PCCB - It's not just the yellow calipers...
02-26-2022, 02:17 AM
#121
Rennlist Member
My Spyder order locks March 4 and I was just informed that PCCBs are not available. Part of me not sad to be forced into 8K savings, part of me bummed
02-26-2022, 02:46 AM
#122
Race Car
Thread Starter
Hmm, mine locks March 2, and I haven't heard no pccb yet.
02-26-2022, 04:04 AM
#123
Rennlist Member
02-26-2022, 02:47 PM
#125
02-26-2022, 07:50 PM
#126
Even if you track the car, just go with PCCB and replace the rotor with Cast Iron after 40 lapping days. It's a 8k option, not a $25k option when you build it with the car.
I am no track rats and track 4-6 times a year. So, the rotor will probably last like 6-8 years?
For me, the only reason not to spec pccb is if I want to go 19 inches wheel from day one.
I am no track rats and track 4-6 times a year. So, the rotor will probably last like 6-8 years?
For me, the only reason not to spec pccb is if I want to go 19 inches wheel from day one.
The following users liked this post:
MaddMike (02-27-2022)
02-28-2022, 07:49 AM
#127
Even if you track the car, just go with PCCB and replace the rotor with Cast Iron after 40 lapping days. It's a 8k option, not a $25k option when you build it with the car.
I am no track rats and track 4-6 times a year. So, the rotor will probably last like 6-8 years?
For me, the only reason not to spec pccb is if I want to go 19 inches wheel from day one.
I am no track rats and track 4-6 times a year. So, the rotor will probably last like 6-8 years?
For me, the only reason not to spec pccb is if I want to go 19 inches wheel from day one.
That....and the ability to choose from a much wider array of pad compounds, that once you change them it will brake better than PCCBs
03-03-2022, 07:06 AM
#128
I do tend to agree that in stock form, some iron rotor setups may offer better modulation, but it depends on personal preferences.
As for such brake tests, it's more complex than just one foot of difference. If you take two GT4 cars on track with the two different brake options, they may initially perform the same, but after 10 laps the PCCB car will perform better with less fade. Even if one just did 5 stops from 200 the iron would lose. Sure we can talk about then changing pads and fluids, but remember, this you can do on both cars. Run a car fitted with PCCB rotors and RSC3 pads and SRF Racing fluid, and very few iron setups will run with it. I've tried Drexel, Endless, Pagid etc. on my iron rotor 981 GT4 with over 15k track km on it + 20k street km, and while I like the feel a lot and also the performance, there are limitations. Also, in order to get this performance there is a massive compromise in street driving comfort. They are grabby and insanely noisy.
Now if the noise is something one can live with, well then Pagid RSL29 also works for PCCB pads. Yes they were originally developed for iron rotors, but they also work with ceramics. I would however only use them if RSC2 or RSC3 were not available. Not because of wear issues, but because the RSC pads are easier to live with and less noisy. The RSL29 will glaze more during street driving, and be about as noisy as with iron.
As far as longevity goes, the rotors are different depending on materials. If we are talking CCM rotors as used by Ferrari etc. they are pretty bad on track. Yes they perforn with a good pad, but they burn up. The 20+ year old CCM technology just runs hot and heat is what kills brakes, especially CCN rotors. However, Porsche brakes are not the CCM type. They will still be subjected to increased wear from heat, but by default, they run cooler than CCM brakes. They will last longer than iron rotors, but come time to change, they are more expensive. They will last at least over 100 hours on track, and that's five times what I got from my OEM iron rotors on the GT4. Here I'm comparing the PCCB's I had on my 991.2 GT3RS vs. the iron on the GT4. Those OE irons were dead after 20 hours on track. Cheaper yes, but crap wear. I have since switched to a set of aftermarket rotors, and they lasted about double that. My GT3RS had 18k km on it when I sold it, and the rotors were in good shape. About half the km were on track, but it is important to stress that most of those,were the Ring, and that track is pretty gentle on track. Still, a lot of my GT4 km were also the Ring, so somewhat comparable.
Fact is that I suspect that a lot who talk about the disadvantages of PCCB brakes don't do so from experience. They just parrot the common popular opinion that iron is better. Reality is that both setups can be made to perform, and that PCCB rotors do last longer.
