PCCB - The Devils Work?
Discussion
My deposit is down on a 997 GT3 and my delivery date is next year, but I'm still in two minds about specifying PCCB.
I am currently driving a 997 C2S and the standard brakes are none to shabby, but are the PCCB all they are cracked up to be (literally)?
Obviously I am aware of all the early horror stories in relation to cracking, excessive wear and the horrendous cost of replacement, but I would value some personal insights from those who have the option fitted to their car.
Are they really five grand better than the standard stoppers?
I am currently driving a 997 C2S and the standard brakes are none to shabby, but are the PCCB all they are cracked up to be (literally)?
Obviously I am aware of all the early horror stories in relation to cracking, excessive wear and the horrendous cost of replacement, but I would value some personal insights from those who have the option fitted to their car.
Are they really five grand better than the standard stoppers?
TheDeadPrussian said:
My deposit is down on a 997 GT3 and my delivery date is next year, but I'm still in two minds about specifying PCCB.
I am currently driving a 997 C2S and the standard brakes are none to shabby, but are the PCCB all they are cracked up to be (literally)?
Obviously I am aware of all the early horror stories in relation to cracking, excessive wear and the horrendous cost of replacement, but I would value some personal insights from those who have the option fitted to their car.
Are they really five grand better than the standard stoppers?
I am currently driving a 997 C2S and the standard brakes are none to shabby, but are the PCCB all they are cracked up to be (literally)?
Obviously I am aware of all the early horror stories in relation to cracking, excessive wear and the horrendous cost of replacement, but I would value some personal insights from those who have the option fitted to their car.
Are they really five grand better than the standard stoppers?
I guess it depends how far away the brick wall is?
TheDeadPrussian said:
My deposit is down on a 997 GT3 and my delivery date is next year, but I'm still in two minds about specifying PCCB.
I am currently driving a 997 C2S and the standard brakes are none to shabby, but are the PCCB all they are cracked up to be (literally)?
Obviously I am aware of all the early horror stories in relation to cracking, excessive wear and the horrendous cost of replacement, but I would value some personal insights from those who have the option fitted to their car.
Are they really five grand better than the standard stoppers?
I am currently driving a 997 C2S and the standard brakes are none to shabby, but are the PCCB all they are cracked up to be (literally)?
Obviously I am aware of all the early horror stories in relation to cracking, excessive wear and the horrendous cost of replacement, but I would value some personal insights from those who have the option fitted to their car.
Are they really five grand better than the standard stoppers?
They make good sense for road use, i have them on TT cab, and swear by them, they are very powerful and fade free.
They also produce zero brake dust, which is a bonus, and less unsprung weight helps handling.
If your going to do a lot of track work, it's a totally different story, as i haven't heard how much, if any better they
will hold up compared to the MKI version.
Wouldn't fancy being a guinea pig !!!
I will be speccing steels for my forthcoming 997RS
G.
glenn mcmenamin said:
and less unsprung weight helps handling.
would be interested in how unsprung weight helps handling?
(had a debate once that lightweight wheels help handling and the person I was debating with said it was a load of old tosh)
and becuase he (and his friend) where both engineers I left it at that, interested on your thoughts.
cheers.
Personally i think they are really very poor value.
The lighter weight works in two ways.
1. Less rotating mass, car accelerates and decelerates faster. Simple laws of physics. F=MA
2. Less unsprung mass, means the spring damper unit can control the wheel / road tracking over bumps. You will see aluminium used alot on suspension components. Titanium and carbon fibre are used on race / rally cars.
Even the use of remote reservoirs for the damper oil helps ...
However on a road car you may have some difficulty telling the difference.
Hope this helps
Ciro (Bsc(hons) Electronic Systems and Control Engineering)
The lighter weight works in two ways.
1. Less rotating mass, car accelerates and decelerates faster. Simple laws of physics. F=MA
2. Less unsprung mass, means the spring damper unit can control the wheel / road tracking over bumps. You will see aluminium used alot on suspension components. Titanium and carbon fibre are used on race / rally cars.
Even the use of remote reservoirs for the damper oil helps ...
However on a road car you may have some difficulty telling the difference.
Hope this helps
Ciro (Bsc(hons) Electronic Systems and Control Engineering)
Wooooow boyz...
I'm no engineer, so no need get your degrees out
Just quoting one of the Porsche stated benefits of these items, i can't quote the exact savings
but they are quite a bit per corner, so if not just unsprung weight, then overall weight saving isn't
a bad thing is it ?
