Ceramic Brakes VS. Regular Brakes
10-06-2015, 08:46 PM
#1
Instructor
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ceramic Brakes VS. Regular Brakes
I'm debating if I should build the GT4 with the upgraded ceramic brakes. What are the member's experiences thus far on their GT4s with and without? I wont be taking mine to the track much so mainly will be for weekend cruises
10-06-2015, 09:07 PM
#2
If you are going to heavily track the car iron brakes are probably a least costly option. However if light tracking, autocross and street driving is more what you will do PCCBs are a great choice. advantages, they do brake better, lighten unsprung weight significantly and will last forever.
I have them on several PORSCHE cars including a Cayenne and will get them on a GT4 if I get an allocation
Yes they are expensive to replace but if you don't heavily track that replacement is way down the road.
I pull a trailer ( enclosed Trailex) with my Diesel Cayenne with PCCBS and before I got it i asked PORSCHE engineers about brake life for my use. The answer probably around 90,000 miles you will need brake work and we are talking about a 4500 lb tow vehicle. Yes I like them and will not be without them
I have them on several PORSCHE cars including a Cayenne and will get them on a GT4 if I get an allocation
Yes they are expensive to replace but if you don't heavily track that replacement is way down the road.
I pull a trailer ( enclosed Trailex) with my Diesel Cayenne with PCCBS and before I got it i asked PORSCHE engineers about brake life for my use. The answer probably around 90,000 miles you will need brake work and we are talking about a 4500 lb tow vehicle. Yes I like them and will not be without them
10-06-2015, 09:11 PM
#3
Nordschleife Master
It's only a matter of cost. Ceramic brakes are superior in every way except cost of replacement. If you don't track I'd go ceramics. The ceramic rotors can last a very very long time if you don't track.
10-06-2015, 09:19 PM
#4
Drifting
10-06-2015, 09:22 PM
#5
Drifting
The unsprung weight difference was explained in the thread I linked above and suggested to be minor at best on this particular car, fwiw. As for the argument that while the replacements are more expensive, they're also way down the road, that makes no sense to me unless you don't plan to own the car beyond the life of the first set of rotors -- which if you track the car will come sooner than you may expect. Otherwise, if they're going to need replacement, it's going to be very expensive at SOME point, so unless you decide to start saving well in advance, then the cost hit is still going to be there, and no the longer life does not even come close to offsetting the higher replacement cost.
10-06-2015, 09:55 PM
#6
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
Last edited by 4carl; 10-06-2015 at 10:19 PM.
10-06-2015, 10:02 PM
#7
Rennlist Member
Well, ceramic brakes are also a lot more fragile, so much more care is required when removing and replacing wheels, and I've even read that some people have fatally chipped their rotors going off-track and kicking up debris, so I would argue that ceramics are inferior when it comes to durability. But I suppose if it will be a road-only car, you personally won't be taking wheels off, and the looks of the rotors and/or perpetually clean wheels are worth $8K to you, then sure. And if you WILL track and cost is no concern, then once again, by all means. But if vanity isn't worth $8K to you, then pass, because even the steel brakes are hugely oversized for the GT4's weight and power, so I can't imagine anyone having any complaints with their performance.
The unsprung weight difference was explained in the thread I linked above and suggested to be minor at best on this particular car, fwiw. As for the argument that while the replacements are more expensive, they're also way down the road, that makes no sense to me unless you don't plan to own the car beyond the life of the first set of rotors -- which if you track the car will come sooner than you may expect. Otherwise, if they're going to need replacement, it's going to be very expensive at SOME point, so unless you decide to start saving well in advance, then the cost hit is still going to be there, and no the longer life does not even come close to offsetting the higher replacement cost.
The unsprung weight difference was explained in the thread I linked above and suggested to be minor at best on this particular car, fwiw. As for the argument that while the replacements are more expensive, they're also way down the road, that makes no sense to me unless you don't plan to own the car beyond the life of the first set of rotors -- which if you track the car will come sooner than you may expect. Otherwise, if they're going to need replacement, it's going to be very expensive at SOME point, so unless you decide to start saving well in advance, then the cost hit is still going to be there, and no the longer life does not even come close to offsetting the higher replacement cost.
I have been very happy with the latest generation PCCB's, although my incoming Boxster Spyder is coming without them. I'll be interested to compare its brakes' feel with that of my PCCB equipped cars. YMMV.
Trending Topics
10-06-2015, 10:39 PM
#8
Three Wheelin'
One thing to be wary of with PCCB is pedal feel. They are very grabby, making it a pain to heel toe or just brush some speed off. At least that is the case with 997 gen PCCBs. Not sure if they changed it for this gen.
10-06-2015, 11:16 PM
#9
For street use CCB's cannot be beat, they will last forever and it is as if "The Hands of God" stop you ;-)
However, for track use I do not recommend them. I had about a heart attack ($$$) after I had to replace my last set of CCB rotors after ten track days, and with my second set of rotors well on their way to kaput as well after another five days, I decided to use steel rotors instead for track use.
I also found steel rotors a bit easier to modulate and they felt a bit more consistent for me when they started getting a lot of heat in them on the track. Might just be me though...
However, for track use I do not recommend them. I had about a heart attack ($$$) after I had to replace my last set of CCB rotors after ten track days, and with my second set of rotors well on their way to kaput as well after another five days, I decided to use steel rotors instead for track use.
I also found steel rotors a bit easier to modulate and they felt a bit more consistent for me when they started getting a lot of heat in them on the track. Might just be me though...
10-06-2015, 11:25 PM
#10
Burning Brakes
It's an odd car to spec CCBs on, IMO
The steel brakes are WAY more than enough brake for the street
Everyone seems to complain about track durability with CCBs
Some have complained about the ability to modulate the CCBs (and isn't this a car we want to heel n toe on?)
Finally, aero is better with the steel brakes
Even ignoring the initial cost I couldn't find a good reason to spec carbons... Other than brake dust. I hate brake dust.
The steel brakes are WAY more than enough brake for the street
Everyone seems to complain about track durability with CCBs
Some have complained about the ability to modulate the CCBs (and isn't this a car we want to heel n toe on?)
Finally, aero is better with the steel brakes
Even ignoring the initial cost I couldn't find a good reason to spec carbons... Other than brake dust. I hate brake dust.
10-06-2015, 11:59 PM
#11
I remember reading some post previously comparing the PCCBs vs steel in terms of weight. The weight differences are smaller in reality as steel rotors wear down etc
On top of that, the steel brakes tend to have a smaller diameter, so the mass is actually closer to the center. Besides, one could always opt for aftermarket 2 piece discs with lighter hats that help replicate the weigh savings + heat dissipation characteristics.
Pretty much in the grand scheme of things, the diff is actually a lot smaller than people think. The brakes don't necessarily last longer either. A while back C&D (or one of the major magazines) did a test on a Z, 335i, Corvette and 911 (steel + PCCB). The PCCB and steel rotors actually experienced the same braking distance and fade resistance in that testing environment -- i.e. some 30 rounds of braking and accelerating, and braking again.
Perhaps the benefits of PCCB are more apparent if one's looking to run the car in an endurance race?
On top of that, the steel brakes tend to have a smaller diameter, so the mass is actually closer to the center. Besides, one could always opt for aftermarket 2 piece discs with lighter hats that help replicate the weigh savings + heat dissipation characteristics.
Pretty much in the grand scheme of things, the diff is actually a lot smaller than people think. The brakes don't necessarily last longer either. A while back C&D (or one of the major magazines) did a test on a Z, 335i, Corvette and 911 (steel + PCCB). The PCCB and steel rotors actually experienced the same braking distance and fade resistance in that testing environment -- i.e. some 30 rounds of braking and accelerating, and braking again.
Perhaps the benefits of PCCB are more apparent if one's looking to run the car in an endurance race?
10-07-2015, 01:38 AM
#12
I've PCCB on 987.2 S and bigger steel on GT4.
PCCB are far better, don't feel dead like, grap better and don't grab less the more you press and last much longer.
PCCB on 987.2 S is now 5 years old, done track days every month, 70,000 kms and the discs still look like brand new. Only just replace the pads for the first time a few weeks ago.
Now regretting not getting PCCB on the GT4.
PCCB are far better, don't feel dead like, grap better and don't grab less the more you press and last much longer.
PCCB on 987.2 S is now 5 years old, done track days every month, 70,000 kms and the discs still look like brand new. Only just replace the pads for the first time a few weeks ago.
Now regretting not getting PCCB on the GT4.
10-07-2015, 03:20 AM
#13
33 lb difference in weight when new. However the average is substantially less, in part because worn iron looses mass where PCCB doesn't. Either way you likely won't feel the change: new vs worn tires is a greater dynamic delta overall.
On the street the only potential drawback other than initial cost is feel. Porsche has reduced pedal effort for PCCBs to levels significantly lower than those preferred for competition in response to customer demand: most like to feel the difference when spending nearly 10k on brakes. The result can feel over-assisted and create issues with heal-toe as noted. Some prefer it, but I and others including many within Porsche do not.
On the track four other drawbacks surface:
First, running costs are expensive in situations that stress the brake system (high temps)- disks cost over $20k per set to replace, and most advice is to swap pads at half thickness to keep peso remix down.
Second, the 33% reduced front downforce with PCCB does negatively effect high speed aero balance.
Third, PCCBs must be used with approved pads, limiting tuning options by preventing access to many popular compounds.
Finally they restrict the use of smaller diameter wheels, and hence generally prevent use of most 18 and 19" wheels and competition tires.
On the plus side PCCBs will ultimately be slightly faster on most tracks due their lower weight... barely noticeable assuming you're very good and running against the clock. They will also fade later if pushed to the extreme limit (unfortunately eating themselves expensively in the process). The noticable benefit in the street is that they produce less brake dust.
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.
On the street the only potential drawback other than initial cost is feel. Porsche has reduced pedal effort for PCCBs to levels significantly lower than those preferred for competition in response to customer demand: most like to feel the difference when spending nearly 10k on brakes. The result can feel over-assisted and create issues with heal-toe as noted. Some prefer it, but I and others including many within Porsche do not.
On the track four other drawbacks surface:
First, running costs are expensive in situations that stress the brake system (high temps)- disks cost over $20k per set to replace, and most advice is to swap pads at half thickness to keep peso remix down.
Second, the 33% reduced front downforce with PCCB does negatively effect high speed aero balance.
Third, PCCBs must be used with approved pads, limiting tuning options by preventing access to many popular compounds.
Finally they restrict the use of smaller diameter wheels, and hence generally prevent use of most 18 and 19" wheels and competition tires.
On the plus side PCCBs will ultimately be slightly faster on most tracks due their lower weight... barely noticeable assuming you're very good and running against the clock. They will also fade later if pushed to the extreme limit (unfortunately eating themselves expensively in the process). The noticable benefit in the street is that they produce less brake dust.
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.
10-07-2015, 04:20 AM
#14
Couldn't fit my "special" 19" BBS wheels if I had ceramics. Steel rotors FTW!
10-07-2015, 04:43 AM
#15
Instructor
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yesterday I drove my 911 with PCCBs then jumped into my GT4 with steels. PCCBs feel better, and brake better. I plan on tracking my GT4 so I went with the cheaper-to-replace option of steels. Like someone mentioned, Cup cars use steel brakes for a reason.