PCCB
06-07-2012, 11:31 AM
#16
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't have to "feel" unsprung mass changes to benefit from them, but you can. Or at least I do.
Sour grapes are back. I repeat, if you can afford them, get them. If you can't, make silly excuses to justify why you didn't when the real reason is you couldn't afford them.
There are no "hidden" surprises down the road.
06-07-2012, 12:12 PM
#17
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 2009 made noise (occasionally). My 2012 does not. Not at all.
You don't have to "feel" unsprung mass changes to benefit from them, but you can. Or at least I do.
Sour grapes are back. I repeat, if you can afford them, get them. If you can't, make silly excuses to justify why you didn't when the real reason is you couldn't afford them.
There are no "hidden" surprises down the road.
You don't have to "feel" unsprung mass changes to benefit from them, but you can. Or at least I do.
Sour grapes are back. I repeat, if you can afford them, get them. If you can't, make silly excuses to justify why you didn't when the real reason is you couldn't afford them.
There are no "hidden" surprises down the road.
I'm just trying to figure out what other guys who posted on this thread are talking about.
06-07-2012, 12:19 PM
#18
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a car with conventional suspension, sure. But with EPS, PASM, DEM, PDCC, and PTV (did I miss any?), what you feel is completely filtered by computer programming. So I don't buy the PCCB benefit on a car like the 991S so equipped.
To add to paver's comment, for track use cast iron is not only cheaper, but also less fragile, has more pad options, are less sensitive/easier to modulate, and no less prone to fade on track with proper fluid (and technique).
To add to paver's comment, for track use cast iron is not only cheaper, but also less fragile, has more pad options, are less sensitive/easier to modulate, and no less prone to fade on track with proper fluid (and technique).
06-07-2012, 12:22 PM
#19
Burning Brakes
To say that this hoary chestnut has been debated would be an understatement, to wit:
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...estions-2.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...el-2010-a.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...s-re-pccb.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...discovery.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...es-melt-3.html
jury rather still divided...
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...estions-2.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...el-2010-a.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...s-re-pccb.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...discovery.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/997-gt2-...es-melt-3.html
jury rather still divided...
06-07-2012, 12:25 PM
#20
Race Director
The CCBs are awsome, no one can blame you for getting them. I do find it interesting that many track rats opt for steel even tho the cost is nothing to them. FOr instance my friend has a cup car ($350-400k) w/ conventional brakes. He just likes the optionality.
BTW regarding my comments about brakes noise- the CCB on the new 991 did not make any noise.
GL
BTW regarding my comments about brakes noise- the CCB on the new 991 did not make any noise.
GL
Last edited by kosmo; 06-07-2012 at 02:46 PM.
06-07-2012, 01:23 PM
#21
Rennlist Member
Go tell that to the guys over on the GT3 forum that dropped $200k+ on their 4.0s and did not opt for PCCB. Think it is because they couldn't make the stretch?
06-07-2012, 01:34 PM
#22
Rennlist Member
And go drive a 5,000lb Cayenne Turbo on 21s over a rough twisty bit of road. Physics say it should feel like absolute crap, but doesn't due to the same electronic acronyms now applied to the 991. Same reason why a 991S is about as fast around the Nurburgring (bumpy, for those that haven't been on it) as a 997GT3. Electronics are manipulating the suspension and power delivery that the driver is given very little information about. Makes for an ultimately faster, seemingly physics-defying vehicle in either scenario, but not as involving as a conventional 'analog' suspension. Which is the problem many of us have with Porsche's new generation of sports cars.
06-07-2012, 03:00 PM
#23
Still plays with cars.
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
If you want to reduce unsprung weight, spend less money and buy a set of three piece wheels. Go for 18 inch rims, tires are more plentiful and cheaper. Ride and noise isolation are superior too.
The rotors fitted to 2010 and later cars are not as heavy as the old ones. The difference is less than you think and again, a set of good wheels will easily make up the difference. When it comes time to replace a damaged rotor, you will thank me
Check with the parts department about how much a single PCCB rotor costs......
06-07-2012, 07:09 PM
#24
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roman, PCCB in general are highly overrated, Smithee is correct.
If you want to reduce unsprung weight, spend less money and buy a set of three piece wheels. Go for 18 inch rims, tires are more plentiful and cheaper. Ride and noise isolation are superior too.
The rotors fitted to 2010 and later cars are not as heavy as the old ones. The difference is less than you think and again, a set of good wheels will easily make up the difference. When it comes time to replace a damaged rotor, you will thank me Check with the parts department about how much a single PCCB rotor costs......
If you want to reduce unsprung weight, spend less money and buy a set of three piece wheels. Go for 18 inch rims, tires are more plentiful and cheaper. Ride and noise isolation are superior too.
The rotors fitted to 2010 and later cars are not as heavy as the old ones. The difference is less than you think and again, a set of good wheels will easily make up the difference. When it comes time to replace a damaged rotor, you will thank me
Check with the parts department about how much a single PCCB rotor costs...... This is a daily driver in the end of the day. I do not want to do any mods on it.As I understood from other threads most people are not particularly pleased with how long PCCB rotors last on the track given costs of replacement. Is it an issue of ceramic brakes in general or it is just PCCB? I've seen several very sponsored looking threads dedicated to Movit. Are they are really that good?
06-07-2012, 07:23 PM
#25
As I read savyboy's threads, the Movit's(hideously expensive) are made of friction resistant material all the way through. Apparently the PCCB's have only a very thin veneer of friction resistant material on the face of the rotor where it contacts the pad. Once that veneer is worn through, the "substrate" goes away very fast. Again, this is what I have read on RL. Take it for what it's worth.
Seems to be the consensus that if you only track a few times a yr., PCCB's are fine especially since they last sooo long on the street. Some that track them frequently even say you get good service from them as long as you replace the pads when they get down to 50% and you are careful to do warmup and cooldown laps.
I have a set boxed up in my closet. I may just find out for myself one day
Seems to be the consensus that if you only track a few times a yr., PCCB's are fine especially since they last sooo long on the street. Some that track them frequently even say you get good service from them as long as you replace the pads when they get down to 50% and you are careful to do warmup and cooldown laps.
I have a set boxed up in my closet. I may just find out for myself one day
06-07-2012, 07:30 PM
#26
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Define "better".
And go drive a 5,000lb Cayenne Turbo on 21s over a rough twisty bit of road. Physics say it should feel like absolute crap, but doesn't due to the same electronic acronyms now applied to the 991. Same reason why a 991S is about as fast around the Nurburgring (bumpy, for those that haven't been on it) as a 997GT3. Electronics are manipulating the suspension and power delivery that the driver is given very little information about. Makes for an ultimately faster, seemingly physics-defying vehicle in either scenario, but not as involving as a conventional 'analog' suspension. Which is the problem many of us have with Porsche's new generation of sports cars.
And go drive a 5,000lb Cayenne Turbo on 21s over a rough twisty bit of road. Physics say it should feel like absolute crap, but doesn't due to the same electronic acronyms now applied to the 991. Same reason why a 991S is about as fast around the Nurburgring (bumpy, for those that haven't been on it) as a 997GT3. Electronics are manipulating the suspension and power delivery that the driver is given very little information about. Makes for an ultimately faster, seemingly physics-defying vehicle in either scenario, but not as involving as a conventional 'analog' suspension. Which is the problem many of us have with Porsche's new generation of sports cars.
It is actually quite a coinsedence. I drive Cayenne Turbo on 21-inch wheels when not in the UK.
Could you please stop arguing about unsprung weight and electronic aids? What I am saying is that even if it is hard to feel, the car with lighter brakes will perform marginally better (stability on the bend, ride comfort etc.) than the one with heavier ones, given that both cars benefit from all clever technology. Might be hard too feel, might not make much difference. But you cannot really deny that lighter brakes are an advantage and they cannot be irrelevant to the performance of the car. I almost certain that they are not exactly good value for money but if I don't get them, then I will be thinking that it still could have been better which is very annoying when you spend around £110k for a car.
06-09-2012, 01:42 PM
#27
Intermediate
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been tracking and racing for 20+ years. Had to keep my day job; just not that good but proud to say I tried. BUT if you want to practice threshold braking and tap into the ABS, the ceramics are necessary or else you sit out the next two sessions while your brake fluid gets off the boil. Until five years ago, you always ran through your brakes on a good track day if you were really doing it. I had a 944 Turbo S which was outstanding because the weight was down and the brakes were from the 928 but it was the only steel rotor brake system that I did not run through if I really went ***** to wall. Ceramics got a bad rep when they came out but they are really much improved in "gen 2" form. On the street, everything is overkill. We were over the top by the time we got to the 930 30 years ago. You can go to track days and lollygag or really do it with ceramics.
06-09-2012, 08:50 PM
#28
Instructor
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only reason people have trouble with the CCBs is because they don't use the proper pads on track. Track users also run the risk of damaging the disks during tire/wheel changes if there is an accidental impact. Otherwise, CCBs are superior in EVERY WAY. Even for the neophyte driver, the increase in ride quality on less than perfect roads is noticeable. For the serious driver (I was an instructor for Skip Barber and a multi national karting champion), the difference is easily felt and appreciated in both steering precision, maintaining traction on uneven surfaces, pedal feel, and most importantly, consistency. There is nothing better for driver confidence than knowing your brakes are always going to be there.
If the PCCBs are within your means, by all means get them.
If the PCCBs are within your means, by all means get them.
06-09-2012, 09:04 PM
#29
Race Director
Why do most GT3 owners switch to cast iron?
Unsprung mass reduction can be perceived not only via steering. There are number of advantages including better stability while cornering on uneven surfaces, due to lower inertia of the wheel, what you might appreciate say on the nordschleife. But I have mentioned that weight advantage is obvious. What I want to find out is whether there might be any nasty surprises in future.
Unsprung mass reduction can be perceived not only via steering. There are number of advantages including better stability while cornering on uneven surfaces, due to lower inertia of the wheel, what you might appreciate say on the nordschleife. But I have mentioned that weight advantage is obvious. What I want to find out is whether there might be any nasty surprises in future.
06-09-2012, 09:17 PM
#30
The only reason people have trouble with the CCBs is because they don't use the proper pads on track. Track users also run the risk of damaging the disks during tire/wheel changes if there is an accidental impact. Otherwise, CCBs are superior in EVERY WAY. Even for the neophyte driver, the increase in ride quality on less than perfect roads is noticeable. For the serious driver (I was an instructor for Skip Barber and a multi national karting champion), the difference is easily felt and appreciated in both steering precision, maintaining traction on uneven surfaces, pedal feel, and most importantly, consistency. There is nothing better for driver confidence than knowing your brakes are always going to be there.
If the PCCBs are within your means, by all means get them.
If the PCCBs are within your means, by all means get them.