I’ve never driven in any Porsche Turbo charged car. In fact, ive only driven one Porsche, a 1983 911SC. And that was only in a parking lot. But I know for a fact the GT2 is the car for me. Sadly though, im only 20 years old. So due to my financial situation, or lack there of, im going to have to wait a few years before I purchase my GT2. So basically what im trying to say here is, please continue to tell all these potential gt2 owners that the gt2 just isn’t the car for them. I want to make sure that there are a few gt2s left for me in a few years.

 

Wow !! For a subject that's been discussed previously this certainly appears to have generated a lot of hits. I have a quick question regarding the ceramic brakes. Some posters have brought up the issue of cracking,durability and possible fade with track use. Does anyone know of any reliabilty issues with everyday street driving ? If so how difficult (and costly) would it be to have the brakes replaced with steel calipers? Thanks.

 

To my knowledge there have been no problems with everyday street driving.

Any problems encountered seem to stem (IMO) from worn pads or excessive heat build up (some claim ABS operation). The excessive heat on ceramic rotors can occur quite rapidly due to over braking because the build up is exponential, e.g. heat build on 30 second braking is not 50% more than 20 second braking, it could be a factor of x times depending upon circumstances.

I don't mean to imply that there are not genuine warranty issues with "ceramics". It's like clutch wear, a lot depends on user input and nobody (naturally) wants to admit to improper usage. The facts and circumstances of each failure need to be fully analyzed and understood to determine the root cause. That has not been demonstrated (impossible?) objectively on these boards yet (IMO). It's impossible to tell what the usage was from photographs, after the fact. I'm sure Porsche has the wherewithal to apply the laws of "physics " to failed rotors and guesstimate the probable cause. They have a history (demonstrated on this board) of giving the owner the benfit of the doubt

What is interesting is that Porsche continues to expand the use of ceramic technology, e.g. clutch in the new Carrera GT, while others continue to bemoan the effectiveness of the technology.

While some are dissatisfied, it seems to me that it would be reasonable to assume (until proven otherwise) that Porsche has done it's homework in this area.

However, if my ceramics were "toasted" I would be mighty upset and demanding of Porsche for a replacement. Watt, who posts on this board quite frequently had an interesting insight...anger hides a lot of guilt.

Now as an owner of two cars with ceramic brakes I have a very vested interest in the eventual resolution of the differing views. My experience to date, with significant fun use, but no tracking, is I have had no problems with the ceramics.

I do, however, reserve the right to change my mind (and hope I get the benefit of the doubt). The big question is if the ceramics don't really work what will they do with the Carrera GT?. I think Porsche is smart enough to have figured this out.

To replace the ceramic rotors with steel (on a GT 3) costs about $3000 assuming you can use the same calipers and pads.

Others will differ based upon their "ownership" experience.

 

Agreed. Magazine "reviews" often come from very little contact. I think that's a useful observation, although "never" is hardly true insofar as I've read the various European mags for years and, while they often start with a "first drive" that's just one day, they then often follow up with longer tests.

Note that Car magazine this month gave a rather dismal (p)review of the Carrera GT based on a one day drive around unfamiliar roads -- curse them for assaulting my namesake!

 

Thanks for the insight .

 

Yes.

 

Colm,
You've taken a generous position on the ceramic brake question. Since the car is intended for track use, I suspect all of us believed the brakes were as reliable and simple to use as steel brakes, only better. A Porsche spokesperson in an early interview had stated the discs were good for the "life of the car", and added that meant 250,000 miles.
Having an extremely rigorous bedding and break-in procedures which are not defined in the manual (I think), and specifiying different pads for each application took me by surprise. It seems to me that the customers of these brakes are a beta test site.
Right now, I wonder how many of the ceramic owners openly or secretly wish they had made the alternate choice for steel- if that option was open to them. The option was promised on the ttX50 but never materialized. Though moot, I had decided the gain was not worth the cost. How do you feel on that question? AS

 

AS,

I vacillate....but then I vacillate about everything.

Seriously, I've been doing some checking and discovered a number of things.

1. Replacement Rotors (all wheels) for the ceramic discs run about $32K, after PCA discount. This is for the GT2 and I assume it's similar for the GT3

2. You can buy a complete upgrade kit, brakes, pads and rotors for around $12-$14K. So how do you make sense of item 1 above?.

3. Replacement steel rotors for the GT3 run about $3K for the complete set.

Funny you should bring it up but I have another production spot for next February, and I think about going the steel route, why? Resale value, but based upon my interpretation of the various problems I think the Ceramics are getting a "bum" wrap and not everything is being told about how some of the brakes were (ab)used .

It's a tough issue.

 

this is ridiculous. 3 people post on an internet board that they've had problems with their PCCB brakes (actually usually "my friend's" car) and all of a sudden everyone thinks they're made of cardboard or something. Do you honestly think porsche would put a product that is so bad on their flagship cars? Do you think they would take the liability of using brakes that don't work? Come on guys, lets get back to reality. Just because someone has had a problem with their PCCB brakes does not mean they're falsely advertised or an inferior product. I've personally beat the hell out our PCCB's and they've performed flawlessly.

 

please also remember bob rouleau has 3 of 5 gt3 buddies with steel brake trouble already.

 

I had not heard of trouble with the '04 GT3 (350mm) steel rotors. Some friends have commented that for "serious" driving, the previous 996 GT3 fronts were not up to snuff.

I think it's fair to say that Porsche makes mistakes, from head gaskets and flywheels to engine blocks and, perhaps this time ceramic brake rotors. Some times products work in R&D but don't work in the field.

The '04 GT3 is the first 996 I like at all. Before their arrival in the US, I toyed with the idea of ordering one and a big slice of the initial appeal is the PCCB's. For now, I don't find it a compelling car and there's plenty of time for Mr Porsche to sort out the braking issues -- whether it's a matter of setting customer expectations or actually revising the product. Certainly, in my experience, the early marketing promises (such as the "lifetime of the car" which I heard) are now even less credible. I've heard from GT3 and GT2 owners that they were advised by Porsche to fit alternate pads for track driving -- apparently to dissipate heat.

As for these "hiccups" being construed as questions for the Carrera GT, it would be foolhardy to suppose the Carrera GT will pass muster with zero troubles.

Back to the thread, my ranking of choice, in order of preference, money no object, would be 993 Turbo, 993 Carrera 2S, 996 GT3 with the conspicuous absence of the 996 Turbo simply because there is a long list of other Porsches I'd love to enjoy before any of the other 996's (again, money no object, but not getting silly like suggesting a 959 or factory race car)

 

offroad35- Point well-taken...but some of these reports (and photos) suggest "sentinal event" as opposed to bizarre abberation. When it comes to brakes on any car, especially a fast track car, there is no room for abberation. I suspect a real problem, perhaps in quality control, since the brakes are a complex production of new technology. I'm curious as to what the future will tell. AS

 

CarreraGT- having driven both the 993tt and 996tt, my opinion is that for everyday driving, the 996 is much better. Hence my X50 selection and no regrets. A neighbor/friend offered me his 993tt at an enourmous price delta from the X50, and I haven't thought once that I made the wrong decision. AS

 

Adam,

While I agree with you, there is a significant difference between the GT3 and the TT or GT2, one so significant it has affected more than a few decisions NOT to buy GT3's - TORQUE. After almost 4 years with 2 different Turbos (993TT and 996TT) I'm not sure that I can go back to 280 Ft/LBS from more than 400 ft/lbs. Horsepower is nice to have, Torque is addictive, and influences your driving style on a day to day basis, much more than HP.

Robin

 

Mr Stemer, after having driven both the 996 TT and the 993 TT
I agree the 996TT is better for everyday driving. Its much more like a
Lincoln Town car. IMO.