Ceramic vs steel brakes revisited
 

An interesting R&T Apr 2008 (p59) braking comparison '08 CarreraS (steel) vs. GT3 RS (ceramic). Most articles todate that I have seen and racing school's reps talked to and dealer opinions have all said that stopping distance of steel matches stopping distance of ceramic. However, never have seen direct comparison until now.

R&T shows braking distance 60-0 m/h Carrera S (steel) 111ft vs. GT3RS (ceramic)115ft, and then from 80-0 m/h, Ca-S 193 ft and GT3RS 201 ft.

The article says that "the few feet longer for PCCBs is perhaps due to not reaching their most effective operating temperature."

Wonder what that statement means under street driving conditions where often brakes may never reach "PCCB's most effective operating temperature.:confused:

Isn't the Carrera S steel brakes smaller then the ceramics??

yes, they are, but the PCCBs need to get warmed up a bit i believe for them to really do their job.. from what i understand

PCCBs dont stop that well until they are up to temp, but when they do, they bite pretty hard. The main purpose of the new brakes is to keep braking distances consistent, and eliminate fade.

The other “advantage” is the reduction in unsprung weight. On the street, they really are not practical for how much they cost. For one, the temperature as stated by others is a huge deal. You will also not feel that loss in weight even if it is quite a bit. On the track, well we all know and have heard stories about that. The price to do a brake job with pccbs is also extraordinary. The only real upside is that they supposedly have a longer service life when used off the track. My question would be why upgrade something that is already out of this world? The main reasons manufactures are making components from more expensive exotic materials I think is falling into the bragging rights/brochure comparison category.

If you really drive your car hard, the only practical choice is metal just like on the cup cars. The test as explained above is not an equal one and I wouldn’t take the results as hard fact. One thing that is a fact is that either of those brake setups have more then enough force to lock up the wheels. A street car with street tires in all truth does not need this expensive option. The test that they use at Porsche consists of a number of consecutive runs to a very high speed and then very quick decelerations over and over. This will take into account not only stopping distances, but also fade. The ceramics will be more resistant to fade. Then again the number of people that could actually push standard brakes to the limit of fade, especially on the public roads, I don’t think that’s a big number. If you really want to make your car stop faster and handle better. Throw out those adaptive seats, get rid of navigation/stereo, take out rear seats, and get a set of lighter wheels. Light weight = more fun. Pretty soon Porsche is going to have kitchen sink, gold plated on the option list. I bet some would even go for it.

No brake dust is definitely a big plus. :D

RPM,
You say get lighter wheels. Going from stock wheel to dymags would not drop as much weight as PCCB's. So if light weight wheels are a good idea, so might be the PCCB's.

Lighter wheels is for the rotating inertia I believe so please correct if I am wrong. I understand the unsprung weight rule but wouldn't a lighter wheel also result in less rotating inertia which is more important on a track than a lighter brake kit. I see that cup cars and many heavy track people use the 15" BBK setups and not the PCCB's.

True, but that seems to get better as the brakes wear a bit. When my TT was new I would go around the block and get brake dust. Now it takes 2 blocks. LOL!! No, seriously the brake dust is not a big deal (to me) because after awhile it just becomes part of the routine and a Meguire's yellow wheel brush makes the job a breeze. Too bad they discontinued it. I stocked up when i heard that because the wire in the middle will snap within 6 months if you wash your car weekly. There are other good ones on the market. The Ceramics are a cool option mainly for the weight savings. That particular option just put my car over the amount I planned to spend. Instead I weighed my car down with leather. If I were a track guy I would have purchased a GT3 with Ceramics.

+1 Agree 100%

Not to say that any of us would buy options simply for resale...but I'd also like to add another point. Of all the possible options...leather console, carbon fiber vents, alcantara steering wheel...this is one of the few that actually maintain some value when you resell or trade in the future.

While carbon fiber trim is nice, you probably won't get much in return. Skipping sports chrono or LSD on a manual car is essentially a negative for the car. PCCBs...especially this second generation of discs, maintain pretty good value for the car.

Not here, people dont want pccb on a used car, because probably they need to pay a lot to replace it very soon.

Brembo GT brakes
 

I have a 997 turbo and opted to switch to the Brembo GT brakes and there is some pretty good weight savings. Steve Kasper recommended them and the negative issue with the ceramics for me was the replacment of the rotor if it cracks. The cost is supposedly in the $5,000 range. I paid close to $7,000 for the new brakes front and rear and when I get my car back from Steve I will post my thoughts.

I have heard that too, both have the same stopping distance when heated, just different feeling.

I guess the different feeling is due to the less in weight. Although I like that feeling, but probably not worth the price, especially pccb is not as reliable as steely. And for track use, you need to prepare for the replacement quite offen.

had both. PCCB rocks.