So let's talk replacement. Enter the 488 Spider and Pista. As I mentioned previously, classic Brembo CCM rotors burn themselves up kn track, especially on fast powerful cars. Prior to getting my Pista, I regularly tracked my 488. Those cars will eat a set of stock pads in 4-6 hours on a track like Spa or Paul Ricard. These cars really test the life of both pads and rotors and I understand the desire to go to a cheaper alternative. Not only are the discs expensive, but so are the pads. If it wasn't for the 2k Euro pad replacement, it would be easier to live with. Anyhow, my original CCM rotors started to show significant wear after 15k km of mixed street and track driving. I had gone through about 6 sets of pads at this stage. Now I could tell that most of this wear was from tracking, as the physical apperance of the discs were degrading rapidly. I have other cars with the same discs that never see track and they are spotless. This is where the Surface Transforms disc come into play. I ordered a set for the 488 which I would later put onto the Pista. They ran on the Spider for anther 15k km with a mix of road and track. They still ate OE pads like there was no tomorrow albeit at a slightly lower pace. I then tried a set of RSC1 pads which lasted about 10 hours on track, and which in conjunction with the ST discs were a nice upgrade in feel and performance. After this I had a brief stint with RSC2 pads which were removed as part of a different plan. Only git maybe 2k km with those but the combination of ST rotors and RSC2 pads is my best overall brake experience to date. So why did I remove them. Well the Pista was going to be in soon, and I wanted to keep the RSC2 pads for when I switched back to OE rotors on the 488. You see, in the meantime the RSC2 in this pad shape was discontinued. I then ordered up a set of Pagid RSL1 which is Pagids highest performing and most aggressive endurance pad. Now one might think these would tear a ceramic rotor apart, but they don't. This is one of the many advantages of this disc. Granted, a pad like an RST1 is not a good idea, but I doubt many use,such an aggressive sprint pad for their street car anyway. But the ST rotor and RSL1 pad got about 5k km on the Spider prior to being moved to the Pista. After that, both pads and rotors still showed zero wear. After being moved to the Pista, the longevity of the pads has increased by about five times. Ricard will chew through a set of pads in a Pista in 3-4 hours. That's just how itvis with fast cars on track and old tech street pads. By comparison, my current set of pads have about 5k street km on them and three 5 hour Ricard sessions on them. In those 5 hour sessions, the only cooling the brakes got, was the 2 minute driver change every hour and refuelling. They were basically glowing red most of the time. At this stage, as I type this, those pads have 25% left and the discs look like new. Now this is obviously not a super street friendly setup either. They howl and are grabby, but for people who track a lot, it is tolerable. It is no worse than the other endurance setups most track rats use on the street. My point here is to show that anything can be made to work one way or another, and to show that performance is in the setup, not an absolute that cannot be changed.
This brings us to the second part of my point. Should one get PCCB brakes? For street driving and the occasional track day? Absolutely. Trick here is to get the right setup. A good fluid and a set of RSC2 pads will not only run very well, but also last a very long time. Modulation is great and the lighter unsprung mass does seem to help with the compliance and stability of the car.
if I was to get a car for the track, I'd do It slightly different. I'd get the iron rotors and replace them with ST rotors right away. There is one thing aside from all the performance and comfort benefits of ST rotors I have not mentioned yet, and that is the ability to resurface them. This you can do 3-4 times for a fraction of the purchase price. When I look at how fast I'm going through iron rotors on a GT4, the delta over time is closing fast. At the end of the day it's a matter of paying the fee of admission so to speak. Yes they are pricey, but so is iron discs and pads over time. If one can swing the initial price, I see no use or need for iron "upgrades". For this reason I have also opted for iron on my GT4RS. That car will take over track duty for my 981 GT4 and thus the ST setup is a no-brainer.
I chose the PCCB setup for my Touring as that car will be tracked less, and therefore fhe cheaper PCCB setup makes more sense. I can still throw a set of RSC2 or 3 pads at it, and it will run with all the naysayers on their iron rotors.
in short tovthe OP. Yes, get PCCB brakes, they are really good.
