Anyone want to defend steel brakes on an RS?
11-01-2007, 05:09 AM
#32
Drifting
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Munich
Posts: 2,722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't be an arsehole, despite your deliberate rudeness, I did you the courtesy of explaining some of the realities associated with comparisons between iron and PCCB based brake systems. Your inability to verify what I wrote, is your problem.
R+C
R+C
11-01-2007, 01:32 PM
#33
Advanced
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Slightly North of Seattle
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listen, Nerdschliefe, don't do me any of your courtesies, ok? I don't give a rats *** about your long-winded lectures. And we now know you're obviously no latin scholar.
11-01-2007, 02:40 PM
#34
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Robin,
While I respect the fact you are trying to educate people about steel vs iron, at times you come across a little harsh for such a seemingly small issue. FWIW, you might want to dial back the aggression a little bit because I just came across this in the official 996 GT3 brochure from Porsche and put it in a pic for you. They call the stock rotors "steel" in more than one place in the brochure. People will tend to repeat what they read from Porsche - the theoretical "ultimate" authority about what they use in their cars.
Just letting you know.....
Cheers,
While I respect the fact you are trying to educate people about steel vs iron, at times you come across a little harsh for such a seemingly small issue. FWIW, you might want to dial back the aggression a little bit because I just came across this in the official 996 GT3 brochure from Porsche and put it in a pic for you. They call the stock rotors "steel" in more than one place in the brochure. People will tend to repeat what they read from Porsche - the theoretical "ultimate" authority about what they use in their cars.
Just letting you know.....
Cheers,
11-01-2007, 03:50 PM
#35
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Florida
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11-01-2007, 03:59 PM
#36
Drifting
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Munich
Posts: 2,722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allan
Jager was deliberately being offensive, and continues to be so, if you check his deliberate and repeated mispelling.
I have heard other people refer to the rotors as 'steel', its unfortunate that the copywriters encourage it. The first time I fitted 'steel' rotors from Porsche Motorsports I specifically asked about the material and was explicitly informed that they were iron. Somewhere there is some published data showing why iron is better than steel for brake rotors. Some motorcycles have/had Ti or steel rotors, but their requirements are somewhat different.
Jager [sic] states quite clearly he has no use for courtesy, that's his problem, I appreciate your thoughtfulness.
R+C
Jager was deliberately being offensive, and continues to be so, if you check his deliberate and repeated mispelling.
I have heard other people refer to the rotors as 'steel', its unfortunate that the copywriters encourage it. The first time I fitted 'steel' rotors from Porsche Motorsports I specifically asked about the material and was explicitly informed that they were iron. Somewhere there is some published data showing why iron is better than steel for brake rotors. Some motorcycles have/had Ti or steel rotors, but their requirements are somewhat different.
Jager [sic] states quite clearly he has no use for courtesy, that's his problem, I appreciate your thoughtfulness.
R+C
11-01-2007, 04:03 PM
#37
Technical Guru
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by AllanJ
They call the stock rotors "steel" in more than one place in the brochure.
11-01-2007, 05:38 PM
#38
Advanced
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Slightly North of Seattle
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allan
Jager was deliberately being offensive, and continues to be so, if you check his deliberate and repeated mispelling.
I have heard other people refer to the rotors as 'steel', its unfortunate that the copywriters encourage it. The first time I fitted 'steel' rotors from Porsche Motorsports I specifically asked about the material and was explicitly informed that they were iron. Somewhere there is some published data showing why iron is better than steel for brake rotors. Some motorcycles have/had Ti or steel rotors, but their requirements are somewhat different.
Jager [sic] states quite clearly he has no use for courtesy, that's his problem, I appreciate your thoughtfulness.
R+C
Jager was deliberately being offensive, and continues to be so, if you check his deliberate and repeated mispelling.
I have heard other people refer to the rotors as 'steel', its unfortunate that the copywriters encourage it. The first time I fitted 'steel' rotors from Porsche Motorsports I specifically asked about the material and was explicitly informed that they were iron. Somewhere there is some published data showing why iron is better than steel for brake rotors. Some motorcycles have/had Ti or steel rotors, but their requirements are somewhat different.
