PCCB out braked the steels last night on 5th gear.
Discussion
surprised no ones talked about this yet.
as the normal suspects poo poo PCCB and say no advantage.
5th gear, 2 cars, same model,tyres etc , The PCCB car killed the steel shod car by a nice margin (16 feet) then after 10 stops beat it by 100 feet.
black and white PCCB win really.
as the normal suspects poo poo PCCB and say no advantage.
5th gear, 2 cars, same model,tyres etc , The PCCB car killed the steel shod car by a nice margin (16 feet) then after 10 stops beat it by 100 feet.
black and white PCCB win really.
Edited by Porsche911R on Friday 15th November 15:20
Slippydiff said:
And ?
95% people here say zero advantage because AP from Porsche does not talk about them when he does his cars chats.Even the racers here say no such advantage, and thus every one falls in line with miss info.
I have always said their was an advantage and not just for repeated stops.
hence I now own 3 cars with ceramic disks.
2 cars tested results are black and white to see.
16 foot after 1 stop, 100 feet after 10 stops.
of course after enduring the pointless test with a metal tube and a blow torch , then same with a carbon fiber one ( completely different material than used in the disks ) ..... it was a pretty clear win on the 80mph ( approx) to zero back to back tests.
Material aside..... no mention of the 350mm/350 front/back diameters being more or less relevant compared to the 330mm/299 on the steel equipped car ?
For me, for dimension, rotating mass and repeat performance... its a very worthy consideration.
Maybe no-one commenting on the 911 section as they didn't bother watching the program featuring 718T
Material aside..... no mention of the 350mm/350 front/back diameters being more or less relevant compared to the 330mm/299 on the steel equipped car ?
For me, for dimension, rotating mass and repeat performance... its a very worthy consideration.
Maybe no-one commenting on the 911 section as they didn't bother watching the program featuring 718T
Porsche911R said:
Slippydiff said:
And ?
95% people here say zero advantage because AP from Porsche does not talk about them when he does his cars chats.Even the racers here say no such advantage, and thus every one falls in line with miss info.
I have always said their was an advantage and not just for repeated stops.
2 cars tested results are black and white to see.
16 foot after 1 stop, 100 feet after 10 stops.
JulierPass said:
I haven't seen the article as I don't watch 5th gear. However, there is a reason why all of the factory built Porsche Cup Cars and R's have steel brakes. If the advantage was as pronounced as your post suggests then the race would come with ceramics from the factory.
Higher up the racing tree they do use carbon disks.They used a 718T? If so:
Steels: disc diameter (front/rear): 330 mm/299 mm, 4-piston aluminium monobloc fixed calipers front and rear,
PCCB: disc diameter 350 mm front and rear, six-piston calipers at front, four-piston calipers at rear
6-pot vs 4-pot on the front, bigger discs all round for PCCB especially on the rear.
Not exactly a like-for-like comparison, obviously bigger brakes will fare better in repeated tests.
Steels: disc diameter (front/rear): 330 mm/299 mm, 4-piston aluminium monobloc fixed calipers front and rear,
PCCB: disc diameter 350 mm front and rear, six-piston calipers at front, four-piston calipers at rear
6-pot vs 4-pot on the front, bigger discs all round for PCCB especially on the rear.
Not exactly a like-for-like comparison, obviously bigger brakes will fare better in repeated tests.
Porsche911R said:
surprised no ones talked about this yet.
as the normal suspects poo poo PCCB and say no advantage.
5th gear, 2 cars, same model,tyres etc , The PCCB car killed the steel shod car by a nice margin (16 feet) then after 10 stops beat it by 100 feet.
black and white PCCB win really.
Probably due to the EPAS.as the normal suspects poo poo PCCB and say no advantage.
5th gear, 2 cars, same model,tyres etc , The PCCB car killed the steel shod car by a nice margin (16 feet) then after 10 stops beat it by 100 feet.
black and white PCCB win really.
Edited by Porsche911R on Friday 15th November 15:20
Porsche911R said:
JulierPass said:
I haven't seen the article as I don't watch 5th gear. However, there is a reason why all of the factory built Porsche Cup Cars and R's have steel brakes. If the advantage was as pronounced as your post suggests then the race would come with ceramics from the factory.
