SSDVC

Car has 85K on her. I haven't seen it in person yet or even picked it up for that matter (soon). Pads were checked 850 miles ago, during a PPI, and I believe they were noted at 5mm front and 9mm rear (or maybe it was the discs, as it just says brakes?). Pads aren't cheap, but the rotors are killer. Inspection of the rotors indicated no crack, pits, or other damage, so they, hopefully, should still be good. First Turbo, so I have a lot to learn and I guess I am just a little nervous. My understanding is the rotors are somewhat fragile and anything dealing with removing, reinstalling tires would include a slight panic attack. Is all that unfounded?

2fcknfst

Rotors are good for 300k miles, and once you get there, rebrake.de can re finish them for you; I do believe there is another supplier doing it as well in NA, but cannot recall who it is. The fact they are visibly good is enough reason to re and re pads, pucks, hardware, etc.

They are more brittle, however, using the wheel guides when removing the wheel will eliminate the issue of the wheel coming into contact with the rotor.

I would keep them as is, you'll like them. A lot.

Lazurus

As far as I know, the only thing I would consider "fragile" will be your pockets after replacing PCCB stuff. Infinitely better braking, but as you know - significantly higher rotor/pads $$$.

2fcknfst

Yes, I was a couple of grand into pads and all, but I'll be good for at least another 50k miles, save for a bleed every couple of years.

SSDVC

Thanks All. At what thickness do the pads need to be replaced?

2fcknfst

I'd replace them now; mine, at 50k miles, were tapered in the rear. PO was an old guy, wasn't hard on the car, the tapering apparently has something to do with on/off load on the rear.

docwyte

Given the cost of those rotors/pads, I'd remove them, triple wrap them in bubble wrap and very carefully store them. Then just run regular steel rotors and normal brake pads. If you're just street driving the car you won't see any performance difference between the two and your wallet will love you.

2fcknfst

That is not entirely accurate, there is a very noticeable difference between the two, the pccbs are far superior, have zero dust and weight half as much as the steel counterpart.

There is also a very noticeable difference between the 14" pccbs on the 996, versus the 16.1" version on the 991, the second gen stuff on the 991 may not last as long, but you can feel the planet slowing its rotation if you get on the brakes hard.

docwyte

Sure it is. You're not feeling a performance difference between 996 Gen 1 pccb's and steel rotors/pads on the street. They weigh less, but you can't feel that.

2fcknfst

The only other turbo I've driven back to back is Matt's, and his has standard brakes.

Matt has a more aggressive pad, and his steelies work well, but his suspension response is markedly slower than mine, and it takes a moment for the pad to bite.

With the 991, against a similar, steelie equipped car, the dynamic effect is even more noticable as the stock rotors are a couple inches taller and some mm thicker.

I would say the best analogy for the difference would be driving a cast wheel over a billet mono block, the weight difference between the two is very apparent.

The less sprung weight, the better.

SSDVC

She will basically by street driven, with an occasional foray to the track for P=car events. I just want the PCCBs to last. Oh, and I do love the no dust thing, I really, really do.

So if I check the pads and wear is consistent and flat, at what thickness should the pads be replaced??

I appreciate all the advice and input, but again, and back to my original question, if I do decide to swap them out for steel, it's 997.1 rotors and pads, keeping the same calipers. No additional spacers or other changes needed. Is that correct?

2fcknfst

I think doc said you could do that.

Sounds as if you have lots of pad left.