How much weight do Carbon brake discs save

vs OEM pls ?

 

on a 430 that is, nobody knows ??

 

I dunno...........You could probably save more weight by eating rasin bran and a pit-stop..........BUT, I can tell you they look cool, and have much less brake dust to clean!!!!!!

 

Why would it be important if you want to save weight get rid of the OEM Exhaust/Cats/Seats/Battery

 

My guess would be a few pounds 2-3 per corner. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but having packed them into boxes, I'm always surprised how heavy the CCM ones are.

 

I can give you a comparison that may help. If a one piece iron rotor(355mm x 32mm) weighs 19lbs ea., a two piece rotor of the same size using an aluminum hat will weigh approx. 16.8lbs(2.2 lbs weight saving). The same size CCM rotor w/aluminum hat will weigh approx. 9.6lbs. That is 9.2lbs less than the one piece rotor......big big big weight difference(almost 37lbs total), and it is ALL unsprung weight(don't forget it is rotating mass also!!!) which makes it fantastic for the driver who wants maximum performance.

 

Ridding the suspension of unsprung weight is very important, the more weight you lose the better handling response you get.

 

And the average driver will notice this?

 

Not a Ferrari, but on a Porsche GT3 ceramics save 40 lbs. per magazine articles (I find that hard to believe).

 

I know it is hard to believe, but 40 lbs seems right on. As technology improves there will be even more dramatic unbelieveable stuff....was around some people 2 months ago working on a spark plug that controls the F/A mixture for each individual cylinder...WOW!!!!

 

Every little bit helps however, when it comes to performance, its where you remove the weight. To begin to understand this do a little homework on 'ratational mass' and you'll understand how important this can be.

 

In rotational mass weight.

 

The weight savings on the 430 Scuderia carbon brakes will be even more as the hub carrier is also carbon vs. alloy.

 

I don't know the numbers off hand, but I can say this, the rotors on my 355 could have been used as boat anchors! They were heavy has hell.

Ray

 

According to the press kit I have, the unsprung weight was reduced by 5kg or 16% lighter than standard 360 rotors.

 

I would like to know the cost of CCB system for a 430...
Also a good way of course to save unsprung weight is with light weight wheels like Dymag or Neez Mg.

 

about $16,808 on May 2007 Carrozzeria Scaglietti price list. Definately more now due to de-valued dollar.

 

Thanks Drew for clarifying you are correct I am an Engineer and appreciate the concept but was trying to make the point that to the drivers of 90% of these cars the difference will not be noticed.

Martin

 

Does anyone know the replacement costs of the rotors and pads of the CCM vs iron? I remember reading that the Enzo brakes were around 30k. Also, in normal street driving, do they last longer than the standard brakes? Sorry if this has been asked before, but I don't recall seeing it.

George

 

These figures do not seem to add up to what Ferrari have actually stated in their 360CS brochure.

Q. Did you get these weights from an official source or are they just a guess work what is technically possible?

Ferrari stated their 360CS CCM discs save 16% weight over the Steel ones from the Modena. Ok so the Strad ones are actually larger items (part of the reason for the 15% reduction in stopping distance over the Modena -the other was the weight reduction) but that still does not account for the differences you claim. If the Modena ones weigh 19lbs each (assuming Ferrari's 16% figure is to believed) the mass would be 3lbs saved per wheel (obviously still very significant because its unsprung weight). If you deducted 16% from the Steel ones they would weigh 15.96lbs, not 9.6lbs.

What makes things worse is that Ferrari fell for the marketing departments demands and style of bigger wheels (sure they look good but do nothing to help unsprung weight). As a result of this the 360CS's 19" wheels are heavier than the Modena's ones, let alone the super lightweight challenge wheels. I actually fitted 20" wheels on my 360 for a while and they actually weight the SAME as the 19" from the CS yet they where 1" bigger (they where forged)!

I can confirm when I weighed the set of 4 wheels/tyres from the CS they weighed just shy of 200lbs for the set of 4 (!!). That is quite a bit more than they should. The Modena ones weighed less as they where only 18" and had skinnier tyres, - so the Strad wheels actually GAIN over 3lbs per wheel (the extra width does increase mechanical grip though) thus negatively offsetting all the great work Ferrari did on saving weight from the Titanium bolts and the CCM discs.

Sigh...,

... the only way to recover this would be to fit the racing 18" BBS wheels from a Challenge car or superlight forged magnesium aftermarket 18's. Furthermore Brembo make a pure track day big brake rotors kit upgrade for the 360. It is their top of the line Gran Turismo kit - some Strad owners have actually fitted them in place of the CCM discs despite them being steel! Why? Because they weigh less and are significatly better brake feel - In the UK some of the race teams who run Challenge cars have done the same thing too, swapped out CCM for Steel. These Brembo kits are for the 360 (they fit both Modena and Strad) that weighs LESS than the Strads CCM brakes and improves both brake feel and modulation of the pedal. Don't believe everything you read, the CCM discs are still a generation 1 technology. I agree they will improve ( in terms of weight reduction ) over time but they are not the pancea everyone is claiming them to be.

Already since Ferrari's CCB was produced scientists discovered that adding crystalline silicon carbide to the mixture during manufacture of the discs carbon composite material results in significantly better longevity. Here's the patent describing it. See http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6376431.html. The technology will get progressively cheaper but only once volumes go up and then they will be adapted to become 'wedge electronic brakes' and completely ditch the hydraulics, the brake master servo, the fluid, the lot! This will save a LOT of weight and reduce complexity - scary thing is its Brake By Wire (well we already have an electronic throttle by wire on our cars)

Ferrari's carbon brakes were designed to address the specifc requirement to withstanding higher temperatures. To provide brakes that would not fade as the brake grew hotter in lapping a track. In a race cars body panels duct cool air onto the brakes to keep them within operating temperatures. Ofcourse the disadvantage here is that re-routing air onto brakes increases drag and doesnt work on all types of track where speeds dont get enough cool air to the brakes.

Carbon’s friction properties do not appreciably degrade, even at temperatures over 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Carbon has another key advantage in that it the material can absorb more energy for a given heat sink material mass than steel can. Carbon brake material is by no means a drop in replacement for steel. There is a fundamental difference between how carbon and steel provide torque as a function of the rotating speed of the brake that static (stationary) friction is regarded as greater than sliding (moving) friction.

In research and testing done to date, it was discovered that with a steel brake, the amount of wear on the brake generally correlated to how much energy was absorbed by the brake. I.e. however much you applied the brake effected the wear in a linear fashion. For Carbon friction materials it was different, they exhibited wear rates as a function of the number of applications, not just the total energy. In other words, it is better to apply brakes continuously and smoothly than to apply and release, apply and release, etc. This research provides some clues on how to adjust your driving style and make your carbon brakes last longer and work better.

 

Sorry, but I aint seen no CF hub carriers....got pics or PN?

 

I seriously doubt the hub carrier would be made from CF. Multi-way stresses on the hub are huge, I'd think this may even be impossible with current technology and materials. Not to mention prohibitively expensive.

Its more likely to be forged or cast aluminum like on the 360.

 

No the hub carrier is Magnesium...

 

Nice. Magnesium! Yum.

 

Daniel,

I think your assessment is spot on.

If the steel discs weigh 19lbs each and the CCM's where 16% lighter thats 3.04lbs saving per disc. Just a shame those 19" BBS alloys weigh so much