The great PCCB debate
Discussion
I’m in the market to change my GT4 for a GT3. Ive never had any issue with the brakes on the Cayman on track, but I don’t do long sessions. The question is, are the PCCB on the GT3 a real step up in performance? Are they worth having with the extra poke of a GT3?
I can say now, unsprung weight isn’t relevant to me. I’ve all the finesse of a walrus. I could drive round Silverstone in Timberland boots and not notice the difference from some nomex dancing slippers. I wouldn’t notice the reduced mass.
Purely performance wise, are the PCCB really worth the cost, or are they just a nice match for yellow seatbelts?
I can say now, unsprung weight isn’t relevant to me. I’ve all the finesse of a walrus. I could drive round Silverstone in Timberland boots and not notice the difference from some nomex dancing slippers. I wouldn’t notice the reduced mass.
Purely performance wise, are the PCCB really worth the cost, or are they just a nice match for yellow seatbelts?
Given the choice I would definitely like pccbs, they have a number of useful benefits. And, these days many people will expect them on the GT and other halo models
The only exception might be if the car was going to be used extensively on track, and brakes were going to be a consumable. Although, I understand pccb equipped PEC cars have had a hard life with no issues.
There was a time when the doubters cited all manner of negatives, but for the last 10 years they have become mainstream fitment and I never seem to read about any problems, only postives.
The only exception might be if the car was going to be used extensively on track, and brakes were going to be a consumable. Although, I understand pccb equipped PEC cars have had a hard life with no issues.
There was a time when the doubters cited all manner of negatives, but for the last 10 years they have become mainstream fitment and I never seem to read about any problems, only postives.
I had them on my RS, and they needed replacing after approx 20k miles and 20 track days, at a cost of .... £19k! I chose to refurbish them instead, then sold the car, so can’t say if that lasted well or not.
I’ve got steels on my Gt3 now, with zero fade and great feel on track.
I’d still have pccb’s though, just because they look awesome!!
I’ve got steels on my Gt3 now, with zero fade and great feel on track.
I’d still have pccb’s though, just because they look awesome!!
Mad Scientist said:
Purely performance wise, are the PCCB really worth the cost, or are they just a nice match for yellow seatbelts?
There is practically no difference in braking capability between ceramic and iron. There are advantages to ceramic rotors but braking performance isn't going to be one of them.Another for the ‘No performance advantage’ I’m afraid. They need managing on the track - particularly on cool down. Too many red lights preventing proper in lap cooling can be very expensive - unless you drive around the paddock or out of the circuit to do the job which can still be too little too late.
Personally, on a second hand car, ceramics would be a absolute no, unless they added little to the price of the car, were boxed and had been replaced by a decent set of steels. If I were buying new? Yep, worth it with a heavy subsidy but I’d box them up and put some Alcon/brembo steels on day 1. I know it’s an emotive issue and appreciate that some people really like them They are getting a little more practical but as a performance upgrade they offer hardly any benefit versus the risk of damage and the cost of replacement
Personally, on a second hand car, ceramics would be a absolute no, unless they added little to the price of the car, were boxed and had been replaced by a decent set of steels. If I were buying new? Yep, worth it with a heavy subsidy but I’d box them up and put some Alcon/brembo steels on day 1. I know it’s an emotive issue and appreciate that some people really like them They are getting a little more practical but as a performance upgrade they offer hardly any benefit versus the risk of damage and the cost of replacement
Be interesting to do 5 120mph stops and see after 5 if the PCCB out brake the steels.
Of course they will offer a very tiny advantage in braking distance due to less rotational mass.
A lot of people upgrade the GT4 so they must feel it’s lacking.
But go try a GT2 RS and start doing 170mph down the straights one wonders if steels could cope.
I am blown away by the PCCB over my GT4 steels, and I have always been blown away on my Spyder by the PCCB vs steels.
So without a real life back to back we just have forum rumors as too which really is best.
But going on my cars and cars I have been in the PCCB advantage seems bigger then people would suggest.
Every reviews ever done on these cars always state how great PCCB are but again without a back to back it’s just a review.
There is no doubting the weight saving and there is no doubt they stand heat more, thats about all we can say on forums.
Of course they will offer a very tiny advantage in braking distance due to less rotational mass.
A lot of people upgrade the GT4 so they must feel it’s lacking.
But go try a GT2 RS and start doing 170mph down the straights one wonders if steels could cope.
I am blown away by the PCCB over my GT4 steels, and I have always been blown away on my Spyder by the PCCB vs steels.
So without a real life back to back we just have forum rumors as too which really is best.
But going on my cars and cars I have been in the PCCB advantage seems bigger then people would suggest.
Every reviews ever done on these cars always state how great PCCB are but again without a back to back it’s just a review.
There is no doubting the weight saving and there is no doubt they stand heat more, thats about all we can say on forums.
I have PCCBs on my GT3 and also had them on my GT4 and i love them..I've driven both a PCCB and Steel braked GT3 back to back at the PEC to compare..IMO in terms of braking the massive 380mm f/r are more than capable and resist fade better than other steels i've driven..I've also driven various 991.2GTS/S with the standard 350mm f/r on track and found them lacking and prone to fade..In this case for track use i'd say the PCCBs offer a real performance upgrade.
On a GT3 despite my personal preference for PCCBs the big steels offer more than adequate braking ability..I find all PCCBs ride better on rough roads even in my hamfisted hands, however this is totally irrelevant for smooth track use.
To recap if your main usage is road driving and very occasional track use i prefer PCCBs and conversely for high track %age i'd choose Steels for all the reasons Steve Rance mentioned above.
On a GT3 despite my personal preference for PCCBs the big steels offer more than adequate braking ability..I find all PCCBs ride better on rough roads even in my hamfisted hands, however this is totally irrelevant for smooth track use.
To recap if your main usage is road driving and very occasional track use i prefer PCCBs and conversely for high track %age i'd choose Steels for all the reasons Steve Rance mentioned above.
hunter 66 said:
They keep the wheels cleaner that is the only guaranteed benefit .
They don’t rust so the pads don’t stick to the disks.My car lives outside and they look new, if they were steels they would be rusty, the pads stick to the disks and you have to always dry them when you wash the car with a run out.
Hubs on steels will also look rusty after 6 months unless you paint them or own a garage queen.
The weight saving is quite large over the 380mm units also, so there is a performance difference even if it’s tiny.
I also wonder on track how many stops it takes before the advances grows ? One does see a lot of blue disks on track days ! I just don’t think steels have it in them for the heat a gt2 RS provides from the crazy speeds you get too.
I guess if you spent £6k on a prober steel set up it would be closer. But then the PCCB only cost £6k to spec.
So on paper you get faster acceration, shorter shopping distance, more Constance braking performance when hot, better suspension, better turn in, cleaner wheels, no rust and last of course looks.
Lol or there might be no differance at all in real life.
Porsche911R said:
Be interesting to do 5 120mph stops and see after 5 if the PCCB out brake the steels.
Of course they will offer a very tiny advantage in braking distance due to less rotational mass.
A lot of people upgrade the GT4 so they must feel it’s lacking.
But go try a GT2 RS and start doing 170mph down the straights one wonders if steels could cope.
I am blown away by the PCCB over my GT4 steels, and I have always been blown away on my Spyder by the PCCB vs steels.
So without a real life back to back we just have forum rumors as too which really is best.
But going on my cars and cars I have been in the PCCB advantage seems bigger then people would suggest.
Every reviews ever done on these cars always state how great PCCB are but again without a back to back it’s just a review.
There is no doubting the weight saving and there is no doubt they stand heat more, thats about all we can say on forums.
How are you 'blown away' ?Of course they will offer a very tiny advantage in braking distance due to less rotational mass.
A lot of people upgrade the GT4 so they must feel it’s lacking.
But go try a GT2 RS and start doing 170mph down the straights one wonders if steels could cope.
I am blown away by the PCCB over my GT4 steels, and I have always been blown away on my Spyder by the PCCB vs steels.
So without a real life back to back we just have forum rumors as too which really is best.
But going on my cars and cars I have been in the PCCB advantage seems bigger then people would suggest.
Every reviews ever done on these cars always state how great PCCB are but again without a back to back it’s just a review.
There is no doubting the weight saving and there is no doubt they stand heat more, thats about all we can say on forums.
What performance metrics have you measured to draw this conclusion?
Other unsprung mass reduction, the lack of brake dust and the other items I've lifted from the SGL site in the post below SGL do not state any performance advantage versus steel.
From the manufacturers website:
Carbon ceramic offers substantial benefits in terms of performance - in both wet and dry conditions - weight, comfort, corrosion resistance, durability and high-tech appeal.
They make no claim of any steel versus carbon ceramic braking performance improvement in terms of stopping distance.
Durability on the road is fine, the compromise with the durability comes when they are used heavily on track.
Carbon ceramic offers substantial benefits in terms of performance - in both wet and dry conditions - weight, comfort, corrosion resistance, durability and high-tech appeal.
They make no claim of any steel versus carbon ceramic braking performance improvement in terms of stopping distance.
Durability on the road is fine, the compromise with the durability comes when they are used heavily on track.
