Ceramic Brakes VS. Regular Brakes
10-08-2015, 12:22 AM
#46
I didn't state otherwise. I was just reporting what I've read over the years here on rennlist. And perception/belief of replacement cost is more the issue. But it doesn't matter to me. If you like ceramics more, go nuts. I will stick with steels for the various reasons I listed. Although I'm happy to have ceramics "for free" on my turbo S.
10-08-2015, 01:36 AM
#47
Easy solution is to just drive both and see which you like better. I'd never go steel again if I was ordering a car. YMMV of course.
10-08-2015, 03:26 AM
#48
Don't get me wrong. I might even spec PCCBs on my own car soon. All I'm saying is, the PCCBs are more for brake dust + advantage of more resistant to fading but only much more extreme track conditions beyond 25 mins sessions + the bling factor. I'm aware of the the fact that the perceived lightness and increased stopping power are indeed not the case in reality. From talking to guys who track their cars regularly, it doesn't look like their lap times are actually anything noticeable coming from brakes alone.
Last edited by Alpha.GT4; 10-08-2015 at 04:17 AM.
10-08-2015, 05:22 AM
#49
PCCB brakes are not race grade brakes. Just because LeMans cars runs ceramic brakes doesn't necessarily mean Porsche is giving you the same brakes for road cars. Again and again, PCCB brakes make you feel the car brakes better simply because of the brake pedal feel. I don't think there is any argument that PCCBs feel different, just that the argument is whether they are worth it for people who care about spending the 8K for the feel + no brake dust yet with no real world braking power improvement. Ceramic brakes will be more resistant to fade on the track under extended periods of use. However, from guys who run their GT3s on the track, the don't seem to experience any noticeable different while running 25 mins sessions. Perhaps the difference is there if you do 45 mins+? But then who actually does that? Not that many people. On top of that, the heat dissipation and marginal weight difference could be achieved by putting in floating discs into the red brakes during brake rotor change ...
Racing applications are actually changing based on the budget.
Ferrari Challenge is using Carbon/Ceramic, but the F1 is using Carbon/Carbon applications. Not sure about the GT3 cup. I think they are using iron.
Carbon/Carbons provide much better deceleration, but they do function between 350-1000 degree celcius, which you not would reach this temp range during city driving. And it has a life of 800km.
Hence, they come up with a solution where they form the disc core with carbon and coat with silicon carbide (Carbon fibre-reinforced silicon carbide = C/SiC). It also functions with the regular temp range, lighter and has a good heat dissipation. But the life gets significantly shorter with track usage.
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2...ic-brakes.html
“This feature means that the wear resistance of Carbon Ceramic Material guarantees an approximate disc life of 150,000 km (93,000 miles) for road use and 2,000 km (2,400 miles) for extreme track use (e.g. Ferrari Challenge),” Michelini said.
“This feature means that the wear resistance of Carbon Ceramic Material guarantees an approximate disc life of 150,000 km (93,000 miles) for road use and 2,000 km (2,400 miles) for extreme track use (e.g. Ferrari Challenge),” Michelini said.
http://www.ceramicdiscrefurbishment.com/home
Last edited by hellboy_mcqueen; 10-08-2015 at 03:10 PM.
10-08-2015, 12:34 PM
#51
Now even I'm confused. WR suggested I skip the PCCBs, not spec them...
Agree on trying both of possible. There is no wrong answer as long as you're aware of the true costs and benefits.
Personally I think if Porsche cut replacement disk sets to no more than the price for the option new they would do themselves a world of good. $22k per set when the new price is $7k is simply malicious. Particularly when you can buy a set of Vette rotors from the same original manufacturer for $5k.
Agree on trying both of possible. There is no wrong answer as long as you're aware of the true costs and benefits.
Personally I think if Porsche cut replacement disk sets to no more than the price for the option new they would do themselves a world of good. $22k per set when the new price is $7k is simply malicious. Particularly when you can buy a set of Vette rotors from the same original manufacturer for $5k.
10-08-2015, 12:42 PM
#52
GT3 Cup uses iron.
GT3 Supercup uses PCCB.
Word is it was normal for Supercup to swap rotors every other race weekend. This was a few years ago with Gen 2 PCCB. I don't think Gen 3 is used on Supercup cars, however: 410mm disks seem incompatible with 18 inch wheels.
10-11-2015, 02:49 PM
#53
i ordered PCCB. this topic has literally been weighing on my mind since I first was allocated a car.
To me, costs are a factor. But, I do get 918 brakes on the cheap and i have absolutely no complaints about the PCCBs on my spyder or RS. The lack of brake dust helps with the silver wheels I ordered and I am going to chance it that the yen 3 discs will last longer and that recent advancements in refurb mean that I don't have to pay the porsche premium tax when that gets replaced.
But, most importantly, I have another track car which uses AP racing hardware on steels. That eats discs every 10 track days. GT4 will be used much less for track.
To me, costs are a factor. But, I do get 918 brakes on the cheap and i have absolutely no complaints about the PCCBs on my spyder or RS. The lack of brake dust helps with the silver wheels I ordered and I am going to chance it that the yen 3 discs will last longer and that recent advancements in refurb mean that I don't have to pay the porsche premium tax when that gets replaced.
But, most importantly, I have another track car which uses AP racing hardware on steels. That eats discs every 10 track days. GT4 will be used much less for track.
11-03-2015, 07:54 PM
#54
I just did a track day in the GT4.
Well, big supprise and big disapointment. Steel brakes are not good compared to PCCB. Really regretting not getting PCCB now.
Tried some late braking and compared to previous 987.2S with PCCB, just no way near the same point and they just dont grab as hard. Had to press really hard to even get ABS to activate.
Well, big supprise and big disapointment. Steel brakes are not good compared to PCCB. Really regretting not getting PCCB now.
Tried some late braking and compared to previous 987.2S with PCCB, just no way near the same point and they just dont grab as hard. Had to press really hard to even get ABS to activate.
11-03-2015, 09:36 PM
#55
Drifting
I just did a track day in the GT4.
Well, big supprise and big disapointment. Steel brakes are not good compared to PCCB. Really regretting not getting PCCB now.
Tried some late braking and compared to previous 987.2S with PCCB, just no way near the same point and they just dont grab as hard. Had to press really hard to even get ABS to activate.
Well, big supprise and big disapointment. Steel brakes are not good compared to PCCB. Really regretting not getting PCCB now.
Tried some late braking and compared to previous 987.2S with PCCB, just no way near the same point and they just dont grab as hard. Had to press really hard to even get ABS to activate.
If you've only got one track day in this car, try keeping an open mind and allowing more of an adjustment period before letting buyer's remorse set in.
11-03-2015, 09:50 PM
#56
The difference between PCCB and steel is not just the brake booster. The carbon ceramics have more bite. And, IMO, as an owner of both, offer better pedal feel.
Both are great brake systems, but stating the stronger bite of the PCCBs is all boost is wrong.
Both are great brake systems, but stating the stronger bite of the PCCBs is all boost is wrong.
11-03-2015, 10:13 PM
#57
Rennlist Member
I just did a track day in the GT4.
Well, big supprise and big disapointment. Steel brakes are not good compared to PCCB. Really regretting not getting PCCB now.
Tried some late braking and compared to previous 987.2S with PCCB, just no way near the same point and they just dont grab as hard. Had to press really hard to even get ABS to activate.
Well, big supprise and big disapointment. Steel brakes are not good compared to PCCB. Really regretting not getting PCCB now.
Tried some late braking and compared to previous 987.2S with PCCB, just no way near the same point and they just dont grab as hard. Had to press really hard to even get ABS to activate.
End of the day, the real difference is in consumable costs. Unless you're a professional driver, I doubt you could exploit the difference in rotating mass, etc. Where's orthojoe when you need him
11-03-2015, 10:31 PM
#58
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I would be shocked to find that stopping distances varied more than a couple of feet between the two. Pedal feel on the other hand may be different.
End of the day, the real difference is in consumable costs. Unless you're a professional driver, I doubt you could exploit the difference in rotating mass, etc. Where's orthojoe when you need him
End of the day, the real difference is in consumable costs. Unless you're a professional driver, I doubt you could exploit the difference in rotating mass, etc. Where's orthojoe when you need him
A couple of feet, even one, is kind of a lot on most tracks. Assuming that foot (or feet) difference even remains constant lap after lap after lap.
11-03-2015, 10:33 PM
#59
I just did a track day in the GT4.
Well, big supprise and big disapointment. Steel brakes are not good compared to PCCB. Really regretting not getting PCCB now.
Tried some late braking and compared to previous 987.2S with PCCB, just no way near the same point and they just dont grab as hard. Had to press really hard to even get ABS to activate.
Well, big supprise and big disapointment. Steel brakes are not good compared to PCCB. Really regretting not getting PCCB now.
Tried some late braking and compared to previous 987.2S with PCCB, just no way near the same point and they just dont grab as hard. Had to press really hard to even get ABS to activate.
