Carbon Ceramic Brakes - Leaning to yes, your opinion?

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

It's actually -12.5kg of rotational mass... HUGE DIFFERENCE

Let's not confuse rotational mass and unsprung weight.

I did the calculation a little while back, and the equivalent weight reduction provided by the CCB on the entire vehicle considering intertial impacts of the rotating mass equates to about 20lb. Any weight reduction is welcome, but I would not call it huge.

IMO, the 3.6lb reduction in unsprung mass provided by the CCB is more significant in terms of performance through improved handling.

[AM4ZING]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Let's not confuse rotational mass and unsprung weight.

I did the calculation a little while back, and the equivalent weight reduction provided by the CCB on the entire vehicle considering intertial impacts equates to about 20lb. Any weight reduction is welcome. But I would not call it huge.

The CCB's are 60% lighter than the regular brakes... That is HUGE

Are you trying to argue that CCB's suck? lol i dont get your points

[FTS]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

The CCB's are 60% lighter than the regular brakes... That is HUGE

Are you trying to argue that CCB's suck? lol i dont get your points

I hear you and share some of your frustrations, but please don't be defensive, you are not going to convince anyone, it will stay as an argument. CanAutM3 is only stating engineering data and he is doing a good job seperating fact from anectodes. The advantage is there and can be felt, but also remember that the calipers are also heavier, so the weight savings are not enough to choose CCBs over irons given cost. But when you add up everything else and if you are driving in environments to be able to take advantage of the benefits, I don't think they are arguing CCBs are better or worse.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

Are you trying to argue that CCB's suck?

When did I ever say that ?

CCBs are superior, but for a cost. How much superior for how much money, that is where the debate lies.

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

The CCB's are 60% lighter than the regular brakes... That is HUGE

If a 1lb cup holder is made 60% lighter, does that make a HUGE weight reduction on the whole car?

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

lol i dont get your points

My points are to put some perspective to things.

20lb of equivalent weight reduction on the whole car is welcome but not a HUGE advantage. As a comparison, CF roof vs moonroof or coupe vs sedan are both more than 20lb difference.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

It's been tested that CCB's stop sooner than regular brakes... its physics and has been proven over and over and over again

Can you show evidence of this?

The test done by C&D referenced earlier on the PCCB tends to indicate otherwise...

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

Plus i own CCB's and the stopping power is superior compared to regular braked... EVEN during daily driving

Your personal impression remains a very subjective reference point .

[AM4ZING]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

When did I ever say that ?

CCBs are superior, but for a cost. How much superior for how much money, that is where the debate lies.



If a 1lb cup holder is made 60% lighter, does that make a HUGE weight reduction on the whole car?



My points are to put some perspective to things.

20lb of equivalent weight reduction on the whole car is welcome but not a HUGE advantage. As a comparison, CF roof vs moonroof or coupe vs sedan are both more than 20lb difference.

but... Not talking about a 1lb cup holder.. Lets not assume and actually compare Facts.

CCB's are 60% lighter in weight (Calipers, Rotors & pads) and offer -12.5kg off the rotational mass compared to stock brakes. If it didn't improve the car, then BMW would not use lighter wheels to save Rotational Mass on their new Motorads.

Do you daily drive an F8x with CCB's? Doesn't sound like it.. cuz ive driven both and the difference is VERY Obvious.. night and day

So if your're asking how much superior for how much money? Its clear that it is Highly more superior at an affordable cost... 10k as an option with wheels is a steal for CCB's especially on a leased car.. Use and Abuse

Dont woryyyyy bud, were not making fun of you for cheaping out on these beauties... You just don't have to try to prove to us that they're not worth it cuz honestly, ITS SOOOOO WORTH IT!

[AM4ZING]

Love people who don't get these cuz it makes our cars that much more unique

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

but... Not talking about a 1lb cup holder.. Lets not assume and actually compare Facts.

