RacingBrake

RacingBrake is a sponsor of Viper forum helping Viper owners solving their brake issues.

The newest ACR-E (Extreme) has CCB option, so when it comes to ordering a new Viper prospective owners seem to have the same struggle as Porsche owners in regard to what to decide; so when I saw his review I thought it could be of interest and helpful to you - A straight talk from an experienced track driver comparing how CCB performed vs. the traditional iron brake.

Hope you enjoy reading it and feel free to share your question or concern. The original writer - Todd gave us his permission to re-post and share his review here.

ACR CCBs - How have they performed after 5 track days? Prepare yourselves- this post may go against conventional wisdom and rub you the wrong way
The hardest decision when ordering my ACR was whether to go with steel or carbon ceramic brakes, because of the widely varying opinions on the subject. After three years of tracking my 2013 GTS, I had pretty much outgrown the 4-piston steel brakes....I was in the process of trying to fab cooling ducts for the front brakes, after one shop gave up. Even with TA rotors and Carbotech track pads, my front pads were less than 1/2 thickness after just one day at Buttonwillow. Stock pads of course were much worse- I went all the way to the backing plate on the third session at Laguna Seca. So it was either go for a 6-piston big brake steel kit, or try the CCBs on the ACR Extreme. I chose the CCBs, with the back-up plan of converting to steel if I didn't like them. So how did they perform and hold up?

Break-in: Make sure you burnish these brakes per the ACR manual or they will wear out prematurely. I followed the procedure. Hard to find a place to brake from 90mph-20mph a bunch of times unless you are at the race track, haha.

Performance: All I can say is, wow. First time I tracked the ACR Extreme at Laguna Seca, I was utterly blown away at how much later I could brake before turn 2 (downhill hairpin, breaking at between 135 and 140mph). The lap times spoke for themselves. I ran a number of low 1:34s with a best of 1:34.1. I am still trying to find the limits of the ACR, I believe I can improve on that time. If I attempted to brake that hard and late at Laguna Seca with the steel brakes of my GTS, I would have overheated the pads within 3 or 4 laps. The lap times have a lot to do with the ability to brake late and hard, lap after lap without issue. CCBs FTW. I can't imagine going back to steel for this reason alone.

http://driveviper.com/forums/threads...he-Extreme-ACR

Pad Longevity: New pads are 10mm thick in the front, and 9mm in the rear. After 4 hard track days- 1 at Laguna Seca, 2 at Chuckwalla and 1 at Sonoma- front brakes were down to 4-6mm, and rears were down to 6-7mm. I replaced the front pads and burnished them before going to my 5th day at Thunderhill, but left the rears alone. Two things struck me. The first, that these pads were lasting 4 times longer than my track pads on steel rotors. Second, that the rears were wearing out faster than I expected. This was a surprise, as with my GTS the rears last 3-4 front sets. The culprit may be that I was running the ACR in Track Mode, whereas I tracked the GTS with stability control Full Off. On many cars such as the C7 Corvettes, you can wear out your rear brake pads in one day due to stability control using them often. On my 5th track day, I ran with it Full Off and found the car handles more to my liking. If the car steps out, I can drive through it and it behaves predictably. No drama, just a fantastic car at the limit. Rears have barely worn in that day, fronts are looking good.

Rotor longevity: My biggest concern was not pad life, but rotor life. The pads are fairly reasonable in price, more on that later. The rotors however, are pricey. After talking with one of the SRT engineers, I learned that the rotors last a very very long time (leaving that vague on purpose). The engineers chose a pad compound that is rotor-friendly, so they don't eat CCB rotors like some of the early CCBs on other makes. I spoke with a local hot shoe and mechanic that runs a C7 Z06. He said that they are converting many of their most serious track rats' cars to CCBs that originally had steel. He raved about them, and said his rotors last pretty much forever as well.



Yellow piece is a 4mm pad thickness gage.



Brake pads - Left (new), Right (used)

Cost comparison to steel: So far, one set of front pads. I won't disclose the price but I got them for MUCH less than list price. And the rotors- I got quotes on them as well. MUCH less than list price. Less expensive than Porsche CCBs rotors/pads, about the same price as ZR1/Z06 CCB rotors/pads on eBay. My front pads are about twice as expensive as the Carbotechs I ran previously, but last 4 times as long. And with iron rotors, I periodically had to deal with uneven pad build-up. At times I turned my rotors, but a couple times I had to replace my front rotors because they got hard spots under the pad build up and were not able to be turned. At this point, I believe total cost to run CCBs will be less than steel. Proof will be when I finally do need to replace rotors, then I will know for sure.

Road and Track: This part is huge. With the GTS, I had two sets of brakes- TA rotors and Carbotech pads for the track, and Stoptech rotors and stock pads for the street. I would swap between them before and after every track event. Talk about a time-consuming pain in the ***! But with the CCBs, they work well everywhere. No loud squealing on the street, no issues with cold stops, no pad build-up, they perform uniformly well hot or cold. And get this- almost no dust! Wheels stay clean and nice a lot longer.

It should be said that steel rotors will be fine for most anyone until they become advanced drivers and are turning fast lap times. Initially my stock brakes were more than adequate, but now I needed something more.

