mdrums

+1 guys with PCCB's I have tracked with find the same problem.

TrackDays247.com

Old thread from about a year ago details OEM PCCB pad chucking and the apparent & others' conclusions of resultant early rotor demise.

TrackDays247.com

WOw that was wordy.

Terry Adams

I think Porsche switched to Gen II PCCBs for the 2008 model year. This resolved the cracking rotor issue but I don't know what else.

acf

LOL

Macster

One doesn't like to suggest the driver is at fault, but there's some opinion the PCCB brakes got a bad rap due to owners visiting the track and simply driving the car to the point the brakes severely overheated which resulted in cracking and after continued overheating episodes eventually outright failure.

With steel brakes the brakes would get hot and the pedal pressure would soften giving the driver a clue the brakes were hot and it was time to come in and let things cool down after a cool down lap or two.

With PCCBs the pedal doesn't get soft. But the brakes, at least the rotors are overheated. With no other signs of overheated brakes the drivers would stay out way longer and the brakes would just overheat to the point of damage.

PCCBs are also very much at risk when the car suffers a visit to the gravel or sand trap. This can put gravel or sand or whatever dependng upon if the car suffers an off at some other place on the track in between the rotor and shield or even in the holes in the rotor that if the driver isn't aware can have him back on the track at speed and upon using the brakes the first time damaging the brakes from gravel/etc that got kicked up and end caught in the brakes somehow. Many owners of Porsches with steel brakes that have not even ventured onto the track let alone gone off into gravel pit have had a piece of debris get caught between a brake's splash shield and a rotor.

Sincerely,

Macster.

Boeing 717

How about for street use though, If you just drove them in normal street conditions how much longer do you think the pads and rotors would last compared to a regular set????

Terry Adams

Rough guess, 4 times as long.

I averaged 40K on a set of rotors during the 161K miles I owned my 993. At 40K service on the TT, the tech did not say anything about rotors, other than they are good.

The TT weighs almost 500 lbs more, though, so that could factor in.

Boeing 717

Hmm thats cool, just wondering because i see some cars for sale advertised with those brakes. And i was wondering if one should stay away from those due to costs down the road.

Macster

Porsche tech told me based on how often I have to replace pads or pads and rotors on my 02 Boxster I could probably expect the PCCB pads and rotors to last the life of the car. Now at the time I had over 225K miles on the Boxster so he was talking about the life of the car in terms of how long I owned my current car and how much I drove it.

Sure most Porsches that can be fitted with PCCBs weigh more than the Boxster but my style of driving doesn't use up brakes that much. The brakes on my 03 Turbo at just over 40K miles have plently of pad and rotor life left. I might manage 50K or more miles out of the pads and even more miles out of the rotors. Which is nearly the same life I get from the Boxster's brakes, and the Turbo weighs in at least several hundred pounds more than the Boxster.

Thus if my 03 Turbo had PCCBs the brakes might indeed be lifetime brakes.

However, even if I had to replace PCCB pads and rotors one time the cost would drive the total cost of brake jobs way over what I've spent on regular brake pads and rotors.

So in this sense the PCCBs are not cost effective.

For a new car, one would be better off opting for the standard brakes instead of the much more expensive PCCB option.

And then of course be faced with more frequently replacing the standard brakes' pads or pads and rotors. As long as the driver managed to get reasonable life out of the standard brake components he would not spend anywhere near as much on standard brake parts as he would have on just the purchase price of the PCCBs.

However, the benefits of PCCBs is not their potentional for lower frequency of component replacement -- ignoring their higher cost at car purchase time -- but the lightness they bring to the car at just the right place.

As I mentioned in a previous post the payback of PCCBs is their light weight and the benefit this brings to the car every second it is moving. Better acceleration. Quicker stops. Better handling. IOWs, the car is more responsive under all conditions thanks to PCCBs.

In spite of the upfront cost, and assuming good component life -- which I think most of us Porsche owners would experience -- PCCBs is the best option imho.

Sincerely,

Macster.

Bob Rouleau

Macster - First I'll admit a bias. I think PCCB are the worst bang for the buck ever. I had them on my 996 GT2 and switched to steel when they wore out in a single track season. At the time in Canada, each rotors cost $12,500 - year that's $50 thou for a set. The Gen 2 rotors are better, they might last one and a half seasons and the price is reduced but still 10X the price of a good racing grade rotor.

I think that it is worth pointing out that the average driver on the street might feel a subtle difference due to PCCB but it is indeed subtle. On a race track with a well prepared car on R compound tires, an experienced driver might see a slight improvement, but then he'd curse the replacement cost and switch to steel anyway. Consider that several of our site sponsors offer brake upgrades which are almost as light as the PCCB at less than half the cost of the option. Better still, replacement rotors are about $400 each.

For the price of PCCB, the same money can be invested in suspension components which would provide a better improvement in handling on and off the track without incurring the liability of crazy expensive replacement of PCCB rotors. For example I am thinking of PSS9 or PAS suspension upgrades. PCCB has a very poor bang for the buck quotient in my opinion.

Best,

Leigh2

I have them on my 997TT and like the lack of brake dust but wouldn't spec them if buying new. The cost/benefit analysis just doesn't work and the reds are just fine.

Edgy01

Try not to judge the PCCBs based upon the experience seen with the Gen I brakes--they were poorly designed and fixed in time for the 997Turbo and 997s.

Any damage done to current Gen II PCCBs are done by people who don't know how to drive.