I only gave the cup holder example to demonstrate that quoting 60% as number by itself is meaningless

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

CCB's are 60% lighter in weight (Calipers, Rotors & pads) and offer -12.5kg off the rotational mass compared to stock brakes. If it didn't improve the car, then BMW would not use lighter wheels to save Rotational Mass on their new Motorads.

Don't get your numbers confused. The entire CCB package is 14.5lb lighter than the iron package. The CCB rotors themselves are 27.5lb lighter than the iron rotors, but the calipers (and other mounting hardware) are 13lb heavier on the CCB setup (based on info obtained on the forum from interviews with BMW).

There are multiple factors to consider to evaluate the impact of rotating mass. For instance the diameter of the rotating mass and how fast it rotates relative to the vehicle speed. A wheel or tire has a bigger impact than a brake rotor because the mass is much farther away from the rotating centre. A flywheel has much more impact than a brake rotor because is spins much faster relative to vehicle speed.

On a motorcycle, reducing wheel rotating mass has a more significant advantage because the weight of the wheels are a bigger proportion of the total weight of the bike. Further, reducing the rotating mass of the wheels makes it easier to tilt the bike and therefore provides a more responsive handling.

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

Do you daily drive an F8x with CCB's? Doesn't sound like it.. cuz ive driven both and the difference is VERY Obvious.. night and day

I was given an M4 with CCB for about an hour test drive. I did some threshold braking, and could not "feel" any superiority. The pedal feel is very different though and how much pressure is needed for varying brake torques did feel different than with the irons. But that is all very subjective...

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

So if your're asking how much superior for how much money? Its clear that it is Highly more superior at an affordable cost... 10k as an option with wheels is a steal for CCB's especially on a leased car.. Use and Abuse

Dont woryyyyy bud, were not making fun of you for cheaping out on these beauties... You just don't have to try to prove to us that they're not worth it cuz honestly, ITS SOOOOO WORTH IT!

And I am not making any fun of those who opted for the CCB.

Actually, I think a good case can be made for them. For a daily driven car that might see a few track days where the owner does not want to bother with pad swaps, they provide improved looks, feel, longevity, convenience and a performance advantage (stock for stock).

You, on the other hand, seem to want to ridicule those that didn't opt for the CCB.

For a track rat like me, for the use of my car, that case was not there. At $9800CAD (yes that is what they cost in Quebec with the added sales tax) plus the potential replacement costs after multiple track days ($10k~17k/year) plus the increased cost of 19" track tires (I use 2~3 sets per season) plus the risk of damage, the cost was just prohibitive for the advantages they offer.

[AM4ZING]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I only gave the cup holder example to demonstrate that quoting 60% as number by itself is meaningless



Don't get your numbers confused. The entire CCB package is 14.5lb lighter than the iron package. The CCB rotors themselves are 27.5lb lighter than the iron rotors, but the calipers (and other mounting hardware) are 13lb heavier on the CCB setup.

There are multiple factors to consider to evaluate the impact of rotating mass. For instance the diameter of the rotating mass and how fast it rotates relative to the vehicle speed. A wheel or tire has a bigger impact than a brake rotor because the mass is much farther away from the rotating centre. A flywheel has much more impact than a brake rotor because is spins much faster relative to vehicle speed.

On a motorcycle, reducing wheel rotating mass has a more significant advantage because the weight of the wheels are a bigger proportion of the total weight of the bike. Further, reducing the rotating mass of the wheels makes it easier to tilt the bike and therefore provides a more responsive handling.



I was given an M4 with CCB for about an hour test drive. I did some threshold braking, and could not "feel" any superiority. The pedal feel is very different though and how much pressure is needed for varying brake torques did feel different than with the irons. But that is all very subjective...



And I am not making any fun of those who opted for the CCB. You, on the other hand, seem to want to ridicule those that haven't.

