[FTS]

How can I resist responding

Originally Posted by SteveSpy

Because of the significant cost involved, and because I'm not tracking my car I didn't order CCBs.

IMHO, if you are not going to track regularly I highly doubt the CCBs will offer you much benefit; save your money.

Originally Posted by gthal

As others have posted, as long as the brakes are strong enough to lock the tires then either option should stop the car in a similar way until the stock brakes start to overheat. Stopping is about traction of the tires once the brakes have enough force to lock them up.

I am sorry, but you are way oversimplifying the issue here. I can lock up and engage ABS at 20 mph, that is not a measure. Performance braking is an art IMO and it is the very last thing even racers learn how to do well, let alone us regular Joes. It is not just a matter of pushing the middle pedal. So, please don't use that as your comparison variable, for your sake. I am sure you heard it many times before, brakes are not for slowing down, but to manage the weight transfer for most grip available, just like all other controls.

Originally Posted by boogie1

another thing when u compare to porsche, i wouldn't mind the steel version at all because it still gets a first class caliper but with the m4 its not the same caliper or even size rotor i would be shocked if the tests don't result in shorter stopping distances between the m4/3 with and without the ccb

Not all cast iron brakes are created equal, and what boogie is saying here is absolutely true. CCBs on Porsches offer much less benefit, first because of regular brakes calipers are very capable, and even the iron rotors sizes on GT cars are as big as the CCBs. In addition, in every Porsche you get at least some brake cooling. If I can overcook Porsche brakes in their 3200 lbs cars, I will overcook BMW's 3600 lbs car with irons as well, I have no doubts. And btw, 48% of all 991 GT3s are ordered with PCCBs, contrary to many posts in these forums.

Porsche brakes are legendary for their performance and durability. BMW brakes are legendary for being non-adequate for track use. Although I have no technical knowledge, I am assuming the standard brakes are designed to be a very nice compromise between easy maintenance, street performance and some lapping around. And there is no cooling of any kind to the front or the rear. To compensate, BMW is saying, you dish out a lot of $$$, we'll give you CCBs, they'll perform a little better on the track (p.s. not for racing though )

Originally Posted by Dalko43

I am much more interested in seeing actual long-term performance comparisons between CCB and the base steel brakes rather than relying on the "best guesses" from a bunch of forum posters. I'm not saying that there aren't some smart people on this forum, but BMW and other companies have developed CCB's for reasons other than "a cool look."

Plenty of articles have talked about how CCB do offer a longer lifespan and better heat resistance than regular iron rotors. Of course they will cost more $. The real question is by how much will they outlast iron rotors under similar "track" conditions.

That is the key, right? few stops, all brakes will perform fine mostly, even the stupid floating piston ones. But will they last in a single 30-min session, lap after lap? During an entire season? Multiple years? I opt'd in for the CCBs, despite Karusell's recommendations, because I don't want to experiment with the brakes.