20 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHcrossdrilled rotor installation direction
Leading reported evidence
Replace rotors
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Leading evidence: 'Replace rotors' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'inch of static clearance' (1 discussions; 0 report identifying it and 1 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace rotors' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that suspect a cause
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
Well the car does see track use, sometimes in the 150mph+ range.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
20 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T200546Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I changed my rotors today with Sebros. They were clearly marked left/right, and the rotors that came off the car, which I believe are original, were oriented the same way, which is strange because I had seen some other pictures on the internet suggesting the opposite installation. The Sebro fit/finish was excellent. I haven't driven on them yet though.
I've lost some time in my life pondering the same question. In the end, I've just gone with the direction the original car came with. I would think that there would be a difference when going 'in the direction' of the wheels or 'against' the direction of the wheels. I believe Audi's go against the wheel spinning direction. From your pics above, Porsches go with the direction of the wheels.
So I don't think it's the cross drilling that actually matters, it's the direction of the slots. See this
link.
It has a nice picture.
Basically, you want the slots of the rotor to scoop in air from the center and 'throw' it out the edge.
Okay great so I am not losing my mind.
Here's another puzzle, how the heck is my tire contacting the bottom of my spring perch? See picture above. There is probably an inch of static clearance.
The diagram was fine - the misleading parts were "
...slots of the rotor to scoop in air from the center and 'throw' it out the edge
" and "
...water and braking material gets flung out from within the rotor, not the reverse for it would get trapped
".
No idea who Loren is... but if he suggests I am incorrect in my explanation of why that vane orientation is specified by Porsche, he should probably share his expertise so we can all benefit (and not just belittle those who are trying to help)... just saying. If my explanation is inaccurate I can accept that from someone who offers a corrected one on better authority.
I merely relayed what I was told from an ASE mechanic when I asked that same question... it seemed plausible so I accepted it and passed it along... fyi. I'll ping a brake manufacturer to see if I can get an authoritative explanation and post what I get here...
I was thinking the same thing and LMAO. I actually agree with SP. I would not argue with Loren about anything Porsche related. Loren is nothing but helpful to all here and at Renntech. His site is a "must read and become member of" for any Porsche owner. No nonsense and drama tolerated there. (Thank goodness some is allowed here or we would all be banned)
My comment about "misleading information in the Internet" was meant as a general comment -
not about anyone's comments here
.
The problem for the novices out there is there are lots of sources for information (thanks to Google et al). But many times that information is not correct information. One of things we strive for over at RennTech.org is correctness of information - that is one of the reasons we have so many shops and private techs at the site. It helps that we have some very knowledgeable people answering questions and keeping other's answers "on-track". Some very knowledgeable folks helping out - including 20 plus year shop owners and former Porsche factory employees.
We never ban folks for disagreeing - we ban folks for getting personal and flaming others -- and not stopping when we ask them.
So back to the question - the diagram should be clear.
Just remember the goal of this type of brake disc is to cool the disc and move the heat away. Perhaps the following diagram explains it better...