Jager [sic] states quite clearly he has no use for courtesy, that's his problem, I appreciate your thoughtfulness.
R+C
Nerdschliefe, if you need insight into deliberate offensiveness (and you appear to be a master of offensiveness), perhaps review your own recent posts. If the courtesy you offer is the courtesy you have shown me so far, keep it to yourself.
11-01-2007, 08:59 PM
#39
Rennlist Member
Steel doesn't rust. Iron does. if you look at all the Porsche "steel" rotors that have been sitting unused for a while...you'll see they get rusted.
Not trying to inflame this argument, simply stating an observation.
Cheers.
Not trying to inflame this argument, simply stating an observation.
Cheers.
11-02-2007, 09:37 AM
#40
Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: IGoli
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Steel doesn't rust. Iron does"
Not true by a long chalk - even some types of stainless steel rust. It all comes down to what the definition of steel you use.
Iron with any amount is carbon is generally reffered to as steel, but Iron that is cast and then goes through a series of rollers in a forging process is also often called steel (ok some carbon is added during this process) , as are most alloys of iron with other metals (chrome for example in various percentages to make different grades of stainless steel), etc.
I think the point Robyn is trying to make is that on a like for like basis (same rotor size, same calipers, same speeds etc) then there is very little difference in actual braking performance between them - given that difference in pad material and surface temps makes comparing apples and apples difficult.
The weight of the rotor does make a different to vehicle performance and handling feel, and lighter unsprung weight is better as a general rule.
Frankly I think the carbon rotors are too delicate & expensive for general amateur track use - unless you have a really thick wallet for funding them - good gravel kitty litter is not good for them.
For serious racing it is another matter - and then you should do your own R&D to decide which works better for the conditions you are racing in.
I would rather spend the money on tires and track time - it's a better return on investment for going faster and for time spent having fun.
Not true by a long chalk - even some types of stainless steel rust. It all comes down to what the definition of steel you use.
Iron with any amount is carbon is generally reffered to as steel, but Iron that is cast and then goes through a series of rollers in a forging process is also often called steel (ok some carbon is added during this process) , as are most alloys of iron with other metals (chrome for example in various percentages to make different grades of stainless steel), etc.
I think the point Robyn is trying to make is that on a like for like basis (same rotor size, same calipers, same speeds etc) then there is very little difference in actual braking performance between them - given that difference in pad material and surface temps makes comparing apples and apples difficult.
The weight of the rotor does make a different to vehicle performance and handling feel, and lighter unsprung weight is better as a general rule.
Frankly I think the carbon rotors are too delicate & expensive for general amateur track use - unless you have a really thick wallet for funding them - good gravel kitty litter is not good for them.
For serious racing it is another matter - and then you should do your own R&D to decide which works better for the conditions you are racing in.
I would rather spend the money on tires and track time - it's a better return on investment for going faster and for time spent having fun.
11-02-2007, 12:08 PM
#41
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the point Robyn is trying to make is that on a like for like basis (same rotor size, same calipers, same speeds etc) then there is very little difference in actual braking performance between them - given that difference in pad material and surface temps makes comparing apples and apples difficult.
However, when you compare the factory stock PCCB setup with the factory stock steel/iron setup (stock rotors and pads), the PCCB feels way different than the iron. From my experience, the PCCB also stops faster. The PCCB also has an intense initial bite which hauls you down right away. I think the key component is the pads as mentioned before (PCCB use Pagid P90 and the regular iron rotors use ______), but I'm not sure if there are even a set of pads for the iron rotors that would make them perform the same as PCCB in that regard.
So....if you can't even buy equivalent performing pads then the apple to apple comparison is moot because it isn't possible. Reality will dictate a difference between these two braking systems and that's that.
BTW, the brochure writers wrote this little blurb about the PCCB in the 996 GT3 brochure: "Thanks to its enhanced stability in all conditions, PCCB helps minimize braking distances in even the most extreme road and race scenarios. Inherent fade resistance provides safer deceleration from racing speeds and the system's prodigious response requires only moderate pedal inputs from the driver."
