IMO it is because of Elon Musk or their leadership style. They seem to do everything on a whim and it's not always thought out at all.
Plaid still has horrible brakes
- Thread starter edyvw
- Start date
I watched the video again. it doesn't even look like the current brake system on it is strong enough to lock the tires.
CCMs right now are really more of a cash grab. (For anybody wondering, CCM is carbon ceramic matrix which is vastly inferior to the carbon/carbon (C/C) found on F1 and professional race cars.) They're actually "better" for street use than racing because of their quieter properties and very low wear rates as long as nothing chips away the rotor face.
For racing applications despite being much lighter, the high heat during racing will cause pitting and oxidize the CCM rotors which will need to be replaced after this happens. CCMs also require a larger rotor compared to an iron disk because of their poor thermal properties and rely on the surface area to cool down compared to vanes in iron disks. CCMs were solid disks with drilled holes until recently where they just started to become vaned - although iron disks used in racing have a lot more vanes. Takes more thermal management to make sure they stay hot enough in operating temps but cool enough so they don't oxidize (which can also be a con for street use since CCMs are zero feel until they get into operating temps, then it's like you hit a brick wall once they do.)
The costs for CCMs are crazy too - and they almost always require special pads. Most 'regular' pads used with iron disks cannot [should not] be used with CCM rotors.
EDIT: I'll also like to add that you're supposed to be wearing gloves when handling CCM rotors and have to be handled carefully to not damage the surface at all. I hear the carbon fibers in these rotors are worse than fiberglass.
CCMs right now are really more of a cash grab. (For anybody wondering, CCM is carbon ceramic matrix which is vastly inferior to the carbon/carbon (C/C) found on F1 and professional race cars.) They're actually "better" for street use than racing because of their quieter properties and very low wear rates as long as nothing chips away the rotor face.
For racing applications despite being much lighter, the high heat during racing will cause pitting and oxidize the CCM rotors which will need to be replaced after this happens. CCMs also require a larger rotor compared to an iron disk because of their poor thermal properties and rely on the surface area to cool down compared to vanes in iron disks. CCMs were solid disks with drilled holes until recently where they just started to become vaned - although iron disks used in racing have a lot more vanes. Takes more thermal management to make sure they stay hot enough in operating temps but cool enough so they don't oxidize (which can also be a con for street use since CCMs are zero feel until they get into operating temps, then it's like you hit a brick wall once they do.)
The costs for CCMs are crazy too - and they almost always require special pads. Most 'regular' pads used with iron disks cannot [should not] be used with CCM rotors.
EDIT: I'll also like to add that you're supposed to be wearing gloves when handling CCM rotors and have to be handled carefully to not damage the surface at all. I hear the carbon fibers in these rotors are worse than fiberglass.
Last edited:
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
For a lot less money the new Z06 is looking inexpensive. I am not a fan of domestic cars but this car is a game changer and a real nice ride.
https://www.caranddriver.com/chevrolet/corvette-z06
I used to think this way but I very briefly considered going CCB on my M2 comp after driving an M4 with CCBs. They are great for street use if you don't mind burning cash. The amount of dust and noise I get with the 400mm 6 pot steel brakes is absurd. The wheels are caked within 50 miles after washing. The M4 with CCBs generated almost no dust and pedal feel was fine if not better. Plus, they last almost forever on the street. If you do need to replace them though, yeah, you're in for $10k and that's why I didn't do it.
You can always replace the pads on the steel brakes but every pad is a compromise and most low dust pads are not that great IMO. I will probably switch to Carbotech 1521 for street use though.
I mean, except you're wrong.
1) I don't need to justify it. I researched it BEFORE buying it, and it outperformed, SO I DID buy it. You got it backwards.
2) L'Argus is not affiliated. They are like Autobild.
3) This is true, Plaid issues are not Kia issues. The Taycan is a benchmark in suspension tuning only, IMO.
4) Its brakes are better than Porsche and BMW based on track work that L'Argus did.
First, I think Kia has done a good job with this car and it will probably brake at least as well as the BMW since it’s not an actual M car.