At £5-6k it's certainly a lot of money for an upgrade, but i have had experience of a few sets of Porsche
brakes now, and i would certainly spec them again, but only for a road car.
Just my 0.02p
I'm no engineer, so no need get your degrees out
Just quoting one of the Porsche stated benefits of these items, i can't quote the exact savings
but they are quite a bit per corner, so if not just unsprung weight, then overall weight saving isn't
a bad thing is it ?
At £5-6k it's certainly a lot of money for an upgrade, but i have had experience of a few sets of Porsche
brakes now, and i would certainly spec them again, but only for a road car.
Just my 0.02p
Edited by glenn mcmenamin on Saturday 12th August 21:41
glenn mcmenamin said:
Wooooow boyz...
I'm no engineer, so no need get your degrees out
Just quoting one of the Porsche stated benefits of these items, i can't quote the exact savings
but they are quite a bit per corner, so if not just unsprung weight, then overall weight saving isn't
a bad thing is it ?
At £5-6k it's certainly a lot of money for an upgrade, but i have had experience of a few sets of Porsche
brakes now, and i would certainly spec them again, but only for a road car.
Just my 0.02p
The weight savings (against standard 350 diam iron) is 4+ kg per corner. I'm no engineer, so no need get your degrees out
Just quoting one of the Porsche stated benefits of these items, i can't quote the exact savings
but they are quite a bit per corner, so if not just unsprung weight, then overall weight saving isn't
a bad thing is it ?
At £5-6k it's certainly a lot of money for an upgrade, but i have had experience of a few sets of Porsche
brakes now, and i would certainly spec them again, but only for a road car.
Just my 0.02p
About half of that is the savings because the PCCB has an aluminium floating bell, whereas the iron rotor has an integral iron bell.
Ergo, if you use the Alcon floating bell/iron rotor alternative, you cut the weight difference roughly in half.
flemke said:
glenn mcmenamin said:
Wooooow boyz...
I'm no engineer, so no need get your degrees out
Just quoting one of the Porsche stated benefits of these items, i can't quote the exact savings
but they are quite a bit per corner, so if not just unsprung weight, then overall weight saving isn't
a bad thing is it ?
At £5-6k it's certainly a lot of money for an upgrade, but i have had experience of a few sets of Porsche
brakes now, and i would certainly spec them again, but only for a road car.
Just my 0.02p
The weight savings (against standard 350 diam iron) is 4+ kg per corner. I'm no engineer, so no need get your degrees out
Just quoting one of the Porsche stated benefits of these items, i can't quote the exact savings
but they are quite a bit per corner, so if not just unsprung weight, then overall weight saving isn't
a bad thing is it ?
At £5-6k it's certainly a lot of money for an upgrade, but i have had experience of a few sets of Porsche
brakes now, and i would certainly spec them again, but only for a road car.
Just my 0.02p
About half of that is the savings because the PCCB has an aluminium floating bell, whereas the iron rotor has an integral iron bell.
Ergo, if you use the Alcon floating bell/iron rotor alternative, you cut the weight difference roughly in half.
But would an average , or even above average driver notice any difference from this weight saving
i doubt itDucatiGary said:
(had a debate once that lightweight wheels help handling and the person I was debating with said it was a load of old tosh)
Whoever told you that reducing unsprung rotating weight makes no difference is utterly and totally wrong.
The rule of thumb that some engineers use is that saving 1 kg of unsprung rotating weight is as good as saving 5 kg of sprung weight.
If you were to reduce the weight of your wheels by, say, 3 kg/corner, you would notice the difference immediately.
If you have the ability to do so, try heavier and then lighter wheels on a pushbike. That will immediately demonstrate the influence that rotating weight has on acceleration.
With respect to changes in handling responsiveness, think about how on a motorbike as the speed builds so does the resistance to turning of the front wheel. The same applies to responsiveness to changes in the road surface, which is what grip is largely about.
There are genuine issues with PCCB, although as Brembo have progressed on the product they have steadily improved it.
One thing that is for certain, however, is that reducing your unsprung rotating weight by 4-ish/corner begets an unmistakable, permanent improvement.
Marki said:
But would an average , or even above average driver notice any difference from this weight saving i doubt it
That I couldn't say - what is an average driver like? i doubt itWhat I would say, with no disrepect intended towards anybody, is that if a person not a good enough driver to notice the difference, perhaps a GT3 would be wasted on him.
flemke said:
Marki said:
But would an average , or even above average driver notice any difference from this weight saving i doubt it
That I couldn't say - what is an average driver like? i doubt itWhat I would say, with no disrepect intended towards anybody, is that if a person not a good enough driver to notice the difference, perhaps a GT3 would be wasted on him.
