Adrift

I would consider it a grievous failure to not take the spyder to the track. I gotta do it.

Alan C.

If I were going to track my car again I'd contact Clark at Apex Performance and buy an AP Racing Radi-CAL brake kit. It's about $11k for all four corners. Lighter than the factory iron setup and a bit more than the PCCB factory setup. Replacement rotors are competitive with factory iron rotors. And changing pads is WAY easier. When you sell the car you can easily recoup half the cost and you have a new set of rotors for the car.

I've had cars with both iron and PCCB rotors. Both worked for me with no complaints.

JSF101

You are going to get many opinions on this, probably as many as you will get on LWB seats versus 18-way versus regular sports seats

I'd say get what you like first and foremost

I would not hesitate to get PCCBs for all of the above-mentioned reasons

our 2016 GT4 has nearly 50,000 miles and the PCCBs are still like new
tracked but not heavily, autocrossed quite frequently

if you have a Spyder, you will probably not be tracking heavily
if you get to the point where you are tracking heavily, you will probably be looking for a different car

so, as Alan suggests, you could swap out the PCCBs when you take delivery
keep them until you sell the car and put them back on

or you could drive the car until the PCCBs need replacement (my guess 100,000 miles +)

if you get hooked on tracking the Spyder, you'll probably need to upgrade the car with a roll cage, safety harnesses, etc
you probably won't want to do that to your Spyder but I did see a guy in CA who raced his Spyder (987 version) at rennsport reunion about 8 years ago

I don't know you but I'd say get the PCCBs, enjoy them and after you decide you want to be a hard core track rat you'll probably want a different car (maybe a GT4 or a GT3)
you will have to track your Spyder really, really hard to use up the PCCBs and I'd bet you will sell it long before that happens

how many people on this forum have kept their Porsche to 80,000 or 100,000 miles?

Tigers10

just curious since this is a helpful data point, what are you considering “heavy” track use?

Zhao

hahahahahahaha, no.

There are actual tests out there done by someone other than a guy on youtube. The actual difference when tested is within 1 foot for stopping distance. Another test where they did 50 repeated stops and no fade was noticed with PCCBs or Steels.

Bob Z.

I ordered a Targa GTS in 2018 and my SA/friend recommended to not get PCCBs - he is no longer either. I paid to have them converted and loved them and ordered them on my incoming Spyder; however, not Yellow but in Black since my car will be Racing Yellow.

OP: if you can afford them, get them.

YMGT4

This is all about track vs street.

My gt4 came with PCCB and they are totally great for street use and will last you a long long time. PCCB for a street car is a no brainer imo. The most important thing with PCCB rotors is to make sure you have sufficient pad life.

You will burn through pads very quickly on track though and it adds up quick, which stresses me out thinking about the rotors. I was shocked how much front pad depth I killed in one day my first time out with the car at laguna. I am switching out to AP BBK as my car will see a lot of track use and I actually prefer i can fine tune feel more with steel and certain pads, which is a matter or preference.

JSF101

2-3 times a month (5-6 days a month) is what I think most track junkies would be doing
I wouldn't consider once a month heavy track use, especially if you live in colder climates where track season runs from March/April to Oct/Nov
I have driven my GT4 to Sebring, 2 track days, drove home
drove it to Laguna, one track day, drove home
5 track days at COTA
multiple track days at Harris Hill
my track use has declined as I've gotten older
used to go to Harris Hill once a week (went through tires rather quickly)

I agree that steel brakes are just fine and after market solutions seem like a logical (best?) solution for heavy track use

if you get PCCBs and go to the track once a month (6-7 times a year), I think they will last much longer than most people on here will own the car

Adrift

Track use /= spyder?

Tell that to the two boxsters I ran previously. Open air tracking is sublime, for me at least.

Heavy use? Not by your definition. Two day weekends, 3-4 times a year. That would be max track for me, I think.

Zhao

Here are some sources for performance:

found the reference to fade test. I think the original link is lost to the googles, but the chart is pretty telling. Similar peaks and valleys, and it was about 50 brake applications without any fade for both steel and pccb:

and here is a link to just one of the companies that tested stopping distance. The difference is one foot. There is a better test out there that compared GT3 steels to GT3 PCCBs (and I remember it's results were 0.7 feet difference, in favour of PCCBs, which is small enough it could be a difference in reaction time, slightly faster speed, etc) but this is the first one i found that compared a base 911 with steels to a GT3 with PCCBs. Now I understand you could argue that they are 2 different cars, but I'm going to assume the base 911 with smaller brakes, worse tires, and a heavier curb weight isn't secretly better than a GT3.

