I see a Jason and a big rotor, I SMASH like! After having thrashed that RS7 boy to those brakes feel amazing once they get some heat. Not bad cold, but not great. On that car, each front rotor is almost $6000 to replace. OUCH!
would have liked to see the negatives too. My experience with carbon brakes is in aircraft, not cars, so maybe things are different. Aviation uses them almost entirely for life expectancy, but they achieve all the benefits you mentioned. Downside (apart from cost) is that their brake performance while cold is pretty bad and unpredictable. The same brakes will pull left or right depending on the day. Once they warm up, however, they perform wonderfully. Brake fade is only part of the equation. You need to look at brake warm-ups too. In daily driving, you're brakes are usually cold. Only in track racing do your brakes typically remain at the ideal operating temperatures for carbon brakes. Unless the technology has changed for car applications, I do not see carbon brakes being an advisable choice for a daily driver
CCBs are great for the reasons Jason identified, but the major issue is simply cost. They are often 5x-10x more more as Jason mentioned. From a use standpoint if overheated (on a track day for example) they will wear quickly, which leads to replacement (read $$$.)
Perhaps the car's stability systems help the inconsistencies in cold carbon ceramic brakes. I wonder if there's different brake logic like programming battieres in newer cars.
I think you’re getting carbon ceramic rotors confused with carbon-carbon rotors that are only used in racing. Carbon-carbon rotors have a very narrow temperature window in which they operate correctly. This is not the case with carbon ceramics. They work correctly immediately from ambient temperature. I had carbon ceramics on my BMW M3 and never experienced what you described. What I did experience was 0 friction during the first 2 seconds of brake pedal pressure in wet conditions.
Brake system engineer here: in a street car application CSiC (Carbon-Siliconcarbide) Brakes nowadays perform almost identical to Cast-Iron brakes when cold. The real enemy for CSiC Brakes is water! To reduce that issue, the brakes will be slightly applied on the car to get rid of the waterlayer, when its raining and the brakes are cold. This method will be used every minutes without the driver noticing. Carbon-Carbon brake rotors ( used in racing) have a really low friction coefficient when cold and can't really be used without being warmed up.
It shouldn't be an option. That car can actually accelerate faster than it can brake, and it is extremely heavy. I'm surprised Musk hasn't developed a retro rocket package for that road missile.
I used to track the Ferrari 360 and then the 430. The brakes would disappear after 2 laps at Monza. One time I pressed the brake and NOTHING happened, so much so I though I pressed the clutch pedal. Car went straight into the grabble. There was sand and stones INSIDE the car somehow! Then the 458 came out with the ceramic brakes. I remember we trashed them for 3 straight days at Maranello from morning to dust (as part of their Pilota Sport program). Never missed a beat. Fresh and perfect every time. Like out of the factory! They're not just superior, they're ON ANOTHER PLANET !
As much as I love carbon ceramics I still have a few questions left: What about brake squeal? - I'm guessing this issue has been fixed, but the Veyron had the infamous brake squeal when not at operating temperature (in this case hot) What about not having good enough brake feel? - Once again I this issue was fixed, but the first few carbon ceramics were working in a way that nothing happens when you start pushing the brake in slowly, and then all of a sudden all braking power comes in. (I think the LP670-4 SV had this issue) And another question is how prone are they to damage? - I've heard a horror story of a stone getting between the rotors and the pads and it completley destoryed the carbon ceramic. As far as I know one little crack (not the surface crack you mentioned) and it's basically junk.
Good questions! Regarding brake squeal, this is generally more a pad related issue than rotor related; there are quiet pads and more track oriented pads which aren't as focused on minimizing brake noise. And with any rotor, there are many options as far as what pads to use with it. Regarding brake feel, again the brake pad is pretty critical; a high temp pad won't bite as much when the brakes are cold, but it will feel great once everything is up to temperature. The rotor itself is an incompressible surface, so as far as feel, there shouldn't be any difference between an iron or carbon rotor (if both are within a proper operating window). Regarding damage, I don't know. It's a good question for me to follow up with! *Edit:* I followed up w/ Brembo regarding damage, here's what they said: "Carbon ceramic is definitely more brittle than iron, and there is some risk of damage if handled inappropriately. I’ve never seen a disc damaged by a rock. I think the likelihood of that happening is very low. Rocks getting lodged in the wheel usually damage the caliper, not the disc. I have seen, however, discs get damaged when people remove wheels and let the wheel contact the edge of the disc. This results in a chip. A small chip
I have carbon ceramics on my alfa romeo giulia quadrifoglio. It very rarely squeals at very low speed. There is a bit of rumble or roar when stopping from high speed but I think it sounds and feels cool. At speed the brakes feel normal when driving normal. But when in stop go it is a bit hard to drive smoothly because they are very touchy. I love them
Most performance traditional brakes also have an ungodly amount of squeal. I don't so much think it's "not good enough" but more so different, it always takes time to get use to new tech and brake feel along with steering and clutch feel differ from manufacturer to manufacturer. From what I've seen they are about as easy to damage as traditional rotors, which does pose a problem because they are significantly more expensive. Once they have a non superficial crack they are trash they can't be resurfaced or fixed in any legitimate way. I think the cons outweigh the pros, but it definitely is personal preference. I do laugh at the Porsche guys who buy a spec'd to hell Porsche just to take off the carbon brakes and throw on steel ones that way they can save the resale value down the road, I really think the offset there doesn't pay out if you actually do the math. Provided nothing detrimental happens to your brakes anyhow.
@@alfaqvcarlos4406 I envy you. The Giulia is an absolutely stunning car. There's a few around where I live and I always get so distracted looking at them especially the Quadrifoglios. Have yet to see a Stelvio Quadrifolio, but the Stelvio is also very popular around where I am. One day I'll have a Giulia
When I had a Corvette, I kept up with the comments from the other track rats. Heavy users switched out their factory carbon rotors and matching calipers for AP Racing rotors and calipers. Carbon rotors lasted about a year of track use. The AP Racing setup could be purchased for less than the replacement rotors, and users stated their lap times improved. I'm sure a track only carbon setup would be faster than the iron rotor track setup, but only pro teams would be willing to pay for the difference. Cool stuff, Jason. Let's see more of your new garage!
I have no direct experience here, but I've read lots of stories of Porsche GT3 owners who switched from carbon to iron rotors for racing. The main reason was that the carbon didn't get much of an advantage and the iron rotors were considerably cheaper to replace at the end of the season. The carbon is the only choice if you're trying to set fastest laps, but if you only race a few weekends a year then it's not a concern. Lots of people are happy to finish mid pack (or finish at all) with iron rotors.
Additional info: if you are using Carbon on the track, you need to constantly weigh the rotors as that's the only method to determine when they are worn out. If you neglect to do this, you have a chance of catastrophic brake failure, not the funnest thing to happen while on a track. Iron rotors you can easily monitor without removing from the car and also put up with much more abuse. As you said, only pro teams are willing to put up with the extra cost and maintenance for carbon.
I too swapped out my CC rotors on my C7Z for the irons. Better braking modulation and much, much more compound to use than the CC. Lap times has also dropped, mainly because the CC was an on/off switch.
@@DougAdams-Outside You don't have to do that - you can feel that surface gets very rough when too much carbon gets burned out. At that case you check if they done or not by weight.
The intersection of energy loss due to wind-resistance and in-cabin energy use (which would encourage going faster to minimize time spent in the cabin). My bet would be 20-30 mph (similar speeds to a bicycle).
EV's range is very dependent on aerodynamic drag. It affects ICE cars some, but it can really hurt EV range more. Also, ICE cars tend to have multispeed transmissions, so you want to be in top gear for best range in an ICE car. In an EV car with one gear, the slower the better. It becomes down to how much longer do you want to make your trip to be to get more range. Bear in mind that an electric motor is 90% efficient, while an ICE gas engine is about 33% efficient. The energy density of batteries (very low) means you start your journey with much less available energy, so efficiency and aerodynamic drag are a big deal for EV's.
Efficient really slow. Fast you can drive fast as long as fast charging is available everywhere. Fastest way to travel a model 3 is 190kph when 200kw charging is available and you only charge up to ~70%.
I think the question we should all ask is: What is the best brake pad for Carbon Rotors? The best quality rotors is definitely important, but having the right brake pads will take full advantage of it, otherwise, it will be a waste of money.
There is no one-size-fits-all, as I understand it. I think it has more to do with how a specific set of rotors gets along with a specific set of brake pads.
@@RB-xv4si I second that. I don’t have any data on these rotors, nor have I started looking into this part of automotive tech. Simply operating from assumptions: Brake system simply needs to turn from kinetic/movement into heat energy. Grinding away the iron on an iron rotor is an unfortunate side-effect. (Sure, grinding also requires energy, but that’s not what we focusing on here.) If a better rotor is available, but cost 10X, I would HOPE the manufacturer has found a pad formulation that takes advantage of the new rotor tech, without aggressively grinding down that new & expensive rotor. Turning from speed into heat using friction, but without grinding away on the rotor like 80-grit sandpaper on a block of brie (soft cheese).
Jason! This has been a phenomenal video - very informative and very entertaining. I hope you have no regrets on scaling back the frequency of your videos, because high-quality like this trumps quantity any day.
Really appreciate the comment, Finian. While the channel has certainly dipped in views, I'm really happy with the transition as it has allowed for me to have a much better work/life balance. Thank you, thank you!!
Brembo got started in racing a heck of a lot earlier than 1975 - on motorcycles. By the 1980s, they were standard fitment on virtually all Italian motorcycles, and some other European brands, as well as being a popular upgrade for enthusiasts fed up with Japanese stainless steel discs, which basically had no wet weather braking for the first second or 5 of each application. Sintered metal pads solved that, but ate discs at an alarming rate. Brembo used cast iron, and the surface rust formed so fast that wet weather braking was instant and predictable, as the rust broke up the water film on the disk. Goodbye to booking your braking points on a calendar. On high-performance motorcycles, they improved weight by using thinner disks and making the disks instead of the callipers do the floating. Sprung to unsprung mass ratio is an item that is so important I feel it should be a required listing in the vehicle specification. And yes, I've worked on systems from end-of-life junkers to top-tier motorsports with a sidestep into Citroen systems, on their own vehicles and the ones they licensed to Mercedes and Bentley. The additional spring added by tyres is so vital that I'm not a fan of the super low profile tyres, which may improve steering feel, but have huge suspension disadvantages (as well as being an enormous pain in the ass to fit). They also damage far more easily, and in doing so easily damage the rim. Of course, inboard discs can be exposed to more airflow and have unsprung mass reduced in proportion to how far inboard they are positioned.
If an artist paints four paintings a year, he must sell them at a high premium to make his money. If a print shop mass produces printed artwork by the thousands every month, they don't need to have a super high premium per item to cover overhead, low per unit cost with scales of economy, and still make a profit. This is a radical example of the idea, but you get the picture. Luxury brands and small production lines have no choice but to charge large to make their business function.
I find it telling that a lot of people run iron rotors on the track but put the carbon ceramics back on for the street. In a street application they last forever, and you get the benefit of lighter unsprung weight and no dust on your shiny Concours wheels. On the track, while performance with CCBs would be better, with aggressive pads and aggressive usage the wear is greatly accelerated, and many owners just don't want to smash on rotors that cost as much as a whole Nissan Z. You may burn up iron rotors by the pallet load, but a pallet of irons is a lot cheaper than a set of ceramics.
I would somewhat disagree with improving ride quality. If a manufacture uses a specific tire and wheel combo on an OE setup. Those dampers are tuned using that specific rotational mass. When you alter that making it lighter or heavier. You’re now potentially out of the range of the specific dampers. So on normal roads with pot holes and expansion joints that lighter wheel/tire/brake combination now deflects easier because of its reduced mass. This transmits even more harshness into the cabin. I had a MK7 golf R that I did the same thing as you did. Went from factory 19” wheel and tire combo to a smaller 18” forged wheel and tire combo. Dropping almost 6lbs a corner. The ride actually became so jarring and unbearable I found the heaviest set of cast 18’s I could to get some weight back on the hubs. This in turn made a huge difference and returned it back closer to factory ride quality.
@@EngineeringExplained Oh yeah with that I completely agree with. But at the same time it’s inevitable that with less rotating mass, the entire hub assembly will react more/faster to a smaller imperfections in the road as compared to a heavier setup. In turn this will transmit more into the cabin making your ride quality “feel” worse. Although your wheel may be in contact with the road more which increases grip since the suspension can push it down quicker. With a lighter wheel the opposite is true as well. It can just as easily be pushed up by smaller bumps that the heavier setup may not have been as affected by. No factory non adjustable suspension can react to that change. So I bet if you took the same two cars out with factory wheel setups the lighter setup will have a slightly worse ride quality.
I should also state that those results can be heavily skewed based on how much weight you’re actually saving and the difference in size wall size. When you step down a wheel size or even two yet keep the same overall diameter tire. That extra sidewall will help absorb those smaller bumps. That can only go so far though. If you start dropping 5lbs+ a corner. No amount of sidewall is going to stop you from feeling those little bumps in the road you didn’t before. If you’re keeping the whee and tire combination the same and shaving weight via rotors, titanium lug nuts, calipers, etc. Then you will most definitely notice a ride quality change for the worse.
Jason - your original question, “why so expensive” is actually best answered by, “Marketing 101”. “Marketing 101” dictates: THERE IS NO RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COST AND PRICE. Any manager who fails to understand this basic business concept is fundamentally incompetent and deserves to be fired. (SIDE NOTE: this is why a lot of engineers are bad managers).
NAO pads or Ceramic pads. Ceramic being more expensive but also lasting longer and less dust, less sound, better wear on your rotors. I just bought Carbon ceramic rotors and had to buy pads separately from 'Endless'. W008 compound, $1,800 for front and rear.
This video is for suckers there’s no reason to pay that much for a rotor unless you have tons of money to give away. But for average people no don’t think about it it’s not worth anymore than 50-75 for pair of rotors
The actual R&D of the rotor nowadays probably is pretty trivial but the manufacturing process will certainly be much more challenging than for steel discs - though steel discs probably will be much challenging to produce at a price point since their price point actually matters where as with carbon ceramics it isn't the even a top3 thing.
Can they be made for motorcycles? Rotational mass is a massive issue there to the point people pay a similar amount for a pair of carbon fibre wheels, but I'm not familiar with carbon discs in the bike space. Maybe just not enough of a market to justify it, or possibly the out in the open nature means they're too likely to be damaged?
Good question. I don't know if carbon rotors could be made thin enough to be reliable on a bike. Imagine what a carbon rotor failure on the front wheel of a motorcycle would do.
You can save some unsprung weight on your MX-5 by installing Flyin' Miata's Big Little Brake kit. Wilwood calipers all around, even lighter than the front Brembos that are so expensive from Mazda. The kit is around $1,100. I, a 75yo man, did it myself in my driveway. They come with braided SS hoses, I added one way bleeder valves so it was a one man job. Great brake feel, easy pad replacement, just pull the pins and slip in new pads.
Awesome to hear! Yeah I have the Brembo kit on mine from the factory, so not really looking to upgrade (bought it used, not quite the price jump). Also comes with the BBS wheels which I love.
@@EngineeringExplained You can get just the rear brakes, a nice upgrade and a big weight savings. The handbrake isn't very strong on the Wilwood kit but it's adequate.
@Craig Davies Goodness I hope not. It can be fairly dusty here. As far as I know my work has taken samples and deemed it non hazardous. A college of mine retired last year after working with carbon for 30 years and seemed in good health.
My Porsche GTS came with PCCBs as an option. As a "used" vehicle purchase, I could not turn down a car with a mere 98 miles on it after it was 3y 1m old. If I had bought the car new, I would have passed on PCCBs, but since this car came with them, no regrets now that I have them. No rust, no brake dust and they will last me the life of the car, even if I did track it now and then. One of our regional PCA directors once said, "what is the point to PCCBs"? I guess I could say "what is the point to having a car that does 180+ MPH on a public road". Sounds like sour grapes to me as he could not afford a 911.
I dare to disagree - lack of sense doesn't necessarily correspond to lack of money. If I WANTED a sport car, I'd buy an NSX but never (NEVER!) a porsche. To me, reliability and comfort are way more important than anything else. I remember doing an inspection on a broken down 911, and the porsche shop owner proudly announced that he had managed to wear out breaks in 11,000 miles. Silly at best.
@@nofyfb123 Well I guess we could talk about Acuras having looked at the old NSX of a couple of decades ago. Nice, but too much plastic, too Japanese and I have owned many and still own a Japanese car as a daily driver. Reliable but boring. As for the recent NSX, I haven't seen one on the road and they have been around for about 5 years. Grossly overpriced compared to my GTS. Now lets talk about automatic transmission issues in an Acura. By the way, if anyone is wearing brakes out in 11,000 miles, they are either on the track a lot or have brake issues? I guess you forgot to ask how old the car was and if it was proprtly maintained.
@@a.c.e.7568 1. For me, Japanese is a HUGE advantage over anything else, especially European 2. There is nothing exciting about sitting on the side of a road waiting for a tow truck with subsequent sitting at a stealer's waiting room 3. It was not about just wearing brakes out in 11,000 miles - it's about being proud of it. Thus skewed mentality. 4. I leave in the middle of nowhere and mostly drive back roads, and nobody is slower here than sports cars. Especially all kinds of mustangs and corvettes. 5. The one who leaves the intersection first comes to the finish first rather rather than the one who needs a couple of seconds to figure out that it's already green and is not going to get any greener, and from my experience, it's the sport car driver. There are exceptions, though - some leave their tires on the asphalt just to come to a screeching stop at the next traffic light. 6. I don't remember exact mileage of the 911 I referenced but first, I was involved with low mileage vehicles and it belonged to a dedicated porsche shop owner so it was babied. 7. I am not a huge honda fan - since the Old Man died (1999?), it's not nearly as reliable as it used to be And finally, WHO IN THE HELL DRIVES A SPORTS CAR WITH AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION?!?!?!? But - since you mentioned that, thank you for making my point.
@@nofyfb123 Well in my 45+ years of driving, I have only been stranded once...in my Honda. The catalytic converter clogged on a 7.5 year old car with a mere 92,115 miles. Althoug not stranded in my first new car, a Ford (before I knew something about cars...lol), a hydraulic lifter completely collapsed after a 14 months. I do my own work to a higher level than the vast majority of shops, why my cars last 14+ years before going to a friend.
@@a.c.e.7568 Like I said, since about 2000, honda has been consistently going downhill. I sold the last one - 1998 Civic - a couple of years ago, and I wouldn't touch it ever again. Statistically, among about 20,000 vehicle mechanical failures I investigated over almost 20 years in the field, European brands were champions in number/frequency of problems. To be fair, all kinds of pontiacs, chryslers, and fords take honorable close second place. I saw a bwm with 48,000 miles and 50 (FIFTY!!!) repairs - not maintenance but repair visits. In my practice, maximum number of INDEPENDENT defects at one given point was 18. Yes, EIGHTEEN. One pontiac, one jag, and one mb. Considering generally/statistically low miles driven, porsche is also at the bottom of the list. The most common issues I've dealt with included but are not limited to leaking coolant cooler o'rings and all kinds of obscenely expensive electronic/electric failures. Mechanically, they were sound. Even I - being 5'7"/165 lbs - am not comfortable getting in and out of most sports cars (exceptions: NSX, Supra, S2000), and driving a porsche can be compared to being dragged by your legs while sitting on your ass. Quite frankly, a Civic is more comfortable...
Would love to see you take a deeper dive into the two piece rotors and how the construction works on a design level. I've always been curious about the fastenings and why they "are the way they are"
Good video...I have some experience with both brakes materials on Porsche cars and I track a lot my cars..one think that we need to get clear from the start is that racing cars don't use Carbon Ceramics, they use Carbon-Carbon technology. On which one to choose my last two cars have been spec with Iron rotors. PCCBs do weight about 20 lbs less (full system) and that's unsprung weight... but I can always swap the rotors for a good quality aftermarket rotor and save some...not all 20 lbs. But then we have another problem...on GT4/GT3 with PCCB you can't use 19" wheels because the rotor is 410 mm vs 380, that larger size is needed to dissipate the heat. With a good quality performance wheel and racing DOT tire combo in 19" I have been able to drop 26 lbs for the 4 corners. BTW...don't ever drop a wheel on a PCCB rotor...that would be an expensive mistake. On braking performance once I change pads to a quality, track oriented one like Ferodo/PFC/ Pagid there's no advantage to PCCB and a good chance the Iron rotor will out-break the PCCB at a much lower cost with improved pedal feel....with Iron you have a great choice of pads not so much with PCCBs. So the only benefits I see are reduction on unsprung weight and no dust...in case you hate cleaning wheels.
@@pkt1213 And to make matters WORSE, you retain the old faded black inner "hat". The 1200 buys you what they call "friction rings" and the $100 hardware kit. Changing out the friction ring is a real PITA involving tedious disassembly of old Loctited hardware and then VERY carefully torqueing and Loctiting new hardware to fasten the new ghastly expensive rings to your old inner hat. Long long ago, I did track the car...rarely. I sometimes used racing pads and $80 per liter Castrol FRS brake fluid. I never boiled fluid, experienced any brake fade even at Sebring, or warped a rotor. Now??? Two piece rotors are waaaaay over kill for the street. Apparently, I have NO other option. There is no one piece rotor fitment for my Brembo GT set up. Six piston in front and 4 in the back. The cost in 2009 was $7K. Now its over $10k!! for the four wheel kit. That is without any installation fees. They do come with SS braided brake lines. I bought titanium heat shields for the front pads. Oh, and while racing pads WILL stop you incredibly fast, they tear up the rotors faster!
Please do a video explaining different Tire Pressure Monitoring systems; why do some systems show the pressure for each tire (Hundai, Kia, etc.) vs. others that only have a low warning light (Mazda CX-5). Thanks
Probably not enough for a video there. The difference is actually really simple, on cars that support individual pressure there is a sensor on the tire to actually measure that pressure. Those can go bad individually and need to be changed over/replaced when you get new tires. If your car can only say low pressure it is just using the stability control to see that one tire is a different diameter than the other, and thus one tire has less pressure. No sensors on the actual tire. But the car can only guess as to what is actually wrong and it takes longer for it to figure out that there is a problem.
I don't think there's really any difference unless you know if the car has in wheel pressure sensors or not. The simple warning light is the most basic system, but it still works the same way. If you use the proper scan tool to get into the TPMS system on a "warning light only" car, you can still read the individual tire pressures, but the auto manufacturer simply gives you no means to read it, just triggers the light under a certain pressure. However there is a system out there (don't know if it's still in use) that triggered the light if wheel speed was different, I know Toyota had these for a period, and they have a button you can press to relearn the system. Ford may have had it, which might be the system in your Mazda... Just my 2c... Would like to know for sure though. I am under the impression all systems are sensor type these days.
That's entirely up to the manufacturer. All new cars have the wheel mounted sensors and are monitoring the actual pressure real time. Mfr decides if they want to show you those values or just have a warning light that's triggered when a sensor reads a value less than a specific tire pressure number. Same question as why don't all cars show the oil pressure, oil temperature, and coolant temperature? Often, too much information is worse than not enough information. K.I.S.S. Most people just want to know when there is a problem and prefer the warning light.
Another thing to note is that the carbon ceramic rotors on a road car are actually different than those on a race car. The ones for road car can be made in a less expensive fashion because they're not expected to be used frequently on a race track.
You forgot to mention that manufacturers just markup carbon ceramics to an insane amount because they can. And that a lot of people in Motorsport are actually ditching carbons lately for a high quality steel.
Even though its true that the carbon ceramic discs have "unlimited" life, in the real world not so much. They are brittle and can be chipped by stones etc and have to changed because of imbalance. Often times it is also not possible to buy only the center section if it is warped, and then the whole disc will have to be changed. It is a reason that 10 year old cars with carbon brakes usually are worth less than a similiar one with steel brakes.
I always highly appreciate the symmetry and attention to detail you have with the background panels/table/camera angle. Just shows that you're willing to spend that little bit of extra time to do that!
They should put these in Teslas and other EV's where most of the everyday driving braking is done by regen. EV's could really benefit from lighter unsprung weight and potentially smaller brakes allowing for smaller wheels.
Disadvantages; (1) extreme brittleness; if the wheel touches even a little the disk they can crack and need replacement. (2) poor cold disk performance. When used as a daily driver, if your brakes are cold and wet they will not bite as much as cast iron (3) resale value of cars with carbon ceramics are lower than equivalent with cast iron. The reason is the same as for any car with v expensive spare parts in proportion of the value of the used car. $10k bill to replace rotors on a car worth 20-30k down the line is not a value proposition
They cost that much because they charge that much. After nearly 20 years of manufacturing for production cars there doesn't seem to be any incentive to come up with any way to increase the efficiency of manufacturing these rotors. For a daily driver, these carbon ceramic rotors are not necessary.
Nobody needs any performance related stuff for daily driving, not even engines bigger than 1,4L turbo, or expensive hifi….or… Nothing really is needed, unless we just want to:)
lol I had absolutely no idea that most brake dust comes from the rotor. I always just figured it was the pads, but now that I think about it it makes a lot of sense.
It actually depends on the specific mix of pad and disc - softer pads were fast and are kinder to the disk, harder pads wear more slowly and eat discs faster, plus they have a slightly less consistent feel.
9:53 most brake dust come from grinding down the rotor is lie. Most brake dust comes from pad wear. If you don’t believe me. Put some Detroit Axle pads on your car.
Great and informative video Jason. I do disagree with one part though. You said that brake dust was a result of the disc wearing down. Are you sure about that? While I don't pretend to be an expert, I have been around racecars for a lot of years and my thoughts are that brake dust has more to do with the brake pads than the disc.
Indeed, there are two components to friction: abrasion and adhesion. You need a balance. OE tends to favour abrasion and hence more brake dust. Folks who like clean cars (but not cleaning their wheels every week) want low dust alternative. However, some that major on low dust can rely too much on adhesion which then results in a glazed surface. I forget now whether it was Akebono Euros or PBR Deluxe but I experienced low bite within the first 100 miles and I never want to experience that again. Nor having to throw away glazed and unevenly worn discs.
Not mentioned - A lot of rich people just get all the options when buying an expensive car, so it's easy to charge $10k for your Carbon Ceramic brakes, even if they're only worth $7k.
Scales of economy; if you only make handfuls of sales to the people who can afford the expensive item or service, you HAVE to charge more money to make your profits possible. If you sell millions upon millions of cheap goods, you don't need the same profit margin to turn a profit. Simple economics.
they dont even race in IMSA with carbon brakes, they use steel. Steel rotors have a more consistent feel under braking. If you do want lighter weight rotors, a good 2 piece rotor has good weight savings too over 1 piece rotors
Large cast iron rotors for my F150 were only $25 each...and they even have a E-brake drum on the inside of it. How iron rotors could sell for $1k is completely baffling to me.
Your F-150 is not only the best selling consumer truck, but also a major fleet vehicle. You're talking about one of the cheapest, most mass produced one piece cast iron rotors on the market. The manufacturer can make them very quickly, and in huge numbers making them very cheap. They're a dime a dozen with many different manufacturers making them and competing. Now imagine a niche sports car or SUV with high performance calipers and huge 2 piece rotors that you can only buy from one or two sources. These parts are much more specialized, only used on certain trims of the vehicle. They are made in much smaller batches, and take much longer to make. You've got a cast iron ring with maybe slots or drilled holes, a billet aluminum hat for the ring to bolt to, and hardware to hold it all together. This requires a wider variety of materials, more specialized manufacturing tooling, more complex engineering, and more time to produce. Not to mention if you drive a foreign car these parts probably need to be imported as needed from other countries. All of this extra work for something you won't sell many of. Gotta charge much much more to make all that worth your while.
Im surprised you didnt explain the difference between carbon ceramic matrix rotors you find on OEM and the Carbon Carbon you find on race cars. They are different and cannot be compared with each other. You used them interchangeably and they cannot be. Race teams do not use CCM's they use Carbon Carbon. They are a world of difference between them.
The braking power with the carbon ceramic rotor is unbelievable! If you're going super fast and about to crash, the carbon ceramic will stop in no time to save your car and your life. I love these carbon ceramics.
I was literally wondering how much performance my car would gain by dropping 60ish pounds, and then I seen we have the exact same car and you tested it for me 😂 Thanks for the quick answer!
Dear Brembo, I'd like to volunteer to test your carbon ceramic rotors on my 2007 Honda S2000. Please send them along as soon as possible. Thank you, COS2KOwner
Been running Carbon Ceramic discs on my 1995 E36 M3 GT since 2007 !! Quite sure I was the first one World Wide to run Ceramics on a road legal BMW. Amazing on the track, great on the road. 370x38mm with 8 Piston Brembo calipers. Came from a McLaren SLR.
Great video, Jason, as always! Could you talk about how to know when a carbon ceramic rotor needs to be replaced? On an iron rotor, one can measure thickness, see cracks, and so on. How does one know when it is appropriate to replace a CC rotor?
My 500hp AC had small 1 pot iron discs from a 76 Ford Pinto and no brake booster. The car weighs 950 kg and that is key compared to a 2.3t 911 or Gatti. The disc weight is 2kg. The steelie nascar rim is 6kg. The 215/65-14 7kg. Tot unsprung mass is 30kg compared to a 911 60kg. This works better for many good reasons.
I can't believe an engineer just said "ten times less". You mean "one tenth of". ten times less is -9x and there can't be a negative wear rate physically.
Hey Jason, thanks for another great video! - question. I have a C63s AMG with carbon ceramics. I live in Denmark, where we’re at below 0 degrees Celsius these days with snow. Today i noticed a massive difference in breaking - normally my breaks are so strong, i barely need to press on the pedal to achieve the daily breaking and pressing just slightly harder (like, maybe 20% of the pedal instead of the usual 5-10%) i can feel the stopping power. Today, it felt like they had almost no breaking power. I even tried to press the break pedal hard or all the way but the breaking was much weaker than usual. I was wondering if carbon breaks needs to be at a minimum temperature before working normally, or if they get weakened in very cold weather (0 or -1 degrees C) ??
@@undergroundoutlaw411 hey, no no, not the issue - just fade.. like, no grip or breaking power - day after, it was 4 degrees and that helped but still not what it used to be maybe a week ago when we had 8 degrees so i’m thinking temp is a big factor when you’re down in the frost temps
For the vast, vast majority of cars these make zero sense, for the high performance and track oriented cars I can see the advantage. Note to self if I’m ever looking at a used car that has these, see how many miles it has and if it’s a lot run like the wind.
Interesting video. "Most brake dust comes from iron rotors." I'm going to need a citation on that. I'd be completely shocked if that was true. Honestly, all the advantages listed are real, but given how brakes are actually used on street cars, not very important. Cool technology that may eventually trickle down though.
You spent a lot of time to explain how weight savings improve handling. Unless serious tracks driving, it may be wiser to replace lighter wheels. More importantly, I can see the nice looking wheels, but not the ceramic brakes. That's my point of view.
Idk about relieving weight out of a tuned suspension, I mean, if one does that in a race car where you can change spring rates, rebound and so on it’s ok, but in a production car where everything is tuned to work with what it has I have my doubts
I agree, when it comes to comfort, more unsprung weight resists movement more. If you reduce the unsprung weight without reducing damping, more of that movement will be felt in the car. If you can reduce the damping, I think you will see the benefits of more grip, and better comfort. Please explain if I’m wrong. Thanks. Once again great video.
@@brianmichael316 You are mistaken because the damping acts against the forces caused by the road surface. The unsprung weight change will not reduce or increase those forces. If it did, you would feel a reduction in ride quality when you bought new tires. The weights of various brands and types of tires vary by several pounds. No one ever says their new tires caused their car to ride rough or harsh.
“A lighter wheel which readily rebounds from road bumps will have more grip and more constant grip when tracking over an imperfect road. For this reason, lighter wheels are sought especially for high-performance applications. However, the lighter wheel will soak up less vibration. The irregularities of the road surface will transfer to the cabin through the suspension and hence ride quality and road noise are worse. For longer duration bumps that the wheels follow, greater unsprung mass causes more energy to be absorbed by the wheels and makes the ride worse.” Found some more info. We were both partially right. Small bumps will be more apparent with reduced unsprung weight, but large movements will be better controlled.
Most car owners Only change the brake rotors when a mechanic tells them that they need to be changed, and mechanics tend to go by Nothing but LOOKS, like grooves and cracks in the rotor. so in reality, if you did fit carbon ceramic disks on your car, make sure your car is only touched by a mechanic who knows all about these rotors. There should be something like a stress test for brake disks, because again, in my experience most mechanics ONLY do a visual inspection, and many brake disks are replaced unnecessarily……….
If unsprung mass does so much, how come the brakes doesn't sit further in at the differential? Sure the maintenance costs will be higher since it's more complicated to change, but on a performance car performance should be more important. Maby it would take too much room to be a reasonable solusion.
@@jamesengland7461 Yeah, guess you're right. It may not be possible to have a brake servo strong enough to cope with smaler brakes either. Interesting thoughts tho :)
Attention to aLL car expert. Just using water to cooL down disc brake & brake pad. I suggest about a miliLiter per minute dropping on disc brake directly is very safe whilLe traveling more than 100 mph. to prevent faiL brake due to overheating. Or simply apply radiator on brake pad / disc brake. BECAUSE SAFETY IS EVERYTHING
New carbon ceramic brakes for my 2019 392 charger is only 3600 bucks. Not extremely expensive IMO. If you think about it and do the work yourself, iron brakes are only 500 bucks for a complete set. If you replace your brakes every 30 thousand miles that's only 1800 bucks for 120,000 miles. Seems like standard brakes are better price wise. Also, how often do pads get replaced on carbon ceramic rotors?
Sure, I wouldn't expect anything else on high-end luxury performance cars, supercars and hypercards. Would I invest to put these on a street sports car? No. Iron has its many downsides by cost in not one, at the end of the day, we have to pay the bills. I will say that I'm surprised these aren't on more high-end pickup trucks. Heck, if I'm going to drop $80-$90K on a truck, I'd expect ceramic brakes!... Of course, I don't, so at a more reasonable $45K, I don't expect 1/4 of my truck's cost to just be in the brakes, lol.
About 6 months ago i bought 4 used calipers/rotors from a totaled Camaro ZL1 for $1200. Rn there’s a listing up on ebay for the same 4 calipers/rotors for $12,000. However they’re brand new. I asked why and the guy said it’s bc theres a shortage. Kinda ridiculous
I have a very original C3 1969 corvette which has 4 wheel ventilated disk brakes which are unboosted! Trying to keep the car as original as I can but brakes aren’t great! What pad would you recommend for improved stopping power. Dust and noise not critical! Thanks David
I have a porsce 911(922) turbo . The other day some old man with a 922 like mine was touting the superiority of his convertible s with ceramics. Not really. There's better places to spend option money when his was 157 and mine was 118. My iron brakes will put you through the windshield. Carbon brakes are a 13k option. I don't think so... I'd rather have aftermarket turbo upgrades and lighter wheels than brake fade advantages. Promise I'd smoke him on the track anyway.
Okay, I love the information. But, let's compare apples to apples. They have to use high quality fasteners because they last longer? Fair enough, but.... Typical Iron/steel Cast rotors don't have any fasteners. Weird, right? The ones you show aren't typical--nor are they cross drilled and slotted. Again, apples to apples, please. I have cross drilled slotted iron rotors on all 4 corners for less than $200. Is Brembo Iron better? My greatest takeaway from this is that we need better manufacturing processes for carbon rotors that bring the price down--flat screen TVs are 5% of their original price 20 years ago.....and carbon rotors have been around that long. If your brakes judder, get them resurfaced. Not a big deal--nor is avoiding it. Lots of brake dust is.....pad material. Kinda why pads get replaced more often than rotors, even with resurfacing. Presumably, more pad material is worn off by using carbon discs, comparably, so..... I didn't really think iron powder (from the rotor) was such a huge issue for you. And yeah, except when they're rusty after sitting too long outside, my cross drilled iron rotors look just as awesome from 5 feet away--and most people don't get up close enough to see the unique pattern of cracks on carbon brakes. Seriously, they see you from the car next to you. Also, Wilwood and Baer make pretty good brakes, too.
Overdone brakes in traffic? That is how rear end accidents happen. And what difference does it make if your car is smashed up in the front or the rear. LEARN TO DRIVE, so that you won't get rear-ended! Nearly all of rear-end accidents are avoidable. And yes, with about 2 million urban miles driven, I am speaking from experience.
Why so expensive #5: because people will pay for it. For those who have that kind of money, high price means exclusivity. Selling price has a lot more to do with what people will pay (perceived benefit) than what it costs to build. A $100k Tesla costs a lot less to make than a $100k Porsche…but people will pay for both. Econ 101…you are welcome.
I use ceramic tiles from my kitchen for my brakes.Far cheaper and if I need to replace them, I can just grab some from my home depot.
I'd maybe suggest starting at Home Depot, so you still have a kitchen floor.
Porcelain is another option for low cost.
I believe Animal Free Fur Pelts and Rubber Bands are the recommended optional upgrade for this kind of brake setup
I use an ironing board for my rear spoiler and clip boards for my sun visors. Quids in.
Have you ever thought about upgrading to CARBON CERAMIC TILES?
If you do a break delete you have even less unsprung mass
If you do an axle delete even more so!
Jesse's Jetta knows.
I am surprised that inboard brakes are not more of a thing.
@@PaulMorris-UK probably would be a pain to package when there's this big open space between the hub and tyre you can use
You could also leave the wheels and tires back in the garage. That would make the brake delete a lot safer, too.
Me: Bro… Do you lift??
Jason: Yes… **Puts car on car lift**
I just push this button and up it goes!
@@EngineeringExplained **Hit Subscribe Button**
Up Engineering Explained subscribers go! :)
But if the driver lost 40lbs, they could save thousands of dollars on brakes. 🤔
I see a Jason and a big rotor, I SMASH like! After having thrashed that RS7 boy to those brakes feel amazing once they get some heat. Not bad cold, but not great. On that car, each front rotor is almost $6000 to replace. OUCH!
They are amazing. Have them on my S8+.
Yes very good brakes, I work for Audi a brake job cost $15,000 per axle I’ve only done one set on an R8 they last a long time
So humble of you 😜
New RS models are $10,000+ now, insane
Love it!
would have liked to see the negatives too. My experience with carbon brakes is in aircraft, not cars, so maybe things are different. Aviation uses them almost entirely for life expectancy, but they achieve all the benefits you mentioned. Downside (apart from cost) is that their brake performance while cold is pretty bad and unpredictable. The same brakes will pull left or right depending on the day. Once they warm up, however, they perform wonderfully. Brake fade is only part of the equation. You need to look at brake warm-ups too. In daily driving, you're brakes are usually cold. Only in track racing do your brakes typically remain at the ideal operating temperatures for carbon brakes. Unless the technology has changed for car applications, I do not see carbon brakes being an advisable choice for a daily driver
CCBs are great for the reasons Jason identified, but the major issue is simply cost. They are often 5x-10x more more as Jason mentioned. From a use standpoint if overheated (on a track day for example) they will wear quickly, which leads to replacement (read $$$.)
Seems like weight savings would play a major role in aircraft, no? I guess down time to replace brakes is as important.
Perhaps the car's stability systems help the inconsistencies in cold carbon ceramic brakes. I wonder if there's different brake logic like programming battieres in newer cars.
I think you’re getting carbon ceramic rotors confused with carbon-carbon rotors that are only used in racing. Carbon-carbon rotors have a very narrow temperature window in which they operate correctly. This is not the case with carbon ceramics. They work correctly immediately from ambient temperature. I had carbon ceramics on my BMW M3 and never experienced what you described. What I did experience was 0 friction during the first 2 seconds of brake pedal pressure in wet conditions.
Brake system engineer here: in a street car application CSiC (Carbon-Siliconcarbide) Brakes nowadays perform almost identical to Cast-Iron brakes when cold. The real enemy for CSiC Brakes is water! To reduce that issue, the brakes will be slightly applied on the car to get rid of the waterlayer, when its raining and the brakes are cold. This method will be used every minutes without the driver noticing.
Carbon-Carbon brake rotors ( used in racing) have a really low friction coefficient when cold and can't really be used without being warmed up.
Gym bro reaction:
COME ON! You can do it! Push Push Push! Dont give up!
lesson: Gym Bros are super supportive
Considering that he might no lift weights those curls are actually impressive
Tesla Model S Plaid Carbon Ceramic Brake Kit
$20,000 .. rotors, pads, calipers, and a bottle of fluid! 21" wheels required
Wow! Great that they've released an option.
An option sold by Tesla?
It shouldn't be an option. That car can actually accelerate faster than it can brake, and it is extremely heavy. I'm surprised Musk hasn't developed a retro rocket package for that road missile.
Understood. I see that tesla will sell the installed option in mid 2022. I wonder if it will be included standard on the plaid in the future.
I used to track the Ferrari 360 and then the 430. The brakes would disappear after 2 laps at Monza. One time I pressed the brake and NOTHING happened, so much so I though I pressed the clutch pedal. Car went straight into the grabble. There was sand and stones INSIDE the car somehow!
Then the 458 came out with the ceramic brakes. I remember we trashed them for 3 straight days at Maranello from morning to dust (as part of their Pilota Sport program).
Never missed a beat. Fresh and perfect every time. Like out of the factory!
They're not just superior, they're ON ANOTHER PLANET !
As much as I love carbon ceramics I still have a few questions left:
What about brake squeal? - I'm guessing this issue has been fixed, but the Veyron had the infamous brake squeal when not at operating temperature (in this case hot)
What about not having good enough brake feel? - Once again I this issue was fixed, but the first few carbon ceramics were working in a way that nothing happens when you start pushing the brake in slowly, and then all of a sudden all braking power comes in. (I think the LP670-4 SV had this issue)
And another question is how prone are they to damage? - I've heard a horror story of a stone getting between the rotors and the pads and it completley destoryed the carbon ceramic. As far as I know one little crack (not the surface crack you mentioned) and it's basically junk.
Good questions!
Regarding brake squeal, this is generally more a pad related issue than rotor related; there are quiet pads and more track oriented pads which aren't as focused on minimizing brake noise. And with any rotor, there are many options as far as what pads to use with it.
Regarding brake feel, again the brake pad is pretty critical; a high temp pad won't bite as much when the brakes are cold, but it will feel great once everything is up to temperature. The rotor itself is an incompressible surface, so as far as feel, there shouldn't be any difference between an iron or carbon rotor (if both are within a proper operating window).
Regarding damage, I don't know. It's a good question for me to follow up with!
*Edit:* I followed up w/ Brembo regarding damage, here's what they said: "Carbon ceramic is definitely more brittle than iron, and there is some risk of damage if handled inappropriately.
I’ve never seen a disc damaged by a rock. I think the likelihood of that happening is very low. Rocks getting lodged in the wheel usually damage the caliper, not the disc.
I have seen, however, discs get damaged when people remove wheels and let the wheel contact the edge of the disc. This results in a chip. A small chip
I have carbon ceramics on my alfa romeo giulia quadrifoglio. It very rarely squeals at very low speed. There is a bit of rumble or roar when stopping from high speed but I think it sounds and feels cool. At speed the brakes feel normal when driving normal. But when in stop go it is a bit hard to drive smoothly because they are very touchy. I love them
Most performance traditional brakes also have an ungodly amount of squeal.
I don't so much think it's "not good enough" but more so different, it always takes time to get use to new tech and brake feel along with steering and clutch feel differ from manufacturer to manufacturer.
From what I've seen they are about as easy to damage as traditional rotors, which does pose a problem because they are significantly more expensive. Once they have a non superficial crack they are trash they can't be resurfaced or fixed in any legitimate way.
I think the cons outweigh the pros, but it definitely is personal preference. I do laugh at the Porsche guys who buy a spec'd to hell Porsche just to take off the carbon brakes and throw on steel ones that way they can save the resale value down the road, I really think the offset there doesn't pay out if you actually do the math. Provided nothing detrimental happens to your brakes anyhow.
@@alfaqvcarlos4406 I envy you. The Giulia is an absolutely stunning car. There's a few around where I live and I always get so distracted looking at them especially the Quadrifoglios. Have yet to see a Stelvio Quadrifolio, but the Stelvio is also very popular around where I am. One day I'll have a Giulia
@@Yesthatsmyfirstname 2 years ago I thought I'd never have one. I wish you luck. They are truly amazing cars
When I had a Corvette, I kept up with the comments from the other track rats. Heavy users switched out their factory carbon rotors and matching calipers for AP Racing rotors and calipers. Carbon rotors lasted about a year of track use. The AP Racing setup could be purchased for less than the replacement rotors, and users stated their lap times improved. I'm sure a track only carbon setup would be faster than the iron rotor track setup, but only pro teams would be willing to pay for the difference. Cool stuff, Jason. Let's see more of your new garage!
Interesting insight, thanks for sharing!
I have no direct experience here, but I've read lots of stories of Porsche GT3 owners who switched from carbon to iron rotors for racing. The main reason was that the carbon didn't get much of an advantage and the iron rotors were considerably cheaper to replace at the end of the season. The carbon is the only choice if you're trying to set fastest laps, but if you only race a few weekends a year then it's not a concern. Lots of people are happy to finish mid pack (or finish at all) with iron rotors.
Additional info: if you are using Carbon on the track, you need to constantly weigh the rotors as that's the only method to determine when they are worn out. If you neglect to do this, you have a chance of catastrophic brake failure, not the funnest thing to happen while on a track.
Iron rotors you can easily monitor without removing from the car and also put up with much more abuse.
As you said, only pro teams are willing to put up with the extra cost and maintenance for carbon.
I too swapped out my CC rotors on my C7Z for the irons. Better braking modulation and much, much more compound to use than the CC. Lap times has also dropped, mainly because the CC was an on/off switch.
@@DougAdams-Outside You don't have to do that - you can feel that surface gets very rough when too much carbon gets burned out. At that case you check if they done or not by weight.
You know you have made it when Brembo sponsors your videos. Congrats sir!
Could you do a video on what speed is an electric car most efficiently driven like you did on a gasoline car?
The intersection of energy loss due to wind-resistance and in-cabin energy use (which would encourage going faster to minimize time spent in the cabin). My bet would be 20-30 mph (similar speeds to a bicycle).
EV's range is very dependent on aerodynamic drag. It affects ICE cars some, but it can really hurt EV range more. Also, ICE cars tend to have multispeed transmissions, so you want to be in top gear for best range in an ICE car. In an EV car with one gear, the slower the better. It becomes down to how much longer do you want to make your trip to be to get more range. Bear in mind that an electric motor is 90% efficient, while an ICE gas engine is about 33% efficient. The energy density of batteries (very low) means you start your journey with much less available energy, so efficiency and aerodynamic drag are a big deal for EV's.
It depends on whether the electricity was generated by coal or solar.
56mph
Efficient really slow.
Fast you can drive fast as long as fast charging is available everywhere. Fastest way to travel a model 3 is 190kph when 200kw charging is available and you only charge up to ~70%.
I keep forgetting you are over 50. Please take that as a compliment.
I think the question we should all ask is: What is the best brake pad for Carbon Rotors? The best quality rotors is definitely important, but having the right brake pads will take full advantage of it, otherwise, it will be a waste of money.
There is no one-size-fits-all, as I understand it. I think it has more to do with how a specific set of rotors gets along with a specific set of brake pads.
That's easy, when you order the brembo complete kit just put on the ones that brembo put in the box.
@@jaydunbar7538 exactly. You only have a choice with steel rotors. With CC rotors, you must use Brembo pads made specifically for their CC rotors.
@@RB-xv4si
I second that.
I don’t have any data on these rotors, nor have I started looking into this part of automotive tech.
Simply operating from assumptions:
Brake system simply needs to turn from kinetic/movement into heat energy.
Grinding away the iron on an iron rotor is an unfortunate side-effect. (Sure, grinding also requires energy, but that’s not what we focusing on here.)
If a better rotor is available, but cost 10X, I would HOPE the manufacturer has found a pad formulation that takes advantage of the new rotor tech, without aggressively grinding down that new & expensive rotor.
Turning from speed into heat using friction, but without grinding away on the rotor like 80-grit sandpaper on a block of brie (soft cheese).
Jason! This has been a phenomenal video - very informative and very entertaining. I hope you have no regrets on scaling back the frequency of your videos, because high-quality like this trumps quantity any day.
Really appreciate the comment, Finian. While the channel has certainly dipped in views, I'm really happy with the transition as it has allowed for me to have a much better work/life balance. Thank you, thank you!!
Brembo got started in racing a heck of a lot earlier than 1975 - on motorcycles.
By the 1980s, they were standard fitment on virtually all Italian motorcycles, and some other European brands, as well as being a popular upgrade for enthusiasts fed up with Japanese stainless steel discs, which basically had no wet weather braking for the first second or 5 of each application. Sintered metal pads solved that, but ate discs at an alarming rate. Brembo used cast iron, and the surface rust formed so fast that wet weather braking was instant and predictable, as the rust broke up the water film on the disk. Goodbye to booking your braking points on a calendar.
On high-performance motorcycles, they improved weight by using thinner disks and making the disks instead of the callipers do the floating.
Sprung to unsprung mass ratio is an item that is so important I feel it should be a required listing in the vehicle specification. And yes, I've worked on systems from end-of-life junkers to top-tier motorsports with a sidestep into Citroen systems, on their own vehicles and the ones they licensed to Mercedes and Bentley. The additional spring added by tyres is so vital that I'm not a fan of the super low profile tyres, which may improve steering feel, but have huge suspension disadvantages (as well as being an enormous pain in the ass to fit). They also damage far more easily, and in doing so easily damage the rim.
Of course, inboard discs can be exposed to more airflow and have unsprung mass reduced in proportion to how far inboard they are positioned.
1975 was for racing, as mentioned in the video they were founded in 1961.
There's no question it costs considerably more to make, but like many parts for luxury car brands they charge a premium simply because they can.
No doubt about it
It doesnt even cost them $1000 to make, but they sell it for 10k. Cast iron brakes cost
Yep, would love to know the margins on carbon ceramics vs the iron bois. Hell they paid for this infomercial if that says anything
If an artist paints four paintings a year, he must sell them at a high premium to make his money. If a print shop mass produces printed artwork by the thousands every month, they don't need to have a super high premium per item to cover overhead, low per unit cost with scales of economy, and still make a profit. This is a radical example of the idea, but you get the picture. Luxury brands and small production lines have no choice but to charge large to make their business function.
Sure lets forget R&D, tooling, training and so on for a very limited product.
36.5 lbs but Jason rounds up to 40…🤔
Really enjoyed the video. Thanks!
Thirty-six-point-five has way more syllables than forty (I'm lazy), and makes me sound weaker. 😂
.5 rounds up to 1 and 7 rounds up to 10, so he's technically correct, the best kind of correct. 🤣
Try Surface Transforms ceramic rotors, they can be refurbished 4-5x at $600 a corner. Much cheaper as well.
If you think automotive carbon brakes are expensive, wait until you have to buy ones for an aircraft!!
I would never ever have to do that and if I did, that means I’m rich enough to afford an aircraft 💰💰💰
I find it telling that a lot of people run iron rotors on the track but put the carbon ceramics back on for the street. In a street application they last forever, and you get the benefit of lighter unsprung weight and no dust on your shiny Concours wheels. On the track, while performance with CCBs would be better, with aggressive pads and aggressive usage the wear is greatly accelerated, and many owners just don't want to smash on rotors that cost as much as a whole Nissan Z. You may burn up iron rotors by the pallet load, but a pallet of irons is a lot cheaper than a set of ceramics.