The following 5 users liked this post by Il CP:
Car Crazy (03-03-2022),
Gauss (03-09-2022),
JamesBruen (03-03-2022),
Reedy (03-04-2022),
StormRune (03-03-2022)
03-03-2022, 07:35 AM
#129
It is not as black and white as that. I have PCCB's, iron, Brembo CCM, and Surface Transfors discs in my collection, and the notion that cast iron will always outperform carbon is just plain wrong.
I do tend to agree that in stock form, some iron rotor setups may offer better modulation, but it depends on personal preferences.
As for such brake tests, it's more complex than just one foot of difference. If you take two GT4 cars on track with the two different brake options, they may initially perform the same, but after 10 laps the PCCB car will perform better with less fade. Even if one just did 5 stops from 200 the iron would lose. Sure we can talk about then changing pads and fluids, but remember, this you can do on both cars. Run a car fitted with PCCB rotors and RSC3 pads and SRF Racing fluid, and very few iron setups will run with it. I've tried Drexel, Endless, Pagid etc. on my iron rotor 981 GT4 with over 15k track km on it + 20k street km, and while I like the feel a lot and also the performance, there are limitations. Also, in order to get this performance there is a massive compromise in street driving comfort. They are grabby and insanely noisy.
Now if the noise is something one can live with, well then Pagid RSL29 also works for PCCB pads. Yes they were originally developed for iron rotors, but they also work with ceramics. I would however only use them if RSC2 or RSC3 were not available. Not because of wear issues, but because the RSC pads are easier to live with and less noisy. The RSL29 will glaze more during street driving, and be about as noisy as with iron.
As far as longevity goes, the rotors are different depending on materials. If we are talking CCM rotors as used by Ferrari etc. they are pretty bad on track. Yes they perforn with a good pad, but they burn up. The 20+ year old CCM technology just runs hot and heat is what kills brakes, especially CCN rotors. However, Porsche brakes are not the CCM type. They will still be subjected to increased wear from heat, but by default, they run cooler than CCM brakes. They will last longer than iron rotors, but come time to change, they are more expensive. They will last at least over 100 hours on track, and that's five times what I got from my OEM iron rotors on the GT4. Here I'm comparing the PCCB's I had on my 991.2 GT3RS vs. the iron on the GT4. Those OE irons were dead after 20 hours on track. Cheaper yes, but crap wear. I have since switched to a set of aftermarket rotors, and they lasted about double that. My GT3RS had 18k km on it when I sold it, and the rotors were in good shape. About half the km were on track, but it is important to stress that most of those,were the Ring, and that track is pretty gentle on track. Still, a lot of my GT4 km were also the Ring, so somewhat comparable.
Fact is that I suspect that a lot who talk about the disadvantages of PCCB brakes don't do so from experience. They just parrot the common popular opinion that iron is better. Reality is that both setups can be made to perform, and that PCCB rotors do last longer.
So let's talk replacement. Enter the 488 Spider and Pista. As I mentioned previously, classic Brembo CCM rotors burn themselves up kn track, especially on fast powerful cars. Prior to getting my Pista, I regularly tracked my 488. Those cars will eat a set of stock pads in 4-6 hours on a track like Spa or Paul Ricard. These cars really test the life of both pads and rotors and I understand the desire to go to a cheaper alternative. Not only are the discs expensive, but so are the pads. If it wasn't for the 2k Euro pad replacement, it would be easier to live with. Anyhow, my original CCM rotors started to show significant wear after 15k km of mixed street and track driving. I had gone through about 6 sets of pads at this stage. Now I could tell that most of this wear was from tracking, as the physical apperance of the discs were degrading rapidly. I have other cars with the same discs that never see track and they are spotless. This is where the Surface Transforms disc come into play. I ordered a set for the 488 which I would later put onto the Pista. They ran on the Spider for anther 15k km with a mix of road and track. They still ate OE pads like there was no tomorrow albeit at a slightly lower pace. I then tried a set of RSC1 pads which lasted about 10 hours on track, and which in conjunction with the ST discs were a nice upgrade in feel and performance. After this I had a brief stint with RSC2 pads which were removed as part of a different plan. Only git maybe 2k km with those but the combination of ST rotors and RSC2 pads is my best overall brake experience to date. So why did I remove them. Well the Pista was going to be in soon, and I wanted to keep the RSC2 pads for when I switched back to OE rotors on the 488. You see, in the meantime the RSC2 in this pad shape was discontinued. I then ordered up a set of Pagid RSL1 which is Pagids highest performing and most aggressive endurance pad. Now one might think these would tear a ceramic rotor apart, but they don't. This is one of the many advantages of this disc. Granted, a pad like an RST1 is not a good idea, but I doubt many use,such an aggressive sprint pad for their street car anyway. But the ST rotor and RSL1 pad got about 5k km on the Spider prior to being moved to the Pista. After that, both pads and rotors still showed zero wear. After being moved to the Pista, the longevity of the pads has increased by about five times. Ricard will chew through a set of pads in a Pista in 3-4 hours. That's just how itvis with fast cars on track and old tech street pads. By comparison, my current set of pads have about 5k street km on them and three 5 hour Ricard sessions on them. In those 5 hour sessions, the only cooling the brakes got, was the 2 minute driver change every hour and refuelling. They were basically glowing red most of the time. At this stage, as I type this, those pads have 25% left and the discs look like new. Now this is obviously not a super street friendly setup either. They howl and are grabby, but for people who track a lot, it is tolerable. It is no worse than the other endurance setups most track rats use on the street. My point here is to show that anything can be made to work one way or another, and to show that performance is in the setup, not an absolute that cannot be changed.
