[RACE M3]

17k miles since November on my manual g80. I should have got the ccb instead of the carbon pack. I’m 1 package away from the perfect car. I screwed up.

Just spent $8k on wheels tires and brake pads. The 826 bicolor are nearly impossible to beat once they’re paired with spacers.

Don’t be stupid like me. I can’t see the carbon bs from 10’ away but I can see my filthy wheels from 50.

Get the ccb.. you will change your brake pads, but there’s no great aftermarket solution without compromising. Then you’ll want easier to clean wheels. Then you’ll realize without going custom spec you’ll need new wheel spacers. You’ll skip that and want to do it right. 4500-6. You’ll want wider tires to fit your new wheels. That’s another 2k. But wait there’s more; there’s always more.

JUST GET THE FUCKING CCB. You’ll spend 8k on wheel coatings, cleaners and the most expensive commodity… time.

Call your sales guy and order the ccb. Don’t talk to your wives; she thinks the 330 is the same car and doesn’t care. Order them. Don’t think. It’s a lot of money, but you’re going to spend it eventually.

89k car and my wheels are always filthy and brakes always squealing. Don’t be me.

[hhkb]

I’m not spending $8,000 for cleaner wheels lol

[Forzanerazzurri]

If I were you I'd be more concerned that you paid 90k for a car that has a torque figure of an M3 from the Obama administration.

[RACE M3]

Originally Posted by Forzanerazzurri

If I were you I'd be more concerned that you paid 90k for a car that has a torque figure of an M3 from the Obama administration.

Imagine spending 90k to brag instead of buying what you want.

I’ll get you real heated now. I didn’t want buckets. 90k and no buckets. What!?!?!?


If I want to drag race I have tesla 3p and x plaid.

[RACE M3]

Originally Posted by hhkb

I’m not spending $8,000 for cleaner wheels lol

It adds up man; but it’s the time cleaning them, noise and the fact that they’re dirty within 20 miles.

Every ccb post I’ve seen has been for benefits of track use or bragging rights. I thought I’d give a real world analysis haha

[Forzanerazzurri]

Originally Posted by RACE M3

Imagine spending 90k to brag instead of buying what you want.

I’ll get you real heated now. I didn’t want buckets. 90k and no buckets. What!?!?!?


If I want to drag race I have tesla 3p and x plaid.

Ha I'm just busting your balls, and I'm good with no buckets too.

[RACE M3]

Originally Posted by Forzanerazzurri

Ha I'm just busting your balls, and I'm good with no buckets too.

I wish my kids were grown; they’re still in the kicking seat phase lol can’t win them all!

[TheDrivenGarage]

I agree. I wish I would have gotten them. I bought my M4 off the lot and on my incoming M2 it’s not an option…

[Needsdecaf]

I had PCCB's and couldn't get over the thought of what it would cost to replace them and worrying about them getting chipped by rocks.

I will coat my wheels, and I have good cleaners. Besides my wife's obsession with Porsche RS Spyder wheels has got me used to cleaning difficult wheels.

[StephenWyker]

Originally Posted by RACE M3

It adds up man; but it’s the time cleaning them, noise and the fact that they’re dirty within 20 miles.

Every ccb post I’ve seen has been for benefits of track use or bragging rights. I thought I’d give a real world analysis haha

I am with you. I've had them on my F80, F90 and now G80. Haters will hate. They are worth every penny.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by StephenWyker

Haters will hate.

I hate this phrase. It's so dismissive as to other's viewpoints. If you feel like they are worth every penny, good for you! Not everyone feels that way. In my case, the extra $$ was not the factor, I intend to keep this car for a while and while I do fully understand that CCB's SHOULD be a 'lifetime' part, they aren't always. I just didn't want to deal with that hanging over my head. Second, I may do a BBK on this car if I ever decide to track and CCB's aren't the best choice for track, so why spend the money on them?

Having owned them, I totally get why you would want them. They look cool, and are clean. But not everyone thinks that way and "haters will hate" is not why people pass on them.

[RACE M3]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

I had PCCB's and couldn't get over the thought of what it would cost to replace them and worrying about them getting chipped by rocks.

I will coat my wheels, and I have good cleaners. Besides my wife's obsession with Porsche RS Spyder wheels has got me used to cleaning difficult wheels.

I wasn’t aware of chipping being an issue. I guess there’s no winning, thanks for the info!

I have 4 coats of ceramic on my oem wheels. It helps but still a pita.

[StephenWyker]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

I hate this phrase. It's so dismissive as to other's viewpoints. If you feel like they are worth every penny, good for you! Not everyone feels that way. In my case, the extra $$ was not the factor, I intend to keep this car for a while and while I do fully understand that CCB's SHOULD be a 'lifetime' part, they aren't always. I just didn't want to deal with that hanging over my head. Second, I may do a BBK on this car if I ever decide to track and CCB's aren't the best choice for track, so why spend the money on them?

Having owned them, I totally get why you would want them. They look cool, and are clean. But not everyone thinks that way and "haters will hate" is not why people pass on them.

To be fair, that wasn't the context I implied. Every single time CCB are mentioned, that haters come out in full force on all the reasons they are terrible and why nobody should ever buy them. Was more a blanket response to them. Everyone is allowed their own opinion, yet opinion and facts are different, and it's extra muddy when it comes to CCBs. Also feel there are a TON of people who have lots of "thoughts" on them who have never owned them but "heard" and "saw" -- absolutely infuriating, that it can dissuade people who would enjoy their benefits from buying them with skewed data. Similar to all F80 have crank hub issues and every single engine needs that job done.

[RACE M3]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

I hate this phrase. It's so dismissive as to other's viewpoints. If you feel like they are worth every penny, good for you! Not everyone feels that way. In my case, the extra $$ was not the factor, I intend to keep this car for a while and while I do fully understand that CCB's SHOULD be a 'lifetime' part, they aren't always. I just didn't want to deal with that hanging over my head. Second, I may do a BBK on this car if I ever decide to track and CCB's aren't the best choice for track, so why spend the money on them?

Having owned them, I totally get why you would want them. They look cool, and are clean. But not everyone thinks that way and "haters will hate" is not why people pass on them.

I think most of us, including myself, see the cost and gloss right past it without due diligence. I know replacement cost is through the roof, but I never researched them to really get a full understanding of all the pros and cons. Haters just assume, like I did, instead of putting in the work. Lesson learned!

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by RACE M3

I think most of us, including myself, see the cost and gloss right past it without due diligence. I know replacement cost is through the roof, but I never researched them to really get a full understanding of all the pros and cons. Haters just assume, like I did, instead of putting in the work. Lesson learned!

https://www.getbmwparts.com/oem-part...bC1sNi1nYXM%3D

$8,500 for a pair of front rotors....almost not too bad.

Here's the price for front rotors on my 997 Turbo S...

https://www.suncoastparts.com/produc...735103233.html

$17k.

[Berzerker]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

https://www.getbmwparts.com/oem-part...bC1sNi1nYXM%3D

$8,500 for a pair of front rotors....almost not too bad.

Here's the price for front rotors on my 997 Turbo S...

https://www.suncoastparts.com/produc...735103233.html

$17k.

The idea is that you won't have to replace the brake pads or rotors over the life of (you probably owning) the car if you don't track it, and if you track it, it's much much better performance. Pros for both sides.

That being said, if you drive it like you're on a track 100% of the time and you don't like the prospect of replacing them, then it's probably not for you, but that's not the majority of users.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by Berzerker

The idea is that you won't have to replace the brake pads or rotors over the life of (you probably owning) the car if you don't track it, and if you track it, it's much much better performance. Pros for both sides.

That being said, if you drive it like you're on a track 100% of the time and you don't like the prospect of replacing them, then it's probably not for you, but that's not the majority of users.

If you track it, you will toast the rotors, guaranteed. All the 911 track guys switch to iron discs. And the "much better" performance isn't all that it's been cracked up to be. This has been discussed and proven multiple times on Rennlist and other forums. Porsche themselves admitted it:

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/03/24/...r-race-tracks/

Originally Posted by Paul Watson, Porsche Austrailia

During the 2020 992-series Porsche 911 launch in Australia, Wheels magazine spoke to Paul Watson, Porsche Australia's in-country technical representative. When the conversation turned to carbon ceramic brakes, Watson surprised his questioners with the statement that "if you're doing club days we'd always recommend iron discs." This is an unexpected take considering how carbon ceramic rotors have been promoted as an open-secret weapon for track days.

Watson explained that "ceramic discs can degrade if you're hard on the brakes" and that "heat build-up will degrade the carbon fibers in the disc." Rotor wear comes no matter the rotor material, though.

The context of Watson's statement comes when he says, "When we first launched the discs we told people they'd last virtually for the life of the car and people were doing a number of trackdays and coming back to us saying 'I've worn them out.'" The issue isn't about the pure performance value of carbon brakes, but the cost-vs-performance value compared to iron rotors.

And, lolz:

Originally Posted by Paul Watson, Porsche Austrailia

So when Wheels asked Watson who carbon ceramic brakes are for, he replied, "People who don't like cleaning their wheels. They don't leave a build-up of brake dust, so that's an advantage."

I agree that if you drive them on the street you will never wear them. But the prospect of damage IS there. Likely? No. But it's there.

On that note, carbon brakes are notoriously fragile. If the home mechanic chips the rotors, there's another mongo money repair.

As for the "majority of users", I don't see how you can make that generalization.

[RACE M3]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

https://www.getbmwparts.com/oem-part...bC1sNi1nYXM%3D

$8,500 for a pair of front rotors....almost not too bad.

Here's the price for front rotors on my 997 Turbo S...

https://www.suncoastparts.com/produc...735103233.html

$17k.

Wild, but theres always carmax to dump a car lol

[Berzerker]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

If you track it, you will toast the rotors, guaranteed. All the 911 track guys switch to iron discs. And the "much better" performance isn't all that it's been cracked up to be. This has been discussed and proven multiple times on Rennlist and other forums. Porsche themselves admitted it:

https://www.autoblog.com/2019/03/24/...r-race-tracks/

"Porsche themselves" is one technical rep in a single country. Why would every performance brand of car sell (or put them stock on the car, if they're more expensive) them if they don't actually work better?

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

I agree that if you drive them on the street you will never wear them. But the prospect of damage IS there. Likely? No. But it's there.

Of course no likelihood for anything ever is 0 or 100%. What's the point of mentioning this?

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

As for the "majority of users", I don't see how you can make that generalization.

I can make it because I can use logic and common sense. You have 3 groups of people that drive this car, obviously there's some gray area overlap, but it's pretty simple: Those who drive like normal people, those who drive like normal people but also track the car, those who drive like idiots.

2/3 of those categories will have an advantage using CCBs, the 3rd group can be further divided into those who will have an advantage until needing a replacement and not afford replacements, and those who will have an advantage until needing a replacement and afford them.

There's only a smaller minority of people who will not have a net advantage of owning CCBs. I'm not saying everyone needs to buy them, but there is net positives for them for most buyers.

You're also missing the paragraph that drives my main point home:

The context of Watson's statement comes when he says, "When we first launched the discs we told people they'd last virtually for the life of the car and people were doing a number of trackdays and coming back to us saying 'I've worn them out.'" The issue isn't about the pure performance value of carbon brakes, but the cost-vs-performance value compared to iron rotors.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by Berzerker

"Porsche themselves" is one technical rep in a single country. Why would every performance brand of car sell (or put them stock on the car, if they're more expensive) them if they don't actually work better?

LOL, seriously? You seriously believe that?

1. Porsche has not officially denied this statment.
2. Porsche has unofficially confirmed this statement in multiple discussions in multiple locations with owners, media, etc.
3. Because it MAKES MONEY. You don't think they got to be the most profitable automaker by NOT making money selling options, do you?

Yes, they work better....for not making dust and by lasting a lifetime of road use. Their original claim of being some track panacea has long been disproven.

Originally Posted by Berzerker

Of course no likelihood for anything ever is 0 or 100%. What's the point of mentioning this?

Because it's a valid point and HAS happened? And most people aren't aware of how easily they can chip and what the $$ exposure is when that happens?

Originally Posted by Berzerker

I can make it because I can use logic and common sense. You have 3 groups of people that drive this car, obviously there's some gray area overlap, but it's pretty simple: Those who drive like normal people, those who drive like normal people but also track the car, those who drive like idiots.

2/3 of those categories will have an advantage using CCBs, the 3rd group can be further divided into those who will have an advantage until needing a replacement and not afford replacements, and those who will have an advantage until needing a replacement and afford them.

There's only a smaller minority of people who will not have a net advantage of owning CCBs. I'm not saying everyone needs to buy them, but there is net positives for them for most buyers.