Did you ever think of a change of vocation ,, i know the UN would not pay like you are used to but
porsche4life said:
Personally i think they are really very poor value.
2. Less unsprung mass, means the spring damper unit can control the wheel / road tracking over bumps. You will see aluminium used alot on suspension components. Titanium and carbon fibre are used on race / rally cars.
2. Less unsprung mass, means the spring damper unit can control the wheel / road tracking over bumps. You will see aluminium used alot on suspension components. Titanium and carbon fibre are used on race / rally cars.
This is quite correct. The ability of the damper to better control the vertical oscillations means that the tyre is more likely to be in contact with the tarmac, hence better handling. That's all theoretical you are unlikely to notice the difference on the road unless you are Walter Rohl.
PP B.Eng (Hons) Mechanical Engineering
The new GT3 was designed around the PCCBs. If you want 100% of the new car then presumably you'll need PCCBs.
These are the third generation, I believe, with claimed improvements to durability, cooling, front to rear bias, weight resuction, etc.
The main advantages should be, more powerful retardation, no fade, no dust, no rust, longer life, less weight, better handling, etc.
However, on the 996 GT3, the most discernible benefit on the road was improved ride comfort and stability.
They are expensive, but half the price that Ferrari charge.
I think, if you want them - great. If you don't want them - fine.
These are the third generation, I believe, with claimed improvements to durability, cooling, front to rear bias, weight resuction, etc.
The main advantages should be, more powerful retardation, no fade, no dust, no rust, longer life, less weight, better handling, etc.
However, on the 996 GT3, the most discernible benefit on the road was improved ride comfort and stability.
They are expensive, but half the price that Ferrari charge.
I think, if you want them - great. If you don't want them - fine.
as said previously the lower the unsprung weight the easier time the damper and spring has to control the suspension movement. 5 or 6k sounds reasonable but I am told that a set of replacement discs are 15K on a 996 GT2 and that is ridiculous.
To Ducatti Gary I ran a Busa for a few years and bought a TTS tuned version with dymag wheels. When you road the bike it felt 50kg lighter than a standard Busa the steering felt so light.
I sold the bike eighteen months ago off ebay to a guy who lives in Norwich. (still regret selling it). He had a Busa with over 100,000 miles on the clock, had toured all round the world on it. Came down to pick the bike up with a couple of mates paid the money and rode home. Rang me when he got home and could not believe the difference the dymag wheels made to the handling and riding characteristics of the bike. Unsprung weight makes a huge difference, most noticeable on a bike, but not in a road car for road use.
To Ducatti Gary I ran a Busa for a few years and bought a TTS tuned version with dymag wheels. When you road the bike it felt 50kg lighter than a standard Busa the steering felt so light.
I sold the bike eighteen months ago off ebay to a guy who lives in Norwich. (still regret selling it). He had a Busa with over 100,000 miles on the clock, had toured all round the world on it. Came down to pick the bike up with a couple of mates paid the money and rode home. Rang me when he got home and could not believe the difference the dymag wheels made to the handling and riding characteristics of the bike. Unsprung weight makes a huge difference, most noticeable on a bike, but not in a road car for road use.
Geneve is right.
One of the senior guys from Porsche UK said he had 996GT3's on steel & ceramic & the ceramics gave a very noticable improvement in ride comfort, due to better wheel control! the new PCCB also have a different drill pattern & are being used on the 2006 series race cars to good effect. I believe the reliabity issues have been sorted...in the main.
BUT, personally I believe the price premium is too high & the fact that Porsche refused to recognise & support the problems with the series 1 ceramics has undermined re-sale confidence! As such I will definitely NOT be specifying PCCB's.
I sincerly wish that Porsche would better support known problems like RMS etc, in the long term it will return them better proits if they do, because confidence & residuals will remain high!
One of the senior guys from Porsche UK said he had 996GT3's on steel & ceramic & the ceramics gave a very noticable improvement in ride comfort, due to better wheel control! the new PCCB also have a different drill pattern & are being used on the 2006 series race cars to good effect. I believe the reliabity issues have been sorted...in the main.
BUT, personally I believe the price premium is too high & the fact that Porsche refused to recognise & support the problems with the series 1 ceramics has undermined re-sale confidence! As such I will definitely NOT be specifying PCCB's.
I sincerly wish that Porsche would better support known problems like RMS etc, in the long term it will return them better proits if they do, because confidence & residuals will remain high!
