06-16-2014, 02:58 PM | #1 |
BMW Fanatic
374
Rep 1,413
Posts
Drives: 2020 X3 M
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Austin, TX
|
Braking Distance CCB vs Stock
Can somebody provide these figures? I want to know the difference.
__________________
SteveSpy
Current Ride: 2020 X3 M Last edited by SteveSpy; 08-20-2014 at 12:50 PM.. |
06-16-2014, 04:03 PM | #2 |
General
21125
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
We will have to wait for independent tests for actual results.
But my guess is zero difference |
Appreciate
0
|
06-16-2014, 05:15 PM | #3 |
Second Lieutenant
8
Rep 200
Posts |
first few tries they'll be the same, but as the things get hotter steel brakes will fade
if you don't track the car and don't live/drive in mountaineous area you probably won't notice the difference |
Appreciate
0
|
06-16-2014, 06:15 PM | #4 | |
BMW Fanatic
374
Rep 1,413
Posts
Drives: 2020 X3 M
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Austin, TX
|
Not tracking mine
Quote:
__________________
SteveSpy
Current Ride: 2020 X3 M |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-16-2014, 06:20 PM | #5 |
Major General
1904
Rep 5,678
Posts |
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.
However, throw a set of racing pads on the stock rotors and I'd bet they perform as well (or essentially as well) as the CCB even at track temps. To me, you can go to the track with CCB and not worry about anything. With stock brakes, all you need to do is pull the pins and swap the pads before a track day. I'm probably over simplifying but, to me, CCB simply save you the time to swap pads and fluid as often for the low, low cost of $8,000 They do look cool, however.
__________________
2020 X3 M40i | Black | Current DD
2020 C8 Corvette | Z51 | Torch Red ... built and waiting for delivery 2016 M2 | Long Beach Blue | 6MT 2015 M4 | Austin Yellow | DCT 2012 MB C63AMG | 2011 E92 M3 | 2010 E92 M3 |
Appreciate
0
|
06-16-2014, 06:41 PM | #6 |
Second Lieutenant
8
Rep 200
Posts |
CCB rotors will last much longer if the car is on the track every weekend (or abused constantly), in that case it could come out as a cheaper option when you add the numbers
racing pads will do the similar job on the track but they eat up stock rotors even quicker and collect dust so you have to clean the brakes every now and then the most optimal solution is to use steel rotors and switch racing pads when you go to the track, when(and if) rotors go just order an aftermarket quality BBK for half the price of CCBs and call it a day |
Appreciate
0
|
06-16-2014, 09:03 PM | #7 |
Private First Class
18
Rep 123
Posts |
I'm not going to lie i am interested in these and i don't track ever. bmw claims lifetime of car is how long they last, thats vague. brembo makes them and claims they last in regular street use conditions 300,000km which is 185k miles roughly. is that the life expectancy of the m4? hope it would last longer than that, although i would never have it near that long. anyways for 8150 extending the warranty for the rotors since they make that claim and is there major selling point would be nice and make me get them for sure.
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-16-2014, 09:14 PM | #8 |
Lieutenant Colonel
207
Rep 1,864
Posts
Drives: F80 M3
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Texas
iTrader: (2)
Garage List 2016 Porsche GT4 [0.00]
1999 Porsche Spec B ... [0.00] 2014 Ram 1500 Laram ... [0.00] 2007 Porsche GT3 RS [10.00] 2013 Tesla Model S 85 [0.00] |
Threshold braking on a track is about repeatability, confidence, feel and modulation without getting into ABS. Just happy the brakes aren't going to be an issue anymore, steel or CCB.
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-16-2014, 09:43 PM | #9 | |
General
21125
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
On my E92, I needed to replace 2 sets of front rotors and 1 set of rears in 6 years of use with 16~20 track days per year. Those 3 sets of rotors cost me $2700 total tax in (that is in CAD). CCB in Canada are $9775 tax in. So even if CCBs would have lasted the life of my E92, irons are still way cheaper . |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-16-2014, 11:06 PM | #10 |
Private First Class
18
Rep 123
Posts |
top gear tested the m4 with the ccb and concluded they were the best thing about the car on the road, they disliked them on the track. i don't track so hopefully they would last forever, but if at 51k they magically need replacing i would feel bad for the service advisor that day as i would be pissed!
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-16-2014, 11:11 PM | #11 |
Private First Class
18
Rep 123
Posts |
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
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-19-2014, 01:06 PM | #12 | |
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
Quote:
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. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-19-2014, 02:07 PM | #13 | ||||
Enjoying driving
388
Rep 1,169
Posts |
How can I resist responding
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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 ) Quote:
|
||||
Appreciate
0
|
08-19-2014, 02:46 PM | #14 |
Colonel
721
Rep 2,342
Posts |
The stock pads that come with the CCB options are not adequate for track use. They'll still fade.
Without proper cooling the CCB rotors will oxidize, so you'll still need proper cooling. |
Appreciate
0
|
08-19-2014, 03:49 PM | #15 | ||
General
21125
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
Quote:
CCBs offer lower unsprung mass to improve handling (the greatest benefit IMO). They also offer a small reduction in rotating mass (albeit it is almost negligible). They also offer direct street to track possibility (IMO the iron rotors will need proper track pads to last full sessions while the CCB in stock form will be sufficient). Based on my experience with my E92, with proper track pads, the iron rotors should last (perform without significant fade) just as long as the CCB. In terms of wear, that still remains to be seen, but as I posted earlier, even if they last 6 years and ~100 track days, the irons are still cheeper. IMO, there is simply no cost benefit to the CCB and the benefits they do offer are not worth the cost TO ME. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
08-19-2014, 08:25 PM | #16 | |
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
There's no denying that BMW is trying to profit from M4 sales, but name me a car company that it isn't aiming for a profit.
Also, I think I recall having a similar conversation with you on a similar thread. Though $8k is a lot for a brake package, you're still better off getting BMW's CCB package than you are going with an aftermarket CCB package, which are much more expensive at the moment. Quote:
I think for a club racer, stock iron rotors with upgraded calipers, pads, ect. make sense, because you'll be burning through your brake setup quickly. For a dedicated daily driver that does occasional track days (maybe 10-12 per year, and that's on the high side), CCB are a logical option. As you said, they allow a car to go straight from the road to the track without having to fiddle with pad changes, ect. Will BMW's CCB be cheaper for that kind of use? That remains to be seen and depends on how long CCB's last vs base brakes for DD use with occasional track time. Even if they turn out to be more expensive for 6+ years of ownership, that doesn't mean that they aren't worth getting. You have to pay more for better performance...it's all a matter of how much more performance M4 owners want. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-19-2014, 08:32 PM | #17 | |
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
Quote:
Because I can point you to various reviews where journalists drove a CCB-fitted M3/M4 and noticed no degradation in brake performance over numerous laps. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-19-2014, 08:39 PM | #18 | |
Major General
1904
Rep 5,678
Posts |
Quote:
Threshold braking isn't the question or the answer (and I understand threshold braking and am somewhat proficient at it ). The question is stopping distance. The stopping distance will be the same as it is about the weight of the car, the suspension of the car and the traction of the tires... all being the same... as long as the brakes have sufficient power. The same driver in a CCB car vs. a steel brake car and the braking distance is the same as both sets of brakes have more than sufficient braking force to completely lock the tires (or engage ABS) if the driver wished to do so... therefore, the cars ability to actually stop will be based on weight, suspension and tire grip. Now if the question was braking distance after 10 hard stops that might be different. If the question was about brake modulation, that might be different. Absolute stopping distance? The same.
__________________
2020 X3 M40i | Black | Current DD
2020 C8 Corvette | Z51 | Torch Red ... built and waiting for delivery 2016 M2 | Long Beach Blue | 6MT 2015 M4 | Austin Yellow | DCT 2012 MB C63AMG | 2011 E92 M3 | 2010 E92 M3 |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-19-2014, 09:11 PM | #19 | |
Enjoying driving
388
Rep 1,169
Posts |
Quote:
I do follow your posts and I know you do track and have the technical knowledge. That is the reason I picked on your comment. I am sorry if I am being oversensitive on this issue, but when I see comments that start with "the general consensus on this board..." it tickles me You are one of posters that set that general consensus All good, thank you |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-19-2014, 09:21 PM | #20 |
Major General
1904
Rep 5,678
Posts |
__________________
2020 X3 M40i | Black | Current DD
2020 C8 Corvette | Z51 | Torch Red ... built and waiting for delivery 2016 M2 | Long Beach Blue | 6MT 2015 M4 | Austin Yellow | DCT 2012 MB C63AMG | 2011 E92 M3 | 2010 E92 M3 |
Appreciate
0
|
08-20-2014, 12:53 AM | #21 | |
General
21125
Rep 20,742
Posts
Drives: 2021 911 turbo
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Montreal
|
Quote:
I am not willing to shed close to $10000 Canadian dollars for the improved convenience . But that is just me. If you think it is worth it to you, than you have the option. Last edited by CanAutM3; 08-20-2014 at 01:09 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-20-2014, 10:49 AM | #22 | |
Captain
172
Rep 894
Posts
Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY
|
Quote:
Also, I didn't own the E9x M3, but I read about plenty of E9x M3 owners who were also track junkies...many of them claimed that the stock brakes were inadequate for long-term tracking. Many of them upgraded their brake systems, either pads and steel lines or a BBK kit. Though the M3 has always been a street car with track performance in mind, this car has never been a 100% track car out of the box. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|