[blockbuster]

How do the standard brakes compare to the optional carbon brakes?

How much heavier are the standard discs?

Anyone driven the standard brakes on track? Any fade?

How about pedal feel and braking modulation? I've found on other cars (e.g. Ferrari) that there is less feel and pedal modulation with the carbon brakes. Is that also true for the 12C?

Any other comments on standard vs. carbon brakes from owners with experience would be appreciated.

 

[andy c]

How do the standard brakes compare to the optional carbon brakes?

How much heavier are the standard discs?

Anyone driven the standard brakes on track? Any fade?

How about pedal feel and braking modulation? I've found on other cars (e.g. Ferrari) that there is less feel and pedal modulation with the carbon brakes. Is that also true for the 12C?

Any other comments on standard vs. carbon brakes from owners with experience would be appreciated.

Firstly,because of the unique design of the brakes the standard iron rotors are lighter than CF brakes,so the unsprung weight goes to the standard brakes,but as usual the CF have longer running capabilites.

From the discussions we have had most people thing the modulation is similar because the modulation on the standard brakes is fantastic on the track,but similar on the road.

many of us have done track days and the standard are up to the job depending on youe style,we have just come back from castle coombe circuit and its the first trackday i have been on for many years (young family growing up) So being rusty was not even a consideration!!! After the first 2 sessions of 20 mins my brake pedal was getting long,although the stopping power was still there,but as i got into the groove in the afternoon the brakes got better because my usage went down!So if you track often the standard brakes imo are well within the job.But for alot longer sessions CF would be helpfull.

So when Mclaren tell you the brakes are up to it,they mean it!! And dont forget the airbrake plays a massive part.
Ultimately if the expense is irrelavant go for the CF they look great and keep your wheels clean,but for many it is a car that yo dont need to throw money on were you dont need to

 

[roundincircles]

Andy summed up the choice differences very well there. At Castle Coombe I asked a number of the works drivers about which brakes they would choose and all said Iron but for different reasons. Essentially they said the Iron is good enough for track days and road but Carbon was needed for racing or very long track sessions.

Additionally some considered that Iron improved the steering because the reciprocating mass added to steering precision........the weight saving, over carbon, is in the aluminium hub.

Before I specced my car I met Mclarens number two driver and he assured me the iron discs were perfect for track and road. However I do like carbon on track but only have experience in a Vantage V12 , which is a very heavy car, at Silverstone and they were all day stoppers......like throwing an anchor out !

You have to drive both brake types before you spec. The Carbons modulate well even at low speed but that's my judgement and may not be correct for others. My steel brakes have taken time to bed in and are getting better modulation wise. Carbon pads and discs are developing fast with new material and manufacturing methods, improving in the last year or so.

 

[ergoproxy]

Thanks bb for making another thread on this issue. I am still wrestling with it (2013 delivery anticipated, deposit at Lake Forest Sports Cars)


I probably would not notice the weight difference, but it's annoying psychologically.
Historically weight and lack of brake dust, and bragging rights, were the only reasons to get ceramics. I don't care if the brakes are "like Porsche" or "better than Ferrari", they are their own animal. They should be immediate, progressive, intuitive in all conditions, not some learning curve event.

Anyone know if the 12C suspension can deal with unsprung weight better than springs?
(There is no help for increased rotational intertia tho--pay more, go slower.)
Is the supplier/manufacturing technique different than ceramics of other brands?
I wonder if a pad upgrade on the stock irons would be the best...

Another issue is bedding, do the ceramics need it and can it be realistically done on public roads? (I have not read the 12C manual, just cutting my teeth here.)

With weight issue now flipped, ceramics high cost, and me not a track guy, I guess it's iron...but they just don't look as cool.

 

[GT-TT]

if price not an issue, carbon all the way. Have driven both (even though i don't own a mp4 yet). Also if you ever had carbon brakes in another car it will tough to go back to steels as the feeling is addictive.
Also i truly believe carbon discs look much better inside those wheels.
Btw the carbon brakes at the mp4 are not heavier than the steels i was told by mclaren. If i remember correctly they updated the design before launch and carbon brakes are marginally lighter. In any case i have experimented with unsprung weight and +- 1 kg is not really noticeable. You need 3+ kgs per corner to start feeling a difference.

 

[360]

if price not an issue, carbon all the way. Have driven both (even though i don't own a mp4 yet). Also if you ever had carbon brakes in another car it will tough to go back to steels as the feeling is addictive.
Also i truly believe carbon discs look much better inside those wheels.
Btw the carbon brakes at the mp4 are not heavier than the steels i was told by mclaren. If i remember correctly they updated the design before launch and carbon brakes are marginally lighter. In any case i have experimented with unsprung weight and +- 1 kg is not really noticeable. You need 3+ kgs per corner to start feeling a difference.

I think you will find the carbon brakes are heavier , a test driver said at a track day they do affect the cars handling and if you jump from steel to carbon you notice the difference. Also another consideration is wear, Ferrari bin their carbon discs after two hard track days, challenge cars fit steel discs as the cost of running with carbon is to great, I don't know where Mclaren are on wear rates but must be around 10K GBP to replace a full set

 

[gallardo62]

the question are :

if you use the car on trackdays several times of the year, you will need to change you pads often.