Edited by grant3 on Saturday 12th August 23:42
Try this as an experiement.
get one heavy wheel, one light wheel. sit on a standard rotating office chari. take heavy wheel and spin it up, rotate yourself on opffice chair.
Now do the same but with the light wheel.
Notice any difference, how easy it was to turn with the light wheel perhaps......
Gyroscopic effects, it does make a difference, otherwise you would have to ask the question, why do race designers have such an obsesion with redusing unsprung/sprung weights in these areas?
kevin
get one heavy wheel, one light wheel. sit on a standard rotating office chari. take heavy wheel and spin it up, rotate yourself on opffice chair.
Now do the same but with the light wheel.
Notice any difference, how easy it was to turn with the light wheel perhaps......
Gyroscopic effects, it does make a difference, otherwise you would have to ask the question, why do race designers have such an obsesion with redusing unsprung/sprung weights in these areas?
kevin
I have PCCB on my current GT3. 22k miles including several track days. Still on the original disks and pads.
To add two things to the comments from others...
PCCB option on new GT3 & RS is 3rd generation technology with a 380mm front disc. In first generation guise, durability in extreme (on track) use and huge replacement cost were the big issues that put people off. I believe it's a safe assumption that durability in extreme use has been greatly improved...exactly how much time will reveal.
PCCB is a £5,800 option on the new cars. For me this is a no brainer if you intend to track the car. Firstly PCCB offers substantially better performance that steel brakes, especially so on track where the response from PCCB is consistent regardless of temperature. Putting cost aside for a moment...would anyone on here choose steels if PCCB was a no cost option and cost the same to replace as steels?
No matter which brake choice you make, if you use the car as it's maker intends sooner or later you'll need to replace the brakes. If you go with the standard steel brakes you'll end up changing them for 3rd party Brembo or Alcon solutions. Some folks might replace with the standard Porsche steel disks...but either way you'll be spending money on brakes much sooner than they guy with PCCB.
With PCCB, the car will perform better on day one and you will get many more miles from it before the discs expire. When they do eventually expire you'll end up with stand steel disks or the Alcon/Brembo option...unless the replacement cost comes way down or you've got more money than sense.
So the way i see it the question is....is the £5,800 option price for PCCB enough to justify the benefits in terms of improved performance and much better durability than the standard steels?
To add two things to the comments from others...
PCCB option on new GT3 & RS is 3rd generation technology with a 380mm front disc. In first generation guise, durability in extreme (on track) use and huge replacement cost were the big issues that put people off. I believe it's a safe assumption that durability in extreme use has been greatly improved...exactly how much time will reveal.
PCCB is a £5,800 option on the new cars. For me this is a no brainer if you intend to track the car. Firstly PCCB offers substantially better performance that steel brakes, especially so on track where the response from PCCB is consistent regardless of temperature. Putting cost aside for a moment...would anyone on here choose steels if PCCB was a no cost option and cost the same to replace as steels?
No matter which brake choice you make, if you use the car as it's maker intends sooner or later you'll need to replace the brakes. If you go with the standard steel brakes you'll end up changing them for 3rd party Brembo or Alcon solutions. Some folks might replace with the standard Porsche steel disks...but either way you'll be spending money on brakes much sooner than they guy with PCCB.
With PCCB, the car will perform better on day one and you will get many more miles from it before the discs expire. When they do eventually expire you'll end up with stand steel disks or the Alcon/Brembo option...unless the replacement cost comes way down or you've got more money than sense.
So the way i see it the question is....is the £5,800 option price for PCCB enough to justify the benefits in terms of improved performance and much better durability than the standard steels?
Thanks very much to everyone who has contributed so far, I don't have an engineering degree, but do understand the arguments, and the unsprung weight difference must in my opinion make its self felt (otherwise why the technological drive to achieve it). Round One to PCCB.
The other worry I had in respect of specifying the car with PCCB was the excessive wear I had heard about under heavy (track related) use. I'm buying the GT3, not because I consider myself a 'driving god' (to coin a Richard Hammond turn of phrase), but because I do want to do some track stuff and figure that I am never going to out grow the abilities of the car. And of course when I'm finished on track I can continue to drive it daily (unlike say perhaps a Caterham, Radical or Ariel Atom). Perhaps I have failed to keep up with current advances in PCCB, but I am reassured by some owner’s comments about longevity. So I think Round Two to PCCB.
Additionally, at some point I will undoubtedly sell the car (probably to buy another) and I think that PCCB will be 'expected' by (or at least be far more attractive to) a prospective owner on a car that has the focus and reputation of the GT3. I prepare to stand corrected on this last issue, but certainly if looking for a second-hand GT3 I would be more tempted by a PCCB shod car than a 'normal' one (subject of course to inspection for cracks and excessive wear!).
