Replacement of the CC-Brake discs of a Challenge Stradale necessary!

"brake" out the checkbook...doing any aftermarket brakes kills your resale...and the resale on that car is HIGH.

why ruin a good thing?

sounds like you track the car too, and you will have to brake much earlier on the track. you will end up hating the driving style you will have to adapt to now.

you have ferrari sticker shock. we all get it. just one of the many 'joys' of owning a fcar.

 

Drive to England soon and you could maybe have it done much cheaper until the exchange rate catches up !

 

This is not first time i read this about CC brakes......

 

this doesn't sound right to me. the disks should last a very long time. numerous track days will wear out pads faster, but the disks should still last a very long time. the dealer may be "mistaken". i'd contact a ferrari factory representative and ask for them to review the findings.

 

Here's what the experts are saying: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=138271988&postcount=2

 

The challenge cars have a different algorithm as far as I know, but the road car does have its own. I had 20K on my CS when I sold it, had done a bunch of track stuff, but still had plenty of rotor life left.

In my challenge car I went through a bunch of rotors this year 3 sets of Fronts and 2 sets of rears. The check the brake ware indicators in Tech inspection and check serial numbers on rotors on a regular basis. I have on rotor I'm making into a clock

You could certainly put steel brakes on the car, I'm sure the 360 Challenge brakes would be a good starting point. But I'm sure it will hurt resale. You could always just continue to run the rotors, but a failure will mean a rotor explosion which would be "interesting" on the track...

 

I believe there's a service bulletin for the CS that changes the brake wear algorithm to be more forgiving.

 

See if you can fit Scud's brakes! :twisted:

 

I put the 360 challenge steel brakes on my CS. The CC will go back on when I sell it (which is a long time away.)



The reason I did the steel swap was that after a red flag at LCMT my front left rotor cooked away its carbon fiber and left just a very ceramic surface.



A red flag means you have to stop (safely) on the track. This did not allow me to cool my brake properly.

FWIW I have found that the steel brakes are just as good as the CC's. They do make a lot of noise and brake dust. BTW, the steel rotors cost about $300. CC's are in the $6000 to $8000 range each.

 

Cars with the CC brake option will also have additional electronics that will let you know when the rotors need to be replaced. Apparently a light will illuminate on the dash. The computer takes into account the heat cycles that are put on the rotors. Remember, rotor thickness is not what is used to determine wear on CC rotors! It has to do with the physical properties of the rotor itself and the heat cycles that are put on the rotor. These are exactly the reasons that I did not purchase the CC option on my car. If one tracks the car and is fully accepting of the costs associated with brake/rotor replacement, then CC brakes are great!

 

So essentially >1 yr worth of track day will cost as much as a dedicated track car plus mods. You can buy a track ready Miata, 200SX, Civic and MR-2's for the price of a CC brakes replacement. (of course, $17k might be worth the money for those who can really appreciate the difference btw steel brakes and CC system.)

 

Interesting observation. I love the technology of carbon brakes, but...

Gary

 

It seems an extra $1 per mile for civilian would make the CC cars worth less, at least to me.

 

I didn't get CC's on my 430 even though I love the looks and do some tracking. 1. I could buy a new Civic for the price of the option. 2. They would bring little or no extra on resale and 3. replacement is extremely expensive and now it appears that they do not last as long as we were originally led to believe.

Dave

 

The Porsche people have the same problem. I think that they have three generations of PCCB's, the 1st Gen was crap , third was alot better.

 

Ferrari could teach the guys on wall street a thing or three on scamming!

 

who ever said you would not like the steel brakes after driving the CC ones hasn't ever driven both on track. There is a small difference, but not significant. Many porsche guys shelf their CC systems for steel ones on the track. Just more cost effective. Race team edge vs track day cost effectiveness aren't the same thing.

However, dealers tell you parts need to be replaced way before they actually need to. Do you have heat or stress cracks in the rotors? Are you having pedal issues coming from a smaller heat sync from a thinner rotor? If not, I'd assume you have more life left and the dealer is telling you a little earlier than necissary.

 

Nevertheless, I think anyone with an endless supply of funds would opt for the CC over steel! The ONLY reason I chose not to go with the CC is solely due to cost. I think the main reason teams remove the CC brakes and adapt the steel rotors is also due to cost or CC may not be allowed in their class of racing. Put simply, the CC brakes are superior to steel in all measures except cost. If it wasn't, our F1 friends would not be using them. Only my 2 cents.

 

pad options are limited in CC. F1 makes their own, so it does't really matter that much. But there aren't a lot of options for temp range or feel for CC kits. I know more than one team that prefers the feel and control they can get our of steel brakes in comparision to the CC ones. This is of course related to money - if they had more test dollars and R&D spend, then I'm sure the carbon would come out on top - but in the real world, few people work with limitless budgets on money and time...