The net advantage of not owning CCB's is that they cost a lot, lot less. Even when you factor in the "lifetime" pads and rotors, unless you keep the car 100k or more miles and have to do TWO full sets of pads and rotors, you're ahead with the steel rotors.

On street driving there is ZERO performance advantage of CCB's. None. You're at the limit of the tires well before the limit of the brakes. On the track, you will have some additional fade resistance for a few track sessions, and then will be faced with a huge bill.

I'm not following your "logic and common sense", sorry. Also, not "missing" anything. Have owned CCB's and spoken to many who have used them on track. The advantage straight up just isn't there. How many race cars run carbon ceramic, (not carbon-carbon) brakes? Have you had discussions with owners about how much performance gain they've seen with CCB's?

[Berzerker]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

LOL, seriously? You seriously believe that?

1. Porsche has not officially denied this statment.
2. Porsche has unofficially confirmed this statement in multiple discussions in multiple locations with owners, media, etc.
3. Because it MAKES MONEY. You don't think they got to be the most profitable automaker by NOT making money selling options, do you?

Yes, they work better....for not making dust and by lasting a lifetime of road use. Their original claim of being some track panacea has long been disproven.

You seem to be a very tin-foil-hatty person. I encourage you to look into Hanlon's Razor and see how it applies to this situation. They don't do it purely because it makes money. They charge more than it costs and account for profit because it makes money, that's obvious on every single option on the car.

I'm really just baffled on how you can possibly believe they don't actually work better on the track (by not heating up and dying as much/often) based on one single rep saying something. Porsche isn't going to make a public statement to deny something on a single blog's site besides just giving them a talking to internally, if even that. It's not worth the negative publicity they'd get from that over one blog that might be read by some tin-foil hat person like you.

There's nothing that has been "disproven." The fact that all of the performance manufacturers put them as stock on their more expensive track cars should be proof enough of their better capabilities for amateur track drivers.

I'm not sure if you're referring to BMW or Porsche as "most profitable" but neither of them are anywhere close to the top 5 lol.

Also please show me some proof for your 2nd point.

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

Because it's a valid point and HAS happened? And most people aren't aware of how easily they can chip and what the $$ exposure is when that happens?

And most people will do this little thing called "research" before they spend nearly $9000 on an option enough to understand the risks, which are minimal. That's like saying "your house can have a meteor fall on it so you shouldn't live in that spot." Great.

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

The net advantage of not owning CCB's is that they cost a lot, lot less. Even when you factor in the "lifetime" pads and rotors, unless you keep the car 100k or more miles and have to do TWO full sets of pads and rotors, you're ahead with the steel rotors.

Value isn't just in the cost to replace. People value the increased stopping power. People value the lack of dust. People value the safety and peace of mind it adds in situations where a CCB would have stopped in time, but a steel brake wouldn't. You might not value that, and that's fine for you, but the objective-enough-determined value of it (better stopping power, less cleaning, better performance, lack of requirement to replace over a normal car lifespan/ownership) means most people are out ahead. That's just a fact.

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

On street driving there is ZERO performance advantage of CCB's. None. You're at the limit of the tires well before the limit of the brakes. On the track, you will have some additional fade resistance for a few track sessions, and then will be faced with a huge bill.

I didn't say there's a "performance benefit" on the street, so I'm not sure what your point is here.

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

I'm not following your "logic and common sense", sorry. Also, not "missing" anything. Have owned CCB's and spoken to many who have used them on track. The advantage straight up just isn't there. How many race cars run carbon ceramic, (not carbon-carbon) brakes? Have you had discussions with owners about how much performance gain they've seen with CCB's?

Ah yes, the ol' "I've done X so I know more than science" adage. This isn't an opinion. This is physics. You're free to look into how CCBs physically work to understand why they work better. Professional race cars run steel brakes because they care more about initial bite than overall performance and less wear (which is the one advantage steel brakes have). They also have much less cooling problems than street car which will allow them to last longer on the cars they're put on. There's a lot of nuance you're not accounting for here when you're trying to apply your logic to this situation.

[Needsdecaf]

The fact that you keep talking about increased stopping power proves that my time here is done. Stopping power in a modern car is limited by tires, not brakes. You talk about physics, and then say things like that? Uh, ok.

Also, I’m one of the least tin foil hatty people you’re ever going to meet

Thanks for the discussion.