However, I doubt the Kia will brake like a Taycan. Maybe for like one lap. Braking is a thermal management problem and Porsche pays a lot of attention to it on all their cars. The brakes are bigger and possibly slightly better designed since they are Brembo not Akebono (ask Nissan owners). I also doubt Kia has the amount of brake cooling airflow because Porsche is almost certainly willing to trade off more range.
The article you linked doesn’t conduct the testing on the same day under the same conditions and doesn’t even elaborate what the issue they had with the Taycan steel brakes were, it could easily be a regen software thing. It also admits the CCBs were good. Porsche has had consistently superior braking performance over the past several decades and I doubt with their track focus and price point they are going to be beaten by a Kia with smaller Akebono designed brakes. Maybe it’s true, but I want to see some more data.
Keep in mind it doesn’t matter that much what regen can achieve if you are talking track use. Regen is typically far more thermally limited than the regular brakes.
Last edited:
-Taycan GTS has 390mm front rotors, 358mm rear rotors. EV6 GT has 380/360, respectively.
-The regen is where the EG6 GT really wins out, as it can produce 320kW of regen braking, while the Taycan GTS can only manage 290.
This is what leads to L'Argus commenting thus on their experience with the brakes that the Taycan GTS only competes against it with CCB's.
My point is, the EV6 GT has a better braking system than Porsche. Nor do they have the battery failure issues of the Porsche. Porsche is only better (comparable?) in braking when you substitute very expensive (comparatively) materials, and if Kia wanted to do that, it's a rotor and pad swap away, but that's not the mission of the car.
Last edited:
I’ve never seen a Taycan with steel brakes in person and I also doubt your analysis very much. Regen isn’t worth much on track as I already described because it causes a thermal issue elsewhere. Believing your car will brake better than a Taycan on track consistently is not a good bet.
It doesn't cause any issues, but it does lower the brake temps by several hundred degrees. Thats why Kia runs on 800v architecture, in part. Less heat with large energy transfers. Its not my Analysis, its Kia, verified by unaffiliated like LArgus.
As to steel brake Taycans, a coworker has one. Want a pic next time I see it?
The Taycan does use 10 piston Akebono brakes.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
According to this R&T article, the
"The Taycan Turbo gets conventional steel brake rotors measuring 16.4 inches up front and 14.4 inches at the rear. Standard on the Turbo S, and optional on the Turbo, are carbon ceramic brakes, 16.5 inches up front, 16.1 inches in back. Both brake setups utilize giant 10-piston front and four-piston rear calipers."
Also,
"A spokesperson told me that every Porsche is required to pass a braking torture test: 25 stops in a row, from 80 percent of a car's top speed down to 90 km/h (56 mph), with every fifth stop involving full ABS. For a car to pass, it has to generate between 0.8 and 0.9 g of deceleration every time.
The Taycan presents a unique challenge. Its 161-mph top speed is relatively low compared to other Porsche products. And the EV boasts ultra-quick acceleration, so it doesn't take long at all to reach 80 percent of top speed, around 129 mph. This meant that, during Porsche's braking test, the Taycan didn't have much time at all for the brakes to cool between stops."
Also, the articles I've seen has the Kia EV6 60-0 braking distance ~30ft more than the Taycan. CNET reports 131ft from 62mph (same distance as the Model X Plaid) while Motortrend was 102ft from 60mph for the Taycan w/ PCCBs (103ft from 62mph-0). This is just one stop though, the porsche can guarantee it nearly every single time. In any case, trying top stop 5000 pounds fast and consistently is a hard job. In comparison, a stock 3500 pound EvoX takes ~113ft from 60-0.
Last edited:
The problem is on track days the battery starts to derate before the brakes fade. After 2 or three laps the battery is too hot while the brakes are just getting warmed up. Would be a different story if regen could be shut off.
Thank you for clarifying that. Seems to be the first time Porsche has ever deviated from Brembo as the supplier. Wonder if it’s for the CCB also as I wasn’t aware Akebono made any CCB systems.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Guys, every time he is buying car he compars it to BMW, Porsche, MB etc. That includes Mazda and RAV4 he had.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Akebono supply’s F1 too. Not to extent Brembo does, but they are there. Too bad their aftermarket ceramic pads are junk.
In the distant past, I read Porsche and Brembo co-developed the mono block caliper with Porsche getting 49% and Brembo 51% of the profits. I think it was Paul Frere that wrote that.