Time to replace CCB Rotors/pads? That'll be $17,000+

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by MatthewDavid

I still haven't seen evidence of a damaged rotor from wheel change or rock provided by anyone on this forum despite numerous claims.

Once any damage is found, rotor should be replaced quickly. Small damage can lead to a complete failure of the rotor.

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by FTS

http://rennlist.com/forums/991-gt3/7...l#post12093106

look into how CCB works at high temp, they essentially oxidize (aka burn off) at the high temp (CCB gets quite a bit hotter than steel, since they don't shed heat off as easily; but they don't distort or form thermal stress cracks like steel neither, hence its benefits) seen at the track to shed thermal energy generated during braking. they don't wear down like steel rotors at low temp, since the silica compounds in the CCB have much higher hardness than the pads. So, the only way to tell your CCB rotors have pasted its prime is by weighing it.

i dunno about you, but i would much rather trust a basic understanding of how these brakes work instead some guy's post on forums that is based on their "experiences" at track...

however, they do last almost forever under street use, if you keep it cool and don't abuse them. just need to swap the pads every now and then.

[FTS]

Originally Posted by Cloud9blue

look into how CCB works at high temp, they essentially oxidize (aka burn off) at the high temp (CCB gets quite a bit hotter than steel, since they don't shed heat off as easily; but they don't distort or form thermal stress cracks like steel neither, hence its benefits) seen at the track to shed thermal energy generated during braking.

You seem to have good knowledge and personal experience with the CCBs. I thought that the major benefit of them was actually how quickly they dissipate heat, x3 to x5 of iron rotors I read some place. At what temps do these rotors start to oxidize?

Since the Porsche guys are having such poor performance, why do they keep buying them? Their take up rate is much higher than the BMW guys, close to 30% of turbos and GTs, they are just burning money, poseurs, what do you think?

[MatthewDavid]

That's definitely pretty scary looking - no doubt - but there needs to be more quantifiable (not hearsay) data to support a systematic problem then a few references on the forums, where people go to complain and sometimes perpetuate rumors. Tbh, I'm inclined to shy away from them based on forum comments until I think about it more rationally... it's just too bad there's no broader set of data to make a more informed, fact-based & logical decision.

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

Once any damage is found, rotor should be replaced quickly. Small damage can lead to a complete failure of the rotor.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by MatthewDavid

That's definitely pretty scary looking, but there needs to be more quantifiable data to support a systematic problem then a few references on the forums, where people go to complain, and possibly perpetuate rumors. Too bad there's no broader set of data.

There is plenty of first hand data and feedback on the subject, if you care to search the various car forums.

But there isn't a systematic problem, it is just an inherent attribute of a ceramic rotor. It is just something that can happen. Ceramic rotors are more fragile than steel rotors. Don't take our word for it, BMW themselves say they can chip from stones or debris. They clearly stated in the description/warnings posted on first page of this thread.

You have to treat them with more care. Keep and eye out for damage. Follow proper procedures removing wheels. Be careful what products you use to clean your wheels, try best not to get any on the rotor surface. Be aware if you track your car and use a more aggressive track pad, ceramic rotors will wear just as fast as steel rotors.

There is a reason race teams choose to run ceramic brake systems, they are fantastic and work great over a race distance. But keep in mind they are taking apart their brakes systems daily at the track.

[Carl L]

I've only chance to track my F8x once, but it was clear just from this that the stock steel brakes are by far and away better than anything on an M car before (including the current M5/6, but excluding the GTS).

I owned a CSL when living in Europe and the stock brakes were dreadful for hot lapping even with SS line, pad upgrade and high perf fluid. On the F8x stock system all you need to do is chuck on some Pagids and you're done. Change the fluid after a prolonged session and don't worry about anything else but the brake dust. Very pleased M has finally began to catch up Porsche re braking.

I've owned a US spec 996 GT3 and 996 TT and both I had the steel brakes and they were marvelous. For me, the squealing plus fragility of the PCCBs was not worth it for the <1% increase in braking performance on the track. However, for those not bothered by those factors or the high cost it sounds like the MCCBs are fantastic and there's no doubt the technology has greatly improved its low temp street characteristics (though still inferior to steel in this area by all accounts).

[MatthewDavid]

Fair enough. My point is that forum members generally naturally and by default make their voice heard so may not necessarily be an adequate sample of a general population, statistically speaking. It'd be nice to have more objective data to backup actual fragility, etc.

Do you know if damage like this is covered under insurance; say if an Ass Hat damages the rotor while changing the wheel or if an angry stray rock chips the edge (much like they gratuitously do to the E92's ZCP wheels... for shame, BMW... for shame).

EDIT: I talked to my insurance provider. While not entirely clear, it sounds like Comprehensive will cover rocks chipping the rotor during driving ("missiles") and possibly damage from mechanics (e.g. hitting the rotor with the wheel when changing the tire) via Comprehensive or Mechanical Breakdown Insurance (MBI). It's very difficult to get exact terms and conditions from the provider, however, and I find that odd.

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

There is plenty of first hand data and feedback on the subject, if you care to search the various car forums... You have to treat them with more care. Keep and eye out for damage. Follow proper procedures removing wheels. Be careful what products you use to clean your wheels, try best not to get any on the rotor surface. Be aware if you track your car and use a more aggressive track pad, ceramic rotors will wear just as fast as steel rotors...

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by FTS

You seem to have good knowledge and personal experience with the CCBs. I thought that the major benefit of them was actually how quickly they dissipate heat, x3 to x5 of iron rotors I read some place. At what temps do these rotors start to oxidize?

Since the Porsche guys are having such poor performance, why do they keep buying them? Their take up rate is much higher than the BMW guys, close to 30% of turbos and GTs, they are just burning money, poseurs, what do you think?

I don't have first hand experience with CCB on a track unfortunately, have just a few limited street experiences with PCCBs. For the money BMW and Porsche charges for it, it just wasn't worth it for my limited experience. But again, I wasn't doing 130-40mph stops every minutes or so for 20-40 mins on the street... lol, definitely not on the Macan Turbo I last test drove...

Ceramic composite brakes are essentially a composite of carbon and ceramic and perhaps a small percentage of metallic materials, hence its name. Ceramic are very poor heat conductor, but is able to withstand much higher temperature without degradation to its mechanical properties. So you brake rotors are able to withstand much high temperature and act as a BETTER heat sink.

But because these composites have high percentage of ceramics, which are poor heat conducting materials, I am pretty sure they won't lose heat as quickly as good old iron/steel rotors, given the same airflow. If someone can compare rotors temperature of CCB vs steel brakes on the F8x from the same track with the same driver and such, I think the data should be able to prove my point.

Honestly, I have no idea when these rotors start to oxide, since Brembo for sure doesn't publicize the chemical composition of their CCB rotors. But I wouldn't go as far as calling these CCBs have poor performance; they just not as cost effective as a good old steel BBKs. Just have look at pro level motorsports, the only cars that uses carbon or ceramic composite brakes are LMP1 and F1 cars, where they really need all the brakes they can for those downforce effect cars. Most of the GT, touring, and rally cars are still using traditional steel rotors. Are CCB better? Sure, but not $8k better in my opinion, considering you would have to replace them just as often as steel if you track them often.

I can understand the rationale of getting a CCB system for a $150-200k 911 that is probably only driven on the weekends, but for a DD M car, the risk is just too high. It only takes one chip from a piece of gravel or careless tire change to ruin a $3-4k rotor...

[MatthewDavid]

You have the CCBs, right? What's your experience so far?

Originally Posted by FTS

You seem to have good knowledge and personal experience with the CCBs. I thought that the major benefit of them was actually how quickly they dissipate heat, x3 to x5 of iron rotors I read some place. At what temps do these rotors start to oxidize?