Finally, for the owners with experience of PCCB, is the actual stooping power a quatum leap from the steel discs or is it the fade resistance under heavy use that is the most noticable difference?
The other worry I had in respect of specifying the car with PCCB was the excessive wear I had heard about under heavy (track related) use. I'm buying the GT3, not because I consider myself a 'driving god' (to coin a Richard Hammond turn of phrase), but because I do want to do some track stuff and figure that I am never going to out grow the abilities of the car. And of course when I'm finished on track I can continue to drive it daily (unlike say perhaps a Caterham, Radical or Ariel Atom). Perhaps I have failed to keep up with current advances in PCCB, but I am reassured by some owner’s comments about longevity. So I think Round Two to PCCB.
Additionally, at some point I will undoubtedly sell the car (probably to buy another) and I think that PCCB will be 'expected' by (or at least be far more attractive to) a prospective owner on a car that has the focus and reputation of the GT3. I prepare to stand corrected on this last issue, but certainly if looking for a second-hand GT3 I would be more tempted by a PCCB shod car than a 'normal' one (subject of course to inspection for cracks and excessive wear!).
Finally, for the owners with experience of PCCB, is the actual stooping power a quatum leap from the steel discs or is it the fade resistance under heavy use that is the most noticable difference?
TheDeadPrussian said:
Thanks very much to everyone who has contributed so far, I don't have an engineering degree, but do understand the arguments, and the unsprung weight difference must in my opinion make its self felt (otherwise why the technological drive to achieve it). Round One to PCCB.
The other worry I had in respect of specifying the car with PCCB was the excessive wear I had heard about under heavy (track related) use. I'm buying the GT3, not because I consider myself a 'driving god' (to coin a Richard Hammond turn of phrase), but because I do want to do some track stuff and figure that I am never going to out grow the abilities of the car. And of course when I'm finished on track I can continue to drive it daily (unlike say perhaps a Caterham, Radical or Ariel Atom). Perhaps I have failed to keep up with current advances in PCCB, but I am reassured by some owner’s comments about longevity. So I think Round Two to PCCB.
Additionally, at some point I will undoubtedly sell the car (probably to buy another) and I think that PCCB will be 'expected' by (or at least be far more attractive to) a prospective owner on a car that has the focus and reputation of the GT3. I prepare to stand corrected on this last issue, but certainly if looking for a second-hand GT3 I would be more tempted by a PCCB shod car than a 'normal' one (subject of course to inspection for cracks and excessive wear!).
Finally, for the owners with experience of PCCB, is the actual stooping power a quatum leap from the steel discs or is it the fade resistance under heavy use that is the most noticable difference?
The other worry I had in respect of specifying the car with PCCB was the excessive wear I had heard about under heavy (track related) use. I'm buying the GT3, not because I consider myself a 'driving god' (to coin a Richard Hammond turn of phrase), but because I do want to do some track stuff and figure that I am never going to out grow the abilities of the car. And of course when I'm finished on track I can continue to drive it daily (unlike say perhaps a Caterham, Radical or Ariel Atom). Perhaps I have failed to keep up with current advances in PCCB, but I am reassured by some owner’s comments about longevity. So I think Round Two to PCCB.
Additionally, at some point I will undoubtedly sell the car (probably to buy another) and I think that PCCB will be 'expected' by (or at least be far more attractive to) a prospective owner on a car that has the focus and reputation of the GT3. I prepare to stand corrected on this last issue, but certainly if looking for a second-hand GT3 I would be more tempted by a PCCB shod car than a 'normal' one (subject of course to inspection for cracks and excessive wear!).
Finally, for the owners with experience of PCCB, is the actual stooping power a quatum leap from the steel discs or is it the fade resistance under heavy use that is the most noticable difference?
Understand where you are coming from, BUT, i don't think you will get your money back for PCCB on a GT3 come trade in, as unless
they have been kept in a box, they may well have to be replced at some point by the next owner, which is not a nice prospect for
most......
My OPC told me the value of mine go out of the window as soon as you drive out the forecourt.
I felt they were worth getting on my TT as i did not feel the Standard 4 pots were that great, as i had them on a C4S before
it. So going PCCB gave me the bigger 6pot calipers, aswell as carbon etc.
With regard to the forthcoming GT3, i think ? the calipers will be the same size (Carrera GT 6pots ?) for steel or PCCB, so shouldn't
be as big a difference.
G.
Edited by glenn mcmenamin on Sunday 13th August 16:02
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff