Carbon ceramic brakes - your opinion

[peterleo]

Hello everyone!

I'm planning on buying a car, that has ceramic brakes as an option.
What do you think, should I go for it? I'm really interested in the opinion of anyone who's got them already, and has some real first-hand experience.
What are the main advantages or disadvantages of ceramic brakes?
Also, do they offer shorter braking distances over regular ones?
Thanks for your help and cheers!

 

[klier]

They make noises but last forever, and are highly strong. If you don't plan on tracking the car, I'd go for it.

What car?

 

[tristatez28lt1]

I have never owned a personal vehicle with carbon ceramics but have had the pleasure of driving a couple cars with them (R8 plus, Quattroporte GTS). Although they really have no fade and have much less brake dust, 99% of us normal users do not need ceramics. Expensive to buy, little benefit in everyday use, and expensive in regular maintenance. (20,000 euro if all four discs go). Only if you go to the track on a regular basis do they make sense.

 

[Kowalski]

If you are a tame racing driver who some say your voice can only be heard by cats and you have two sets of knees then yes go for the carbon ceramic brakes. But if you're not The Stig then stick with the conventional ones.

 

[peterleo]

I'm looking at the S63 amg 4matic coupe.
This is probably the only optional extra I have yet no idea over

 

[peterleo]

I won't be using the car on the track...ever. It's too big and heavy.
My thinking was that the ceramic brakes might be good, considering the weight of the car.

 

[PanterroR]

I won't be using the car on the track...ever. It's too big and heavy.
My thinking was that the ceramic brakes might be good, considering the weight of the car.

In that case, there's definitely no need for ceramic brakes... Save your money for some other, cool options that you will for sure enjoy on a daily basis...

 

[klier]

In that case, there's definitely no need for ceramic brakes... Save your money for some other, cool options that you will for sure enjoy on a daily basis...

No, ceramics work better on the road than on the track.

Also, there is no maintenance. Only if they break, and when they don't they last a lifetime.
And I see no reason for them to break at all.

 

[Zafiro]

If it was me I would go without it unless you do tracking. And avoid it if you live in a cold and dark country
I have yet to seen a M5 or M6 in Sweden with ceramic brakes and if I go to the place we dont speak of, most of them seem to choose the standard brakes.

Everyone here is going to tell you what to choose. It's your money so I think its up to you if you want it or not.

 

[peterleo]

If it was me I would go without it unless you do tracking. And avoid it if you live in a cold and dark country
I have yet to seen a M5 or M6 in Sweden with ceramic brakes and if I go to the place we dont speak of, most of them seem to choose the standard brakes.

Everyone here is going to tell you what to choose. It's your money so I think its up to you if you want it or not.

That's exactly what I wanted.
I'm very interested in knowing more about these brakes, as I have yet to drive a car equipped with them.

 

[martinbo]

Carbon ceramic brakes have better fade resistance over repeated full-bore braking manoeuvres and thus will offer more consistent braking distances once up to temperature. They are thus better suited to track-driving in the short-term from a braking consistency and performance perspective. Carbon ceramics do wear though and are hellishly expensive to replace as a result of repeated track use. So for hard-core, regular track work, you may as well stick with steel discs (rotors) and replace at a fraction of the cost.

Carbon ceramics for road use will likely outlast the typical lease period of the car so they then start to make more sense. If you drive your S Coupe like you stole it then the benefit of fade-free repeated braking will be realised but you'd have to be driving like a lunatic on public roads - not quite the decorum expected of such a grand, serene motoring experience.

The other key benefit of carbon ceramic discs is the reduction in unsprung mass resulting from discs which are up to 50% lighter which in turn effects a tangible improvement in wheel location kinematics giving improved ride and handling dynamics - particularly in lighter, sportier cars. Of course this is somewhat mitigated in a big, heavy, air-sprung car like an S- Coupe. So, once again, save the money and go with conventional steel brakes.

 

[tristatez28lt1]

No, ceramics work better on the road than on the track.

Also, there is no maintenance. Only if they break, and when they don't they last a lifetime.
And I see no reason for them to break at all.

Here's my long write up on everything ceramic - Mostly Audi and Porsche related

Pads:
Pads on ceramics wear just like conventional pads do on steel rotors, just a bit slower. On the street, pads on ceramics will last (almost) forever and have almost zero brake dust. On the track however, you will see brake dust with ceramics and a much decreased lifespan for pads (three/four weekends at the track can mean new brake pads even for ceramics). Brake pads for ceramics are about 25% more expensive.

Rotors:
The ceramic rotors don't wear down in thickness, but they do loose weight with use (300,000 km with one set is possible). To measure use, ceramic rotors are weighed and not measured for thickness as steel rotors are. The life of ceramic rotors is about 10:1 compared to steel rotors.

Performance:
Obviously far superior to steel in every aspect: less unsprung weight and therefore less gyroscopic inertia make the car and especially the steering feel nimbler. Braking distance is extraordinary, zero fade, and much better longevity all speak for themselves.

Brake feel:
The feel of the ceramics is also different and your foot will need to adjust but everyone gets used to ceramics, it just takes time. I believe the ceramic brake systems also comes with a different, stronger booster. One of the reasons why the brake feel is different.

Cost:
A friend at the local Audi dealership had to replace both front ceramic rotors and the bill was almost $10k. For 991 PCCB rotors, it's $9k for the front and $8k for the rear (parts only).

Conclusion:
If you track a car ceramics are absolutely worth it, it's nice not having to worry about brakes and the performance is amazing. At $10k I would invest in other things if it isn't a track car. However, if you have money to burn to get the absolute best performance out of your car, go for it!

 

[peterleo]

Thank you all for the input.
I very much appreciate it!
In conclusion, being that the car won't be used on the track, looks like I'll just go with the regular-fitted brakes.

 

[Zafiro]

Thank you all for the input.
I very much appreciate it!
In conclusion, being that the car won't be used on the track, looks like I'll just go with the regular-fitted brakes.

Buy something nice to your girlfriend/wife with the money you're saving

 

[Wolfgang]

From MBUSA.

$8,950 AMG Carbon Ceramic braking system

Specially developed brakes cut weight and offer excellent braking performance on the track. Bronze-painted calipers feature "AMG Carbon Ceramic" logos. Harder, longer-wearing carbon-fiber-reinforced ceramic discs endure extreme heat and loads, for even shorter stopping distances and higher fade-resistance in high-performance driving. The two-piece floating discs are larger up front (16.5 inches), with higher total braking force, yet 20 percent lighter, to enhance suspension and steering response. MBUSA

 

[Mr Robert]

The phrase "tame racing driver" caught me, reading it as someone who does not know how to brake. Does anyone know how ceramics stand up to improper braking on track, compared to traditional steel ditos?

 

[savage-It]

I was lucky enough to use ceramic brakes on race tracks.I monitored the consumption after every track days and have to say that at rear it was always from 2 to 3% while front never exceeded the 2% (but this will depend on the level of electronic controls you will leave on your car).Considering about 10/15 track days/year you can make your conclusions (ok I know that will depend even by the race track..the driver and the lenght of sessions..but wanted just to give an idea).They are far better but one important thing is to make the right bedding.When you get a new fast car equipped with these brakes pls don't consider them ready for race tracks.You need to make the right bedding procedure if you want to get the best results from them..but normally the car makers will not give you complete instructions..At the end for your use I would suggest standard brakes based on my experience..

 

[Sunny]

To OP, on a big heavy powerful street car with automatic transmission (no need to worry about heel toeing), like S63, yes, I will pitch for ceramics. They usually (at least the Porsche ones) have a more positive initial bite that is confidence inspiring. And when a 4000lb, behemoth has to drop anchors from serious speeds, you can use all the confidence in the world.

OTOH, on a light, regularly tracked car, especially if manual, I would stay off them for now, till replacement costs come down a bit. They already are affordable on American cars that offer them, not so for the German ones.

I monitored the consumption after every track days

I am curious Savage, how did you monitor it?

 

[klier]

In conclusion, being that the car won't be used on the track, looks like I'll just go with the regular-fitted brakes.

Not really. The conclusion should be the carbon brakes, because they will be far superior on your 2000 kg + car than steel brakes. Plus they will last the car's life.

 

[Zafiro]

Ehh don't listen to Klier. He is just trying rip you off CB is a major money waster, again buy a diamond neckless to your girl.