So how much are a set of CCB pads ?

for the iron , 2 o r 3 track days and they are worned out but it cost less than 350 pounds for the front.
for the CCb i don't know ther price, for sure it's not the same.

And for me , std P0s are giving up before the iron brake !!

 

[ergoproxy]

Would one's decision be impacted by planning to run corsas?

 

[blockbuster]

Thank you for all those great replies and helpful information!

 

[Goplay]

I first spec'ed iron then decided on carbon mainly for resale, secondly for the looks (yes I admit that is shallow!)

I figure if I am going to run a car on the track at 8/10 or better it will be in a race car. Let's face it, super cars are a compromise: you can't drive it on the street to its limit and a cheaper race car will easily beat it on the track.

 

[Sanguru]

I spec'ed carbon ceramics. Having seen the progression in CCB technology coupled with the lack of brake dust and more consistency on track days (owned both a Challenge Stradale and a F430) it was a easy choice. Alessandro at McLaren SF took me out back to back in a steel and then a CCB car and I liked the feel of the CCB car more.

 

[Doubleclutch]

The 12c should come standard with ceramic brakes...I think mcalren made a mistake and should have followed ferraris and make them standard equipment.

 

[gripforce-mclaren]

The 12c should come standard with ceramic brakes...I think mcalren made a mistake and should have followed ferraris and make them standard equipment.

I agree. McLaren being the frontier of automotive technology should've offered CCB as standard equipment and make the steel no cost option. IMO, all super cars should retire steel brakes.

 

[Duncati]

Having driven 12Cs with both CCB and standard brakes, I definitely prefer the pedal feel and confidence inspiring solidity of the CCB option - which is what I opted for on my car.

I would, however, also admit to being influenced by the larger diameter and appearance of the CCBs, reduced brake dust issues, additional Carbon Fibre cooling ductwork at the front and ability to specify the unique 'polished metal' caliper finish only available with the CCB option.

 

[gallardo62]

i am not agree,

i am very pleased that mclaren (like porsche) let the choice between iron and CCB.

CCB is for maketing only, let me explain :

on the road , they are useless, who is driving his car so hard on the road until the brakes go out ?

on the track ?
the tyres is the first problem, (i 'll see with more grip with the PSS, corsas are for the moment sold out)
then if the pads are as expansive as those of a 458, it's 2000 € each two or three trackdays. And the risk to have to change the discs... (10-15k)
same problem for the rear (brakesteer + ESP)

if you are regular to trackdays, you will notice that there are now steel discs (aftermarket) for the 458 and 430sc and ask a GT3RS owner about ccb discs...

for me it's the perfect choice, i just regret that they haven't install thos carbon air duct of the ccb

i'll check next month with the michelin PSS if the endurance is still there..

 

[Wtdoom]

i am not agree,

i am very pleased that mclaren (like porsche) let the choice between iron and CCB.

CCB is for maketing only, let me explain :

on the road , they are useless, who is driving his car so hard on the road until the brakes go out ?

on the track ?
the tyres is the first problem, (i 'll see with more grip with the PSS, corsas are for the moment sold out)
then if the pads are as expansive as those of a 458, it's 2000 € each two or three trackdays. And the risk to have to change the discs... (10-15k)
same problem for the rear (brakesteer + ESP)

if you are regular to trackdays, you will notice that there are now steel discs (aftermarket) for the 458 and 430sc and ask a GT3RS owner about ccb discs...

for me it's the perfect choice, i just regret that they haven't install thos carbon air duct of the ccb

i'll check next month with the michelin PSS if the endurance is still there..

Great post

 

[roundincircles]

I have just been into the largest Porsche dealership in the UK and they are adamant that iron is the way to go based on running cost. Just an opinion by them but odd given they make big margins on selling CC !

They said the long term customer relationship was more important for profit than short term CC profit.Most of their GT3 customers had switched back to iron.

By the way Porsche bulid integrity continues to improve very noticeable on the new 911 and Boxter.

 

[ergoproxy]

A bit disappointing that McLaren deealerships market the ceramics as "track" without commenting on replacement costs or durability. They should just admit the ceramics are for the street.

 

[roundincircles]

A bit disappointing that McLaren deealerships market the ceramics as "track" without commenting on replacement costs or durability. They should just admit the ceramics are for the street.

That's not my experience with London Mclaren, they were happy to let me choose but made their views clear and even presented the replacement costs of CC and iron.

Additionally they provided cars to try with both brake types.

There does seem to be polarised views on CC and iron

Strikes me the dealerships do not know durability yet and Mclaren UK staff have all pushed me to iron on the basis I only 'do' 3 track days per year.

 

[macmadmark]

It seems to me that the carbon brakes are basically an expensive fashion accessory. If you want to keep the car in the garage, clean it, admire it and watch it depreciate, then by all means buy carbon. If you get carbon brakes and have a couple of good track days you will come out around £10K lighter (every year?) and then when you eventually want to sell, the buyers will have cottoned on, and the carbon will likely be harder to sell.