already written into the rule/law.

I kinda hope the entire industry responds by removing the copper and other bad heavy metals.  I mean if the consequence is slightly reduced breaking or increased pad wear that's an ok trade off for reduce impacts to wildlife.  

Aren't the stock pads on the 1LE Camaros basically a full-blown track pad?  It always seemed like one of their selling points that the car is basically track-ready off the dealer lot.  Seems like a regular street pad would be challenged to stop a car with that much power/weight on the track.

nocones said:

I kinda hope the entire industry responds by removing the copper and other bad heavy metals.  I mean if the consequence is slightly reduced breaking or increased pad wear that's an ok trade off for reduce impacts to wildlife.  

Agreed.  

Keith Tanner said:

That's a fun one. IIRC there's a Jeep model that can't be sold in Connecticut because it has too many forward-facing lights from the factory.

That's silly. No factory Jeep lighting throws more than 50 feet anyway. 
 

codrus (Forum Supporter) said:

Anyone know if this is going to impact aftermarket pads?

 

It has been since 2014. If you look at the side of the brake pad box there is a leaf diagram with 0, 1, 2, or 3 leaves filled in to show the pads compliance with the various parts of the law.

OK, I get it. And I applaud the intentions and all that.

But has nobody done an impact assessments of Humans on the planet and come to any similar conclusions? "Hello Elephant in the Room!"

Feeling Grumpy..off to club some cute unborn baby whales or something....

In reply to NOHOME :

In related news.

Duke said:

Keith Tanner said:

That's a fun one. IIRC there's a Jeep model that can't be sold in Connecticut because it has too many forward-facing lights from the factory.

That's silly. No factory Jeep lighting throws more than 50 feet anyway. 
 

Yet at that 50' they are all focused directly on your eyes. Every. Single. One.

So, they'll change the pads. Somehow other high-performance cars seem to be able to stop with "Cali-legal" pads (or so I assume, unless a bunch of other cars are banned too). Seems like a lot of non-story here. 

Keith Tanner said:

That's a fun one. IIRC there's a Jeep model that can't be sold in Connecticut because it has too many forward-facing lights from the factory.

In Ohio, it used to be that a motorcycle couldn't have more that two headlights or it wasn't a motorcycle any more. I don't know if that's still true.

GCrites80s said:

Keith Tanner said:

That's a fun one. IIRC there's a Jeep model that can't be sold in Connecticut because it has too many forward-facing lights from the factory.

In Ohio, it used to be that a motorcycle couldn't have more that two headlights or it wasn't a motorcycle any more. I don't know if that's still true.

I would have concentrated more on counting the wheels, but that's just me...

Keith Tanner said:

GCrites80s said:

Keith Tanner said:

That's a fun one. IIRC there's a Jeep model that can't be sold in Connecticut because it has too many forward-facing lights from the factory.

In Ohio, it used to be that a motorcycle couldn't have more that two headlights or it wasn't a motorcycle any more. I don't know if that's still true.

I would have concentrated more on counting the wheels, but that's just me...

That just seems a tad too, well, obvious?

nocones said:

I kinda hope the entire industry responds by removing the copper and other bad heavy metals.  I mean if the consequence is slightly reduced breaking or increased pad wear that's an ok trade off for reduce impacts to wildlife.  
 

and our lungs

In reply to Stampie (FS) :

Remember this Headline a while back?

Spiders could theoretically eat every human on Earth in one year

Appleseed said:

Duke said:

Keith Tanner said:

That's a fun one. IIRC there's a Jeep model that can't be sold in Connecticut because it has too many forward-facing lights from the factory.

That's silly. No factory Jeep lighting throws more than 50 feet anyway. 
 

Yet at that 50' they are all focused directly on your eyes. Every. Single. One.

Them along with every pickup and Lexus sold in recent memory. No sense having a taller hood if you can't get the lights higher and more "aggressive" while you're doing it. 

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

So, they'll change the pads. Somehow other high-performance cars seem to be able to stop with "Cali-legal" pads (or so I assume, unless a bunch of other cars are banned too). Seems like a lot of non-story here. 

Yup, a TSB and some time spent swapping pads and they are back on the lots.   The collector nerds will snap up the old pads to resell on eBay, etc. to those that want that "exclusivity" and if someone respected in that world comes out and states that the "old" pads were somehow better?  Practically printing money (as far as selling old brake pads goes).

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

So, they'll change the pads. Somehow other high-performance cars seem to be able to stop with "Cali-legal" pads (or so I assume, unless a bunch of other cars are banned too). Seems like a lot of non-story here. 

Do those other cars also have warranties that cover track work?  I suspect that's probably what makes the change a bit trickier.  

It can be done, for sure, but it may not be as simple as just changing the formula.  Might need more rotor mass/diameter, cooling, etc?  I'm no expert at pad composition, just speculating.

Is this really the best way to make an environmental impact?  How about they look at carbon credits...or maybe get cops to switch off their ignitions instead of letting their patrol cars idle 16 hours a day? 

This is left coast political theater.

Tyler H (Forum Supporter) said:

Is this really the best way to make an environmental impact?  How about they look at carbon credits...or maybe get cops to switch off their ignitions instead of letting their patrol cars idle 16 hours a day? 

This is left coast political theater.

There's nothing political about it. Research found toxic levels of copper in San Francisco Bay and other bodies of water, ultimately concluding that runoff from brake dust was responsible for 60% of it. Copper is relatively "cheap" as an ingredient in brake pads and most high-end brakes have been copper-free for years. The law was from 2010 and every other supplier managed to get it figured out by now, including the aftermarket. Note that Ferrari, McLaren, Lamborghini, Shelby, etc can all still sell there cars as normal. GM got caught with their supplier's pants down (again) being cheap.

https://www.hella-pagid.com/hellapagid/assets/media/Copper-free_Brake_Pads_4.2017.pdf

Tyler H (Forum Supporter) said:

Is this really the best way to make an environmental impact?  How about they look at carbon credits...or maybe get cops to switch off their ignitions instead of letting their patrol cars idle 16 hours a day? 

This is left coast political theater.

How would carbon credits help copper poisoning?  

The original article also references tires and I saw this last week https://www.washington.edu/news/2020/12/03/tire-related-chemical-largely-responsible-for-adult-coho-salmon-deaths-in-urban-streams/