Originally Posted by doitmyself
painfx, you are pondering questions that many (myself included) have already done here. Study all the recent threads and the same non-conclusions are reached. There is no definitive answer. We simply don't have enough follow-up responses after people have used these rotors for a few years. Add to that all of the huge variables between our member's use conditions that confounds any solid data interpretation.
Some "think" that the 100% coated rotor will only rust where the pad interaction is. Vs. the painted rotors have a bit of unprotected bare metal on the rotor face. Does it matter? We don't know. At least one member here showed a pretty rusty Raybestos fusion coated rotor after less than a year's use. We don't know if the painted type would do better in the same circumstances.
At least one member says that the metallurgy quality trumps any coating comparison. I might tend to believe this, My OEM Mopar rotor is rusty at 6.5 years of salty roads, BUT it is relatively good for an uncoated rotor and much better than some cheapies I used in the past. Is this because of higher quality metal??
Mopar brake parts are 2x to 3x more than quality aftermarket parts.
Some believe that pad quality is much more important than rotor concerns.
Let us know if you find any more definitive information. I share your pain - I'm due for new front brakes within the next month.
Ive been searching up and down on google about this ecoating rotors. And it put me here. I am also waiting for an answer. Ecoat from Wagner which is more expensive. Or the Raybestos element