Higher up the racing tree they do use carbon disks.Yes, but that is more about weight in those series. My point is the factory built race cars, on which these roads cars are based do not have have ceramic brakes. If ceramics offered the retardation advantage that the average joe is lead to believe they have Porsche would fit them to their cup cars. I own and race one and have dealings with the factory so can be fairly catergoric in that statement.
Chainsaw Rebuild said:
Well this has turned out to be embarrassing for the op: it turned out bigger brakes work better.
Indeed. Comparing a GT car on steels vs PCCBs would be much more informative, although even then:Steel: 380mm front and rear
PCCB: 410mm at front and 390mm at rear
So PCCBs always have a size advantage within the same model.
Chainsaw Rebuild said:
Well this has turned out to be embarrassing for the op: it turned out bigger brakes work better.
He's clearly got nothing better to on an autumn evening than watch obscure programs on equally obscure freeview channels, then present their questionable findings, as fact.Porsche911R said:
Higher up the racing tree they do use carbon disks.
They are completely different to the carbon ceramics found on road cars though. A modern carbon/carbon brake package can't really be compared to what is used for a road application as they are leagues apart in weight, performance and technology and have more in common with what is on commercial airliners than road cars.poppopbangbang said:
Porsche911R said:
Higher up the racing tree they do use carbon disks.
They are completely different to the carbon ceramics found on road cars though. A modern carbon/carbon brake package can't really be compared to what is used for a road application as they are leagues apart in weight, performance and technology and have more in common with what is on commercial airliners than road cars.Twinfan said:
Chainsaw Rebuild said:
Well this has turned out to be embarrassing for the op: it turned out bigger brakes work better.
Indeed. Comparing a GT car on steels vs PCCBs would be much more informative, although even then:Steel: 380mm front and rear
PCCB: 410mm at front and 390mm at rear
So PCCBs always have a size advantage within the same model.
However that said it was an interesting piece, if you actually bother to watch it. The point made was nothing about the size of brakes (some people on here appear obsessed with size for some reason...), but the reduction in their effectiveness over time and use over several runs of heavy braking due to fade.
People do seem to like to gang up against 911R though.
TimoMak said:
The point made was nothing about the size of brakes (some people on here appear obsessed with size for some reason...), but the reduction in their effectiveness over time and use over several runs of heavy braking due to fade.
But do you not think that heat dissipation, and therefore fade resistance, is related to brake disc and caliper size in some way?For a simpleton like me, their findings did seem "logically" to make sense - The material with less/worse heat conductivity, stopped shorter after repeated braking runs (when normal brakes get hot and start to fade).
I get that the PCCBs are bigger and 6 pot but doesn't the basic conclusion stack up? ie. On a like for like basis (same sized discs, same "strength" calipers) would the carbon-ceramic discs offer no benefit? This is a genuine question and not a smart arse one before you all jump on me.
What is the reason for most people preferring steel brakes (apart from the obvious cost one)?
I get that the PCCBs are bigger and 6 pot but doesn't the basic conclusion stack up? ie. On a like for like basis (same sized discs, same "strength" calipers) would the carbon-ceramic discs offer no benefit? This is a genuine question and not a smart arse one before you all jump on me.
What is the reason for most people preferring steel brakes (apart from the obvious cost one)?
Twinfan said:
TimoMak said:
The point made was nothing about the size of brakes (some people on here appear obsessed with size for some reason...), but the reduction in their effectiveness over time and use over several runs of heavy braking due to fade.
But do you not think that heat dissipation, and therefore fade resistance, is related to brake disc and caliper size in some way?Chainsaw Rebuild said:
Well this has turned out to be embarrassing for the op: it turned out bigger brakes work better.
On the contrary , PCCBS have always been bigger and again are bigger in the GT3 models.nothing is embarrassing bar over the last 10 years people saying no advantage even if bigger.
poppopbangbang said:
Porsche911R said:
Higher up the racing tree they do use carbon disks.
They are completely different to the carbon ceramics found on road cars though. A modern carbon/carbon brake package can't really be compared to what is used for a road application as they are leagues apart in weight, performance and technology and have more in common with what is on commercial airliners than road cars.Gassing Station | 911/Carrera GT | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff