all sarcasm aside because I have yet to see a side by side comparison showing that it is a “myth” that they don’t stop better.

the brakes are a larger diameter.
the brakes are significantly lighter.

I don’t see how larger brakes would perform the same.
I don’t see how a lighter car in general with larger brakes would be equal to a heavier car with smaller brakes. That’s all.

this wasn’t an apples to apple test.
I’d like to see same car one with steels one with pccb.

As mentioned it was a fun comparison.

Here you go. Found this. Skip to 4:23. 5 meters. Looks about the same distance.

https://youtu.be/aM1LwvWCz5s

 

Alright, think most of us are just amateur drivers sharing perceptions and experiences.

On that note and to your question above, find it reasonable to assume incremental advantage to PCCB due to notably less rotational mass/inertia. Much the same advantage as lighter wheels and tires. (p.s. not clear to me if Touring is iron discs, maybe pccb with black caliper.)

In the absence of Porsche permitting anything better, Sutcliffe video is ok by me. effectively demonstrates where you'll need to take this RS to tap into its strongest advantage.

 

I was not trying to be sarcastic, I am sorry, if it came out that way.
I was genuinely interested.

Let's put very simple (although it is not thaaaaat simple, if you want to take everything into the equation) in how a brake actually functions:

Size:
In any case we can agree that any brake, no matter if steel or PCCB or whatever other material or system, is able to block your wheels to the point that ABS needs to countermeasure. Right?
Even with smaller discs you would be able to block the wheels. That means: The actual power of your brake, the achieveable brake torque, is much more than you can make use of. This is the case for basically any car.
So the main limiting factor on how quickly you can make the car slow down is the grip you have between tires and ground AND the performance of your ABS. If you have different cars and make a full brake stop, then you can feel the difference between different ABS systems.
The fastest way to slow down is, when you reach the point where your tires are on the edge of losing their grip(block/stand still), but not quite, so the ABS does not kick in, yet. If the ABS kicked in, your brakes would open for the split of a second and during that time you obviously do not decelerate.

Weight:
The weight of the discs do not really make a difference in real life, but yes, therotically they would allow the wheel to follow brake bumps more quickly due their lighter unsprung mass. In other words: Lighter brakes theoretically allow for better wheel-´to ground contact, but that is of of no matter for reasonably flat braking surfaces.
Also, one could argue, that lighter discs makes the car lighter, hence less mass and easier to slow down. Also that is theortically correct. Now we're talking about a 20kg weight saving on a 1600+kg car, which can be easily neglected for measurable improvements in stopping performance.
But since we're already talking about mass and weights, and you would not want to neglect the reduced mass, then one should aso count in the fact that more weght would also mean more normal force on the tires, which translates to more grip.
So more weight would mean little bit more mass to slow down but at the same time also bit more grip. So you can take the weight out of the equation for what we're looking at.

The PCCBs will not make you stop measurably quicker on a 100-0 brake stop compared to a steel disc system, as long as both systems are in their respective window of operating temperatures.
They can feel different, though. Does not not make them stop faster.

I think everyone here needs to make his own experience with PCCB, since there is a lot of talking. Some say "never PCCB on track", some would say the other way around. None of both is right or wrong.
I used to track my stock steel discs and never had any issues (stock fluid, stock pads). I believe I went through 2 or 3 sets of discs, before I started to think about switching to PCCB. Not because I was not happy with the performance, but I wanted to know about the "myth" of the wear of PCCBs on track. Some say you do will wear them up slower but in the end they will cost more after all to replace once it's time. THen there is the talk that PCCBs are prone to rock chipping and that theyare easiyl damaged, when hit by someting. I can not confirm or prove wrong, becuse I never had the latest generation of PCCBs.
But again, my point is: There is too many people saying PCCB is th worst or PCCB is the best. One has to make his own experience in some cases simply because you can not always reply on keyboard warriors who only see black an white.
In the end, I decided to go for Surface Transforms and that was is the upgrade I enjoy and value the most on my car and it was absolutely worth the cost. Not because of any increased stopping power, but because of no wear on the discs after 2 years (I mean literally no wear) and the pads only now needed to be replaced, Noit to mention that there is very little brake dust on track and bascially no brake dust on the street.
On steels I would have replaced at least twice the discs and pads probably 3-4 times. I would like to say, that I replaced steels maybe a bit before time, because I do not like significant heat cracks (just for the looks).

edit: @Jbravo23 : Assuming your video was only linked as a joke, I won't comment on it, OK?