A good case can be made for them. For a daily driven car that might see a few track days where the owner does not want to bother with pad swaps, they provide improved looks, feel, slight performance advantage and convenience.

For a track rat like me, for the use of my car, that case was not there. At $9800CAD (yes that is what they cost in Quebec with the added sales tax) plus the potential replacement costs after multiple track days plus the increased cost of 19" track tires (I use 2~3 sets per season) plus the risk of damage, the cost was just prohibitive for the advantages they offer.

Sorry that you cant enjoy the CCB's in form of appearance and feel

I'll be sure to remember to enjoy it even more now

Plus deep down inside its obvious that you secretly love the M CCB's and hate that you dont have it... or else you wouldnt waste so much time on the CCB threads trying to state random facts which CCB owners dont even care about lol move along

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

Plus deep down inside its obvious that you secretly love the M CCB's and hate that you dont have it... or else you wouldnt waste so much time on the CCB threads trying to state random facts which CCB owners dont even care about lol move along

As a CCB fanboy, you can't seem to remain objective .

The OP came here to ask for opinions regarding the CCB. I am here to offer a technical point of view in the technical section of the forum. This thread is not a CCB hug fest, you should move along if you don't like what you read.

[SapphireSiC]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I only gave the cup holder example to demonstrate that quoting 60% as number by itself is meaningless



Don't get your numbers confused. The entire CCB package is 14.5lb lighter than the iron package. The CCB rotors themselves are 27.5lb lighter than the iron rotors, but the calipers (and other mounting hardware) are 13lb heavier on the CCB setup (based on info obtained on the forum from interviews with BMW).

There are multiple factors to consider to evaluate the impact of rotating mass. For instance the diameter of the rotating mass and how fast it rotates relative to the vehicle speed. A wheel or tire has a bigger impact than a brake rotor because the mass is much farther away from the rotating centre. A flywheel has much more impact than a brake rotor because is spins much faster relative to vehicle speed.

On a motorcycle, reducing wheel rotating mass has a more significant advantage because the weight of the wheels are a bigger proportion of the total weight of the bike. Further, reducing the rotating mass of the wheels makes it easier to tilt the bike and therefore provides a more responsive handling.



I was given an M4 with CCB for about an hour test drive. I did some threshold braking, and could not "feel" any superiority. The pedal feel is very different though and how much pressure is needed for varying brake torques did feel different than with the irons. But that is all very subjective...



And I am not making any fun of those who opted for the CCB.

Actually, I think a good case can be made for them. For a daily driven car that might see a few track days where the owner does not want to bother with pad swaps, they provide improved looks, feel, longevity, convenience and a performance advantage (stock for stock).

You, on the other hand, seem to want to ridicule those that didn't opt for the CCB.

For a track rat like me, for the use of my car, that case was not there. At $9800CAD (yes that is what they cost in Quebec with the added sales tax) plus the potential replacement costs after multiple track days ($10k~17k/year) plus the increased cost of 19" track tires (I use 2~3 sets per season) plus the risk of damage, the cost was just prohibitive for the advantages they offer.

I appreciate your scientific approach to this never ending pissing contest ,but unless you have taken both complete brake assemblies off their respective cars (booster, rotors, brackets, calipers, pads, and anything I may have forgotten), don't quote the weight difference of the respective assemblies to the tenths of a pound. Thank you.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by SapphireSiC

I appreciate your scientific approach to this never ending pissing contest ,but unless you have taken both complete brake assemblies off their respective cars (booster, rotors, brackets, calipers, pads, and anything I may have forgotten), don't quote the weight difference of the respective assemblies to the tenths of a pound. Thank you.

I am just using the figures quoted by BMW in interviews rounded to the nearest half pound .

[AM4ZING]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

As a CCB fanboy, you can't seem to remain objective .

The OP came here to ask for opinions regarding the CCB. I am here to offer a technical point of view in the technical section of the forum. This thread is not a CCB hug fest, you should move along if you don't like what you read.

Exactly... he could've gone on google and looked up random facts just like you but he chose to ask fellow members on the forum what their opinions are...

You simply are trying to stir a pot which needs no more stirring.

Us CCB owners love the brakes so we express our opinions vividly... If you dont own them, state your opinion and move on. i dont see your need to keep altering ones positive statements about the above mentioned carbon ceramic brakes

Originally Posted by JTmarlin

, so even more reason i assume to go with CBB, but wanted those opinions that now have it and love it, or vice versa. thanks,

As stated by OP, He wants to know from those who have it and love it... also those who Have it and hate it.... You, dont have it and hate on it lol

[captainaudio]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

Is that a serious question? It's been tested that CCB's stop sooner than regular brakes... its physics and has been proven over and over and over again

Plus i own CCB's and the stopping power is superior compared to regular braked... EVEN during daily driving

Well in that case your experience is counter to that of any tests I have seen and anything I have heard from professional race driver or tester I have spoken to.
The general consensus is that CCBs do not stop better than steel brakes unless they are VERY hot. At temperatures where steel brakes fade CCBs still have great stopping power which is why the are used in racing.

If there are test results showing that CCBs stop better in normal or even spirited driving I have not seen them.

All I have gotten when I asked for test results was "it is common knowledge", "I love mine", ."I can afford them and you can't" and "They look cool" - all of which may bear an element of truth but the question about stopping power remains unanswered.

As for stopping better in daily driving how often do you threshold brake in daily driving and even if you do anti-lock kicks in.

FWIW I don't "hate" CCBs and don't fault anyone for getting them - or for not getting them for that matter. I think it is great technology particularly for racing applications.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

You, dont have it and hate on it lol

Please point out to me where I "hated on" the CCB. Because I don't believe I have, since I certainly don't hate CCBs.

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

You simply are trying to stir a pot which needs no more stirring.

Us CCB owners love the brakes so we express our opinions vividly... If you dont own them, state your opinion and move on. i dont see your need to keep altering ones positive statements about the above mentioned carbon ceramic brakes.

The positive impressions and feedback provided by the CCB owners are all valuable.

However, when misleading statements are made, such as "scientifically proven to provide shorter stopping distances" or "provide a HUGE weight reduction", they prompt responses that offer a counterpoint.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

They stop way better on the street once they warm up (which happens in no time) ... How would you know if you do not own CCB's lol

Stopping distance is a function of traction. If the brakes can lock the wheels (which both the steel and CCB can), how quickly you stop is based on the tires. Put another way, either brake option provides MORE stopping power than your tires can use.

CCB will resist heat better than steel brakes. At some point, the OEM pads overheat and fade. This would NOT happen under even aggressive street driving. At the track, CCB will work better than OEM rotors and pads. On the street, the stopping power is the same.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by AM4ZING

Consider people like me who go to the canyons... CCB's are much more superior than the standard brakes

If you are driving hard enough to fade the steel rotors on public roads, you are driving fast enough for a long enough time that you will be in jail if the police catch you

I'm not commenting on the value of CCB or whether they are worth it to someone (as that is subjective) but I believe you are dramatically over emphasizing the benefits for street use. I'm actually considering CCB for my next M4 but ONLY so I can get out of swapping pads for the track. If it was a street only car, there would be no real need for them (other than brake dust) and no meaningful performance improvement relative to stopping power. I can't comment on "feel".

I think CCB are a great option for those who like the look, like the lack of brake dust or track their cars and don't want to swap pads. If someone is suggesting that they are a superior performing option for street use, they are peddling false info as they are not. If someone gets to the point on the street where they fade the OEM pads/rotors, they are being utterly reckless.

[Fast4d]

canautm3 and gthal, thanks for bringing objectivity and real tech into this thread.

I will order my 2016 with steel rotors and 18" wheels. if I start tracking again....what are some good aftermarket pad compounds available out there for f80/82?