I would somewhat disagree with improving ride quality. If a manufacture uses a specific tire and wheel combo on an OE setup. Those dampers are tuned using that specific rotational mass. When you alter that making it lighter or heavier. You’re now potentially out of the range of the specific dampers. So on normal roads with pot holes and expansion joints that lighter wheel/tire/brake combination now deflects easier because of its reduced mass. This transmits even more harshness into the cabin. I had a MK7 golf R that I did the same thing as you did. Went from factory 19” wheel and tire combo to a smaller 18” forged wheel and tire combo. Dropping almost 6lbs a corner. The ride actually became so jarring and unbearable I found the heaviest set of cast 18’s I could to get some weight back on the hubs. This in turn made a huge difference and returned it back closer to factory ride quality.
One thing to keep in mind is these are often factory options where you can choose between the two, with the suspension tuned accordingly.
@@EngineeringExplained Oh yeah with that I completely agree with. But at the same time it’s inevitable that with less rotating mass, the entire hub assembly will react more/faster to a smaller imperfections in the road as compared to a heavier setup. In turn this will transmit more into the cabin making your ride quality “feel” worse. Although your wheel may be in contact with the road more which increases grip since the suspension can push it down quicker. With a lighter wheel the opposite is true as well. It can just as easily be pushed up by smaller bumps that the heavier setup may not have been as affected by. No factory non adjustable suspension can react to that change. So I bet if you took the same two cars out with factory wheel setups the lighter setup will have a slightly worse ride quality.
I should also state that those results can be heavily skewed based on how much weight you’re actually saving and the difference in size wall size. When you step down a wheel size or even two yet keep the same overall diameter tire. That extra sidewall will help absorb those smaller bumps. That can only go so far though. If you start dropping 5lbs+ a corner. No amount of sidewall is going to stop you from feeling those little bumps in the road you didn’t before. If you’re keeping the whee and tire combination the same and shaving weight via rotors, titanium lug nuts, calipers, etc. Then you will most definitely notice a ride quality change for the worse.
@@bradrichter5082 _Less_ unsprung weight makes for worse ride quality???
I may be old, but I'm _very_ confused by this. 🤔
@@jimurrata6785 Give it a try for yourself. Math and engineering don’t always equate to real world results.
Jason - your original question, “why so expensive” is actually best answered by, “Marketing 101”. “Marketing 101” dictates: THERE IS NO RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COST AND PRICE. Any manager who fails to understand this basic business concept is fundamentally incompetent and deserves to be fired. (SIDE NOTE: this is why a lot of engineers are bad managers).
Do carbon ceramic rotors have to use special brake pads or will standard pads work fine with them?
Special. The 4 corners cost about $2400. I dread the day I have to replace them.
@@alfaqvcarlos4406 OUCH.
NAO pads or Ceramic pads. Ceramic being more expensive but also lasting longer and less dust, less sound, better wear on your rotors. I just bought Carbon ceramic rotors and had to buy pads separately from 'Endless'. W008 compound, $1,800 for front and rear.
This video is for suckers there’s no reason to pay that much for a rotor unless you have tons of money to give away. But for average people no don’t think about it it’s not worth anymore than 50-75 for pair of rotors
I imagine the R&D plays a part in the cost of carbon ceramics as well. It can’t be cheap to design something like that.
Good point. Less user base to spread R&D costs across, too.
The actual R&D of the rotor nowadays probably is pretty trivial but the manufacturing process will certainly be much more challenging than for steel discs - though steel discs probably will be much challenging to produce at a price point since their price point actually matters where as with carbon ceramics it isn't the even a top3 thing.
There is only one manufacturerer for CSiC Brakes currently (SGL Carbon, owned by Brembo) which gives them a monopoly worldwide.
Can they be made for motorcycles? Rotational mass is a massive issue there to the point people pay a similar amount for a pair of carbon fibre wheels, but I'm not familiar with carbon discs in the bike space. Maybe just not enough of a market to justify it, or possibly the out in the open nature means they're too likely to be damaged?
Good question. I don't know if carbon rotors could be made thin enough to be reliable on a bike. Imagine what a carbon rotor failure on the front wheel of a motorcycle would do.
I think Moto GP uses carbon ceramics but don't know much else about bikes.
It fills my soul when you talk in METRIC... Thanks Jason!!!!!
When can we talk about the new garage/studio/ house?
Happy to! It's been a work in progress for about the last year, but in a really good spot now!
You can save some unsprung weight on your MX-5 by installing Flyin' Miata's Big Little Brake kit. Wilwood calipers all around, even lighter than the front Brembos that are so expensive from Mazda. The kit is around $1,100. I, a 75yo man, did it myself in my driveway. They come with braided SS hoses, I added one way bleeder valves so it was a one man job. Great brake feel, easy pad replacement, just pull the pins and slip in new pads.
Awesome to hear! Yeah I have the Brembo kit on mine from the factory, so not really looking to upgrade (bought it used, not quite the price jump). Also comes with the BBS wheels which I love.
@@EngineeringExplained You can get just the rear brakes, a nice upgrade and a big weight savings. The handbrake isn't very strong on the Wilwood kit but it's adequate.
people realize that carbon ceramic rotors are a "Bit" more pricy.
Yes, I just realize that carbon ceramic rotors are a "Bit" more pricy, just a "bit"
People track often knows first thing need to be swapped out is ceramic brakes. Too easy to crack and cost too much.
So your saying the Model S track pack with Carbon brakes is the biz...?
I have made the rotors that went on the Sena for a few years now. A lot of work and quality checks go into them and go through a fascinating process.
How harmful is the brake dust? Carbon dust appears to be as bad asbestos or worse?
@Craig Davies Goodness I hope not. It can be fairly dusty here. As far as I know my work has taken samples and deemed it non hazardous. A college of mine retired last year after working with carbon for 30 years and seemed in good health.
Too expensive no money should be given to anyone here for anything Insha Allah God willing
My Porsche GTS came with PCCBs as an option. As a "used" vehicle purchase, I could not turn down a car with a mere 98 miles on it after it was 3y 1m old. If I had bought the car new, I would have passed on PCCBs, but since this car came with them, no regrets now that I have them. No rust, no brake dust and they will last me the life of the car, even if I did track it now and then. One of our regional PCA directors once said, "what is the point to PCCBs"? I guess I could say "what is the point to having a car that does 180+ MPH on a public road". Sounds like sour grapes to me as he could not afford a 911.
I dare to disagree - lack of sense doesn't necessarily correspond to lack of money. If I WANTED a sport car, I'd buy an NSX but never (NEVER!) a porsche. To me, reliability and comfort are way more important than anything else. I remember doing an inspection on a broken down 911, and the porsche shop owner proudly announced that he had managed to wear out breaks in 11,000 miles. Silly at best.
@@nofyfb123 Well I guess we could talk about Acuras having looked at the old NSX of a couple of decades ago. Nice, but too much plastic, too Japanese and I have owned many and still own a Japanese car as a daily driver. Reliable but boring. As for the recent NSX, I haven't seen one on the road and they have been around for about 5 years. Grossly overpriced compared to my GTS. Now lets talk about automatic transmission issues in an Acura. By the way, if anyone is wearing brakes out in 11,000 miles, they are either on the track a lot or have brake issues? I guess you forgot to ask how old the car was and if it was proprtly maintained.
@@a.c.e.7568 1. For me, Japanese is a HUGE advantage over anything else, especially European
2. There is nothing exciting about sitting on the side of a road waiting for a tow truck with subsequent sitting at a stealer's waiting room
3. It was not about just wearing brakes out in 11,000 miles - it's about being proud of it. Thus skewed mentality.
4. I leave in the middle of nowhere and mostly drive back roads, and nobody is slower here than sports cars. Especially all kinds of mustangs and corvettes.
5. The one who leaves the intersection first comes to the finish first rather rather than the one who needs a couple of seconds to figure out that it's already green and is not going to get any greener, and from my experience, it's the sport car driver. There are exceptions, though - some leave their tires on the asphalt just to come to a screeching stop at the next traffic light.
6. I don't remember exact mileage of the 911 I referenced but first, I was involved with low mileage vehicles and it belonged to a dedicated porsche shop owner so it was babied.
7. I am not a huge honda fan - since the Old Man died (1999?), it's not nearly as reliable as it used to be
And finally, WHO IN THE HELL DRIVES A SPORTS CAR WITH AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION?!?!?!? But - since you mentioned that, thank you for making my point.
@@nofyfb123 Well in my 45+ years of driving, I have only been stranded once...in my Honda. The catalytic converter clogged on a 7.5 year old car with a mere 92,115 miles. Althoug not stranded in my first new car, a Ford (before I knew something about cars...lol), a hydraulic lifter completely collapsed after a 14 months. I do my own work to a higher level than the vast majority of shops, why my cars last 14+ years before going to a friend.
@@a.c.e.7568 Like I said, since about 2000, honda has been consistently going downhill. I sold the last one - 1998 Civic - a couple of years ago, and I wouldn't touch it ever again.
Statistically, among about 20,000 vehicle mechanical failures I investigated over almost 20 years in the field, European brands were champions in number/frequency of problems. To be fair, all kinds of pontiacs, chryslers, and fords take honorable close second place. I saw a bwm with 48,000 miles and 50 (FIFTY!!!) repairs - not maintenance but repair visits. In my practice, maximum number of INDEPENDENT defects at one given point was 18. Yes, EIGHTEEN. One pontiac, one jag, and one mb.
Considering generally/statistically low miles driven, porsche is also at the bottom of the list. The most common issues I've dealt with included but are not limited to leaking coolant cooler o'rings and all kinds of obscenely expensive electronic/electric failures. Mechanically, they were sound.
Even I - being 5'7"/165 lbs - am not comfortable getting in and out of most sports cars (exceptions: NSX, Supra, S2000), and driving a porsche can be compared to being dragged by your legs while sitting on your ass. Quite frankly, a Civic is more comfortable...
Not to mention they can sound terrible sometimes and when its cold it performance can be worse than it brother cast iron
Would love to see you take a deeper dive into the two piece rotors and how the construction works on a design level. I've always been curious about the fastenings and why they "are the way they are"
Good video...I have some experience with both brakes materials on Porsche cars and I track a lot my cars..one think that we need to get clear from the start is that racing cars don't use Carbon Ceramics, they use Carbon-Carbon technology. On which one to choose my last two cars have been spec with Iron rotors. PCCBs do weight about 20 lbs less (full system) and that's unsprung weight... but I can always swap the rotors for a good quality aftermarket rotor and save some...not all 20 lbs. But then we have another problem...on GT4/GT3 with PCCB you can't use 19" wheels because the rotor is 410 mm vs 380, that larger size is needed to dissipate the heat. With a good quality performance wheel and racing DOT tire combo in 19" I have been able to drop 26 lbs for the 4 corners. BTW...don't ever drop a wheel on a PCCB rotor...that would be an expensive mistake. On braking performance once I change pads to a quality, track oriented one like Ferodo/PFC/ Pagid there's no advantage to PCCB and a good chance the Iron rotor will out-break the PCCB at a much lower cost with improved pedal feel....with Iron you have a great choice of pads not so much with PCCBs. So the only benefits I see are reduction on unsprung weight and no dust...in case you hate cleaning wheels.
My floating Brembo cast iron rotors are 1,200 a pair! I feel they are vastly over priced.
I've always wondered why 2 piece rotors cost 10-20x more.
@@pkt1213
And to make matters WORSE, you retain the old faded black inner "hat". The 1200 buys you what they call "friction rings" and the $100 hardware kit.
Changing out the friction ring is a real PITA involving tedious disassembly of old Loctited hardware and then VERY carefully torqueing and Loctiting new hardware to fasten the new ghastly expensive rings to your old inner hat.
Long long ago, I did track the car...rarely. I sometimes used racing pads and $80 per liter Castrol FRS brake fluid.
I never boiled fluid, experienced any brake fade even at Sebring, or warped a rotor.
Now??? Two piece rotors are waaaaay over kill for the street. Apparently, I have NO other option. There is no one piece rotor fitment for my Brembo GT set up. Six piston in front and 4 in the back.
The cost in 2009 was $7K. Now its over $10k!! for the four wheel kit. That is without any installation fees. They do come with SS braided brake lines. I bought titanium heat shields for the front pads.
Oh, and while racing pads WILL stop you
incredibly fast, they tear up the rotors faster!
Please do a video explaining different Tire Pressure Monitoring systems; why do some systems show the pressure for each tire (Hundai, Kia, etc.) vs. others that only have a low warning light (Mazda CX-5). Thanks
Probably not enough for a video there. The difference is actually really simple, on cars that support individual pressure there is a sensor on the tire to actually measure that pressure. Those can go bad individually and need to be changed over/replaced when you get new tires. If your car can only say low pressure it is just using the stability control to see that one tire is a different diameter than the other, and thus one tire has less pressure. No sensors on the actual tire. But the car can only guess as to what is actually wrong and it takes longer for it to figure out that there is a problem.
I don't think there's really any difference unless you know if the car has in wheel pressure sensors or not.
The simple warning light is the most basic system, but it still works the same way. If you use the proper scan tool to get into the TPMS system on a "warning light only" car, you can still read the individual tire pressures, but the auto manufacturer simply gives you no means to read it, just triggers the light under a certain pressure.
However there is a system out there (don't know if it's still in use) that triggered the light if wheel speed was different, I know Toyota had these for a period, and they have a button you can press to relearn the system. Ford may have had it, which might be the system in your Mazda...
Just my 2c... Would like to know for sure though. I am under the impression all systems are sensor type these days.
That's entirely up to the manufacturer. All new cars have the wheel mounted sensors and are monitoring the actual pressure real time. Mfr decides if they want to show you those values or just have a warning light that's triggered when a sensor reads a value less than a specific tire pressure number.
Same question as why don't all cars show the oil pressure, oil temperature, and coolant temperature?
Often, too much information is worse than not enough information. K.I.S.S. Most people just want to know when there is a problem and prefer the warning light.
Lol i cant unsee you spaghetti arms now
Another thing to note is that the carbon ceramic rotors on a road car are actually different than those on a race car. The ones for road car can be made in a less expensive fashion because they're not expected to be used frequently on a race track.
Frankly you did pretty well curling 40lbs for your size. haha
You forgot to mention that manufacturers just markup carbon ceramics to an insane amount because they can.
And that a lot of people in Motorsport are actually ditching carbons lately for a high quality steel.
Unsprung weight makes a huge difference
Even though its true that the carbon ceramic discs have "unlimited" life, in the real world not so much. They are brittle and can be chipped by stones etc and have to changed because of imbalance. Often times it is also not possible to buy only the center section if it is warped, and then the whole disc will have to be changed. It is a reason that 10 year old cars with carbon brakes usually are worth less than a similiar one with steel brakes.
What models of cars have less value when equipped with carbon rotors when 10 years old?
They don't warp.
@@miken6imy Audi S8 for example
@@Timoastra would you pay less or more for an Audi s8 with ceramic brakes?
@@miken6imy Less. Where i live rocks and salt destroy these brakes and they are not really needed on a barge like the S8
People must really love Carbon Ceramics, 0 dislikes
I always highly appreciate the symmetry and attention to detail you have with the background panels/table/camera angle. Just shows that you're willing to spend that little bit of extra time to do that!
They should put these in Teslas and other EV's where most of the everyday driving braking is done by regen. EV's could really benefit from lighter unsprung weight and potentially smaller brakes allowing for smaller wheels.
Disadvantages;
(1) extreme brittleness; if the wheel touches even a little the disk they can crack and need replacement.
(2) poor cold disk performance. When used as a daily driver, if your brakes are cold and wet they will not bite as much as cast iron
(3) resale value of cars with carbon ceramics are lower than equivalent with cast iron. The reason is the same as for any car with v expensive spare parts in proportion of the value of the used car. $10k bill to replace rotors on a car worth 20-30k down the line is not a value proposition
a good 2 piece steel rotor is a better compromise
They cost that much because they charge that much. After nearly 20 years of manufacturing for production cars there doesn't seem to be any incentive to come up with any way to increase the efficiency of manufacturing these rotors. For a daily driver, these carbon ceramic rotors are not necessary.
Nobody needs any performance related stuff for daily driving, not even engines bigger than 1,4L turbo, or expensive hifi….or… Nothing really is needed, unless we just want to:)
lol I had absolutely no idea that most brake dust comes from the rotor. I always just figured it was the pads, but now that I think about it it makes a lot of sense.
It actually depends on the specific mix of pad and disc - softer pads were fast and are kinder to the disk, harder pads wear more slowly and eat discs faster, plus they have a slightly less consistent feel.
9:53 most brake dust come from grinding down the rotor is lie. Most brake dust comes from pad wear. If you don’t believe me. Put some Detroit Axle pads on your car.
Great and informative video Jason.
I do disagree with one part though. You said that brake dust was a result of the disc wearing down. Are you sure about that? While I don't pretend to be an expert, I have been around racecars for a lot of years and my thoughts are that brake dust has more to do with the brake pads than the disc.
Indeed, there are two components to friction: abrasion and adhesion. You need a balance. OE tends to favour abrasion and hence more brake dust. Folks who like clean cars (but not cleaning their wheels every week) want low dust alternative. However, some that major on low dust can rely too much on adhesion which then results in a glazed surface. I forget now whether it was Akebono Euros or PBR Deluxe but I experienced low bite within the first 100 miles and I never want to experience that again. Nor having to throw away glazed and unevenly worn discs.
2019 Camry XSE. 74K miles, rideshare. Swapped front rotors at 70k. $200 for decent aftermarkets in OEM size, both sides with pads and clips.
RockAuto.
Iron rotor: "Do you even lift, bro?"
Jason: "I don't need to. Carbon ceramics for the win!"
Only a dumbass would spend that amount on brakes. 10k gets you a honda, building it with a motor swap & the suspension needed to hold on turns
Exactly.
Not mentioned - A lot of rich people just get all the options when buying an expensive car, so it's easy to charge $10k for your Carbon Ceramic brakes, even if they're only worth $7k.
Scales of economy; if you only make handfuls of sales to the people who can afford the expensive item or service, you HAVE to charge more money to make your profits possible. If you sell millions upon millions of cheap goods, you don't need the same profit margin to turn a profit. Simple economics.
@@kingduckford He mentioned that.
Always learn from every video even in categories I didn’t know I need to know about cars 🤣🥴
That's why I'm getting a C7 GS with steel brakes. Even though carbon ceramics are great, the maintenance costs are insane.
they dont even race in IMSA with carbon brakes, they use steel. Steel rotors have a more consistent feel under braking. If you do want lighter weight rotors, a good 2 piece rotor has good weight savings too over 1 piece rotors
@@ForTehNguyen no one mentioned IMSA. And yes they do use steel rotors. Back in the GT1 days they were carbon ceramics too.
Excellent video, happy someone finally done really informative source about carbon ceramic brakes 😉👍
Large cast iron rotors for my F150 were only $25 each...and they even have a E-brake drum on the inside of it. How iron rotors could sell for $1k is completely baffling to me.
Well I drive a bmw i and know for most European car getting quality rotors and pads for less than a 1k is a steal in Canada
theyre two piece, and a LOT bigger. also that's probably for all four, but i could be wrong
A set of 4 14" rotors can easily be $500+ and that's for one piece.
Used?
Your F-150 is not only the best selling consumer truck, but also a major fleet vehicle. You're talking about one of the cheapest, most mass produced one piece cast iron rotors on the market. The manufacturer can make them very quickly, and in huge numbers making them very cheap. They're a dime a dozen with many different manufacturers making them and competing. Now imagine a niche sports car or SUV with high performance calipers and huge 2 piece rotors that you can only buy from one or two sources. These parts are much more specialized, only used on certain trims of the vehicle. They are made in much smaller batches, and take much longer to make. You've got a cast iron ring with maybe slots or drilled holes, a billet aluminum hat for the ring to bolt to, and hardware to hold it all together. This requires a wider variety of materials, more specialized manufacturing tooling, more complex engineering, and more time to produce. Not to mention if you drive a foreign car these parts probably need to be imported as needed from other countries. All of this extra work for something you won't sell many of. Gotta charge much much more to make all that worth your while.
Very good video. Thank you. Carbon ceramics are awesome. Once you use them it is extremely hard to go back. The pedal consistency is unmatchable.
Im surprised you didnt explain the difference between carbon ceramic matrix rotors you find on OEM and the Carbon Carbon you find on race cars. They are different and cannot be compared with each other. You used them interchangeably and they cannot be. Race teams do not use CCM's they use Carbon Carbon. They are a world of difference between them.
The braking power with the carbon ceramic rotor is unbelievable! If you're going super fast and about to crash, the carbon ceramic will stop in no time to save your car and your life. I love these carbon ceramics.
I was literally wondering how much performance my car would gain by dropping 60ish pounds, and then I seen we have the exact same car and you tested it for me 😂 Thanks for the quick answer!
An important distinction to keep in mind is it's 60lbs of rotating mass, not just 60 pounds.
Dear Brembo,
I'd like to volunteer to test your carbon ceramic rotors on my 2007 Honda S2000. Please send them along as soon as possible.
Thank you,
COS2KOwner
It's so great that how he explains the science and engineering in a lay man's language and also adds some humour to it. The blend is very great.
Thank you!!
Been running Carbon Ceramic discs on my 1995 E36 M3 GT since 2007 !! Quite sure I was the first one World Wide to run Ceramics on a road legal BMW. Amazing on the track, great on the road. 370x38mm with 8 Piston Brembo calipers. Came from a McLaren SLR.
Becouse of you i chosed my engineer career 🥰
Hope everything goes well, thanks!
Bro, eat more Wheaties. Weak af.
Great video, Jason, as always! Could you talk about how to know when a carbon ceramic rotor needs to be replaced? On an iron rotor, one can measure thickness, see cracks, and so on. How does one know when it is appropriate to replace a CC rotor?
So how FAST would a Plaid be with carbon fiber rotors?
It would stop better.
My 500hp AC had small 1 pot iron discs from a 76 Ford Pinto and no brake booster.
The car weighs 950 kg and that is key compared to a 2.3t 911 or Gatti. The disc weight is 2kg. The steelie nascar rim is 6kg. The 215/65-14 7kg. Tot unsprung mass is 30kg compared to a 911 60kg. This works better for many good reasons.
I can't believe an engineer just said "ten times less". You mean "one tenth of". ten times less is -9x and there can't be a negative wear rate physically.
well played, well played.
As an engineer too, you’re not wrong.
Hey Jason, thanks for another great video! - question. I have a C63s AMG with carbon ceramics. I live in Denmark, where we’re at below 0 degrees Celsius these days with snow. Today i noticed a massive difference in breaking - normally my breaks are so strong, i barely need to press on the pedal to achieve the daily breaking and pressing just slightly harder (like, maybe 20% of the pedal instead of the usual 5-10%) i can feel the stopping power.
Today, it felt like they had almost no breaking power. I even tried to press the break pedal hard or all the way but the breaking was much weaker than usual.
I was wondering if carbon breaks needs to be at a minimum temperature before working normally, or if they get weakened in very cold weather (0 or -1 degrees C) ??
I noticed if they are wet - like right after washing the car - they have no grip till you pump them a few times and then it’s all good.
@@undergroundoutlaw411 hey, no no, not the issue - just fade.. like, no grip or breaking power - day after, it was 4 degrees and that helped but still not what it used to be maybe a week ago when we had 8 degrees so i’m thinking temp is a big factor when you’re down in the frost temps
Airbus has used Carbon brakes on their planes as well for decades
For the vast, vast majority of cars these make zero sense, for the high performance and track oriented cars I can see the advantage.
Note to self if I’m ever looking at a used car that has these, see how many miles it has and if it’s a lot run like the wind.
I mean at one point that's what people said about disk brakes.... just wait till they get cheaper... then they'll just be better in every way.
@@GreenBlueWalkthrough I’m all for it
Did You really eccllerate faster with 18" wheels because of their lower mass? Or is it just that smaller wheels in diameter improve acceellaration?
It's got to be down to the rolling circumference of the two tires, no?
Though I doubt anyone with a track car wants an 'extra' inch of sidewall.
Interesting video. "Most brake dust comes from iron rotors." I'm going to need a citation on that. I'd be completely shocked if that was true.
Honestly, all the advantages listed are real, but given how brakes are actually used on street cars, not very important. Cool technology that may eventually trickle down though.
You spent a lot of time to explain how weight savings improve handling. Unless serious tracks driving, it may be wiser to replace lighter wheels. More importantly, I can see the nice looking wheels, but not the ceramic brakes. That's my point of view.
Idk about relieving weight out of a tuned suspension, I mean, if one does that in a race car where you can change spring rates, rebound and so on it’s ok, but in a production car where everything is tuned to work with what it has I have my doubts
The brakes are often factory option, meaning the suspension is tuned accordingly.
Also people spending that kind of money to upgrade the brakes, will surely spend the money to upgrade suspension and tune it.
I agree, when it comes to comfort, more unsprung weight resists movement more. If you reduce the unsprung weight without reducing damping, more of that movement will be felt in the car. If you can reduce the damping, I think you will see the benefits of more grip, and better comfort. Please explain if I’m wrong. Thanks. Once again great video.
@@brianmichael316 You are mistaken because the damping acts against the forces caused by the road surface. The unsprung weight change will not reduce or increase those forces. If it did, you would feel a reduction in ride quality when you bought new tires. The weights of various brands and types of tires vary by several pounds. No one ever says their new tires caused their car to ride rough or harsh.
“A lighter wheel which readily rebounds from road bumps will have more grip and more constant grip when tracking over an imperfect road. For this reason, lighter wheels are sought especially for high-performance applications. However, the lighter wheel will soak up less vibration. The irregularities of the road surface will transfer to the cabin through the suspension and hence ride quality and road noise are worse. For longer duration bumps that the wheels follow, greater unsprung mass causes more energy to be absorbed by the wheels and makes the ride worse.” Found some more info. We were both partially right. Small bumps will be more apparent with reduced unsprung weight, but large movements will be better controlled.
Most car owners Only change the brake rotors when a mechanic tells them that they need to be changed, and mechanics tend to go by Nothing but LOOKS, like grooves and cracks in the rotor. so in reality, if you did fit carbon ceramic disks on your car, make sure your car is only touched by a mechanic who knows all about these rotors. There should be something like a stress test for brake disks, because again, in my experience most mechanics ONLY do a visual inspection, and many brake disks are replaced unnecessarily……….
Hi, Can you take a look at the "Liquid Piston" Engine as it seems to achieve 28% more power per KG than the Mazda RX-8 .
How is that even possible ?
6:44. ...don't come a knockin'.
If unsprung mass does so much, how come the brakes doesn't sit further in at the differential? Sure the maintenance costs will be higher since it's more complicated to change, but on a performance car performance should be more important.
Maby it would take too much room to be a reasonable solusion.
I think it's becoming more and more difficult to place rotors inboard because they're so big now.
@@jamesengland7461 Yeah, guess you're right. It may not be possible to have a brake servo strong enough to cope with smaler brakes either. Interesting thoughts tho :)
Inboard brakes are more difficult to cool and service
Attention to aLL car expert. Just using water to cooL down disc brake & brake pad. I suggest about a miliLiter per minute dropping on disc brake directly is very safe whilLe traveling more than 100 mph. to prevent faiL brake due to overheating. Or simply apply radiator on brake pad / disc brake. BECAUSE SAFETY IS EVERYTHING
Silly question, but do carbon ceramic brakes typically have brake pads that are some kind of carbon ceramic composite?
The only reason I got Carbon Ceramic rotors on my Audi RS Q8 (brake dust) no squeal like on other brands, worth every penny.
New carbon ceramic brakes for my 2019 392 charger is only 3600 bucks. Not extremely expensive IMO. If you think about it and do the work yourself, iron brakes are only 500 bucks for a complete set. If you replace your brakes every 30 thousand miles that's only 1800 bucks for 120,000 miles. Seems like standard brakes are better price wise. Also, how often do pads get replaced on carbon ceramic rotors?
For $10,000 I can have my brakes changed with good quality parts, every month for a year...or two!
Sure, I wouldn't expect anything else on high-end luxury performance cars, supercars and hypercards. Would I invest to put these on a street sports car? No. Iron has its many downsides by cost in not one, at the end of the day, we have to pay the bills.
I will say that I'm surprised these aren't on more high-end pickup trucks. Heck, if I'm going to drop $80-$90K on a truck, I'd expect ceramic brakes!... Of course, I don't, so at a more reasonable $45K, I don't expect 1/4 of my truck's cost to just be in the brakes, lol.
About 6 months ago i bought 4 used calipers/rotors from a totaled Camaro ZL1 for $1200. Rn there’s a listing up on ebay for the same 4 calipers/rotors for $12,000. However they’re brand new. I asked why and the guy said it’s bc theres a shortage. Kinda ridiculous
I have a very original C3 1969 corvette which has 4 wheel ventilated disk brakes which are unboosted! Trying to keep the car as original as I can but brakes aren’t great! What pad would you recommend for improved stopping power. Dust and noise not critical!
Thanks David
I have a porsce 911(922) turbo .
The other day some old man with a 922 like mine was touting the superiority of his convertible s with ceramics.
Not really. There's better places to spend option money when his was 157 and mine was 118.
My iron brakes will put you through the windshield.
Carbon brakes are a 13k option. I don't think so...
I'd rather have aftermarket turbo upgrades and lighter wheels than brake fade advantages.
Promise I'd smoke him on the track anyway.
Okay, I love the information.
But, let's compare apples to apples. They have to use high quality fasteners because they last longer? Fair enough, but.... Typical Iron/steel Cast rotors don't have any fasteners. Weird, right? The ones you show aren't typical--nor are they cross drilled and slotted. Again, apples to apples, please. I have cross drilled slotted iron rotors on all 4 corners for less than $200. Is Brembo Iron better?
My greatest takeaway from this is that we need better manufacturing processes for carbon rotors that bring the price down--flat screen TVs are 5% of their original price 20 years ago.....and carbon rotors have been around that long.
If your brakes judder, get them resurfaced. Not a big deal--nor is avoiding it.
Lots of brake dust is.....pad material. Kinda why pads get replaced more often than rotors, even with resurfacing.
Presumably, more pad material is worn off by using carbon discs, comparably, so.....
I didn't really think iron powder (from the rotor) was such a huge issue for you.
And yeah, except when they're rusty after sitting too long outside, my cross drilled iron rotors look just as awesome from 5 feet away--and most people don't get up close enough to see the unique pattern of cracks on carbon brakes. Seriously, they see you from the car next to you.
Also, Wilwood and Baer make pretty good brakes, too.
Overdone brakes in traffic? That is how rear end accidents happen. And what difference does it make if your car is smashed up in the front or the rear.
LEARN TO DRIVE, so that you won't get rear-ended! Nearly all of rear-end accidents are avoidable.
And yes, with about 2 million urban miles driven, I am speaking from experience.
Why so expensive #5: because people will pay for it. For those who have that kind of money, high price means exclusivity. Selling price has a lot more to do with what people will pay (perceived benefit) than what it costs to build. A $100k Tesla costs a lot less to make than a $100k Porsche…but people will pay for both. Econ 101…you are welcome.