Brake pads suggestions for enthusiastic and standard road use

Clearly there are various ways to improve brake performance. So assuming a conversion to 280 mm front and rear what would be the suggestions that would not need too much heating up for standard use but give better performance even if “pushing on a bit”.
Any experiences please.

If you have 280mm discs all round Mintex all round will be adequate for what you are wanting. There comes a point where the limitation is the tyre grip. I don’t know whether you have 15” or 16” wheels, the choice of 16” tyre is very limited and just from looking casually most owners are now buying cheap Chinese tyres. If you look at the ADAC tyre tests it is rare for any Chinese manufactured tyre to make it into the final 10 shootout. Even then look at the stopping distances, I have seen a difference of over ten metres using the same car on the Nardo test track. Even the “grippy” Falken and Toyo tyres that are recommended do not fare that well. I fitted ATE ceramic pads on the front of our TF , they are great pads but they don’t make them to fit a TF calliper. 
A similar conversation was on the MG Experience regarding uprated brakes for a MGB. I pointed out that in 1980 the Aston Martin V8, BMW 635 CSL and Jaguar XJ12 all had 280mm or smaller brake discs. They all weighed considerably more than a TF. 

That why I don't understand why the TF brakes are so poor.  Throughout the 80s / 90s had any number of  modern and ancient.  I cannot remember any that had as poor brakes EXCEPT a Ford Puma (also same age) which, whilst a remarkably nice little scoot in many ways, brakes where just as butt clenching.  Fitting ABS was taking the mickey!  Might be useful on sheet ice.d as

Delbourt - first I would (did) ensure that all the basics are as good as possible.  Servo brace / hydraulics etc 

It's all about the brake pad radius. I haven't taken any measurements so please accept they are not 100% accurate, I am assuming that the TF pads are 50mm (2") high, they aren't but its good enough. the radius of a 240mm brake disc is 120mm  and it is just 95mm from the centre of the disc to the half height of the brake pad.. The 280mm disc brake conversions are much better, on these the haff pad height is 115mm which is more than 20% greater, but there is also an additional benefit. The swept are on a 240mm brake disc is 197sqcms while on the 280mm disc it is 361sqcms, this an increased area of 90% so the disc will have a greater heat capacity and compared to the smaller disc will run much cooler. With the 304mm discs the half height of those is 132mm which is 15% greater than a 280mm disc, the 4 pots have one downside which is their calliper piston area. The standard TF calliper pistons have a surface  area of 1810sqmm while the AP's have a surface area of just 1559sqmm  which is 16% less "Squeeze" pressure than a standard TF calliper. In theory the 4 pots are 1% worse than the standard callipers with 280mm discs. In reality it is not quite so clear cut, there may be differences in the co efficient of friction of the pads and as we know due to the front callipers being designed for a much smaller disc the pad does not sit properly on the disc (They overhang a little) That is why I went the Mini R53 calliper route, same piston area as the TF so the same clamping force used on a standard Mini R53 disc and the pad has a greater surface area that combined with the larger brake disc keeps the brake temperatures down.

Then there is the leverage to take into consideration!
By that I mean the stopping power applied at a greater radius!

Im going to try the 280 disc option as that will enable both 15 and 16” wheels to be tried.

If the same force is applied to larger pads wouldn't the pressure per square cm be less?
Also the surface of the edge of a greater radius disc would be travelling faster. 

If the same force is applied to larger pads wouldn't the pressure per square cm be less?
Yes it is, but it is irrelevant, although the pad area changes what matters is the pressure from the calliper, if you remember back to Physics lessons at school you will have been taught that the total friction of a substance (brake pad)  is the same irrespective of area. Two brake pads made of the same friction material  of different areas will exhibit the same total friction.
Also the surface of the edge of a greater radius disc would be travelling faster. 
This is irrelevant to the question, but this is the same whether you have 240mm 280mm or 360mm discs, the outer is always turning faster, the only relevance is the leverage effect.
Then there is the leverage to take into consideration!
I answered that in my last post, over 20% greater leverage from a 280mm disc over a 240mm disc
Im going to try the 280 disc option as that will enable both 15 and 16” wheels to be tried.
This is also irrelevant, you are just braking a rotating mass into heat, (kinetic energy into heat energy)the wheel and tyre are just a minor part of that mass. Incidentally the 15" and 16" wheel and tyre combinations have almost exactly the same rolling radius. On another MG forum MGB owners are going from 14" to 15" wheels for better tyre availability but always concerned about it regarding speedo accuracy despite having fitted tyres with almost the same rolling radius.
The servo brace does not improve the braking at all, it eliminates the bulkhead flex which gives the effect of improved braking, it's a little like spongy brakes where you have the same braking effect but removes any confidence. As Vince says getting both sorted is the first priority.

Great post MGB281 and helps those that need the science behind it as it clarifies a lot of the doubts.

Yellowstuff pads equals greater friction ..more grip on the disc and improves braking.

280mm discs all round means greater leverage on the discs and improves braking.

Yellowstuff pads and 280mm discs equals great brakes on a TF.
Very easy bolt on solution with 15 inch wheels.

Philip,
Great post.  Perhaps I should have paid more attention at school.  The subject of maximising braking on disc brakes did not come up strangely!
So -  for larger pads - less lbs pressure per sq cm but more of them equals the same over all force.  But that force is at a greater dia. from the hub centre hence
a greater braking effect.
I can agree that yellow stuff pads are way better than the originals (just fitted) BUT the cost is pretty high just for pads.

I am not sure what goes on with this forum, I have had to rewrite the last two posts because they disappeared into the ether as soon as I pressed the submit button, a third I didn't bother with. Maths Physics and Chemistry were my only decent subjects at school, don't even mention English literature or language, IIRC even French was five grades higher, but that was fifty six years ago and a lot of water has gone under   the bridge since then. 

The size of the wheel is not irrelevant.
Aa we all know you can’t fit the 4 pot or 2 pot Calipers under a 15” wheel. So if wishing to retain the 15” wheel (or at least have that option available) the the option of 280 discs is the way to go. 
My point about leverage was this.
For the same caliper with the same pad and same pedal pressure the clamping force is the same. At a greater radius the applied torque must surely be greater. But as expressed by MGB281 there are other factors such as tip speed of the brake rotor. There are numerous “papers” on this subject. 
Personally I just want something that is a bit better than standard that works for both me and as Cobber would say “my glamorous assistant”.
For touring the 15” wheel with a deeper section tyre will hopefully give a slightly more comfortable ride.
 

Philip - I tend to copy any length post before submitting.  Its been a problem for a while.

Delbourt -   Kind of depends on the one you have and district you live.  I live in Bucks and it is well named.  Anyway its the daft low profiles that ride poorly.  
  For poorly - imagine riding down an escalator in a shopping trolley.  Nip across to Essex and it's like a billiard table by comparison.