This brings us to the second part of my point. Should one get PCCB brakes? For street driving and the occasional track day? Absolutely. Trick here is to get the right setup. A good fluid and a set of RSC2 pads will not only run very well, but also last a very long time. Modulation is great and the lighter unsprung mass does seem to help with the compliance and stability of the car.
if I was to get a car for the track, I'd do It slightly different. I'd get the iron rotors and replace them with ST rotors right away. There is one thing aside from all the performance and comfort benefits of ST rotors I have not mentioned yet, and that is the ability to resurface them. This you can do 3-4 times for a fraction of the purchase price. When I look at how fast I'm going through iron rotors on a GT4, the delta over time is closing fast. At the end of the day it's a matter of paying the fee of admission so to speak. Yes they are pricey, but so is iron discs and pads over time. If one can swing the initial price, I see no use or need for iron "upgrades". For this reason I have also opted for iron on my GT4RS. That car will take over track duty for my 981 GT4 and thus the ST setup is a no-brainer.
I chose the PCCB setup for my Touring as that car will be tracked less, and therefore fhe cheaper PCCB setup makes more sense. I can still throw a set of RSC2 or 3 pads at it, and it will run with all the naysayers on their iron rotors.
in short tovthe OP. Yes, get PCCB brakes, they are really good.
I do tend to agree that in stock form, some iron rotor setups may offer better modulation, but it depends on personal preferences.
As for such brake tests, it's more complex than just one foot of difference. If you take two GT4 cars on track with the two different brake options, they may initially perform the same, but after 10 laps the PCCB car will perform better with less fade. Even if one just did 5 stops from 200 the iron would lose. Sure we can talk about then changing pads and fluids, but remember, this you can do on both cars. Run a car fitted with PCCB rotors and RSC3 pads and SRF Racing fluid, and very few iron setups will run with it. I've tried Drexel, Endless, Pagid etc. on my iron rotor 981 GT4 with over 15k track km on it + 20k street km, and while I like the feel a lot and also the performance, there are limitations. Also, in order to get this performance there is a massive compromise in street driving comfort. They are grabby and insanely noisy.
Now if the noise is something one can live with, well then Pagid RSL29 also works for PCCB pads. Yes they were originally developed for iron rotors, but they also work with ceramics. I would however only use them if RSC2 or RSC3 were not available. Not because of wear issues, but because the RSC pads are easier to live with and less noisy. The RSL29 will glaze more during street driving, and be about as noisy as with iron.
As far as longevity goes, the rotors are different depending on materials. If we are talking CCM rotors as used by Ferrari etc. they are pretty bad on track. Yes they perforn with a good pad, but they burn up. The 20+ year old CCM technology just runs hot and heat is what kills brakes, especially CCN rotors. However, Porsche brakes are not the CCM type. They will still be subjected to increased wear from heat, but by default, they run cooler than CCM brakes. They will last longer than iron rotors, but come time to change, they are more expensive. They will last at least over 100 hours on track, and that's five times what I got from my OEM iron rotors on the GT4. Here I'm comparing the PCCB's I had on my 991.2 GT3RS vs. the iron on the GT4. Those OE irons were dead after 20 hours on track. Cheaper yes, but crap wear. I have since switched to a set of aftermarket rotors, and they lasted about double that. My GT3RS had 18k km on it when I sold it, and the rotors were in good shape. About half the km were on track, but it is important to stress that most of those,were the Ring, and that track is pretty gentle on track. Still, a lot of my GT4 km were also the Ring, so somewhat comparable.
Fact is that I suspect that a lot who talk about the disadvantages of PCCB brakes don't do so from experience. They just parrot the common popular opinion that iron is better. Reality is that both setups can be made to perform, and that PCCB rotors do last longer.
So let's talk replacement. Enter the 488 Spider and Pista. As I mentioned previously, classic Brembo CCM rotors burn themselves up kn track, especially on fast powerful cars. Prior to getting my Pista, I regularly tracked my 488. Those cars will eat a set of stock pads in 4-6 hours on a track like Spa or Paul Ricard. These cars really test the life of both pads and rotors and I understand the desire to go to a cheaper alternative. Not only are the discs expensive, but so are the pads. If it wasn't for the 2k Euro pad replacement, it would be easier to live with. Anyhow, my original CCM rotors started to show significant wear after 15k km of mixed street and track driving. I had gone through about 6 sets of pads at this stage. Now I could tell that most of this wear was from tracking, as the physical apperance of the discs were degrading rapidly. I have other cars with the same discs that never see track and they are spotless. This is where the Surface Transforms disc come into play. I ordered a set for the 488 which I would later put onto the Pista. They ran on the Spider for anther 15k km with a mix of road and track. They still ate OE pads like there was no tomorrow albeit at a slightly lower pace. I then tried a set of RSC1 pads which lasted about 10 hours on track, and which in conjunction with the ST discs were a nice upgrade in feel and performance. After this I had a brief stint with RSC2 pads which were removed as part of a different plan. Only git maybe 2k km with those but the combination of ST rotors and RSC2 pads is my best overall brake experience to date. So why did I remove them. Well the Pista was going to be in soon, and I wanted to keep the RSC2 pads for when I switched back to OE rotors on the 488. You see, in the meantime the RSC2 in this pad shape was discontinued. I then ordered up a set of Pagid RSL1 which is Pagids highest performing and most aggressive endurance pad. Now one might think these would tear a ceramic rotor apart, but they don't. This is one of the many advantages of this disc. Granted, a pad like an RST1 is not a good idea, but I doubt many use,such an aggressive sprint pad for their street car anyway. But the ST rotor and RSL1 pad got about 5k km on the Spider prior to being moved to the Pista. After that, both pads and rotors still showed zero wear. After being moved to the Pista, the longevity of the pads has increased by about five times. Ricard will chew through a set of pads in a Pista in 3-4 hours. That's just how itvis with fast cars on track and old tech street pads. By comparison, my current set of pads have about 5k street km on them and three 5 hour Ricard sessions on them. In those 5 hour sessions, the only cooling the brakes got, was the 2 minute driver change every hour and refuelling. They were basically glowing red most of the time. At this stage, as I type this, those pads have 25% left and the discs look like new. Now this is obviously not a super street friendly setup either. They howl and are grabby, but for people who track a lot, it is tolerable. It is no worse than the other endurance setups most track rats use on the street. My point here is to show that anything can be made to work one way or another, and to show that performance is in the setup, not an absolute that cannot be changed.
This brings us to the second part of my point. Should one get PCCB brakes? For street driving and the occasional track day? Absolutely. Trick here is to get the right setup. A good fluid and a set of RSC2 pads will not only run very well, but also last a very long time. Modulation is great and the lighter unsprung mass does seem to help with the compliance and stability of the car.
if I was to get a car for the track, I'd do It slightly different. I'd get the iron rotors and replace them with ST rotors right away. There is one thing aside from all the performance and comfort benefits of ST rotors I have not mentioned yet, and that is the ability to resurface them. This you can do 3-4 times for a fraction of the purchase price. When I look at how fast I'm going through iron rotors on a GT4, the delta over time is closing fast. At the end of the day it's a matter of paying the fee of admission so to speak. Yes they are pricey, but so is iron discs and pads over time. If one can swing the initial price, I see no use or need for iron "upgrades". For this reason I have also opted for iron on my GT4RS. That car will take over track duty for my 981 GT4 and thus the ST setup is a no-brainer.