Edited by 993rsr on Sunday 3rd March 11:29
isaldiri said:
Also - the thermal capacity of iron rotors is far higher than ceramics so ceramic rotors do not technically 'stand heat more'.
That’s why they are larger.100mph is nothing these days, I would like to see 140mph stops, then measure the 5th stop PCCB vs oem set up. I think the difference would be quite big.
I faded my last loan car after 3x 127 mph stops ! It stank and I had no brakes after only 3 stops.
Gt3 owners ditch the oem brakes every model ! Which before did not cost much.
Modern 380mm disks with endless pads would be £6k a set on a GT3 :-(
Prices have gone up esp as disk size has gone up.
100mph is nothing these days, I would like to see 140mph stops, then measure the 5th stop PCCB vs oem set up. I think the difference would be quite big.
You can organise this, you've got a PCCB equipped car I'm sure someone would offer a steel braked car.
Assuming you have OEM pads and fluid.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Totally agree, super price inflation over the cost.I spent a lot of time with Surface Transforms and had an early iteration of their rotors made for a GT. They had issues with the bedding process early on, but it was a very interesting process and product and they have got it very well developed now. I heard a figure of what the 'out the door' price of the SGL rotors were , absolutely staggering!
Not worth it at all.
If you track they will not last. £20k = many sets of Alcons with PFC pads.
They are sensitive. You need to pay attention when removing/mounting wheels. So you bet someone will damage them at some point unless you do the work yourself.
The PCCB gotten a lot better compared to the old days. Had them years ago on a 2007 Turbo. Second set of pads lasted two days at SPA. Discs were pretty much done.
On the GT3 I run Alcon/PFC. Works best for me.
If you track they will not last. £20k = many sets of Alcons with PFC pads.
They are sensitive. You need to pay attention when removing/mounting wheels. So you bet someone will damage them at some point unless you do the work yourself.
The PCCB gotten a lot better compared to the old days. Had them years ago on a 2007 Turbo. Second set of pads lasted two days at SPA. Discs were pretty much done.
On the GT3 I run Alcon/PFC. Works best for me.
993rsr said:
How are you 'blown away' ?
What performance metrics have you measured to draw this conclusion?
Other unsprung mass reduction, the lack of brake dust and the other items I've lifted from the SGL site in the post below SGL do not state any performance advantage versus steel.
Because I am shocked in a GT2 RS you can do 170mph and 10 laps at Silverstone and they handle it no questions asked, it’s very impressive.What performance metrics have you measured to draw this conclusion?
Other unsprung mass reduction, the lack of brake dust and the other items I've lifted from the SGL site in the post below SGL do not state any performance advantage versus steel.
Where you see GT3 with steels and they come in and are blue !
On my car the performance is night and day on the 987 cars as the oem has 314mm disks and 4 pots, my other car has 350mm disks and 6 pots, it blows every one away who has been in it instructors inc when you see them panic and go for a grab handle 70 yards from the apex lol.
I think every steel car I have driven brakes have faded oem. Inc top end GTS models which I faded just after 3 high speed stops :-( . My GT4 even was not 100% but a pad change might be all it needed.
Now as I said you could spend £6k on a proper steel after market set up, but the PCCB only cost £6k to spec and offer all the other advantages to boot.
So yes I am blown away on my 987 with PCCB and I am blown away by my PCCB GT3 set up as I have not had to buy more parts.
I see in another thread a 991.2 GT3 owner is asking about a brake upgrade !
You don’t see PCCB owners asking as they are mind blowing.
Also a weight saving will make a car accerate faster and thus stop shorter, that’s just maths vs mass. Even if it,s only a 1 foot gain, it’s a gain.
I am all up for a one on one with hunters car to see in real life my car vs hunters RS as I also think my car would be faster down a straight also even though the RS has a bhp advantage.
Braking is a harder test vs the RS as it has wider tyres, but we could do a 140mph brake fade test to see what happens after 5 140mph stops. I have vbox stuff etc.
You guys are very well off, let’s test in real life on a run way, be fun. Not brunters it kills cars that place. But 888mf seems to have found a run way he hires for his you tube channel.
We could with your help put in some real life figures which would be a 1st in 15 years on PCCB vs steels debate at real life speeds not 100mph rubbish.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
The SGL ones that Porsche use are more expensive (2x iirc roughly retail prices) than the brembo option used by commonly to be fair but at £4-5k a rotor yes the replacement cost is eye watering. As an aside that's why I think throwing expensive carbon fibre parts at a car to 'save weight' is loony. The cost of the front wings/bonnet on a 3rs or 2rs is astronomical.Gassing Station | 911/Carrera GT | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff