Quote:
Originally Posted by brt3
I love CCBs and have driven many CCB-equipped cars on-track (and at the limit). I think many Porsche owners dislike them because of the way = Porsche handles the electronics for traction control and handling. In cars equipped with Porsche Torque Vectoring, the brakes can be applied by the system to help rotate the car. This leads to excessive rear brake wear, meaning the CCBs don't end up with the "virtually unlimited lifespan" referred to by the factory.
To me, it seems that a lot of folks miss that one of the big things you get with CCBs is a huge reduction in unsprung weight, along with the potential for improved ride and handling characteristics that result if a car is designed around the CCBs.
And then there's the very substantial issue of no brake dust...  |
Totally agree with you on the benefits of CCB, there's no debate there.
It's very interesting that you bring up the PTV system, because I agree that it does affect the lifespan of CCB rotors. I've seen a friend's PTV equipped 911 eat through his rear CCB in only 4 track days.
That being said, PTV isn't the main problem. My CCB equipped car doesn't have PTV and the front rotors started to show wear after only a few track days. To replace them at $17k for a full set just wasn't realistic, so I switched to iron replacements.
Cost is the issue with CCB. If they could last forever, or replacements make sense from a financial standpoint, then you would have a winner.