 

But we are talking tenths, feet, and inches, limit performance. 20 kg unsprung weight is not something to dismiss in this context.

Lighter wheels fitted with same tire type & specs have been demonstrated to improve stopping performance. Brake discs are a part of that discussion as well.

Instead of a reduction in weight, if we doubled or tripled the weight of the discs and/or wheels, do you think that would make a measurable difference in stopping performance from 100+ mph?

 

Yes, most of us are amateur drivers (maybe even 99,9% of us, since you would have to be paid money to be professional, right?).
And sharing experience is good and that is what I am here for. Some people however, do not share experience, but just repeat hearsay or what they were told from the nephew of their deceased uncle's German sheperd.
I am here to share experience and learn from others. I am not here to show off my cars or my wealth. But I've learned to take many comments and epxeriences with a grain of salt.

About rotational mass or mass in general, I tried to explain that before: If we want to go that deep into brake performance, then you could also say that more mass means more grip, because more normal force on the ground. It's a never ending story for very very small factors, that do not play a key role in stopping performance from 100-0. Let's not forget, that this (100-0) is what we're talking about here.
Of course, stopping once from 100-0 is something completely different than lapping on a track for 20 or more minutes. That being said, I've never had problems with steels on any of the tracks I've visited and I usually stay out as long as possible, means there have been quite a few 20+ minute stints. Steel brakes were of my least concern.
There might be other tracks or drivers who can push the stock brakes to or over the limits, but I am also no slouch on the tracks I know well.

 

@Nur93 Just wondering, if your car has a sticker showing something like "notafollower"? Your neon orange decals are kind of unique. I believe I saw this particular car on Manthey NOS trackday in September?

 

RS has CUP2R and Touring has Cup2s (I thought). If that's the case, it's all tire.

 

Apologies I was not trying to turn this into a pccb vs steel or rs vs touring. In no was shape or form am I trying to say the touring performs as well as an rs. I made an observation about the braking part of the video. You asked me what made me think that and it’s simple as it being less weight and larger diameter.

the video I sent was all I could find on the subject. Wasn’t a joke at all and pretty much is what I thought would happen when comparing the two apples to apples.

 

True. I hadn’t even factored in the tires or the mag wheels.

 

There will be? Have they announced that?

 

Yes sir thats me👍🏻

 

Why feel the need to apologize. No one was hurt or offended.
There are three cars or are compared under uncotrolled and unmentioned conditions - in a video which leaves a lot of questions unanswered.
We are looking at three different cars with (most likely) three different tires . Even if the tires were of the same model and compound let say all Cup 2), they'd still have different sizes, means different contact patch to the ground. That contact patch alone would make much more of a difference than PCCB or steel could make.
Accounting the stopping power to the RS having PCCB (we don't eben know what the Touring has) is simply naive and not well thought through.
Not only has the RS not insignificant amount of downforce at 100mph, which lets him bring more grip to the ground, it also has the widest and possibly grippiest tires.
I would almost bet that, if you put a standard base Boxster on warm slicks, it would outperfom a GT3, maybe even an RS on the brakes on a proper surface.

 

That car definitely stuck out of all the other cars.

 

Same, only run iron setups, never failed me, but like you I'd like to get my hands on a set of ST at some point

Believe the PCCB performance advantage is often overcomplicated. Everything else being equal -- wheels, tires, friction coefficient, etc. -- less weight is less weight. And we know that dropping unsprung weight, less rotating mass/inertia, creates a greater performance advantage than cabin weight, for example. In the case of brake discs alone, surely an incremental advantage, but that's the nature of the discussion.

Here's a pretty good test involving a Fiesta ST and lightweight wheels https://www.focusst.org/attachments/...est-pdf.13174/ Notably more braking g and less time braking from 100-0 mph. Similar testing validated the GT350R carbon fiber wheel advantage some years ago, believe it was an old Car & Driver test.

If you swap mag wheels for standard and/or pccb for iron on a 992, every reason to believe it would also be a performance disadvantage. Hopefully more independent testing between 992 models with equal equipment to come.

 

thanks Buddy🙏 Hope to get my hands on the RS and i Will bring the Wrapstyle on that but new colors