cabman4007

i could not believe our HOA issued warning to many that shutter come down OR ELSE (assessments). The Impact Glass is amazing, sound proof and basically indestructible. At my age I decided I ll never hang shutters. Some paid $500 to hang the last FALSE ALARM here.

After constantly cleaning my 997 Turbo (non PCCBs) I said the samething, No more slaving over cleaning dirty brake dust so it has been PCCBs JUST for the maintenance and looks. Maybe a little Status and Prestige lol.

Perimeter

I ordered Steels due to hearing early 991.2 GT3 owners complain of very tight caliper-to-barrel distances.
Once arrived I was surprised that after hearing all the RL comments that Steels stop "just as well" as PCCBs that this was very far from the truth in my experience.
I am now doing a Steel to PCCB conversion to recapture that fantastic initial bite and short stopping distances I've had on the last 3 GT cars w/ PCCBs.
OEM Steels are so disappointing upon initial pedal press.

Chris3963

I guarantee that in a back-to-back test of 10 crash stops from 100-0 mph, the iron brakes will stop shorter in at least the first 2 applications and that the PCCBs will only start to out perform the iron brakes after at least 10-12 crash stops. This is a very harsh test because even on track, you do not do crash stops from 100mph to 0mph so the benefit of PCCBs is really not there. And as I have said many times before, I have never been out braked by a PCCB car on track.

Indeed in an emergency stop on cold brakes, in a PCCB equipped car you potentially hit the child whereas in an iron braked car, you potentially stop and save the child. And thats a key difference because PCCBs require heat to work, Iron brakes do not.

chance6

I've had 9 Porsches, and only on my 991.2 GT3 do I have PCCB. On my 991.2 TT I had the std brakes...on a panic stop from 55 mph, it showed me that the brake rotors could be larger...so later I tried a TTS with PCCB...that sold it for me. PCCB all the way.
Less unsprung weight
Larger diameter rotors
Less (zero) fade over time
BUT- you gotta pay for it.

If you're tracking once a week or more than 3-4 times a year, I can totally see the cost effective manner in which folks would run with steel. Who wants to fork out $12k for brakes?

blackholescion

It's a perception thing. A soft or mushy pedal or lack of strong initial bite does not breed confidence in the brakes. I've had cars with both, mushy pedal and good initial bite. The good car always gave me more confidence when in reality, they stopped the same. The first things to try are changing the brake fluid and/or pads. Cheap way to improve things without spending 12k+.

Dr.Bill

Yes. Clear tail lights don't work for me.

robmypro

Hey I get tired of them too sometimes. Easy 10 minute fix! But i think they look best on white cars. Never liked them on any other color GT3.

robmypro

PCCBs are better. Hard to argue that fact. But credible arguments can be made regarding the benefit of PCCBs vs the price delta. So when anyone says that iron brakes are “better,” they are really saying that the benefits of PCCBs are not worth the additional cost to them. And that is a reasonable argument.

PCCBs are better...and a very expensive upgrade.

Psup4s

Better in terms of weight savings not so much when they brake and replacement is needed. This forum will be flooded with threads on iron conversion brakes and how to buy cheap replacement pccbs in few years as our cars ages. Hopefully prices on ceramic brakes come down in near future

docjohnM

Actually, you can pretty easily argue both ways.
I had PCCBs on Viper ACR and 570S and did not like them. Poor linearity. Over the course of a race, they start off terrible, then get VERY grippy, and then occasionally disappear in the middle of a braking zone. Luckily, the ACR would re-establish the braking power if you just pumped the brakes once. With a nice set of irons, they linearly lose braking power and then reset on each straight. Very easy over the course of a long race. remember that tires "fade" faster than brakes on a track. And both should do so in a linear and predictable fashion. You will need to manage both.
People also often get confused and believe that the PCCBs are "racing brakes"..ala Formula 1 or such. Untrue. Those are narrowly engineered parts. They are designed specifically for the platform and for the exact speed range and conditions of the individual race. You THINK you can buy them, but you can't..just like you can't buy Roger Federer's racket. You only buy the paint job. LOL!

WernerE

All my cars have PCCBs, which I prefer over IRON brakes for similar reasons (no brake dust, lower weight, and cool factor - YMMV). It's only the last set of PCCBs on my Touring that occasionally squeak, otherwise I would have claimed the additional benefit of no-squeak brakes.

robmypro

I was only referring to Porsche brakes, so no idea how Mac or Viper ACR carbon ceramics perform. My ZR1 carbon ceramics are supposed to be very good, too. Sorry, can’t really comment on anything else!

pissedpuppy

no idea, I don't track but I do hear a lot of good things about the new version corvette

Perimeter

Great point; PCCBs are 410mm rotors and Steel brakes are 380mm rotors.
The PCCBs are grabbing at a further radius, giving them a mechanical advantage

orthojoe

If you go back and do some reading, pccb have a larger diameter because the surface doesn't bite as well as iron, so the larger discs are needed to make up for that deficiency. The braking capabilities are the same between the 2.