There's not much recent discussion on this topic, so I thought I'd revive this old thread. The conversation was mostly about ceramic pads on iron rotors, but there was some discussion about carbon ceramic brakes. Here's my opinion based on everything I've been able to learn so far. I haven't actually ever driven with CCB, but really, how different could it be? Challenge anything you want, as discussion and learning is an ongoing process.
Touching first on the topic of heat. CCB make less heat that iron brakes under braking. CCB dissipates heat faster than iron brakes. CCB operate at lower temperatures than iron brakes. Although CCB operate at lower temperatures, they have the capability of tolerating heat far exceeding what iron brakes can tolerate. This last thing doesn't seem very important because I haven't been having a heat problem on the track with iron brakes.
The guy tracking his car wants CCB more for handling than braking. Taking 15lbs off each front and 10 lbs off each rear wheel of unsprung weight will improve the cars handling capability. Let's say you're now 1-2 mph faster into every corner, out of every corner and 1-2 miles an hour faster on every straight section. Primary secondary benefit is longevity, probably lasting 3x the life of iron rotors. Beyond that, there's some increased braking capability if you using the track specific carbon ceramic pads and lastly there's less brake dust. Well, I guess not quite lastly, because the 20lb reduction of rotational mass of the rotors will yield a 2-3 hp increase on a chassis dyno.
For the guy just driving on the street, his primary reason for wanting CCB is to eliminate brake dust. Primary secondary benefit is 3x life over iron rotors. Beyond that, eh, that guy is not driving the car anywhere near it's capabilities on the street, so what's the need to increase it's capabilities?
So it seems to me that with CCB it's about eliminating brake dust, or going faster and eliminating brake dust. But there actually is more, and that comes back to the 3x life expectancy. If you're comparing an OEM set of rotors and pads for $3,500 versus a $10K GM CCB package, the 3 to 1 cost matches, the 3 to 1 life, so where's the incentive to go CCB. Rather than comparing a situation where GM sells you a $3,500 part for $10K, just buy the $3,500 part direct from the manufacturer? So, it's $3,500 to replace with OEM iron, or $3,500 to replace with "aftermarket" CCB. I put the quotes around aftermarket because it's not like GM makes their own CCB. They are made for GM by a Chinese company.
