Ceramic Brakes VS. Regular Brakes
#16
The only reason they may actually stop better is their larger its that simple. I had a GT2 years ago and switched PCCB's to the same size steel and no difference in stopping distance or power on track. UN-sprung weight is the only real benefit and i couldn't feel that.
What i did feel is a heart attack when the dealer told me $13,000 to replace the fronts that were like sandpaper after about 800 track miles(gen 1) .
Lucky i got them to warranty a set. Put them in a box and gave them to the next owner with the car.
There's a reason Cup cars come with steel rotors... carl
What i did feel is a heart attack when the dealer told me $13,000 to replace the fronts that were like sandpaper after about 800 track miles(gen 1) .
Lucky i got them to warranty a set. Put them in a box and gave them to the next owner with the car.
There's a reason Cup cars come with steel rotors... carl
Braking distance is defined by the tyre nowadays and both steel and PCCBs are oversized in GT4. If you are driving heavy on the brakes, you might feel pccb is better after many appliance. But they cost crazy money; 25% of the car's price.
I read that a Swiss company is now re-coating the silicon carbide on the PCCB discs. But i have not seen any re-coated disc and have not yet read a review.
#17
Burning Brakes
Anyone ever chip a PCCB while driving? I have and have had paint chips on my calipers.
#18
You're at risk for chips if you go off into a gravel trap.
#19
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
PCCB's on the GT4 are a relative "value" as Porsche prices options based on the Vehicle - not their cost (as noted by Petevb elsewhere). PCCB's on the GT4 are $7,400 (US), 911 (Turbo, GT3 RS etc.) they are $9,210 on the Cayenne they are $8,840.
Same brakes, all three vehicles - but different price! So you they are a value on the GT4, relative to the cost of the GT3 and relative to the cost of the replacement rotors.
Probably should have gotten them, replaced with steel disc and sold the ceramic disc's over time at a nice profit - even at $3,000 each they are far cheaper than the dealer! For someone who needs one you would be a great option!
Just a thought!
Same brakes, all three vehicles - but different price! So you they are a value on the GT4, relative to the cost of the GT3 and relative to the cost of the replacement rotors.
Probably should have gotten them, replaced with steel disc and sold the ceramic disc's over time at a nice profit - even at $3,000 each they are far cheaper than the dealer! For someone who needs one you would be a great option!
Just a thought!
#20
Seems like this is a good test to settle a lot of the thinking that PCCBs actually reduce fade substantially or has shorter stopping distances:
http://m.caranddriver.com/features/the-power-to-stop-performance-cars-page-4
As others have mentioned, the weight savings of PCCBs are not as big as what most would perceive simply looking at the numbers. Worn vs new. And going on floating discs. Of course the article doesn't account for crazy tracking, but that surely gives a pretty good idea of what their performances are in repeated use of braking under that particular scenario.
Often times people feel PCCBs are far superior because of the advertising and also the initial bite. It's like how BMW owners often think their cars have great brakes because BMWs are overboosted at the first part of the brake pedal travel.
Also, I read somewhere on this forum that claimed Walter Rohrl said he would spec his GT4 in steel brakes? Of course I haven't done a fact check on that. If that statement was really made by him, that would be very interesting and actually mean something given his role as a test driver for Porsche AG.
http://m.caranddriver.com/features/the-power-to-stop-performance-cars-page-4
As others have mentioned, the weight savings of PCCBs are not as big as what most would perceive simply looking at the numbers. Worn vs new. And going on floating discs. Of course the article doesn't account for crazy tracking, but that surely gives a pretty good idea of what their performances are in repeated use of braking under that particular scenario.
Often times people feel PCCBs are far superior because of the advertising and also the initial bite. It's like how BMW owners often think their cars have great brakes because BMWs are overboosted at the first part of the brake pedal travel.
Also, I read somewhere on this forum that claimed Walter Rohrl said he would spec his GT4 in steel brakes? Of course I haven't done a fact check on that. If that statement was really made by him, that would be very interesting and actually mean something given his role as a test driver for Porsche AG.
#21
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I had a long discussion with a Brembo engineer 6 months ago about the benefits of steel vs. ceramics. He opined that the ceramics that come directly from the automaker, regardless of brand, are not the highest quality ceramics that can be applied and are not measurably better than the steel brakes -- it's basically a marketing tool and a very high margin mark up that has taken off in upper end brands.
You have to go aftermarket with both rotors and pads to get what is basically a race specific rotor and pad combination to have any significant/measurable benefits when using the same tire.
Given the size of the brakes on the GT4, I don't see the benefit of PCCBs vs. cost of purchase and certainly not replacement.
You have to go aftermarket with both rotors and pads to get what is basically a race specific rotor and pad combination to have any significant/measurable benefits when using the same tire.
Given the size of the brakes on the GT4, I don't see the benefit of PCCBs vs. cost of purchase and certainly not replacement.
#22
When comes time to replace those ceramic rotors, can you not replace with OEM steel rotors (with proper adapters ofcourse) and still retain those Yellow Calipers?
Not that I would do that but that would cost you the same to replace rotors if you opt not to get ceramics in the future.
Not that I would do that but that would cost you the same to replace rotors if you opt not to get ceramics in the future.
#23
Also, I read somewhere on this forum that claimed Walter Rohrl said he would spec his GT4 in steel brakes? Of course I haven't done a fact check on that. If that statement was really made by him, that would be very interesting and actually mean something given his role as a test driver for Porsche AG.
#24
I have ceramics for the first time on my Turbo S. Man, they are touchy! Incredibly quick and sharp bite. I have started to get used to them but the feel is extremely different from steel. They are standard on the TTS, so I'll take them, but I don't know that I see the $8k value in the difference for the GT4 so I'll stick with steel. As for looks, I think the red looks better because it matches the tail lights and rear reflectors. Anyway, there are literally dozens of threads on this issue on various RL forums, so welcome OP and don't be afraid to use the search engine!
#25
Three Wheelin'
I have ceramics for the first time on my Turbo S. Man, they are touchy! Incredibly quick and sharp bite. I have started to get used to them but the feel is extremely different from steel. They are standard on the TTS, so I'll take them, but I don't know that I see the $8k value in the difference for the GT4 so I'll stick with steel. As for looks, I think the red looks better because it matches the tail lights and rear reflectors. Anyway, there are literally dozens of threads on this issue on various RL forums, so welcome OP and don't be afraid to use the search engine!
#26
The only reason I got a gt4 was so I could have yellow lwb stitching that matches the calipers.
#28
I have steel on the Cayman S and PCCB on the Carrera S. Both are obviously great braking systems, but if I was speccing a car today I would absolutely go with PCCB. The brake feel IMO is much better with PCCB and that and the weight savings would be worth it to me. The lack of brake dust and squeal is just a bonus. Driving the cars back to back, the difference is very noticeable.
For track use, I'd have some longevity concerns, but from what I've read, a lot of the problems people complained of were the Gen 2 PCCBs not the Gen 3 PCCBs. Some Rennlisters have reported no durability problems with the Gen 3 PCCBs on the track, but who really knows based on anecdotes on the internet. For a street car though, PCCBs are awesome and worth the money to me. I wouldn't have said that before I owned a car with them, and I wouldn't have specced them if I was building a car. But now that I have them, I couldn't order a car without them.
For track use, I'd have some longevity concerns, but from what I've read, a lot of the problems people complained of were the Gen 2 PCCBs not the Gen 3 PCCBs. Some Rennlisters have reported no durability problems with the Gen 3 PCCBs on the track, but who really knows based on anecdotes on the internet. For a street car though, PCCBs are awesome and worth the money to me. I wouldn't have said that before I owned a car with them, and I wouldn't have specced them if I was building a car. But now that I have them, I couldn't order a car without them.
#29
Rennlist Member
In terms of street use and costs there is sharp depreciation against (near zero additional value given to used PCCB cars). Overall the smart money would probably be saved for the next car, but there is an argument for PCCBs on a street car for a keeper if you like the pedal feel.
#30
That's the thing. You may be eliminating a portion of your potential buyer pool on resale if you spend the extra money to get PCCBs. Many/most track rats buying used will pass on a car with ceramics. Many RLers have made posts to this effect.