[Neil McRae]

the only reason to buy CCB's is because they look good.

[chris s]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

As a CCB fanboy, you can't seem to remain objective .

The OP came here to ask for opinions regarding the CCB. I am here to offer a technical point of view in the technical section of the forum. This thread is not a CCB hug fest, you should move along if you don't like what you read.

Stop feeding the troll man...

[SapphireSiC]

Lots of good information in this thread. But I am left puzzled as to whether any braking system is better than another if our definition of good braking is the ability to lock the wheel, making braking limited only by tire.
With all of our braking engineers on this forum (I am being only slightly facetious) I am left wondering whether my brakes are any better than the ones on my '91 Chevy Cavalier, because I could lock the brakes on that car too.

What's with the fixed calipers v. floating ones. They say fixed are better but not so sure. Larger diameter rotors are popular-- 380mm v 360 v 340 on the Jaguar F-type I think--maybe all a waste. There are 6 piston v. 4 piston v. 1 piston in back of my Jeep Grand. Let's not even get into drilled v. slotted v. drilled and slotted brakes.

I'm gonna just keep on enjoying my dustless wonders.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by SapphireSiC

Lots of good information in this thread. But I am left puzzled as to whether any braking system is better than another if our definition of good braking is the ability to lock the wheel, making braking limited only by tire.
With all of our braking engineers on this forum (I am being only slightly facetious) I am left wondering whether my brakes are any better than the ones on my '91 Chevy Cavalier, because I could lock the brakes on that car too.

What's with the fixed calipers v. floating ones. They say fixed are better but not so sure. Larger diameter rotors are popular-- 380mm v 360 v 340 on the Jaguar F-type I think--maybe all a waste. There are 6 piston v. 4 piston v. 1 piston in back of my Jeep Grand. Let's not even get into drilled v. slotted v. drilled and slotted brakes.

I'm gonna just keep on enjoying my dustless wonders.

Originally Posted by gthal

Stopping distance is a function of traction. If the brakes can lock the wheels (which both the steel and CCB can), how quickly you stop is based on the tires. Put another way, either brake option provides MORE stopping power than your tires can use.

I wanted to post this earlier in response to gthal.

I am not an expert in braking systems, this is only my understanding based on various technical readings I did on the topic:

The ability of a brake system to lock the wheels does not really reflect the ability of a brake system to convert kinetic energy into heat. It has to do with the delicate balance between kinetic and static friction at both the pad/disc interface and tire/tarmac interface. Fade is mostly dependent on the pad material's ability to sustain kinetic friction with heat. When a brake system gets saturated with heat, the pads lose their ability to sustain kinetic friction and applying more force on the pads results in a transition to static friction and inherent lock-up. A brake system that has started to fade still has the ability to lock the wheels. As stated in the C&D article, they still could get ABS to engage on faded brakes.

A poor brake system with insufficient heat dissipation capability can get saturated with heat within a single panic stop, resulting in longer braking distances. However, a brake system that has sufficient heat dissipation capability will be able to extract the maximum traction the tires are able to offer throughout the entire stop. Improving the brake system beyond that point will not result in shorter braking distance as the tires have become the limiting factor.

All the goodies you mention such as floating calipers, multi-pistons, slotted/drilled rotors, larger diameter rotors are all there to either improve the heat dissipation and/or optimize the pad to disc friction interface.

The big question with the F8X is if the base iron system has sufficient heat extraction capability to allow the pads to maximize the grip provided by the tires. For street driving, I certainly believe it does. The CCB likely have the stock iron setup beat with repeated heavy braking from track use, especially if grippy-er r-comp tires are used. At some point, the base iron setup will build up enough heat for the stock pads to fade. However, based on personal experience, the iron setup is able to cope just fine when proper track pads (that are able to sustain higher operating temperatures) are installed.

In the end, we will only find out for sure when a true comparison test of MCCB vs iron comes out .