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...sted/?slide=15



I also remember reading long ago champ car switched back to steel brakes. They did so to lengthen the braking distances and increase the amount of passing done under braking. Now you may think ah ha, proof CCBs are better.... but they went on record saying that the stopping distances were actually exactly the same, but with their cars, on slicks, that the drivers could over heat the brakes over the length of the race so that while the steel brakes could start out the same, if they continued to use the steels to their full potential their cars generated more heat than they could handle and eventually started to fade. So they designed the cars where over the course of the race you couldn't use your brakes for their full potential or they'd fade and you'd lose, but if you really wanted to you could surprise out brake someone and pass them here and there meaning that there definitely was going to be more passing under braking. Much like their push to pass button that gave an extra 50hp it made for more interesting racing.



There are also the articles with statements from Porsche saying don't buy PCCBs if you go to the track. Everyone heard Preuninger say it in the gt4/spyder carfection video. Here is a link to another guy authorized to say so.

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/03/24/...r-race-tracks/



There are probably a thousand threads on here about this debate and I don't think I've ever read a thread where someone posted actual factual info for PCCBs improving stopping distances; it's all 'well it felt better to me', or 'I was able to brake later because i felt more confident'. So when people talk about initial bite, feel, I was able to brake later, etc... without numbers to back it up I'd say it's crap because all the tests I've seen say they stop the same, and fade really isn't and issue regardless so why do you need better fade characteristics?... Its like, when you go racing, you don't buy a pad that goes to 3000F when you only ever see 1000F on your brakes.... It's only better on paper, not in the real world.

Porsche also has over the years stated the benefits of PCCBs in marketing material and I have never heard them say improved stopping distance was one of them. So i'd say its a fact you aren't getting any better stopping distance with PCCBs, and unless you are doing something very stupid/illegal, or driving very badly (over braking for corners because you don't know how to take a corner) it should not be possible to over heat steel brakes on the street to the point where they start to fade, so you should never benefit from the PCCBs higher threshold for fade.

One thing I'd say is, PCCBs probably do serve a purpose for the amateur driver who often has a flaw in constantly over braking for every corner on the track and trying to make up time on the straights until the next corner, yet doesn't plan to track their car enough to justify proper track pads or semi track pads. But usually an instructor in a car will solve that problem though. And there are lots of other reasons to get PCCBs, especially if you mostly plan to street drive it.

ipse dixit

Stopping distance -- regardless of PCCBs or irons -- is really more about the tires than the rotors or brake pads.

What PCCBs have over the irons is (1) resistance to fade and (2) reduced unpsrung weight. And for those who are C&C regulars, less to almost no brake dust.

But between the resistance to fade and unsprung weight, the PCCBs are worth it to me.

And for those who say the PCCBs are not track-worthy? My good friend in his 991.1 GT3 went through more engines (3) than PCCBs rotors (none) during the 10k track miles he had on his car.

YMMV.

tthellott T

This is actually very easy to answer...

almost all PCCB attributes are out-perform or better than OEM steel, except two things:
1. cost more
2. those disks are just too large relatively to rims with tight tolerance, and a tiny rock will scrub you inner rim pretty bad

Dyim

For argument’s sake, let’s assume there is no significant difference detectable for OP’s driving. Mostly daily with light tracking.

Then OP is basically paying a premium for OE (think of it as PTS pricing) yellow brakes that generates less brake dust. Different pedal feel.

Will OP think it is worth it? This is the question.

Reedy

If I really wanted to run ceramics I’d spec steel brakes and just buy a set of surface transforms. Cost over the lifecycle of a set of those is an order of magnitude cheaper than PCCB’s.

StormRune

To be honest the main reason I've specced them is I was absolutely friggin' tired of cleaning the dust off the wheels after a vigorous drive when the rest of the car was still quite clean. I've dealt with this on four 911s and on the last one (avatar photo) with gloss black wheels they would look horrible after just a single 100 mile outing and a handful of around-town jaunts. I like to keep my cars clean and I'm fortunate enough not to worry about the extra cost to improve the joy of ownership.

The second reason is that it reduces unsprung weight by over 9 pounds for wheel and I figure the GT4 will likely ride and handle better over bumps thanks to this. How many people are willing to spend 10k for a nice lightweight set of forged wheels with a 5 pound per wheel weight reduction being a major argument for that. (Just for amusement, that's $2k per pound per wheel for forged wheels vs less than $1k per pound per wheel for PCCBs, a real bargain!). Since the wheels/tires/brakes are also giant gyroscopic stabilizers, I would expect steering may be perceptibly more nimble too... but I don't know about that. I know on the sport bikes I've owned wheel weight had a significant effect on the nimbleness of the bike due to gyroscopic influence.

Other than an autocross every month or two, I'm not tracking other than maybe a rare PCA event; so the wear concerns and need for maintaining repeated 10/10ths braking are not a concern for me. The steel brakes would have been just fine for me in that regard.

And having the "best" of something is one of the reasons I'm buying (or trying to buy!) a GT4 despite the cost - getting the PCCBs just seems to fall in line with that concept.