Much of the above was not true of CCBs just a few years ago, but this latest generation is a home run. So far, they win over steel on all fronts- performance clearly, longevity, road and track compatibility, and I think that they will be more cost effective. Brakes are like religion, and I don't want to talk anyone out of their preference. However after fighting with brakes on every other track car, this is a huge advancement to me. Aint never going back to steel brakes.

RacingBrake

Another follow track review:

2016 ACR vs. Porsche GT3 at Thunderhill 5-mile

RacingBrake

Cost analysis:

pccb replacement rotor pricing:

Front: $6,250/ea
Rear: $5,615/ea

Reference price based on 997 GT3 rotors of 380x34 front and 350x28 rear
http://www.suncoastparts.com/category/2010gt3_pccb.html

Corvette ZR1 rotor prices from GM dealers are $1,200 to $1,500, averaging $1,350/ea

Aftermarket iron conversion ranging $875 to $950/ea

How ZR1 CCM rotor cost compared to pccb and iron conversion rotors:

~25% of pccb
~140-150% of iron

How durable ZR1 CCM rotors compare to pccb which is yet to be determined but shall be equal or better based on the feedback we learned from this forum and other counterparts (Corvette, Camaro and Viper drivers)

Durability comparison to iron rotors shall depend on how you track the car, for hardcore racing I would expect CCM to last at least 3-4 times longer than iron, other than the confidence of a CCM rotor can provide for fade, warp and crack free braking plus almost dust free which seems to be a major concern for some people.

These ZR1 CCM rotors have become the standard of CCM brakes which we also used them to build our CCM brake kits for GTR and other motorsports vehicles.

By purchasing RCCB kit you will be pooling with the largest CCM motorsports community for the 100% interchangeability on rotor and pad, and enjoy the latest brake technology w/o worrying to break your bank. They are so cheap and affordable that you don't even have to consider having them refurbished.

Link to discussion:
https://rennlist.com/forums/991-gt3-...r-991-gt3.html

Link to the item:
http://www.racingbrake.com/RB-CCB-Sy...ccb-por-01.htm

ChrisF

There is no actual data on longevity of rotors here. Hard to make a cost comparison without knowing the ratio of CCM to steel.

RacingBrake

True, but since pccb (410/390mm) and standard brake (380/380) are mutually exclusive so there can't have a direct comparison.

However since these RCCB kits are using Brembo ZR1 CCM rotor so we use it as a benchmark to compare with pccb, and iron conversion for ZR1 (which RB offers) and we deem it's credible based on the feedback received from Corvette hardcore track drivers.

As mentioned in other threads the unsatisfactory track durability and per-matured failure of earlier Pccb was mainly due to the size (volume) of rotor and pad were too small (350x34/350x28; 380x34/350x28) comparing to the latest design, coupled with the CCB material at that time was not matured as today.

Just realize the pccb rotor size today for 991 GT3 (410x36/390x32) and the what used in RCCB kits (394x36/390x32), you can clearly see they are way larger than 996/997 GT3 that you used to know.

Take another look on the latest CCB rotor sizes:

BMW M3/M4: 400x38mm, M5: 410x38mm
Mercedes: S 400x39/420x38mm
Audi RS7: 420x40mm, S6/S7/S8: 400x38mm

No volume of front rotor is less than 400x36mm
No brake pad friction height is less than 78mm

We done all the research before started our development on those RCCB kits, we expected performance and durability as stated above with confidence.

mooty

ccb making progress that's great
amortized cost dropping is cool
initial cost remains high
I run a few sets of steel then sell car I can't recover the ccb long term saving.
I eagerly awaits when ccb price lowers to iron level mom all
in

malmasri

surface transformers make more durable CCB rotors at significantly less $ than Brembo's PCCB.

RacingBrake

ST discs are available as upgrade option.

We also have iron conversion kits with the same exact rotor sizes and calipers which can save you thousands of dollars for those don't need CCM rotors.

CCM and iron are two entirely different material and made with different mfg process. Neither their price will be the same, nor will it be in the future.

Each has its own characteristics / physical property. Its not a matter of which one is better or worse - It's a choice or preference of an user based on his need and application.

We present available brake options by data*, facts and feedback for your reference and consideration w/o bias because we offer both, but we are certain if you follow our posts your decision should become easier as you gain more understanding of the two (ccb or iron)

At any rate we all agree more choice is always good to a consumer.

*https://rennlist.com/forums/991-gt3-...mystified.html

usctrojanGT3

I'll track with good old heavy steel rotors on my GT cars that hit the track thank you very much.

JSA

I've had the same PF 11 pads on my Spec E46 for nearly a year. And I've done 5-6 DE weekends and 3 race weekends. And the pads are still about 50%.

My philosophy is simple - don't over slow the car. I barely use the brakes and when I do it's to rotate the back of the car and set it for the apex then I'm immediately back on throttle. Brakes slow you down if you don't use them properly! :-)

I understand that not everyone has that skill (yet). But if you practice backing up your brake zone and being smoother with the brake application, you'll be amazed at how much faster you will be and how much longer the pads will last.

Cheers

Keith Verges - Dallas

Not sure if serious. But when I get my Obi Wan brake skills I can move past just shooting Womp Rats like I do now