Since the Porsche guys are having such poor performance, why do they keep buying them? Their take up rate is much higher than the BMW guys, close to 30% of turbos and GTs, they are just burning money, poseurs, what do you think?

[Curt2000]

Originally Posted by FTS

http://rennlist.com/forums/991-gt3/7...l#post12093106

Tons of lessons learned in the Porsche community that we can and should listen to!

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

Once any damage is found, rotor should be replaced quickly. Small damage can lead to a complete failure of the rotor.

[FTS]

Originally Posted by Cloud9blue

I don't have first hand experience with CCB on a track unfortunately, have just a few limited street experiences with PCCBs.

I can understand, I don't have track experience with them either, not yet at least, track season opens in 2 weeks

I believe it is important for everyone's benefit on technical matters, such as how CCBs would perform, to back up the statements with some technical fasts; I generally shy away from making absolute statements when I don't have technical facts. In terms of CCBs, there are enough technical information that show their clear benefits (you can see some of my compilation here: http://drivingsatisfaction.blogspot....-m4-notes.html), but I cannot intelligently comment on their track performance, at least until I see how they perform or not this season.

Originally Posted by Cloud9blue

Ceramic composite brakes are essentially a composite of carbon and ceramic and perhaps a small percentage of metallic materials, hence its name. Ceramic are very poor heat conductor, but is able to withstand much higher temperature without degradation to its mechanical properties. So you brake rotors are able to withstand much high temperature and act as a BETTER heat sink.

But because these composites have high percentage of ceramics, which are poor heat conducting materials, I am pretty sure they won't lose heat as quickly as good old iron/steel rotors, given the same airflow. If someone can compare rotors temperature of CCB vs steel brakes on the F8x from the same track with the same driver and such, I think the data should be able to prove my point.

Some of your technical understanding is little off and leading you to arrive to the wrong conclusions.

Originally Posted by Cloud9blue

Honestly, I have no idea when these rotors start to oxide, since Brembo for sure doesn't publicize the chemical composition of their CCB rotors.

It is critical to understand this to be able to use the CCBs correctly I believe; the CC rotors on the F8x don't start oxidation until nearly 1,300 degF. That is a very high number to reach even under track conditions. I never measured my rotor temps while running on track, but I will this season just to see how closely I need to manage the temps.

Originally Posted by Cloud9blue

Are CCB better? Sure, but not $8k better in my opinion, considering you would have to replace them just as often as steel if you track them often.

Of corse 'worth' is different for everyone, I can certainly understand if most don't find it worthwhile, but don't dismiss its benefits too easily. Many pay $5K+ for exhaust, $2-3K for cosmetics, $3-5K for coilovers, $1-2K for wrapping the car with Xpel, etc. Worth is different for each

Originally Posted by MatthewDavid

You have the CCBs, right? What's your experience so far?

We have been below freezing temps for about 5 weeks straight now, and I was worried about brakes' performance even on the street. Thus far they are immensely precise and have superb feel, much better than the irons I had on my Porsches. I mention Porsche, because IMHO they make the best brakes I have known. Thus far on the street, the MCCBs feel better and more confidence inspiring to me. However, the real test will be on track; I have concerns but I'll find out first-hand and be able to speak whether they are worth it or not at that point.

When I checked with Mr. Isley at the Perf Center he basically said not to worry about the CCBs, use them as they come as they are "race proven and we never had issues with them." Further more, someone else mentioned that the life of the rotors for them seems to be 8 to 10 times higher now that all their M cars have CCBs. Then again I still maintain that the better value with the CCBs are with the calipers, rotors are icing on the cake IMO.

[FTS]

Originally Posted by Curt2000

Tons of lessons learned in the Porsche community that we can and should listen to!

That last picture of the broken rotors is not CCB, it is Carbon-Carbon Matrix from Mov.It. CCBs don't explode like that due to ceramic outter layer. However, the OP hasn't posted the two followup pictures to that Mov.It rotor, in which with their technology it is relatively easy to repair that rotor with additional Carbon-Carbon material baking it again, which is a great value proposition from the company.

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by FTS

That last picture of the broken rotors is not CCB, it is Carbon-Carbon Matrix from Mov.It. CCBs don't explode like that due to ceramic outter layer. However, the OP hasn't posted the two followup pictures to that Mov.It rotor, in which with their technology it is relatively easy to repair that rotor with additional Carbon-Carbon material baking it again, which is a great value proposition from the company.

... if you have no idea what you are talking about and just repeating some marketing terms that you think you understands... please stop commenting...

I never heard of Mov.It before, but by looking at their website just now, it clearly states that theirs are ceramic-carbon composites containing carbon and silica carbide, which is similar to the Brembo/SGL rotors.

Ceramics are fragile by nature even they have much high hardness rating, their toughness, i.e. resistance to deformation and impact, is much lower than a good iron/steel rotor...

The rotors might not oxidize until +1300F, but temp of the pad-rotor contact area may very well be at or above that temperature under repeated high speed braking due to friction, which is ultimately what's stopping your car. The reasons we use big thick rotors or CCB is because we can build in as big of a heat sink to dissipate that ultra high temp into the rest of the rotors.

I have my BS in materials science and currently doing a PhD, so at least I think I know what I am talking about when it comes to materials properties... However, if you can prove me wrong with facts instead just saying "my reasonings are little off", I would be happy to listen too

The truth that I would not trust any spokesperson unless they are actually involved in the R&D of the specific products. Auto industry has been using empty marketings and catchy tech phrase to sell overpriced or useless features to customers for decades...

[FTS]

Originally Posted by Cloud9blue

I have my BS in materials science and currently doing a PhD

I am sorry if I offended you, but based on the statements you made, it is hard to reconcile this; you may want to ask for your money back maybe

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by FTS

I am sorry if I offended you, but based on the statements you made, it is hard to reconcile this; you may want to ask for your money back maybe

Still waiting for you to point out what was I wrong about... Instead of just us comparing dick size over internet...

Btw, I don't pay a dime for my Phd. My school pays me instead...

All in all, if I am not here to bash you for your CCB option. I think they are great if you can afford it or think it is worth it; hell, they look a lot better than the bullshit blue calipers on the standard brakes. Everyone has different needs when it comes to driving their cars, that's why there are different cars and options to choose from. I am just here to post some factual informations for other, so that they can form their own decision.

[FTS]

Trust me when I say I have no gripes about CCBs, if they are not as good as advertised, I'd be the first one to state it so. I have no place to judge people because of their car or parts choices, nor do I identify myself personally with my car(s). It is just a car.

Originally Posted by Cloud9blue

I am just here to post some factual informations for other, so that they can form their own decision.

This is what I am looking for as many of us, or most, or none of us have enough factual information about these brakes. What you stated originally seemed as if you had factual information and grabbed my interest, but then you stated you did not know when they oxidize and went on to lecture based on heresay and stated we should ignore others' experiences. IMO sir, as a scientist you should know that with only scientific (or engineering) data you should refute a theory. So, as I was expecting some good technical information, instead I was disappointed and responded. The second mistake was about the materials' thermal capacity statements and dissipation rates. The third was not having first-hand experience, but stating your conclusions as if they were facts.

I hope this is specific enough for you. Again, I am sorry you are offended, I am not in any way (it is just a piece of car part ), there is no need to personalize this 'stuff.'

[Cloud9blue]

Originally Posted by FTS

Trust me when I say I have no gripes about CCBs, if they are not as good as advertised, I'd be the first one to state it so. I have no place to judge people because of their car or parts choices, nor do I identify myself personally with my car(s). It is just a car.



This is what I am looking for as many of us, or most, or none of us have enough factual information about these brakes. What you stated originally seemed as if you had factual information and grabbed my interest, but then you stated you did not know when they oxidize and went on to lecture based on heresay and stated we should ignore others' experiences. IMO sir, as a scientist you should know that with only scientific (or engineering) data you should refute a theory. So, as I was expecting some good technical information, instead I was disappointed and responded. The second mistake was about the materials' thermal capacity statements and dissipation rates. The third was not having first-hand experience, but stating your conclusions as if they were facts.

I hope this is specific enough for you. Again, I am sorry you are offended, I am not in any way (it is just a piece of car part ), there is no need to personalize this 'stuff.'

ok... I think I am done arguing with you if this is all you have to say while totally ignoring several FACTS that I stated.

[brian99997]

752 Red heat, visible in the dark
885 Red heat, visible in the twilight
975 Red heat, visible in the daylight
1077 Red heat, visible in the sunlight
1292 Dark red
1472 Dull cherry-red
1652 Cherry-red
1832 Orange
2012 Bright Orange
2100 Yellow
2300 Light Yellow

[Curt2000]

Talked with my friend who is a Porsche tech, said a lot of the 911 owners opt to swap out the Carbon brakes for steel when it comes time to replace them. I still maintain my position that I'd rather spend my $8k on a set of Brembos.

[edwinm3]

I tried to add CCB to my car and was a few hours too late as car had already started production, Thaaaank God!!!

[M4TW]

Originally Posted by MatthewDavid

Fair enough. My point is that forum members generally naturally and by default make their voice heard so may not necessarily be an adequate sample of a general population, statistically speaking. It'd be nice to have more objective data to backup actual fragility, etc.

Do you know if damage like this is covered under insurance; say if an Ass Hat damages the rotor while changing the wheel or if an angry stray rock chips the edge (much like they gratuitously do to the E92's ZCP wheels... for shame, BMW... for shame).

EDIT: I talked to my insurance provider. While not entirely clear, it sounds like Comprehensive will cover rocks chipping the rotor during driving ("missiles") and possibly damage from mechanics (e.g. hitting the rotor with the wheel when changing the tire) via Comprehensive or Mechanical Breakdown Insurance (MBI). It's very difficult to get exact terms and conditions from the provider, however, and I find that odd.

I can't seem to find any BMW-specific horror stories related to this. Then again, they are relatively new shiny objects in BMW circles. I think we would have a much larger sample group if the blue brakers weren't so darned good. Meanwhile, I'm on high alert for chips.

To answer your question, asshat insurance would be the asshat's nickle, I would think. I'm getting BMW to change my winters and summers over for an extra layer of asshat insurance.

If you are the asshat, different rules apply. Specifically, the rule about having to pay for stupid. I rather like the special Corvette covers. Then again, putting some spare rubber over the tops or a few wet cloths might equally work?

Car insurance for stone missles is something definitely to explore. I am pretty satisfied that my comprehensive would cover them. This may change once insurance companies get wise to them. [edit out incorrect info on coverage exclusion for aftermarket parts]

Meanwhile, the fear and loathing of the CCB's seems to be a bit overstated, at least when it comes to replacement. To get socked would mean that there would be a chip (not an avalanche of complaints yet) that cannot be passed under some form of warranty (such as a "you broke it, you fix it one") or plain ole insurance.

When I last checked, my iDrive is reporting that my pads have 240,000 km to go until replacement. But I guess that's just fluffery as these brakes are clearly shite and no sane person would want to own them.

Edit:

For example, the exclusion in my policy is:

(a.1) caused by mechanical fracture or breakdown of any part of the vehicle or by rusting, corrosion, freezing or wear and tear, or explosion within the combustion chamber, unless the loss or damage is coincident with other loss or damage that is insured against pursuant to this section;

Not enough to take out an errant rock chipping my rotor, in my view.

[dngo]

Originally Posted by Curt2000

All depends, I know the GTR guys were due for a change at around the 25k-30k mile mark. Im sure it could go either way depending on your usage.

Just a note - GTRs don't have carbon ceramics. They are just very expensive steel brakes.