When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Share with you is a research I have done for our CCM brake development.
I have been reading hundreds of threads in this and other forums about "pccb" or not "pccb" or something to that nature and for sure many more to come but I have yet seen a fact sheet comparing these two type of rotor materials:
Carbon Ceramic - Known as pccb (Porsche Carbon Ceramic Brake) Cast Iron - Known as "Steel"
This chart with my comment and note should satisfy most of your query for a clear and true understanding between two type of rotor material, and their respective advantage and disadvantage which hopefully can help you make a better decision.
Analysis is based on the data published by SGL (Now owned by Brembo) and my reference from various material data book. My comment was duly verified by Geoff Whitfield - Engineering Manager of Surface Transforms.
This presentation is deemed to be accurate at the time of publishing.
If you still have question please feel free to address, in the meantime please keep the discussion focused on the material fundamental and their respective characteristics.
For those who are interested in learning more, we have a more comprehensive collection on CCM including mfg process and experiment data etc. here:
price point on CCM is still significantly higher than iron esp with Porsche tax added. CCM has the cool factor on street but a pig on the track with horrible modulation and high running cost.
nice information
price point on CCM is still significantly higher than iron esp with Porsche tax added. CCM has the cool factor on street but a pig on the track
My experience with PCCBs at the track is possible glazing and in the event of an off destruction of the rotor from the "marbles" kicked up. I had a friend sell his GT2 after an off because he feared he destroyed the rotors and he didn't want to pay $20k plus to replace the rotors. This is all over a decade ago for what it's worth. JBO PS A professional racer destroyed a set of PCCBs in one session PS2 The Enzo/Challenge Stradale ceramic rotors seemed to fair better than PCCBs.
There are basically two types of CCM rotors: Continuous (Long) fiber and Chopped (short) fiber.
Brembo CCM rotors (OE pccb, Ferrari etc.) are made of "chopped" fiber to facilitate its "continuous" production process, although can be with varied surface coating so they will look differently, but the core material are all the same which is known to be fragile and prone to chip & breakage.
Aftermarket CCM rotors such as ST and RB-CCM are made of long fiber which take longer time to make (can't be produced with continuous process), but is much stronger than OE (Brembo), and will never chip/break under normal use including hit by a road debris such as rock/stone.
Thanks for the quick response. As I mention my data is very old. I think the last car I bought with PCCBs was my CGT. I'm very dated..
Best Josh
Yes the "conventional" wisdom on outdated pccb (back to 997) leave most Porsche owners (spilled over to other communities) to believe that pccb is a novelty item (fragile and expensive) and no good on tracks. So switching to iron rotors and "shelf" those ccb rotors for future re-sale seems to be the consensus.
RB took the challenge and started CCB brake development about 3 years ago, including the research of rotor material (see above table) and the development of sintered (full metallic) brake pads dedicated for CCM rotors.
We are good on both iron metallurgy and CCM technology, however we believe CCM rotor has its merit that not iron can compare, and is the future for those who want the best value and performance; especially for track goers & racing professional we can prove to you that not only CCM brake can deliver a highly stable and consistent brake torque & modulation at any situation and temperature, but can last longer and cost less to run than traditional iron brake.
especially for track goers & racing professional we can prove to you that not only CCM brake can deliver a highly stable and consistent brake torque & modulation at any situation and temperature, but can last longer and cost less to run than traditional iron brake.
can you show us the maths that prove this out??? genuinely interested.
I love scientific data and analysis in favor of claims without substantiation. However, for a data driven analysis I have to call out an error. Perhaps you may view it as semantics but you may be able to improve your message without this error.
An item can't can't have a physical property like weight, length, or height 2-3 times less than another item. For example you conclude in comments that CCM is 2-3 times lighter than iron. Not true. If CCM is 2.45 g cm^-3 than for something to be 3 times less is would have to be 2.45 - (2.45*3) = -4.90 g cm^-3. The negative weight of course being impossible/erroneous data.
It would be correct to say Iron is 2-3 times heavier than CCM or CCM is one half to one third the weight of iron.
This error is made regularly and in everyday language meaning is understood but for a scientific summary I would avoid it if possible.
(FWIW I run my PCCBs on track. I love them but I am not a maniac. I love how light it makes the car feel in both accel/decel inertia as well as steering feel.
can you show us the maths that prove this out??? genuinely interested.
Trakcar over at the 991 gt3 rs forum converted from iron to ccm with long fibers and he only has good things to say.
Let me just add that he owned and tracked regurlarly and hard a 997 gt3, a 3.8 rs and a 4.0 rs and now the 991 rs. All with iron brakes.
Give it a search you will not be disappointed
Trakcar over at the 991 gt3 rs forum converted from iron to ccm with long fibers and he only has good things to say.
Let me just add that he owned and tracked regurlarly and hard a 997 gt3, a 3.8 rs and a 4.0 rs and now the 991 rs. All with iron brakes.
Give it a search you will not be disappointed
thanks. I’ve tracked with him at RA. Looking for empirical data. Not anecdotal but thanks all the same.
There are basically two types of CCM rotors: Continuous (Long) fiber and Chopped (short) fiber.
Brembo CCM rotors (OE pccb, Ferrari etc.) are made of "chopped" fiber to facilitate its "continuous" production process, although can be with varied surface coating so they will look differently, but the core material are all the same which is known to be fragile and prone to chip & breakage.
Aftermarket CCM rotors such as ST and RB-CCM are made of long fiber which take longer time to make (can't be produced with continuous process), but is much stronger than OE (Brembo), and will never chip/break under normal use including hit by a road debris such as rock/stone.
I'm confused, I thought RB was running OEM GM rotors (Vettes and Camaros) in their CCB kits. Aren't those chopped fiber CCM's made by Brembo?
I'm confused, I thought RB was running OEM GM rotors (Vettes and Camaros) in their CCB kits. Aren't those chopped fiber CCM's made by Brembo?
We do both - The complete RB CCB kits are standardized with Bremo's chopped fibers (OE ZR1/Z28) and continuous fibers for pccb stock replacement (996/997/991).
We are not a manufacture of those CCM discs, rather we are a CCB brake developer using discs that we deem appropriate for brake system configuration, and discs are consistent in quality, stable in supply and price.
All discs are stocked on shelf ready for assembly and shipment, our turn around time is typically 1-2 days for stick replacement, and 1-2 wks for complete CCB system. Currently our CCM rotors upgrade for Nissan GTR, Dodge Hellcat, Mustang GT350, and Camaro G6 ZL1 are hot.
03-03-2016, 09:08 PM
Carbon Ceramic Brake Demystified
