Doing spec on GT3RS TODAY - PCCB or Steel Brakes????
Doing spec on GT3RS TODAY - PCCB or Steel Brakes????
Author
Discussion

dealmaker

Original Poster:

2,215 posts

285 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
Guys,

I need to give my OPC the spec for my 997GT3RS TODAY!

In reading some of the recent threads with regard to PCCB failure(s) and I am beginning to wonder if I'd be better off with steels???

Car will be used 90% road 10% track.

Should I save the £5800 and what looks like a barrel of issues??

Any other thoughts, from owners, on do's and don'ts spec wise??


Vesuvius 996

35,829 posts

302 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all


Viper green
Steels


Erik997

1,289 posts

239 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
Vesuvius 996 said:
Viper green
Steels
yes

Geneve

4,020 posts

250 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
Do a search, but be careful to separate the comments relating to the first generation ceramics from the latest (gen 3)application on the new GT3s.


SidewaysSid

523 posts

289 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
dealmaker said:
Guys,

I need to give my OPC the spec for my 997GT3RS TODAY!

In reading some of the recent threads with regard to PCCB failure(s) and I am beginning to wonder if I'd be better off with steels???

Car will be used 90% road 10% track.

Should I save the £5800 and what looks like a barrel of issues??

Any other thoughts, from owners, on do's and don'ts spec wise??
Mk 2 version of PCCB's as used on the 997 RS's are the way to go. The horror stories we have heard about tend to be vague and ultimately not a fault of the PCCB system. We know that the standard pads are soft and the rear pads wear rate is unusually high (virtually wear at the same rate as the fronts). RS29 can be used, will last a lot longer but trade off is the noise they make. I have PCCB on my 997 RS and I would spec the car the same way again. Fantastic brakes.

I also have Bi-xenon, sat-nav, phone, leather, orange console to match external colour of car and the sports-chrono. Wouldn't bother with sports-chono but given the amount I was spending what the hell!

anonymous-user

85 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
SidewaysSid said:
The horror stories we have heard about tend to be vague and ultimately not a fault of the PCCB system.
hmmm. mk1's - some people have got lucky and been ok many haven't, mostly on track, but some even on road. the consequences of being unlucky is very expensive. Even cgts are not immune. the experiences of a number of PHers are not vague, or their fault. just do a search.

dealmaker

Original Poster:

2,215 posts

285 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
Geneve said:
Do a search, but be careful to separate the comments relating to the first generation ceramics from the latest (gen 3)application on the new GT3s.
Thats what I thought initially but I've been hearing stories about the new generations as well - such as in this thread of today:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...




sambaman

3,991 posts

255 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
i have steels on my 997GT3RS...work fine with zero issues....for some reason i much rather prefer steels above pccb's.....my personal preference of course....i was delighted when i came across a 997RS with steels for sale...exactly how i would have spec'd the car myself should i have bought it new...perfect for me.....

993rsr

3,677 posts

280 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
SidewaysSid said:
dealmaker said:
Guys,

I need to give my OPC the spec for my 997GT3RS TODAY!

In reading some of the recent threads with regard to PCCB failure(s) and I am beginning to wonder if I'd be better off with steels???

Car will be used 90% road 10% track.

Should I save the £5800 and what looks like a barrel of issues??

Any other thoughts, from owners, on do's and don'ts spec wise??
Mk 2 version of PCCB's as used on the 997 RS's are the way to go. The horror stories we have heard about tend to be vague and ultimately not a fault of the PCCB system. Do you work for Porsche Marketing?


We know that the standard pads are soft and the rear pads wear rate is unusually high (virtually wear at the same rate as the fronts). RS29 can be used, will last a lot longer but trade off is the noise they make. I have PCCB on my 997 RS and I would spec the car the same way again. Fantastic brakes.

I also have Bi-xenon, sat-nav, phone, leather, orange console to match external colour of car and the sports-chrono. Wouldn't bother with sports-chono but given the amount I was spending what the hell!

SidewaysSid

523 posts

289 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
dealmaker said:
Geneve said:
Do a search, but be careful to separate the comments relating to the first generation ceramics from the latest (gen 3)application on the new GT3s.
Thats what I thought initially but I've been hearing stories about the new generations as well - such as in this thread of today:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Yes I read that and as previousLY stated it is vague and worthless comment without some proper explanation.

Lighty

370 posts

238 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
Same dilemma myself a month ago, went for them as I was more impressed with the unsprung weight issue.Also thought that if I was having my ultimate car it should be that in every way.
I also own a garage so would replace myself if they break so cost would be not as horrific as it would be only parts.
I read everything I could find on the subject.

993rsr

3,677 posts

280 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
SidewaysSid said:
dealmaker said:
Geneve said:
Do a search, but be careful to separate the comments relating to the first generation ceramics from the latest (gen 3)application on the new GT3s.
Thats what I thought initially but I've been hearing stories about the new generations as well - such as in this thread of today:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Yes I read that and as previousLY stated it is vague and worthless comment without some proper explanation.
Let's make it simple for you.

I've seen two 997's with PCCB's discs that were at a level of degredation that if taken to an OPC for inspection would have been deemed beyond their usable life.

The panels were all straight on the cars so I'd guess the owners weren't'Driving the car into a bridge parapet at 100mph could cause the brakes to fall apart' so from that we can deduce that the durability of PCCB's when used on track is still questionable.

anonymous-user

85 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
Lighty said:
only parts.
rofl

SidewaysSid

523 posts

289 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all

Mk 2 version of PCCB's as used on the 997 RS's are the way to go. The horror stories we have heard about tend to be vague and ultimately not a fault of the PCCB system. Do you work for Porsche Marketing?

No but I did originally cancel my 997 RS because I wanted more information and reassurance from Porsche with regard to a number of issues. To spend £5,000+ on PCCB I needed a LOT of convincing.

I do get cheesed of with comments by people who don't communicate the full facts, they're no use to anyone. I have kept note of a number of issues reported by various 997 RS owners (Not just brake issues) and these have been reported to Porsche at Reading. I wouldn't say the issues that have arisen on the 997 RS are any major concern, the earlier GT3/GT3 RS versions of the 996 also had a variety of issues.

As of today I am still convinced that the PCCB system is a viable upgrade on the 997 RS. The feed back through the pedal, lack of brake fade, greatly reduced dust on the wheel, non-squeal and consistent performance increase the driver confidence when driving hard.




Edited by SidewaysSid on Thursday 12th July 15:07

SidewaysSid

523 posts

289 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
Let's make it simple for you.

I've seen two 997's with PCCB's discs that were at a level of degredation that if taken to an OPC for inspection would have been deemed beyond their usable life.

Well that's much better, not vague at all! At last a thorough and detailed explanation ideal for anyone wishing to make a well judged decision when buying a Porsche.

Edited by SidewaysSid on Thursday 12th July 15:14

993rsr

3,677 posts

280 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
Just because you choose to disagree with other viable reports on the current PCCB's, have the courtesy not to rubbish them.

SidewaysSid

523 posts

289 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all


The panels were all straight on the cars so I'd guess the owners weren't'Driving the car into a bridge parapet at 100mph could cause the brakes to fall apart' so from that we can deduce that the durability of PCCB's when used on track is still questionable or they don't do cooling down laps. Nothing is indestructable.

gizard

2,272 posts

314 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
SidewaysSid said:
or they don't do cooling down laps. Nothing is indestructable. [/b]
I have specced them on my car - if it ever arrives been delayed a month 1/2 now. Cool down laps is an interesting thing - surely if they don't fade - people might carry on further than they would with steels and therefore put more load onto them... food for thought me thinks...

SidewaysSid

523 posts

289 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
993rsr said:
Just because you choose to disagree with other viable reports on the current PCCB's, have the courtesy not to rubbish them.
I am awaiting a viable report. So far `vague` does not provide a viable report. I am not biased for or against PCCB's but trying to offer a balanced view. If substantiated, failures of latest generation PCCB's would obviously cause concern. Having purchased a car specced with PCCB's I would be daft not to take an interest. If you read all the threads here and on other forums they offer insufficient background information to convince me that the PCCB's are not up to the job.

Edited by SidewaysSid on Thursday 12th July 15:24

993rsr

3,677 posts

280 months

Thursday 12th July 2007
quotequote all
SidewaysSid said:
993rsr said:
Just because you choose to disagree with other viable reports on the current PCCB's, have the courtesy not to rubbish them.
I am awaiting a viable report. So far `vague` does not provide a viable report. I am not biased for or against PCCB's but trying to offer a balanced view. If substantiated, failures of latest generation PCCB's would obviously cause concern. Having purchased a car specced with PCCB's I would be daft not to take an interest. If you read all the threads here and on other forums they offer insufficient background information to convince me that the PCCB's are not up to the job.

Edited by SidewaysSid on Thursday 12th July 15:24
Your definition of viable and mine obviously differ!

If you whipped those blinkers off for moment you may see there is a point of view other than your's.

And for heaven's sake quit with the bold font, is it supposed to make one cower into submission?

Edited by 993rsr on Thursday 12th July 16:03