I use Hawk's, but used to use Porterfields.

I don't like being required to use them, but it is OK - AS LONG AS THEIR CONTINGENCY program works!!

I have had a lot of problems getting pads using their program. Also, their program is not cost effective using a third place certificate vs buying from any of their dealers. Even a second place is about a draw or a slight advantage.

I have had calls and emails into their person since December with no response. Now I am having our NASA contact help me, but they haven't had any response yet either.

I currently use carbotech, however will be testing the new Hawks. Unless there is some monetary incentive to use a specific brand of product not a fan of being required by rule to use.

Using HAWK in the build, but if they don't suit my driving style with this car I would prefer not being limited - especially if the contingency support is broken as mentioned.

Not even sure how they would enforce that silly requirement since the pads loose most identifiable markings after just a couple sessions and heated to temp. It would be a waste of time trying to enforce so what good would it do.

Hawk blue F+R.

Prefer not to mandate unless better contingency is offered.