I chose the PCCB setup for my Touring as that car will be tracked less, and therefore fhe cheaper PCCB setup makes more sense. I can still throw a set of RSC2 or 3 pads at it, and it will run with all the naysayers on their iron rotors.
in short tovthe OP. Yes, get PCCB brakes, they are really good.
I do agree that for a pure street car with a few track days on tracks that are easy on the brakes PCCBs start to sound better.
Never the less, pad choice is a very personal thing and having choice is great...that you only get with Irons.
One more option we have to look at, and the one I'm taking on my 4RS, is changing the whole system to AP or PFC.
With the AP system you get to almost the same weight as PCCBs, can use 19" wheels and you get better/more consistent braking.....this basing it on what GT4 and GT3 owners have posted.
At the end, it comes down to how you plan to use the car.....
03-03-2022, 09:31 AM
#130
Race Car
Thread Starter
Dang, people still respond to the OP 128 posts in? That’s legit. Lol At that point, it’s usually all just localized banter.
03-09-2022, 11:06 AM
#131
Race Car
Thread Starter
Update: So, last week I had a chance to drive a PCCB spyder and a steelies spyder back to back. And wow! I wasn't expecting the crazy initial bite on the PCCBs. They really grab hard, much earlier in the engagement. People assure me you can "feather" the brake just as well with PCCBs (for trail braking, etc), but it will obviously take some practice.
One car was also PDK versus manual. I was hilarious trying to drive the PDK. I would lift when shifting, etc. Once I even reached for the lever. lol Man, that PDK was "like butta," but I still want my MT. Although it did seem like the clutch engagement was VERY high on the release. Is that typical?
One car was also PDK versus manual. I was hilarious trying to drive the PDK. I would lift when shifting, etc. Once I even reached for the lever. lol Man, that PDK was "like butta," but I still want my MT. Although it did seem like the clutch engagement was VERY high on the release. Is that typical?
03-09-2022, 11:08 AM
#132
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Marineland FL
Posts: 12,434
Likes: 0
Received 3,382 Likes
on
2,321 Posts
Update: So, last week I had a chance to drive a PCCB spyder and a steelies spyder back to back. And wow! I wasn't expecting the crazy initial bite on the PCCBs. They really grab hard, much earlier in the engagement. People assure me you can "feather" the brake just as well with PCCBs (for trail braking, etc), but it will obviously take some practice.
One car was also PDK versus manual. I was hilarious trying to drive the PDK. I would lift when shifting, etc. Once I even reached for the lever. lol Man, that PDK was "like butta," but I still want my MT. Although it did seem like the clutch engagement was VERY high on the release. Is that typical?
One car was also PDK versus manual. I was hilarious trying to drive the PDK. I would lift when shifting, etc. Once I even reached for the lever. lol Man, that PDK was "like butta," but I still want my MT. Although it did seem like the clutch engagement was VERY high on the release. Is that typical?
The following users liked this post:
Adrift (03-09-2022)
03-09-2022, 12:45 PM
#133
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Update: So, last week I had a chance to drive a PCCB spyder and a steelies spyder back to back. And wow! I wasn't expecting the crazy initial bite on the PCCBs. They really grab hard, much earlier in the engagement. People assure me you can "feather" the brake just as well with PCCBs (for trail braking, etc), but it will obviously take some practice.
One car was also PDK versus manual. I was hilarious trying to drive the PDK. I would lift when shifting, etc. Once I even reached for the lever. lol Man, that PDK was "like butta," but I still want my MT. Although it did seem like the clutch engagement was VERY high on the release. Is that typical?
One car was also PDK versus manual. I was hilarious trying to drive the PDK. I would lift when shifting, etc. Once I even reached for the lever. lol Man, that PDK was "like butta," but I still want my MT. Although it did seem like the clutch engagement was VERY high on the release. Is that typical?
As for the clutch, I don't find the engagement point high and in fact enjoys how easy it is to modulate it's engagement especially on hill starts...