In my case, that quote above has been my experience. At times I might want to substitute "requires only moderate pedal inputs" to be "have a shoe lace land on the brake pedal...."
Anyhow, if I was tracking my car a ton I'd opt for the steel/iron rotors due to replacement cost. If I were buying a used vehicle, I'd opt for PCCB no matter what my intended usage because in the used market, PCCB doesn't seem to command a premium. I greatly prefer the lack of brake dust with the PCCB setup and when I autox my car they work amazingly well, better than the stock steel setup. If I was going to track the used vehicle a lot, then I can swap out the PCCB rotors for GT3 Cup rotors for $1200 for a set of four rotors. Cheap.
Cheers,
11-02-2007, 02:56 PM
#42
I agree with what's been posted here. I have/had ceramics on my GT3; I've just changed them out for steels. After 10 or 12 track days this year the ceramic rotors were showing signs of wear. They're stupidly expensive to replace, so they are now stored in my basement and I've gone to steel AP Racing rotors in the front and Cup Car rotors in the rear, using my existing calipers. Yes, they weigh a bit more than the ceramics, but I've found the stopping performance to be much better. With the steels you have a wide choice of pad compounds, so you can find something you'll like. I never felt that the initial bite with the PCCBs was strong enough; I'm now running Pagid Yellows and am much happier with the overall braking performance of the car on track. Stopping distances are shorter, the brakes are still easy to modulate, and I've had no issues with fade (nor did I ever have any issues with fade with the PCCBs). So the advantages to switching to steels IMO are better braking, more pad choices, and lower cost. The only advantage to the PCCBs is weight savings, which in my experience is far offset on the track by my ability to go a bit deeper into turns with the steels.
11-02-2007, 03:18 PM
#43
Instructor
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: IGoli
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want shoe lace landing on pedal to have an affect using steels - try Pagid RS15 Grey pads (no idea who can/if supply them for the GT3). Once you have tried it let us know 
I guarantee they are different to the stock pads ito initial bite. I had them on a Scooby with Alcon calipers - interesting to say the least ito initial bite.
Certainly the factory pads for steel on the 6 GT3 are less than great - I put them in a box.
I guarantee they are different to the stock pads ito initial bite. I had them on a Scooby with Alcon calipers - interesting to say the least ito initial bite.Certainly the factory pads for steel on the 6 GT3 are less than great - I put them in a box.
11-02-2007, 04:50 PM
#44
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,968
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want shoe lace landing on pedal to have an affect using steels - try Pagid RS15 Grey pads (no idea who can/if supply them for the GT3). Once you have tried it let us know I guarantee they are different to the stock pads ito initial bite. I had them on a Scooby with Alcon calipers - interesting to say the least ito initial bite.
Certainly the factory pads for steel on the 6 GT3 are less than great - I put them in a box.
I guarantee they are different to the stock pads ito initial bite. I had them on a Scooby with Alcon calipers - interesting to say the least ito initial bite.Certainly the factory pads for steel on the 6 GT3 are less than great - I put them in a box.
I've been thinking about getting a data logger of some sort so maybe I'll take some deceleration measurements if/when I get one. I'm always curious about these things.
Cheers,
11-05-2007, 08:36 PM
#45
Rennlist Member
I agree with Robin that Jager's post is out of line.
I think that Robin was trying to be more precise. Robin has and continues to bring very valuable information to this forum. The lack of spelling hid name correctly was to get a response and I thought the response from Robin was not out of line.
The saga over brakes will continue. I personally enjoy all points of view. The reason I coninue to hang out at rennlist is that i have a lot to learn.
It is unfortunate that some people take things personally, when others feel a need to be more precise.
I think that Robin was trying to be more precise. Robin has and continues to bring very valuable information to this forum. The lack of spelling hid name correctly was to get a response and I thought the response from Robin was not out of line.
The saga over brakes will continue. I personally enjoy all points of view. The reason I coninue to hang out at rennlist is that i have a lot to learn.
It is unfortunate that some people take things personally, when others feel a need to be more precise.